FY03 Serials Review Process

Introduction

The Collection Management Team is initiating the following review process for UM Libraries' serial subscriptions. This process is needed to ensure that the Libraries will be able to continue to balance its materials budget in the current atmosphere of budget uncertainty. The process is based on the regularly scheduled journal review process. This year's process is occurring one year ahead of schedule and will replace the next regularly scheduled review. The review process is not strictly a cancellation process. Once the review is completed, the information gathered will be used to make any cancellation decisions dictated by budgetary circumstances. The UM Libraries believes that any cut to the Libraries' materials budget or any failure to provide funding for serials inflation will seriously reduce the value and effectiveness of our collections.

The Libraries will review all continuing serial commitments, regardless of format. Most licensed electronic resources are serial commitments as are print journals, many materials in microformats, and standing orders for book series.

The Libraries' subject teams will review all serial subscriptions and identify candidates for discussion as potential lesser priority subscriptions. Faculty will be asked to review lists of lesser priority serials and advise on prioritizing those relevant to their work. Library faculty will then create master prioritized lists of targeted serials and consult with faculty on whether any other lesser priority titles should be cancelled to support new purchases. Faculty will be able to justify changes to the prioritization or removal of titles from lists of targeted serial titles.

Faculty will be informed of the review and the logistics of the process by early December. The Collection Management Team is proposing a kick-off meeting led by the Dean of Libraries and attended by library faculty and the departments' faculty liaisons.

Goals

• Evaluate all serial subscriptions (print, electronic, microforms, etc) to identify lesser priority serial titles for all subject areas.
• The implementation of the process will be managed by the subject teams.
• The Collection Management Team will coordinate the process and review the process.
• The process will be fair and open with all faculty having an opportunity to make recommendations
• The selection process will balance specific departmental needs and more interdisciplinary needs.
• The process will respect the Libraries' responsibilities to manage the collections budget in a responsible manner.
• The process will identify 25% of serials expenditures as the lowest priority.

Faculty will be involved in the process:

• Evaluate all serial subscriptions (print, electronic, microforms, etc) to identify lesser priority serial titles for all subject areas.
• The implementation of the process will be managed by the subject teams.
• The Collection Management Team will coordinate the process and review the process.
• The process will be fair and open with all faculty having an opportunity to make recommendations
• The selection process will balance specific departmental needs and more interdisciplinary needs.
• The process will respect the Libraries' responsibilities to manage the collections budget in a responsible manner.
• The process will identify 25% of serials expenditures as the lowest priority.

The Subject teams are responsible for:

• Managing the process by reviewing all titles, meeting deadlines, meeting targets, and coordinating their work with other interested library groups (e.g. other subject teams, IRST, the ERC, etc.)
• Developing initial lists of lesser priority serial titles for each general fund the team manages and distributing the lists using the sel-liason reflector by the end of January.
• Working with other subject teams and interested parties to review titles of shared interest.
• Developing final organized list for all funds managed by the team or team members.
• Submitting lists of lesser priority serial titles for distribution campus-wide.

Selectors are responsible for:

• Contributing to the team review process.
• Contributing to the reviews managed by CMT or ERC for general resources and databases.
• Developing initial lists of targeted serial titles for each fund the selector manages and distributing lists using the sel-liason reflector by the end of January.
• Contacting their departments and working with departmental liaisons and others as needed to ensure that all faculty have an opportunity to participate in the review process.
• Working with their departments to develop prioritization of the targeted list into three tiers of lesser priority serial.
• Working with departments to explore any desired substitutions of existing serial subscriptions for purchase of new resources.

The Collection Management Team will support the process by providing:

• A framework and guidelines for the process.
• A timeframe.
• Selector orientation, kickoff meeting, the FYI announcement and other general communications as needed.
• Team members will function as resource people as needed to clarify the process for selectors and subject teams.
• Calculation of the 25% targets for the various funds.
• Lists of current subscriptions including price and in some cases 3-year price histories for journals.
• Review of lists of lesser priority serial titles from the three subject teams before they are distributed to the campus for final feedback.
• Review of general funds for serials to identify lesser priority serial titles in those funds.
• A final review of the process to ensure that it meets its stated goals.

The Electronic Resources Committee will be responsible for:

• Creating a review process for current database subscriptions.
• Review of databases.
• Providing information on pricing and use (if available) for current database subscriptions.
• Working with subject teams and interested parties to review titles of shared interest.
• Developing final prioritization of lesser priority database titles and submitting the list to CMT.

Timeline for FY03 Serial Review

August and September:
• CMT gathers data and develops process targets and framework.

October:
• Mid month, selectors briefed on process at selector orientation sessions.
• Selectors begin reviewing subscriptions to identify lesser priority serial titles to meet target.
• Invitations to the kickoff meeting for faculty liaisons are issued.

November:
• Lists of lesser priority serial titles prepared for distribution to faculty for discussion and prioritization.
• End of month, kickoff meetings for faculty liaisons; announcement to campus FYI describing the review project.
• Following kickoff, subject team members distribute lists of lesser priority serial titles to teaching faculty for discussion.
• ERC begins to review databases.

December:
• Teaching faculty begin work with the subject team members to provide feedback to prioritize lists of targeted serial titles.

January/February:
• ERC works on compiling prioritized lists of electronic databases.
• CMT compiles prioritized lists of any general print serials.
• Teams organize individual lists of lesser priority serial titles using format provided by CMT.
• February 28, teams submit final prioritized lists to CMT for general distribution campus-wide.
• February 28, final prioritized lists of low priority databases submitted to CMT.

March:
• Early March, composite list is posted on the web, announcements go out to faculty with deadline for final justification for retention.
• Initial discussion of renewal decisions for electronic resources will be occurring.
• End of the month, deadline for faculty to offer justification of reprioritization.

April:
• Budget planning for FY04 occurs.
• Candidates for cancellation may be identified.
• Final renewal decisions on electronic resources will begin.

May:
• As needed selectors prepare paperwork for cancellations.
• Any cancellations are submitted to Acquisitions.
• Remaining renewal decisions on electronic resources finalized.

Three tiered prioritization of targeted serial titles

The UM Libraries believes that any cut to the Libraries' materials budget or any failure to provide funding for serials inflation will seriously reduce the value and effectiveness of our collections. The Libraries have regularly reviewed serial subscriptions with the result that we believe all our subscriptions are currently serving campus needs and priorities. The Libraries are also responsible for managing the materials budget and if that budget proves to be inadequate to retain our current subscriptions cuts will have to be made.

Recognizing these realities, the Libraries are prioritizing serials expenditures amounting to 25% of current spending into the following three categories. The priority level reflects the priority for retention of the continuing commitment.

Priority 3.

These are the titles we believe could be canceled with the least damage to Library services. Some users will be inconvenienced or unserved but the item may be rarely used. Other access options may be available or the resource may be redundant to some extent.

Priority 2.

The cancellation of these titles will more severely damage Library service. A greater number of campus users will be inconvenienced or unserved. Other access options may not be available; the resource is less redundant.

Priority 1.

The cancellation of these titles will cause the greatest damage to Library service. Significant inconvenience for greater numbers of library users would result. The collections would be severely weakened.