University of Maryland Libraries
Report
of the Project
Advisory Team
on
Gifts to the Collections
January 22, 2004
III.Guidelines for
Selectors and Curators
IV. Organizational Placement of Gifts-in-kind
V. Coordination
of Receipt, Acceptance of Gifts;
Reporting to University Relations of Value of Gifts
I. Introduction
and Background
The University of Maryland Libraries has a long and popular tradition in gifts-in-kind (GIK), which is defined as tangible materials that could be added to the Libraries’ collections. (Gifts-in-kind are distinguished from the monetary gifts, grants or contracts sought by the Libraries’ development officers.)
As the Libraries have moved to examine various services for strategic importance plus operational efficiency, the GIK program came under serious discussion, initially because of questions about the annual book sale. It was agreed that the total GIK program could benefit from assessment.
Therefore, in 2002 the Library Executive Council (LEC) approved formation of a project advisory team (PAT) to explore various gifts-related issues and recommend actions to LEC. The group’s purpose statement was the following:
A.
Review all facets of the gifts-in-kind program, including
-
current policy and reasons for accepting gifts,
-
criteria for receiving gifts and adding gift items to the collections,
-
costs and resources for cataloging and preserving items selected for the collections,
-
space for housing material in process and for material to be disposed of,
-
alternative ways of disposing of gifts not added to the collections.
-
public relations and political ramifications of changes to the program.
B. Prepare a report of findings and
recommendations for the Library Executive Council to consider and
decide.
The team carried out the following tasks:
-
Explore the policy and practice at UM’s peer institutions for ideas and options.
-
Interview and/or conduct focus group interviews with UM library staff for views and options.
-
Calculate average costs for processing, cataloging and preserving items, as background information.
-
Calculate space needed for receipt, storage and processing of gift items.
-
Investigate alternatives to the traditional book sale, such as perpetual sales, Internet-based sales, etc.
-
For each facet of the gifts-in-kind program, recommend an option. If more than one is recommended for each facet, prioritize the options.
The Library Executive Council also delegated to the team the work of analyzing the pilot online book sales already underway in the Libraries and recommending disposition of income and/or other possible futures for the sales.
Team members were:
Carlen Ruschoff, Director, Technical Services Division
Cynthia Sorrell, Gifts-in-Kind Coordinator
Desider Vikor, Director, Collection Management and Special Collections Division
Jane Williams, Director, Planning and Administrative Services Division
Irma Dillon assisted the team with developing focus-group questions, conducting the focus groups and preparing a report on the discussions.
Appendix A is a chart showing how the University of Maryland’s peer institutions organize and operate their gifts-in-kind programs. The team also examined GIK programs at the University of Arizona, the University of Calgary, Columbia University, Cornell University, Northwestern University, Southern Illinois University and Yale University. Team members consulted the published literature for information as well. Two publications were especially helpful:
• The Acquisitions Librarian, Number 22: “Gifts and Exchanges: Problems, Frustrations. . .and Triumphs.” Haworth Press, 1999.
• Association of Research Libraries. The Gifts and Exchange Function in ARL Libraries. (SPEC Kit 142) Washington, D.C.: ARL, 1999.
The recommendations in this report appear as highlighted text.
Background. The team recognized that the Libraries should not attempt to sustain the current practice of accepting many gifts that are not added to the Libraries’ collections but that do cause considerable expense and effort to the Libraries in picking up or receiving the gifts, sorting and storing them, etc. The principle became to craft policies and guidelines that help the Libraries increase the percentage of accepted gifts that are actually added to the collections.
Thus, in drafting a new policy for prospective donors of gift materials, the team sought to emphasize desirable donations while supporting greater selectivity by also itemizing unacceptable donations.
It is recognized that a move to greater selectivity may temporarily reduce the total dollar value of gift materials reported to University Relations. However, long-term, the team thinks the greater selectivity will better serve the University Libraries and therefore help attract more substantive gift collections. Whether or not this proposed policy of greater selectivity is adopted, it will be important to see that each potential donor has a good experience with the UM Libraries, regardless of whether his/her offered gifts are accepted. It will also be important to continue accurate and complete reporting of the values of gifts to University Relations.
The proposed guidelines statement for donors follows:
GIFTS-IN-KIND GUIDELINES FOR DONORS
Gifts to the collections of the Libraries constitute an important and ongoing source of materials that support the teaching and research programs of the University. The donation of books, periodicals, audio-visual media, archives, manuscripts, and a diverse variety of other items in many formats have served as the foundation of some of our major circulating and special collections. In other instances these gifts have significantly enhanced existing purchased holdings and already established collections.
Owing to the large volume of materials received in the past and the need to exercise the highest selectivity in accepting materials most relevant to campus academic needs, we provide the following general guidelines for individuals interested in donating materials to the Libraries. The Libraries reserve the right to accept or decline materials based on these and other criteria that serve the best interests of the University and the library collections. Every effort is made to accept only items appropriate to be added to the library collections. Items not added may be sold, exchanged with other libraries, or discarded at the discretion of the Libraries.
Prospective donors of large collections or personal libraries of an academic or research nature should provide a list of items available in advance. Ongoing space constraints do not permit us to keep whole gift collections intact as physically separate or discrete collections within a publicly accessible stack area. The UM Libraries also encourage monetary assistance to cover the costs of processing larger collections that are selected for addition. Timely processing and handling of materials requiring special treatment are especially dependent on additional resources.
Desirable Donations:
Current academic or scholarly publications, especially those that have appeared within the past three years, in disciplines supported by the curriculum or research of the University.
Good condition copies of older publications that are not currently held and serve to fill in notable gaps in historic collections. Materials in good condition are clean, with durable bindings, and do not contain loose, brittle, stained, marked, or discolored pages.
Specialized research materials, including scientific and technical reports.
-
Foreign language publications in areas collected by the Libraries, primarily Western European languages, Slavic, Hebrew, Chinese, Japanese, and Korean.
One-of-a-kind or rare books, special editions of established works, and other materials that contribute to the subject strengths within special collections, such as university history, Marylandia, historic preservation, and broadcasting.
Primary source material (e.g., manuscripts and archives).
Materials that are not relevant to campus instructional and research programs and collecting areas of the Libraries (e.g., medicine, law, and nursing).
Textbooks
-
Popular trade/mass market paperbacks
Popular magazines (e.g., Newsweek, National Geographic)
-
Scattered or single issues of journals, magazines, newspapers, newsletters, etc.
Materials in poor condition, including defaced text. Items that show evidence of mold, mildew, pests, significant embrittlement, or disrepair are routinely declined.
Titles already owned, including journal runs, newspaper files, etc. (unless replacement or additional copies are needed or the copy is a different or special edition that is useful to add).
Outdated, superseded titles (e.g., computer manuals)
-
Loose or miscellaneous materials that do not meet the categories listed under desirable donations.
-
Bulk collections of materials (collections with a substantial proportion of undesirable materials). Typically these are large collections or personal libraries of general reading titles with marginal or no academic value. Where textbooks and other academic materials are also included, these usually are already more than sufficiently represented in the collections of the University Libraries.
Out of Scope and
Unacceptable Donations:
As
a result of the ever increasing costs associated with the short-term
and
long-term storage of gifts and the associated resources required to
sort,
review, process, preserve, and maintain materials, the Libraries are
unable to
accept all donations of gifts-in-kind.
The following represent categories of materials that fall outside the
collecting scope of the Libraries:
III. Guidelines for Selectors and Curators
Background. The
Project Advisory Team on Gifts-in-kind requested that focus groups be
conducted
with four groups of stakeholders:
curators, selectors, Technical Services staff, and the development
group. The purpose of the focus groups
was to help the GIK team understand each group’s views and of their and
others’
roles in the GIK process. See Appendix
B for the questions posed to each of the focus groups. Each group
had the following number of
participants:
Curators 5
Selectors 4
Technical Services staff
4
Development 4
Irma Dillon
identified the common themes of the focus groups’ discussions:
-
Shared knowledge of the total gift process needed by all from beginning to end – what is involved in each step of process; how, why each process relates.
-
Need for cross training in the criteria to evaluate a collection, to determine its value to the circulating collection or rare book collection.
-
Procedures need to be more clearly defined and reinforced – not everyone familiar with them.
-
Need for emphasis on the cost of processing from all perspectives.
-
Need to justify older, brittle books for general collection; consider health issues.
-
Need to engage selectors more in the importance of donor relations.
-
Development team needs to interact more with selectors and GIK office to clarify roles and explain why the need to know donors’ information.
-
Inconsistency in interactions with donors.
-
Reporting of gifts received.
-
Explore improving a more formal exchange program.
-
Informal information exchange and processes need to be formalized.
The proposed guidelines statement for selectors and curators follows:
GIFTS-IN-KIND
GUIDELINES FOR SELECTORS AND CURATORS
Gifts-in-kind
represent significant value to our collections. They have been
the source of some major acquisitions and have
served as a critical and beneficial supplement to the purchased
acquisitions
program. At the same time, gifts have
also raised for the Libraries some substantial management challenges,
especially as the overall volume of materials received has increased
steadily
over the years. Research libraries
everywhere readily acknowledge that gifts represent significant demands
on
already limited resources, including the initial storing, sorting, and
ultimate
disposal of unwanted materials. There
is consequently a need for us to reduce the influx of general gift
materials
and emphasize greater selectivity and quality control in accepting
materials
appropriate for the collections. Just
as we seek greater precision and emphasize prudent decision-making with
our
purchased acquisitions, we should expect no less of gifts-in-kind.
Most
gifts come to us with associated costs: processing, preservation,
shelving/storage, and ongoing maintenance.
These are frequently “hidden” to donors and sometimes to our own
staff. Increasingly we also need to
encourage donors of gifts-in-kind to assist the Libraries with these
related
expenses. Not all donors are interested
or in a position to make a monetary gift as well. It has been
demonstrated, though on a limited scale, that some
donors are also able to provide funds to assist with the preservation
and
processing of their gift materials. We
should remain attentive to this real prospect.
Decisions to add gift materials to the
collections reflect
the informed judgment and expertise of the individual selector.
This is a core element of collection
building in the Libraries. The dynamic
of informed and expert collection building and resource management
requires
that all individuals involved in the process should be mindful of all
post-selection costs. Since many gift
materials are older, they typically require more intensive attention in
cataloging and preservation and consequently more resources.
Processing costs in 2003 range from a
minimum of $126.71 per volume to a maximum of $241.56.[1]
Acceptance of a marginal gift item denies
valuable resources to priority materials that directly enhance our
collections
and the support we provide our users.
Processing Backlog.
As of November 2003, there are 14,672 items in the TSD gifts processing
backlog. This number does not include
Chinese-Japanese-Korean, Jewish Studies, and music materials. Based on
the
costs indicated above, it would cost $1.8 – 3.5 million dollars alone
to
address the already selected materials in the backlog. Clearly,
currently available as well as
anticipated resources for the near future fall significantly short of
this
amount. It is therefore recommended
that selectors be encouraged, where possible, to re-evaluate prior
selection
decisions, especially for significant clusters of subject
materials.
Some gifts materials selected many years ago may no longer be relevant
to
the academic programs they were intended to support. Other items
may be so physically compromised to render the
prospect of effective processing and reasonable access practically
impossible.
The following selection guidelines are
intended to
establish some meaningful parameters towards achieving greater
selectivity with
our gifts program. This information is
also important to share with our donors.
Desirable
Gift Selection:
- Unique and current academic or scholarly publications,
especially those that have appeared within the past three years, in
disciplines supported by the curriculum or research of the
University.
Materials that bring depth to our collections routinely merit serious
consideration.
-
Good condition copies of older publications that are not currently held and serve to fill in notable gaps in historic collections.
-
Specialized research materials, including scientific and technical reports.
-
Foreign language publications in areas collected by the Libraries.
-
One-of-a-kind or rare books and special editions of established works.
-
Primary source material (e.g., manuscripts and archives). See statement on special collections.
Out of Scope and
Unacceptable
Gift Selections:
- Materials that are not relevant to campus instructional and research programs and collecting areas of the Libraries (e.g., medicine, law, and nursing).
- Textbooks, including recent textbooks.
- Popular
trade/mass market paperbacks
Popular magazines (e.g., Newsweek, National Geographic)
- Scattered
or single issues of periodicals (journals, magazines, newspapers,
newsletters,
etc.).
-
Adding gift serials poses special considerations. Issues or volumes that fill in an incomplete run of a title are typically highly desirable additions to the collection. Scattered or single issues of titles to which we do not subscribe typically have minimal value and should be declined.
- Materials in poor condition, including defaced text.
Items that show evidence of mold, mildew, pests, significant
embrittlement, or disrepair should be routinely declined.
Bringing infested materials into the building poses potential health
risks and harm to our resident collections. The physical
condition of materials received has posed ongoing concerns and
problems.
Preservation staff should be consulted prior to accepting large
collections, especially if known problems exist (e.g., fragile,
brittle, damaged). It should not be assumed that dedicated
preservation or conservations funds will be available to address all
problems or that materials can be stored until funds become
available.
This needs to be weighed when considering acceptance of a gift.
-
Titles already owned, including journal runs, newspaper files, etc. (unless replacement or additional copies are needed or the copy is a different or special edition that is useful to add). Multiple copies should be added with discretion. Staff is not available to ascertain the physical condition of existing copies on the shelf. A maximum of three copies of a single monographic title/edition should be added. Equivalent editions do not enhance holdings unless there are substantive and compelling reasons for adding such.
Outdated, superseded titles (e.g., computer manuals)
- Loose or miscellaneous materials that do not meet the categories listed under desirable donations.
- Bulk collections of materials (collections with a substantial proportion of undesirable materials). Typically these are large collections or personal libraries of general reading titles with marginal or no academic value. Where academic materials are also included, they usually are more than sufficiently represented in the collections of the University Libraries
Offprints and broken sets typically pose more problems
than bring actual benefit to the collections and our users and should
be declined.
Exceptions to the above should be exercised only on rare occasions and where substantial justification exists. Acceptance of large major collections should be done with prior consultation and approval of the Director of Collection Management & Special Collections
Gifts-in-kind
are a particularly vital component to the development of special
collections in
the UM Libraries. Curators are
encouraged to develop a schedule of typical costs associated with
processing gifts
to their collections. This information
can be used in discussions with donors and other potential funders who
may be
interested in providing monetary support for materials processing and
preservation. There is also a need for
a formal mechanism to evaluate new collecting initiatives as well as
significant gift prospects supporting existing collection programs and
strengths. As indicated previously,
certain gifts may be immediately relevant in terms of collection scope,
but at
the same time may represent a significant commitment of resources,
including
space, that are otherwise not available through standard resource
allocations. In such cases, it is
imperative that such prospects be brought to the attention of the CMSC
Director, other directors as appropriate, and the Dean of Libraries.
Curators and selectors are encouraged to coordinate their efforts where gift prospects involve the potential acquisition of materials that are destined for both the general and special collections. This occurs on occasion and in some instances with successful results.
IV. Organizational Placement of Gifts-in-kind
In March 1999 the
Association of Research Libraries (ARL) published SPEC Kit 241,
The Gifts and Exchange Function in ARL Libraries. Over half of
the 72 libraries responding to
ARL’s survey reported that their gifts and exchange operations had
undergone
administrative change due at least in part to localized library
reorganization. Some changes resulted
from automation, others from budget cuts, and still others from cost
analyses
of handling gifts, reduction of staff and revision of collecting
guidelines.[2]
At the time of the
survey, the responding libraries reported the gifts and exchange
function under
the following departments:
Acquisitions
23
Collection
development/management
17
Serials
0
Combination
15
No G&E unit
4
Other
3[3]
That variety of
organizational placement for the gifts program is evident in the UM
Libraries’
five peer institutions as well. One is
a unit in Technical Services; in two others gifts is part of
Acquisitions; a
fourth is in the Office of Collections; the fifth does not specify on
its Web
site where its gifts program is placed.
Owing to the fundamental and integral
link between gifts-in-kind and the core collection development function
of the
UM Libraries, the PAT concluded that the organizational location of the
Gifts-in-kind program should remain where it currently resides, i.e.,
as a
component of the Collection Management & Special Collections
Division. The reporting relationship of the
Gifts-in-kind Coordinator was also discussed.
It was similarly concluded that at least for the short-term, the
position should continue to report directly to the Director of
Collection
Management & Special Collections.
The transitions resulting from the changes proposed in this report will
require the direct involvement and leadership of the CMSC
Director.
The Gifts-in-kind Coordinator will continue
to maintain and develop close working relationships with curators,
selectors,
the Development staff, and staff in the Technical Services Division.
V. Coordination of Acceptance and Receipt of Gifts and Reporting Valuations to University Relations
The following procedures seek to centralize the handling and reporting of incoming gift materials to the University of Maryland Libraries. While there have been many advantageous relationships and arrangements between subject specialists and catalogers the reporting of gifts has suffered. Donors as well as the Libraries are adversely affected when the Gifts Office is not notified of incoming gifts. Gift-in-kind donors are not considered donors to the University Libraries until a report is received in the Gifts Office. This office has the responsibility of notifying the official reporting unit, University Relations, of all gift-in-kind donors and a description of the donations received.
Donor Inquiries
-
To achieve continuity in the response to questions, it is requested that all offers of gifts be directed to the Gifts Office. The Gifts Office can assist donors with questions regarding their potential gift, the possibility of picking up gifts, and generating letters of acknowledgment.
-
A potential donor should be made aware that some gifts or portions of gifts might not be added to the collection. Decisions in this regard are at the discretion of the Director of Collection Management & Special Collections, Preservation staff and/or the appropriate subject specialist.
Initial Processing
Gifts
for the general collection that are received by various offices
throughout the library system
should be routed to the Gifts Office with
the date of receipt and donor information.
Titles selected should include completed selection forms.
-
Gifts received directly from donors by the Gifts Office will be processed (e.g. catalog search) and sent to Acquisitions for review in the Gifts Approval Queue by subject specialists.
-
The time needed to process gifts will vary depending on workloads, priorities, and/or backlog in TSD. With that in mind, donors should not be promised a specific time period when such gift titles will appear in the catalog. The only exception to this rule would be materials identified as RUSH by selectors.
Selector Review
-
Subject specialists will follow the procedures and time limits for reviewing gift materials in the Acquisitions Dept.’s Gift Queue.
-
If a title received as a gift needs to be reviewed by another selector, inform the Gifts Office so that the appropriate selector can decide upon disposition. This also alerts Acquisitions regarding titles that need special handling in the Gift Queue.
Internal Reporting
-
ALL GIFTS received on behalf of the University of Maryland Libraries are to be reported by selectors using the online gift report. The form can be found at www.lib.umd.edu/CLMD/Gifts/giftreport.html . Completing the entire form assists the Gifts Office in accurately reporting gifts to University Relations on behalf of the donors and the Libraries. For example, if a gift includes at least 3 items, please identify the titles in the description box. This will help to personalize the donor’s acknowledgment. If the receiving library unit prefers to compose the acknowledgment; simply e-mail the letter as an attachment to the Gifts Officer at csorrell@umd.edu
Acknowledgment
-
Gifts are acknowledged and reported to University Relations, the central database repository for the University System of Maryland donations.
Gifts Declined
-
If the donation is not accepted by the UM Libraries, the
potential donor will be given information on alternative institutions
and/or organizations to contact.
-
Titles not selected for the collections should be boxed and marked as discards with the receiving unit’s name, date, a brief description regarding the origin and the reason for titles rejected for collections, i.e. duplicates, outside academic scope, etc. The boxes should be sent to the Gifts Office.
[1] In this document, processing includes searching, preservation evaluation, cataloging, and physical processing. It also involves significant shelving and reshelving as the material is prepared for evaluation by different individuals throughout the process.
[2] Association of Research Libraries. The Gifts and Exchange Function in ARL Libraries. Washington, D.C.: ARL, 1999. i.
[3] Ibid., 4.
-
