Shedl may 11

1

SHEDLScottish Higher Education Digital

LibraryNegotiating together: collaborative

academic library purchasing

Barbara HoustonCILIPS Shared services event, Dundee, May 2011

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 2

Context Scottish HE tradition of co-operation

Manageable size

Separate funding arrangements

Research Pools

Examples of other consortia, IReL, FinELib

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 3

Investigative Study SCURL sponsored – Scottish Confederation of

University and Research Libraries John Cox Associates Ltd Interviews

Libraries University administrators/Universities Scotland Academics/Research Pools Stakeholders – Scottish Funding Council/JISC etc

Report available on the SHEDL area of the SCURL website

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 4

Relationship with JISC Collections/NESLi2

Strong consensus that SHEDL should work within JISC Collections framework

But wish to fill in gaps, to move away from ‘opt-in’ arrangements, to ensure overall access for Research Pools

Plus possibility of wider range of deals (recognising NESLi2’s current work with ‘small/medium publishers’)

Structure & governance

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 5

SCOPNet

SHEDL Steering Group

SHEDL Working Group

SCURL

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 6

Phase 1 Initial agreement to work with 3 publishers,

covering a wide range of subjects

Agreements for 2009-2011 with: American Chemical Society Cambridge University Press Springer

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 7

Process Institutional verification of holdings and

expenditure with each publisher

Negotiation by JISC Collections

Licence agreement based on JISC model licence

Adjustments to holdings – link resolvers & OPACs

Monitoring of usage – locally and at consortium level

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 8

Costs Costs are fixed at the start of the contract, with

agreed annual price caps

SHEDL institutions continue to fund their own subscriptions, and do not expect to pay more than before

Option to buy print at ddp

Reduced overheads – single payment and early payment where possible

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 9

Phase 2 WG consultation resulted in 40 nominations

6 publishers approached, following consultation with JISC

3 new publisher agreements for 2010-2012 Berg Edinburgh University Press Oxford University Press

Portico licensed across SHEDL

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 10

Phase 3 Similar consultation process resulted in 46

nominations

7 publishers identified for 2011 Agreements for 2011-13

Intellect Project Muse

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 11

Phase 3 - Difficulties Negotiations more difficult in 2010

Agreements with publishers with greater ‘market penetration’ already achieved

Publishers still expecting market growth

More difficult for libraries to commit

Collaboration more essential in world of funding cuts, but also more difficult

Phase 4 Continuation of the difficult scenario of 2010

UK-wide deals for Wiley-Blackwell and Elsevier content due to be renewed

Renewals of phase 1 deals

Decided on one definite, one possibility and one reserve publisher

Awaiting outcomes from JISC

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 12

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 13

Benefits – the HEIs Shift to e-only Single payment Proof of concept

widening access increased availability of content increased usage efficiency gains

Shared services agenda

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 14

Benefits – the Publishers Reduced overheads – single point of contact for

administration and invoicing

Wider dissemination of content

Encourages adoption of e-only

Cash flow – protects market share

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 15

Benefits – the users More content, accessible at the point of need -

2000+ titles available

Analysis shows that previously non-subscribed titles are being used

Increase in usage across all Phase 1 publishers, and across all institutions

Usage increased by 41% from 2008 to 2009

Springer usage at QMU

May 2011CILIPS event, Dundee 16

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep oct nov dec

Dow

nloa

ds

Springer usage

2008

2009

2010

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 17

Evaluation - RIN Report evaluating the impact of SHEDL

John Cox Associates/Frontline GMS

Usage data

Interviews – academics/librarians

Single year of the Phase 1 agreements

RIN report

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 18

Evaluation - RIN Conclusions of the report

Confirmed overall usage increase of 41%, compared with 22% ‘average’ UK wide increase

Wide variation in increases – single year – whether or not titles already accessible

Some evidence that Research Pool participants benefiting

Cost/download was variable but all institutions achieved savings

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 19

Evaluation – JISC Collections

Bloc payment mechanisms Cost redistribution criteria

Albert Prior/John Cox

Not specifically SHEDL

JISC Collections report

Launched July 2010

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 20

Evaluation – JISC Collections

No “magic” formula Authoritative/credible data

JISC Banding Institutional income Research/contract income Staff/student numbers

Not usage Not SCONUL stats Not data from the 2008 Research Assessment

Exercise

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 21

Next steps Review of activities

2011 - a year to consolidate SHEDL model Allocation of costs Types of format procured Expansion to other sectors

Further Education? NHS? NLS?

May 2011 CILIPS event, Dundee 22

Further information Website – under development

http://scurl.ac.uk/WG/SHEDL/index.html

Tony Kidd, Acting Chair, SHEDL Steering Group tony.kidd@glasgow.ac.uk

Kidd, T. Collaboration in electronic resource provision in university libraries: SHEDL, a Scottish case study. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 15 (1), 2009, pp 97-119 http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/7637/

Kidd, T. & Stevenson, L. SHEDL – the Scottish Higher Education Digital Library: an update. Serials, 23(3), 2010, pp 196-200 http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/44955/