Maine Shared Collections Cooperative Executive Committee
September 25, 2017
1:00 pm – 2:00 pm
Attendees: Matthew Revitt, Joyce Rumery, Marjorie Hassen, Barbara McDade, David Nutty
Absentee: Jamie Ritter
1. Planning for 2019 group analysis – updated proposal for collection analysis from SCS
Matthew had circulated prior to the meeting a revised proposal for collection analysis services from Rick Lugg at OCLC Sustainable Collection Services (SCS). Matthew reminded the Committee that the proposal is for MSCC’s 2019 group analysis which will look at developing retention rules for titles that were out of scope during the original analysis back in 2013-2014. These are titles added to MSCC libraries collections between 2003 and 2008 (which total approximately 700,000 titles across MSCC).
The revised proposal incorporated requested changes that Matthew had discussed with Rick following the Executive Committee’s last meeting in March, specifically that each ILS represented in the MSCC group would be treated as a single institution with a single extract and a single instance of GreenGlass. Matthew noted that UMaine Machias who have joined MSCC need to be added to the proposal.
The feedback on the proposal was positive, but there are some specific questions that the Committee would like to discuss with Rick, including not needing comparator groups & HathiTrust overlap comparisons, clarifying set up fees, and the data extract process. Matthew confirmed for David that while MSCC may have experience with developing rules from the grant project and subsequent work that they would still need training for using GreenGlass. Matthew felt SCS training could be limited to just the MSCC Collections & Operations Committee who would be responsible for developing retention rules.
The process for how the data extract would be coordinated still needs to be decided, but Matthew speculated that Maine InfoNet (depending on workloads) could assist with the URSUS and the Minerva extracts, but that CBB would have staff in-house who can carry out the extracts. Matthew’s experience from EAST suggests that the data extract process is relatively straightforward for libraries with technical services support. The Committee also discussed the potential of contracting with Sara Amato to coordinate the data extract process to ensure it is carried out consistently and work needed to parcel out retention commitments to individual libraries within the consortium.
Matthew confirmed for Marjorie that while the Collection & Operations have discussed different retention rules in preparation for the 2019 analysis, a final retention model is still to be agreed and won’t be until 2019 when MSCC analyzes its collective collection.
The Committee discussed the differences in pricing between the 2013 analysis and the proposal for 2019 and the enhanced service SCS now provide via GreenGlass. Matthew also went over how the costs of the 2013 analysis were distributed across the 8 libraries
Matthew confirmed for Barbara that MSCC are still the only shared print program to include public libraries, but that as part of the planning of a shared print summit (see below) the idea of including public libraries had been discussed. During the MSCS grant OCLC data had showed there are unique titles held outside of academic libraries which need to be protected which is an issue the MSCC post-grant analysis is attempting to address in Maine.
The Committee discussed whether it made fiscal sense to look at titles published and/or added to libraries collections after 2008 rather than wait another 5 years to analyze them.
In response to a question from David, Matthew outlined what the “OCLC registration service” referred to in the proposal entails.
Matthew agreed to arrange a meeting with at Bowdoin College before the end of 2017 with Rick Lugg and the MSCC Executive Committee plus the library directors of Portland Public Library, Bates and Bowdoin colleges, the directors of the UMaine system libraries, and a representative from Minerva libraries.
2. Revised MSCC retention commitment transfer document
At the last MSCC Collections & Operations Committee meeting on May 15th the Committee discussed following the Eastern Academic Scholars’ example and instead of requiring libraries to seek out replacements from other libraries for lost or damaged retained items on an ad-hoc basis there will be a semi-annual schedule of retention transfers. Libraries will be expected to submit their transfer requests to Matthew by the two deadline of June and January 1st and he will manage the process centrally, including identifying which MSCC libraries could potentially take on the commitment.
Matthew had shared with the Executive Committee a revised transfer procedure which had been approved by the Collections & Operations Committee.
Matthew confirmed for David that the procedures will also be applied to libraries seeking to transfer large number of commitments as well as one-offs.
The Executive Committee approved the procedures. Joyce asked Matthew to add a note that the procedure will be assessed after a year to ensure the burden on Matthew is not excessive.
The Collections & Operations Committee at its last meeting approved Portland Public Library’s request to reverse retention commitments on the works of a group of specific children’s publishers whose works quickly become outdated and as such aren’t appropriate for long-term retention. Bangor Public Library may also decide to withdraw titles from these publishers as well. Matthew confirmed that the publisher’s names will be added to an updated list of publishers whose works MSCC would agree in 2019 to not retain. Matthew commented that as the only two public libraries in the original grant analysis both Bangor and Portland had taken on relatively large commitments of these sorts of non-fiction titles.
Matthew has been speaking with Evelyn Greenlaw at USM regarding their Franco Collection. Matthew has offered to help identify which of the titles they are withdrawing have MSCC commitments and/or holdings elsewhere in MSCC. It’s still unclear if the coordinator for this collection will be replaced, so things are still in limbo.
3. Project updates
a. MSCC collection analysis & new members update
41 libraries have so far gone through the MSCC collection analysis service. Since the Committee’s last meeting Matthew has worked with UMaine Machias, Lithgow Public Library in Augusta, and Falmouth Public Library. Only the URSUS law libraries aren’t MSCC members.
Matthew commented that with so many of the Minerva libraries having already gone through the MSCC collection analysis things have slow down a little. Matthew is finding that some libraries for various reasons can’t go through the analysis at this time, usually because of staffing and building issues and there are those that aren’t interested. There are 19 public libraries in Minerva Matthew hasn’t yet worked with and of those about a quarter having previously expressed interest in participating. Matthew will continue to send periodical reminders and network at meetings. In the medium-term Matthew is also going to attempt to recruit libraries joining the relatively newly formed MILS consortium.
Matthew confirmed for David that he had previously been in contact with the Balsam consortium about participating in the collection analysis and MSCC, but had found it difficult to get a response. However, he will again contacting Balsam members.
There are now 33 members in MSCC. With the newer (post grant) libraries having committed approximately 1,800 titles in total. Matthew commented that when speaking to newer members about the 2019 group analysis he had made it clear the numbers of titles they would be expected to retain would rise dramatically because currently they are only be asked to consider for retention local interest titles.
There are nine libraries that have gone through the MSCC analysis who still haven’t signed off on their retention commitments, seven of whom haven’t formally joined MSCC; Matthew sends these libraries periodic reminders.
b. New OCLC retention commitment registration service
OCLC have agreed that for libraries with a standard OCLC cataloging subscription service they won’t charge a fee to register retention commitments in WorldCat using their new registration service. This new service replaces the model of how MSCC recorded retention commitments previously using the batchloading service and second shared print symbols. The release of the registration service has been severely delayed and is still being internally testing.
The impact on MSCC is that when it comes time to make commitments in 2019 (and MSCC agrees to record commitments in OCLC) libraries won’t be charged a fee to do so. Also, if MSCC agrees the new methods for disclosing commitments is an improvement on how they are currently discoverable OCLC have agreed to retro fit existing MSCC commitments to the new shared print holding type and will not charge a fee for this work.
c. MSCC presentations – NELA & ALCTS webinar
Matthew will be presenting next month at the New England Library Association’s annual conference on building a shared collection in the northeast which will discuss the work of MSCC and the growth of the Eastern Academic Scholars’ Trust (EAST).
In January, Matthew will be delivering an online ALCTS webinar on governance models for shared print and will include MSCC as one of his examples.
d. EAST shared print summit
In April 2018, EAST will be hosting a shared summit in Boston, MA with representatives from shared print programs from across North America to discuss areas of potential collaboration between the different programs, taking a national view. Matthew will be attending the summit with both his MSCC and EAST hats on and report back to the Executive Committee on the results.
e. MSCC involvement in EAST
Colby remains the only MSCC participant in the Eastern Academic Scholars’ Trust (EAST) with Bowdoin making the decision earlier this year not to participate as part of second cohort of libraries. The EAST Cohort 2 are currently working with SCS on the collection analysis. Matthew is also leading EAST’s efforts on developing retention policy for print serial and journal titles. EAST now has 60 members from Maine to Florida and as far west as Tennessee. The grant funding for EAST from Mellon was originally due to end in June 2017, but EAST secured a no cost extension until June 2018. The EAST leadership team are also investigating opportunities to secure further grant funding.
Matthew agreed to speak with EAST Executive Director Susan Stearns regarding the possibility of MSCC joining EAST as a consortial supporting partner.
f. HathiTrust shared print update
As part of phase 1 of the HathiTrust’s shared print program the members have collectively agreed to retain 16 million print monograph titles, which is by the far the largest number of titles committed by a group of libraries thus far. Colby College have contributed a subset of their EAST retention commitments to the HathiTrust. The next phase of the HathiTrust program will include analyzing the 6 million titles that there are digital copies of in the HathiTrust that didn’t receive a retention commitment in the first phase.
3. Next meeting date
The Committee’s next meeting will be in the spring, Matthew will send a Doodle Poll closer to.