University Library Council
November 19, 2007
9:30 -11:00 a.m.
6137 McKeldin Library
MEETING MINUTES
Present: Baeder, Finsterbusch, Greer, Hahn, Holum, Kim, Klumpp (chair), Nathans, Peres, Ruschoff, Southard, Weil
Meeting with Council: Dean Charles Lowry
Guests: Susanna Van Sant, Desider Vikor, Alan Mattlage
The meeting was called to order at 9:33 a.m.
Topic: Introductions
Klumpp introduced the guests and councilors introduced themselves.
Topic: Minutes from October 18, 2007
The minutes were approved without amendment.
Topic: Reports
Chair’s Report
Klumpp announced that the spring calendar would be distributed soon and asked councilors for their prompt response so he could set the meeting schedule for the Spring Semester.
Dean’s Report
None
Kudos, Comments from Councilors
Hahn queried the status of the liaison study. Mattlage responded that the report is finished, and has been presented to the Libraries Executive Council and to Chair Klumpp. It is on the schedule to be discussed next semester.
Hahn queried the status of the project to look at scholarly productivity. Klumpp responded that there was little progress. The Senate processes work best when it is looking at policies, while this project requires basic information. It stalled with the previous Senate. He will talk more with Senate Chair Montgomery and Vice-Chair Holum.
Topic: Materials Budget
Klumpp stated that the goal of this topic was to understand the budget so that councilors could think “outside the box” on what to do in this crisis time. This is a time when more has to be done than just call for more funds. Council must offer its assistance and judgment on policies that structure these decisions.
Van Sant, Head of the Collection Management Team, gave the report on the Libraries’ budget.
The Libraries’ budget is divided into two parts, operating and materials. The Libraries hear in spring what the materials budget is to be and then plan accordingly. Materials are tracked by type: monographs, journals, databases, standing orders, and preservation and bindery. Acquisitions and expenditures are tracked by academic department to ensure support for the range of disciplines on campus. The Provost is interested in efficiencies to stretch the funds. The Libraries’ base materials budget is $9.1 million for FY ’08 plus $300,000 of soft money carried forward from FY’07.
$1.6 million allocated for monographs in two categories:
- $950,000 in a purchase plan. The Libraries work with a company that supplies books efficiently and quickly with a good discount. The Libraries give them a profile of what is needed, they send books from US and UK academic, society and commercial publishers that fit the profile. These cover basic academic needs. The profile is mapped to teaching and research on campus. Shipments are put on display and selectors (liaisons, a few faculty) are invited to review the new arrivals. The job is re-bid every 5-7 years, but there are few companies that offer this service. The current provider is Blackwell’s Book Services, offering a 21% discount this fiscal year. The Libraries stretch dollars by getting paperback editions if the preservation department certifies this can be done without loss. The allocation amount has remained constant for several years, but inflation has been 2-4% annually. In FY ’07 the Libraries received 21,000 books, but fewer in the current year.
- $672,000 in discretionary funds. These are expended by library liaisons and are distributed across departments, to acquire non-US or UK books, those too expensive to come with the regular shipment, and as responses for individual requests. There are specialized purchase plans for books from Brazil, France and Germany, for example, and for music scores and others. The allocation has remained flat so the purchasing power has decreased.
- The Blackwell’s purchase plan provides shelf-ready books for most titles, which saves on processing and cataloging.
Just under $250,000 is allocated for binding and conservation. The Libraries get bids from commercial bindery services, aiming for maximum discounts for binding and repair beyond what can be done in-house. Bulk purchasing makes use of available discounts. This budget has also remained flat in face of inflation. Fewer journals are being bound with the move toward electronic journals, but there is more repair and upkeep, especially of music scores. This budget is also used for the conservation of special collections.
$7.5 million is allocated to serials. This includes:
- $650,000 allocated to standing orders for items such as monographic series and multi-volume dictionaries or encyclopedias published one volume at a time. This category creates some staff efficiencies and is regularly put out for bid. Companies offering this service are fairly similar but the Libraries aim for the best possible discounts. A lot of non-US books are in this category and these are often very erratic in release, sometimes many volumes a year, sometimes few. Currency exchange rates also have to be factored in.
- $1.6 million for electronic resources – database subscriptions – of which the Libraries subscribe to a couple of hundred, the prices of which tend to increase at 5% per year. About half are acquired with discounts through combining with other USMAI institutions, but discounts are at the discretion of the vendor. Because of who we are, UMCP needs more obscure databases that other institutions are not interested in, so no opportunity for bulk discount. There are also annual access fees to archives, such as JSTOR.
- $1.6 million for journal subscriptions, newspapers, magazines that are either only print-based, or primarily print-based with access to the electronic version with a print subscription.
- $3.6 million, or 40% of the base budget, for electronic-only serials. Journal price inflation, regardless of format, has been at about 8% per year for a number of years.
The Libraries work with a serials vendor to process orders and maintain subscriptions. In spite of service fees, this saves a lot on staff costs and ensures receipt of issues and continuity of online access. Early payment of fees provides a further discount. Moving a journal to electronic may provide a one-time saving, that is more a reduction in inflation. After the first year, there are no actual savings for electronic-only journals.
Discussion
Monographs
Klumpp – regarding the purchase plan for monographs, how do we adjust as the pot of money shrinks? Van Sant – one of the criteria is the maximum price per book. This has been gradually dropping over the years, which is affecting those disciplines with very expensive books, e.g. Engineering.
Lowry – the approval plans are cost effective as it would cost us much more to go title by title ourselves, so the occasional book that is not useful is a marginal cost. The Libraries face a long-term challenge. In 1990 we were at par with Chapel Hill, even spending a little more. Then followed 6 years of flat acquisitions for UMCP, while our peers received inflationary increases that helped to increase the scope of their purchasing power. Over the past 15 years or so, the library budget has been one of decline. We spend less overall than we did in 1990 but have stayed as level as possible with fewer staff and fewer resources, never taking any money out of the acquisitions budget to cover other costs.
Councilors asked about individual ways of saving, and received responses from Van Sant and Vikor:
- How do the Libraries set aside funds for monograph acquisitions for new programs? Can we set up special funds to support new programs? Klumpp explained that this problem was addressed by the ULC’s New Programs recommendation to the provost. Soft money was provided for new programs in FY07. That money was neither hard budgeted nor renewed in FY08. The ULC has recommended a solution, but the provost’s office has so far not been able to implement this part of the recommendations.
- If U MD did not have to pay rent to Johns Hopkins for OSS, could those savings be put into collections? If funding is granted to build an OSS addition at the Hopkins facility, we would become partners with Hopkins and would cease to pay rent. If that money ($160,000 plus per year) were put back into acquisitions, it would help but not solve the problem.
- The bioengineering program started with help from generous donors; can the Libraries approach these donors? No, that is not allowed. Klumpp added that a recommendation to include library materials in budgets presented to donors was a part of the New Programs recommendations.
- If students do not pay their fees, they don’t get access to the Libraries. Are part of the fees apportioned for the Libraries? No. We can apply for some, especially from the student technology fund, but these are one-time awards and our needs are ongoing.
- Are electronic versions of monographs cheaper? No, they tend to cost 150% of the hard copy price, because they offer additional features such as searching capabilities. Publishers are still feeling their way with these.
- Do UMUC students pay to use our library? They used to but this fee was cut and UMUC students now have free access.
- How do we interface with Google’s book digitization project? Their focus is more on general collections and more scientifically oriented books. They are not rich for humanities.
Databases
Reports from across campus show concern that there is a lot of expansion in databases and we are not obtaining the new ones.
Lowry explained the three types of database:
- Journal publishers, e.g. Wiley and Elsevier, all electronic.
- Aggregator databases, which bring together the journals of many publishers, e.g. EBSCO. They provide access to many more journals but are not stable, depending on the aggregator’s contracts with individual publishers, so journals may leave the database.
- Databases that provide the equivalent of old microform sets, especially for historical materials. These must be purchased, plus an annual maintenance fee.
Hahn asked how much do individual colleges and departments control databases. The business school does, and those are not available to the rest of campus. The idea of departments’ purchasing their own databases is counterproductive to the interdisciplinary nature of the university.
Van Sant is concerned about exchange rates. Also, the success of the university in attracting more students means library costs increase, because subscriptions are prorated on FTEs. The Libraries may have to freeze monograph purchases to pay for subscriptions. Greer agreed that enrollment management is challenging. The university is trying to improve off-campus programs, such as at Shady Grove, but those students also need to use the Libraries.
Journals
Lowry said that when deselecting journals, the Libraries do so title by title. Sometimes a journal can still be accessed via the aggregator databases, but this loses the archiving aspect and what is contained in an aggregator database can change from year to year.
Council decided unanimously to continue the discussion in the next meeting.
Meeting adjourned at 11:05 a.m.
