Like Topsy how CAUL became CEIRC the

Like Topsy ………. how CAUL became CEIRC: the rise of the library consortium Diane Costello

Overview z. Why form consortia? z. Australia z. CAUL/CEIRC z. Gaining consensus z. The trends z. Multi-national consortia z. Other consortial efforts

Why form a Consortium? z. Reduce costs - Discount for volume z. Increase access - To all titles owned by the consortium; to publisher’s list; to aggregator’s packages z. Reduce work y. Information gathering y. Trial coordination y. Licence negotiation y. Price negotiation

Principles z. Better price and/or conditions than possible as a single institution z. Entry level which allows the largest number to participate z. Advantages for larger institutions z. Information gathering http: //www. caul. edu. au/datasets/offers. htm http: //www. caul. edu. au/datasets/ip. htm z. Simplify administration

… and the Publishers? z. Single point for wide distribution of information z. Single point of contact for negotiations z. Single invoice … but z. Maintain (or increase) bottom line

Australia z *CAVAL - Victoria z USLA - South Australia z QULOC - Queensland z WAGUL - Western Australia z *UNILINC - New South Wales z ACTUAL - Australian Capital Territory z*CASL/NLA Consortia and Licensing Working Group - Mo. U March 2001

CAUL z 38 AVCC member libraries; z. University/Chief/Principal Librarian; zvoluntary, subscription-based; z 1928 - first meeting; z 1965 - Committee formed; z 1992 - Council named; z 1995 - full-time executive officer.

CAUL Environment z. Publicly funded HE http: //www. detya. gov. au/ … reducing …. y 620, 000+ FTE (including 63, 000 HD) z. Library expenditure $A 390 m ($US 201 m) y$A 136 m on information resources ($US 70 m) ylibrary staff average 108 z. Exchange rate y. October 1996 - AUD 1. 0 = USD 0. 8055 y. April 3, 2001 - AUD 1. 0 = USD 0. 4833

CAUL Organisation z. President - Helen Hayes (elected 1998) z. Executive Committee (elected) z. CEIRC Committee (election/nomination) z. Office staff 2 FTE (5/95, 6/98, 4/01) y. Secretariat, Committee Support, Cooperative Activities (Statistics, NBS, Performance Indicators, CISC), Liaison/Representation, Current awareness, Web site, CEIRC program

CEIRC (CAUL Electronic Information Resources Committee) z. NPRF funds $2 m 1993 -1996 for datasets y“Trials” of ISI Current Contents, Academic Press IDEAL, IAC Expanded Academic ASAP, etc z. Evolved into consortial purchasing y. Committee recommends policy to CAUL y. CAUL Office handles day-to-day z. Now includes CSIRO, CONZUL (+14 total) z. CEIRC Levy

CEIRC (2) z. Guidelines for external participants z. Guidelines for licences - no strict model z. Checklist for “negotiations” but z. No preferred pricing model z. No minimum participation z. No schedule of negotiations

CAUL Office z. Instigation via member, publisher or office z. Distribution of information re product, licence, price & trial via email list z. Negotiation/liaison re price & conditions z. Maintenance of details on web site http: //www. caul. edu. au/datasets/ z. Participation list, IP addresses, contacts z. Invoicing & payments

Decision-Making z. Self-selected consortium vs National Site Licence y“Buying club” z. Changing environment --> Changing decision-making processes z. Each product assessed independently y. Licence conditions y. Overlap between products y. Choice of interfaces

Decision-Making (2) z. Datasets Coordinator - coordinates communication & decision by given date! y. Acquisitions? y. Discipline-based liaison personnel? y. Electronic information coordinator? y. Chief librarian?

Cost-Sharing z. Determined by Publisher & passed on to group eg y. Subscription history (current spend) y. Carnegie Classification y. Percentage discount by volume x# Institutions x# Databases x# Titles y. EFTSU / FTE - all or discipline-specific

Cost-Sharing (2) z. Determined within Consortium eg y. Equal share y. FTE-based y. Usage-based y. Resources budget, or y… a combination of the above eg 50% equal share (entry level) + 50% FTE-based y… or what it is worth to the institution eg NAAL (Alabama)

Cost-Sharing (3) z. Gaining consensus y. Current Contents - 50% fixed + 4 tiers based on FTE (+ choice of interface) y. Math. Sci. Net - Costs of current subscribers reducing with added subscribers y. Pro. Quest 5000 - Minimum entry cost per institution + Minimum total cost

CAUL Agreements 1996 z 32 agreements, 18 full-text, 4 factual databases, the rest bibliographic z Half commenced in 2000 or later yburgeoning of available electronic products yincreasing willingness of publishers to deal with consortia z Billing handled centrally (15) ylocal office or agent z Average number of participants 20 z Highest number 40 (Pro. Quest 5000)

Issues z. Publishers y. Site definition (16 Oz single-campus univ) y. Bundling print with online y. Maintaining bottom line y. Premium for electronic and/or enhanced product eg Wo. S y. Access to “purchased” data & archiving

Issues (2) z. Members y. Variation in size / wealth / research emphasis / discipline base y. Cost-sharing parameters x. Competition x“Subsidy” of less well-resourced institutions x. Relative gain, rather than the NAAL ideal y. Agreement on priorities

Issues (3) z. Subscription Agents y. Publishers dealing directly y. Overlap with consortia x. Invoicing members x. Paying publisher y. Finding new roles x. Agent for consortia x. Collections management and support

Some Approaches z. Tender for journal collection eg California State University z. Mega-consortium eg Solinet z. Managing Agent eg NESLI / Swets / Manchester Computing z. ICOLC z. Consortia Advisory Board (BHIL) z. VADL - usage-based multi-institution licence

Pause. . z. Very similar deals being done by a wide variety of consortia z. National Site Licence - an ideal which requires either ytop-sliced or additional funding or yinternal agreement about what is wanted and how much the individual institutions are prepared to pay for it

… and progress z. Cheaper than list prices z. Access to more titles z. Shift in licence conditions eg ILL, course packs, etc z. Unbundling of print from electronic z. More trust --> Simpler licences

Cooperative Opportunities z. Shared ILMS eg Unilinc z. Joint and/or bulk purchasing/processing eg WAGUL ze-TOC (MEADS) z. Reciprocal borrowing/auto document delivery (QULOC) z. Shared development eg JEDDS (Ariel), LIDDAS, ADT, AEVL, Agri. Gate, Meta. Web, ALEG

International Opportunities z. ICOLC 4, 1998 z. Soli. Net plus z. New Zealand z. Fiji ….