Electronic Resource Electronic Resource Management: a Vended Management: a Vended

ApproachApproachTony HarvellTony Harvell

Head of AcquisitionsHead of AcquisitionsUCSD LibrariesUCSD Libraries

tharvell@ucsd.edutharvell@ucsd.edu

Background of UCSD LibrariesBackground of UCSD Libraries

• Subscribe to over 400 paid “electronic resources” (including e-journal packages, aggregators, databases, CD-ROMs)

• About 60% are purchased consortially through California Digital Library

• Innovative Interfaces user since 1987

• Full-level cataloging done on nearly all e-journals (both for UCSD and the CDL)

Need to better manage e-resourcesNeed to better manage e-resources

• Shift to e-only journal access (over 8,000 paid e-journals)

• E-resource budget share continues to grow (in excess of 15% currently)

• Need to track resources from trial through licensing negotiation and payment

• ILS had no means monitoring all activities so many separate files were being maintained, many in paper

Considerations Considerations

• Identified all potential users of an ERMS

• Identified the potential uses of the system

• Examined amount of human resources and computer resources needed to develop and maintain the system

• Is system scaleable and sustainable?

• Is financial support available for future developments and enhancements?

Options availableOptions available

• Develop system in-house • Costs prohibitive• IT staff unavailable

• Adopt (purchase?) system from another library

• UCLA

• Purchase a vended system

Vendor solutionVendor solution

• Innovative Interfaces Electronic Resources Management was in development at this time

• Our library has historically been a “beta test” library for other III products

• We believed it would require little or no local programming or development

• We hoped it would be fully integrated into our existing ILS

ImplementationImplementation

• Installation in October 2003

• WebEx training from III

• Working Group created to evaluate product, provide feedback to III, and develop local standards for implementation

• Participate in e-discussion list and conference calls with other users

Positive experiencesPositive experiences

• Uses same platform as our existing Web- based technical services components

• Can build database using existing records for orders and holdings

• Offers quite a bit of local customization ability and locally defined fields and labels

• Generally follows the Digital Library Foundation’s ERMI standards and practices

ChallengesChallenges

• Because it is in beta, there is no documentation and “kinks” are continuously being worked out

• System architecture may require us to rethink how we currently catalog electronic resources

• OPAC display is currently being developed, so we may have to redesign OPAC screens

• Not clear as to how it can be used to develop our e-resources portal (SAGE) which includes both licensed and open-access resources

Future directionsFuture directions

• Experiment with E-holdings loads

• Work with public services staff to redesign OPAC displays to incorporate ERM data

• Develop resource records that monitor vendor performance and track usage statistics

• Possible adoption for consortial use by UC libraries?