april 15-16, 2004 north carolina serials conference complicated, constant, and consortial: managing...

April 15-16, 2004

North Carolina Serials Conference

Complicated, Constant, and Consortial: Managing Electronic Resources at The

Ohio State University

presented by:

Rocki StraderElectronic Resources Manager

The Ohio State University LibrariesSandy Hurd

Director of Sales, Digital SolutionsInnovative Interfaces, Inc.

North Carolina Serials Conference April 15-16, 2004

A Librarian’s Perspective


Does an E-Resource Meet our Needs?

• Does it support a curriculum or program?

• Is the content reliable?

• Does it provide access to material we do not have in some other format?

• Does it provide access more effectively than other access to this information?

• Is the improved access worth the cost?

• Is it stable?


Different Types of Electronic Resources

• E-journals• Databases • E-books• Websites


Different Models for Access

• E-journals– May or may not have a license

– May or may not come with print (free or fee)

– May be online only (free or fee)

– May be direct from publisher

– May be provided through aggregator

• Databases– No license, purchased content (rare)

– No license, subscription access (content not purchased)

– License, purchased content

– License, subscription access (content not purchased)


Different Models for Access

• E-books– May or may not have a license

– May or may not supplement or be bundled with print (free or fee)

– Often online only (free or fee)

– May be direct from publisher

– May be provided through aggregator

• Websites– Usually freely accessible

– May or may not have a license or terms of use (usually not)

– May or may not supplement a print document (free or fee)


Different Means of Purchasing

• E-journals – Direct from publisher/provider

– Through vendor

– OhioLINK

• Databases– Direct from publisher/provider

– OhioLINK/OHIONET

– CIC

• E-books– Direct from publisher/provider

– Through vendor

– OhioLINK


Getting a Resource in Place:The People and The Process

• Can involve up to 12 people at OSU

• Usually 9 people if licensed

• Usually 7 people if not licensed

• Once in place may involve 2-5 people– Depending on nature of any subsequent problems


University Libraries:

• Collection manager making request

• Assistant Director for Collection Development

• Head, Serials & Electronic Resources

• Electronic Resources Manager

• Electronic Resources Specialist, acquisitions

• IT Dept Reference Liaison

• Access Support and Accounting

The People


• Head, Serials Acquisitions

• Electronic Resources Specialist, database maintenance

• Systems Librarian

Office of Legal Affairs:

• Liaison to Libraries

• Senior Vice President for Business and Finance and Chief Financial Officer

The People – continued


The Process

1. Selection by collection manager

2. Approval by Assistant Director for Collection Development

3. Negotiation of license• By Head, S/ER (library & business terms)

• By Office of Legal Affairs (State of Ohio requirements; authorized signature)

4. Set up order in online catalog (the ILS)

5. Submit IP addresses to provider


The Process – continued

6. Receive invoice

7. Process and pay invoice

8. Confirm access and make available to patrons via ILS

9. Track renewal

10. Trouble-shoot any later access problems (may be technical or content related)


Set-up and Maintenance Issues

• Trials (maintained by IT Dept Reference Liaison)– Proxy compatibility– Browser compatibility

• Tracking (overseen by Electronic Resources Manager)– Contact information

• Publisher • Vendor • Access provider

– Renewals• Individual titles, package deals• OhioLINK, OHIONET, CIC


Set-up and Maintenance Issues – continued

• Usage statistics (collected by IT Dept Reference Liaison)

– Monthly, quarterly, annual– Each provider has a different means for providing data

• IP addresses (kept by S/ER and IT depts)

– IT dept involved with recurrent access problems– Access is almost exclusively IP based– S/ER maintains lists of ranges for vendors and providers– IT maintains specific IPs for all machines in Libraries


The Only Constant is Change!


“Subject to Change”

• Changes in providers– Lawrence Erlbaum titles: from Ingenta to LEA Online

– Official Index to the Times: from ProQuest to Gale

• Changes in pricing models– Science Online

– PNAS

– AGU (also involved change in license terms)

• License changes

• Title changes

• Coverage changes (e.g., JSTOR moving wall)


Other Issues• The print/e-resource flip

• OhioLINK pricing• Dekker

• Sheer volume of titles• E-journals

• OhioLINK: over 5,000

• Additional OSU: over 3,000

• Databases

• OhioLINK: about 150

• OHIONET: over 40

• Additional OSU: over 1000


Other Issues – continued

• Serials Solutions

• MARC records• E-journal Portal

• Other issues• OSU’s “Database of Databases”


OSU’s Consortial Participation

• OhioLINK

• OHIONET

• CIC: Committee on Institutional Cooperation


OhioLINK Terms and Deals

• OhioLINK comprises five different funding models

• Prices and licenses negotiated by OhioLINK except for Pay-to-Play

• In Pay-to-Play, most prices negotiated by OHIONET

• Pay-to-Play licenses negotiated by individual institutions


OhioLINK Funding Models

1) OhioLINK• Funding comes from the State through the Regents’ system• No OSU costs• Access available to ALL of OhioLINK

2) War Chest• Price negotiated by OhioLINK• Cost based on FTE of participating institutions• OSU’s FTE-based cost comes out of OSU’s budget• Access only to paying institutions

3) Pay-to-Play• Price negotiated by OHIONET• Discounts usually based on the number of participating institutions• Cost comes from OSU’s budget• Access only to paying institutions


OhioLINK Funding Models – continued

4) NPR Model• OhioLINK negotiates the price

• Interested institutions pay portion of cost

• Number of paying institutions determines the cost per institution (the more that participate, the less each has to pay)

• If OSU participates, cost comes out of OSU’s budget

• Access is granted to ALL of OhioLINK

5) Free• LSTA grant-funded databases

• Bartleby.com


OHIONET and CIC

• OHIONET– Prices negotiated by OHIONET– Licenses negotiated by individual institutions

• CIC– Prices and licenses negotiated by CIC


A Vendor’s Perspective


Building New Software

• Listen to the customer, be responsive

• Development partners and beta sites

• Critical concepts

• Support for Digital Library Federation’s Electronic Resources Management Initiative (ERMI)– Vendor reactor panel

– Process and terminology

– Search “web hub Chandler”

• Standards– Joint Working Party (NISO + EDItEUR) and ONIX

– COUNTER


Most Important Criteria

• Loading– Multiple data sources– Multiple formats– Bibliographic and holdings data– URL linking and verification

• Tracking– License terms– Negotiation timing and details– Consistent and controlled vocabulary

• Management– Ticklers– Reports

• Staff and public views• Go beyond the e-journal and the package


What’s Ahead

• General release

• Integrated and stand-alone sites

• Dozens in the queue

• Already planning version 2– COUNTER

– Sub-packages

– Scoping e-journals vs. databases

– More

• Continue to listen and respond


Thank you.

Rocki Strader, [email protected]

Sandy Hurd, [email protected]

april 15-16, 2004 north carolina serials conference complicated, constant, and consortial: managing...

Documents

content license

access ebooks

access ejournals

subscription access

vendor ohiolink slide

improved access

librarians perspective

print free