New York Resource Sharing Solutions - Recently Updated Pages

Resource Sharing Summit 2008 presentations and links

DonnaDixon — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:49:45 CDT

Presentations:

A Tale of Two Consortia: Rush Miller keynote presentation

Delivering the Goods: Katie Birch OCLC presentation

Fast Moving Targets: Cyril Oberlander presentation

RAPID ILL and ConnectNY presentation

RAPID ILL at Columbia University Libraries

RAPID ILL at Hamilton College Library

Rethinking Resource Sharing presentation

Discovery Group Update

Delivery Group Update

Open Mike on Discovery to Fulfillment links:

Using Encore discovery tool to link to CONTENTdm digital collections at St. Lawrence University (joint project of SLU Art Gallery and Library):
http://screencast.com/t/dMUjB1Oxu

Using Encore discovery tool to link to Google Books held by ConnectNY libraries:
http://screencast.com/t/DtviLpDm

Using Encore discovery tool access to harvest from DSpace:
http://www.screencast.com/users/EWB/folders/Jing/media/e32629a2-0b8a-418b-a158-6613bd56b8b9

New York State Guiding Principles for Resource Sharing

DonnaDixon — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:47:27 CDT

DRAFT 3 October 24, 2008
New York State Resource Sharing Guiding Principles: adapted from the “Rethinking Resources Sharing Manifesto” [http://www.rethinkingresourcesharing.org/manifesto.html] and the IDS Project Contract

Introduction:

Library systems, authorized in Education Law by the State Legislature and governed by the regulations of the Commissioner of Education, provide many services aimed at improving the quality of resource sharing in New York State. The Reference and Research Library Resources (3Rs) systems, particularly, were chartered to provide a means for the development of interlibrary cooperative plans and services. Regional resource sharing efforts comprise important elements of their work.

In addition to the funding for the general resource sharing activities of the three types of library systems - public library systems, school library systems and the 3Rs - the State's investment in regional resource sharing is evident in State-funded programs such as the Regional Bibliographic Data Bases program( RBDB), the Medical Information Services program (MISP), the Hospital Library Services program (HLSP), and Coordinated Collection Development (CCDA).

The Regents Commission on Libraries report, Meeting the Needs of all New Yorkers, http://www.nysl.nysed.gov/rcols/finalrpt.htm, which has been adopted in its entirety by the Board of Regents as statewide policy for libraries, affirmed the importance of resource sharing in its first and eighth recommendations. In 2007, the Regents reaffirmed their policy commitment to implementation of the report's ten recommendations.

In June 2007, members of New York’s library community came together in Saratoga Springs for a Resource Sharing Summit to discuss and share ideas regarding the future of resource sharing in New York State. To continue the conversations, outcomes of the summit included:

Creation of a Discovery Working Group and a Delivery Working Group.
Plans for a second resource sharing summit, scheduled for October 23-24, 2008, at the Holiday inn in Saratoga Springs.

[Note: changes in boldface as per discussion on October 24, 2008 at the Resource Sharing Summit]

Goals:

Individuals can find easily identify and locate resources available from any library, library system or the State Library, in New York State.
Individuals can obtain access to what they find no matter where they find it.
Individuals can make choices based on time, format, delivery method and cost

Guiding Principles:

Libraries, library systems and the State Library will continue to explore the development of a rapid, effective resource-sharing system among librariesin New York State.
Libraries, library systems and the New York State Library will work together to implement and objectively evaluate innovative resource-sharing strategies, policies and procedures that will optimize mutual access to the information resources in libraries in the State.
Libraries, library systems and the York State Library will support resource sharing with the funds, staff, training, equipment, technical support, time and work space required to support the goals of resource sharing in New York State.
Restrictions on resource sharing shall only be imposed as necessary by individual institutions with the goal that the lowest-possible-barriers-to-fulfillment is presented to the user.
Library users shall be given appropriate options for delivery format, method of delivery, and fulfillment type, including loan, copy, digital copy, and purchase.
Rather than refuse to provide services, libraries should offer service at a fair and should strive to achieve services that are less expensive than commercial services, e.g. bookshops

NYRSS Home

DonnaDixon — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 15:45:54 CDT

About this Wiki

Thanks to all from the New York library community who participated in the 2008 Resource Sharing Summit October 23-24 in Saratoga Springs, NY. Lively roundtables, panels and thought-provoking presentations helped frame the discussion about the future of resource sharing discovery and delivery.

The summit was open to library staff and directors/administrators from all types of libraries.

Keynote speaker Rush Miller, University Librarian and Director of the University Librarian System, University of Pittsburgh, shared his thoughts on how two different types of consortia have evolved--and what the "next gen" might be.
Katie Birch, OCLC Portfolio Manager, OCLC Europe, exposed new pathways in OCLC resource sharing
Other topics included reporting from the Discovery and Delivery Working Groups, roundtable discussions and explorations of resource sharing models.
Presentations and notes are being posted here during the week of October 27--please take a look and start or join in a discussion.

Delivery scenarios

Kathy-Nylink — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:54:36 CDT

Yesterday (7/22) we talked about suggesting a few possible scenarios for statewide delivery. Here's one possibility, pie-in-the sky kind of thing:

Hub Option: Public library systems, regional library councils (3Rs), (and school library systems if interested) would be invited to participate in the LAND delivery system as "hub" connectors. The one criteria for joining LAND would be that the system would need to have its own internal delivery system - there would be no point in joining if they did not have a means of distributing items to their members. There would be a fee, presumably higher than the current cost for an individual library to join. I'm not speculating on who would pay, at this point. This would create the potential for 27 new LAND stops - 23 public library systems and 4 of the 3Rs since only 4 have delivery services. I'm assuming there would be little interest among school library systems, and no ability to pay.

Each hub would agree to distribute items received in LAND to its member libraries through its own delivery system. There would be no change in the way existing LAND members, mostly academic libraries, experience delivery. They would remain "full" members and get their daily delivery. The "hubs" would be added stops, but this concept should not have a detrimental effect on turnaround time. For current LAND members, there would be no difference. A few added stops in each area of the state should have minimal impact. And for the hubs and the smaller libraries that connect through the hubs, there would be substantial improvement in turnaround time. Let's say SUNY Geneseo needs to send an item to a public library in the Albany area. Right now, they would need to put the item in the mail. With this new option, they would put the item in LAND for delivery to the Capital District Library System. CDLC would then send the item out in their regional delivery system and the borrowing library could receive it in as little as 2 days, rather than the usual mailing time of 7-10 days. The borrowing library would return the item in the same way - send it back to the system office, which would then put the item into the LAND delivery.

This delivery option would work independently, utilizing the existing interlibrary loan process. If we also had a statewide discovery tool or catalog, delivery could be even more personalized.

One-way hub option:
This would work similar to the hub model proposed above, but LAND would be used one way only. Libraries that are part of a system and not on LAND [an individual public library, for example], would request an item from a LAND library. The library would ship the item to the library directly by a means other than LAND so turn-around time is not impacted. When the individual library is done with the item, they would use their local courier system to ship it back to their main system's office, and the system would ship it back to the lending library via LAND. The system would be a LAND stop but not the individual libraries within the system.

This model would avoid having the system be a processing/sorting center, which could be a plus. What would need to be considered is workflow on the part of the lending library.

Tiered Delivery:
This could make it possible for more libraries to participate in statewide delivery by offering a variety of options and costs. Each library could select the option that best met its needs and budget.
DAILY Delivery via courier (such as the existing LAND system) is the premium option. Libraries that subscribe to daily delivery would be guaranteed a quick turnaround time and would be serviced by the courier every weekday, Monday-Friday. This would be the highest cost option.
3X Delivery via courier would be the "middle-of-the-road" option. Libraries would be serviced by a courier service every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. The service could be set up with a different courier company than the one LAND uses, to avoid confusion. Presumably this would be less expensive than daily delivery. Libraries would be guaranteed a turnaround time, but of course the interval would be longer than the daily option. (This could be offered as a 2X option instead, if that proved more reasonable.)
UPS Campus-Ship (or other) option: For libraries with a less frequent need for delivery, this would be a more cost-effective choice. Some regions (CLRC and RRLC among them) are already active with Campus Ship and we could build on our existing list to include additional participants. This is a pay-as-you-go option and would work well if a library had only occasional need for shipping.

If all of these choices were managed at the state level, libraries could choose to participate at the most appropriate level.

Another thought on tiered delivery:
If libraries were willing to pass along a portion of the delivery cost to their users, they could present the menu of delivery options directly to the user.
For example:
We can have it sent to you via UPS - it's free
We can have it here for you in 3 days - you will have to pay $x
We can have it here for you tomorrow - you will have to pay $xx

Regarding Another thought...:
Is it possible for the library to offer all of these options to the users (or for the library to choose the delivery method on a case-by-case basis) or does the library need to choose one of the options and stick with it?

From Delivery group summit discussion re: possible scenarios:

Hub option there is no incentive for drivers

Option, instead of regional system, if one of the other stops would act as the LAND stop for a Library not on LAND
Volume here an issue. Would have to have a cap. If volume became too much the surrogate library would have to become their own LAND stop.

In areas where travel is difficult, like the North Country, have three smaller hubs. Some of the couriers are traveling in these areas already.
This possible dead end.
Three times a week option hub. Would affect turn around time.

Should focus be on those libraries that can not afford land and try and develop a solution for them while leaving the existing successful systems alone?

Tiered delivery:

Buy standardized mailers for smaller libraries who can not afford to be part of LAND.
Possible obstacle is varying size/shapes of materials.

Conclusion:
Every library can not be on one system.

Where do we go from here?
Make the options more available.
Change the margins.
Make known where the libraries that are not in LAND are available.

Delivery Working Group

Kathy-Nylink — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:33:28 CDT

Members | Charges of the Delivery Working Group

Work in Progress

Survey Questions related to Delivery

Summary of Regional Delivery Options

Other Statewide Delivery Groups

Delivery Scenarios

Meeting Notes

December 4, 2007

January 31, 2008

June 27, 2008

September 2008

Breakout session discussion

is not feasible to have one statewide delivery service serving all libraries-need hybrid model

regarding tiered models: consider tiering by activity/volume of materials?

Is there data/evidence that more libraries [smaller academics, for example] would join LAND if cost dropped?

Related to that, if lending to a non-LAND library, what are the delivery costs overall?

don't lose site of home delivery-netflix model with UPS? May work for some but not all library types

the top criteria for delivery may vary by library type: turn-around number one for academics; cost number one for publics

reliability of courier and consistent arrival time is also an issue

Discovery Work in Progress

DonnaDixon — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:37:13 CDT

New York Discovery Tool Matrix

Sample Map: OPALS New York Users

Sample Map: 360 Search New York Users

Documentation/ helpful links

Survey Questions for Discovery

New York State Guiding Principles for Resource Sharing

Documentation and helpful links for the discovery working group

DonnaDixon — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 15:38:01 CDT

See below for attachments

what New York State supports with its library funding:

http://www.nysl.nysed.gov/fundingproposals/Pages/proposal.html

NOVEL's trials of WebFeat:

http://www.nysl.nysed.gov/libdev/news/portal.htm

Web 2.0:

http://www.openlibrary.org/

JISC Report on Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future: http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/gg_final_keynote_11012008.pdf

Library Technology Guides' LibWebCats, a searchable database of technology in use by libraries around the world: http://www.librarytechnology.org/libwebcats/index.pl?SID=20081022507568359&code=lwc

Discovery Group Meeting Minutes

DonnaDixon — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:33:55 CDT

February 1, 2008

March 6, 2008

August 1, 2008

August 21, 2008

September 12, 2008

October 10, 2008

Discovery Working Group

DonnaDixon — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:33:16 CDT

Members | Group Charge

Work in Progress

Minutes

October 10, 2008

DonnaDixon — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:32:16 CDT

Nylink Resource Sharing Discovery Working Group
Minutes from Conference Call October 10, 2008

Present: Donna Dixon and Jon Penn, Nylink; Maribeth Krupczak, New York State Library Division of Library Development; Susan Currie, Binghamton University.

The main agenda item for the call was to discuss roles for the group at the Resource Sharing Summit October 23-24. Maribeth, Susan, Cyril, Bart and Julie will be attending; regrets from Deb and Mary-Carol. On day 1 of the summit, both the delivery and discovery groups will be asked to report on their work over the past year. Donna will put together a few brief slides covering the original and revised charges, decision to do an environmental scan (i.e., discovery tool matrix), and present progress on that so far. The matrix will be posted on our wiki and we’ll ask for folks to keep it updated if it’s agreed to be a useful tool that we want to keep going.

Donna will contact Julie early next week to ask her to present and discuss the Resource Sharing principles that the group compiled, as part of the group report. She will also follow up with Cyril and Bart to recap and plan in person. Donna is finishing the discovery tool matrix over the next few days and will send it around to the group before posting on the wiki. Plan is to add a field for actual URLs of library sites using the various tools, and a field for special notes (for example, the State Library provides discounted pricing for WebFeat for interested NOVEL libraries, and uses WebFeat on its own site). (also carryover from last call, add status of implementation, and stated objectives if available)

Regarding the Open Mic, we’ve received just one submission so far that was unidentified. We brainstormed how to get more participation: Jon will get a list of the attendees and look at their websites to see if there are institutions that we can recruit. Donna will send out a reminder for submissions, and this time give some concrete examples of what we’re looking for.

As we discussed last time, Cyril will kick off the Open Mic with a modified version of his IDS presentation, and Donna will contact him early next week (Oct 14) to confirm this.

On the second day, the delivery and discovery groups will have breakout sessions that attendees can choose to attend. For the discovery group, we’ll create a list of provocative questions around discovery to facilitate the discussion, with the objective of taking the discussions we’ve had in our conference calls further in the community. Donna will draft a list of topics as thought starters for the group and send them around to begin building the list of questions. Discovery group members will be asked to staff a table each (if we have that many attendees in our breakout) and facilitate table discussions, with a reportout to the larger group to wrap up.

Recorder: Donna Dixon

September 12, 2008

DonnaDixon — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:07:51 CDT

Nylink Resource Sharing Discovery Working Group
Minutes from Conference Call September 12, 2008

Present: Donna Dixon and Jon Penn, Nylink; Maribeth Krupczak, New York State Library Division of Library Development; Bart Harloe, St. Lawrence University; Susan Currie, Binghamton University; Cyril Oberlander, SUNY Geneseo; Deb Bendig, Onondaga County Public Library.

Donna will email members of both groups with instructions how to register and get the discounted rate for working group members. Jon recapped the Resource Sharing Summit meeting thus far.

There will be two discussion groups on the second day, one for Discovery and one for Delivery. Need leaders and suggestions for questions for the discussion for our group. Cyril asked what the measurable goals were for the summit. To continue the statewide conversation about resource sharing is the overall goal; the suggestion was made that the registration form ask attendees what their objectives were in attending. It was suggested that Jon correspond with Katie Birch, the OCLC speaker, to ask her not to be product-focused, but rather, to talk about plans to give us better access to WorldCat.org (Donna asked whether anyone was using the WorldCat API, not yet as far as we know. Bart and Susan will ask their systems librarians to talk a look. The systems librarian at Binghamton is a Code4Lib member).

We discussed the discovery tool matrix, and it was suggested that we add a field as to where libraries are at in their implementations, and what their goals are. This may need to be a future project to be completed via a survey or phone calls.

Cyril kicked off a discussion on the future of request management. We have lost discovery; people have found stuff both within and outside of our domains. Google Books now containes 1.4 million full-text books, more robust than thought, and not just the pre-1923 world. Think about enhancing the local collection with an API to this—serve them up through the catalog, reference or instruction. St. Lawrence is loading Google Books that they hold into the ConnectNY Union Catalog. Then the question becomes, how do you expose the “whole collection?”

What constitutes the collection is a big part of what St. Lawrence and others are trying to get a hold of. Digital content, special collections on other platforms, how do they come into resource sharing? The DLF Aquifer project (http://www.diglib.org/aquifer/ ) is stalled as far as Cyril knows.

We discussed the presentation that Cyril gave at the IDS conference, “Resource Sharing: Where are Requests Taking Us?” http://www.idsproject.org/conferences2008.aspx Resource sharing is not just what happens in the ILL office, but in instruction too—making students aware of what’s out there. It can be considered a customized way to provide customer relationship management and marketing—no longer one size fits all. Part of service evaluation involves the connection between resource sharing and the rest of the library.

Discussion of a session at the Resource Sharing summit to be an Open Mic—for participants to demo fast moving targets and free tools they’re using in their libraries right now, with Cyril to kick it off. Objective is to recreate our conversations and bring them into the discussion/roundtable on day 2.

Donna will send out a survey to the participants asking them to volunteer to step up to the mike and share their ideas.

Recorder: Donna Dixon

August 1, 2008

DonnaDixon — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 09:59:00 CDT

Nylink Resource Sharing Discovery Working Group Minutes from Conference Call August 1, 2008 Present: Donna Dixon, Nylink; Susan Currie, Binghamton University; Maribeth Krupczak, New York State Library Division of Library Development Members were asked via email on 7/29 to visit the New York Resource Sharing Summit wiki at http://nyrss.wetpaint.com/ to review the work of our group and the Delivery group. All are asked to sign as members so that we can participate in online discussions and to make comments to new documents as they are posted. The group had been working on draft survey questions (compiled by Susan Currie and Jean Currie) at the same time as the Delivery group, with the intention of doing a combined survey.

The Delivery Group has decided instead to create some delivery scenarios to be posted to the wiki for the community to react to; the first of these has been posted. A subset of our group (Donna Dixon, Julie Cunningham, Susan Currie and Cyril Oberlander) met at the Nylink Annual Meeting in May, and generally agreed that because so much has changed and developed in the New York resource sharing landscape since the resource sharing summit in June 2007, particularly in the discovery area, that we may wish to narrow our focus from a global survey of discovery to look at what is going on just in New York—identifying initiatives and categories, with perhaps some recommendations on how they might cooperate . (One of the folks at the May mini-meeting mentioned the recent JISC report, http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/reppres/gg_final_keynote_11012008.pdf ; it has been posted to the Resource Sharing Summit wiki for all to review).

Thus the primary agenda item for the call on August 1 was to look at our work so far, and decide on what direction to take next. We discussed whether we should still survey, and if so, are there questions we should add, change, or remove? Has the time for such a survey passed, in your opinion, or would such information be useful in going forward? Susan, Maribeth and Donna agreed that rather than doing a survey, our time as well as the community’s time would be better spent conducting an inventory of discovery tools and cooperative resource sharing systems in New York, to include schools (the OPALS schools catalog was mentioned).

One possible way to present this information would be to create an online map showing sites, overlaps and boundaries, and putting this up on the wiki for the working group and community to comment and add to. Next steps would be to look for points of similarity, possible linkages, etc., that may suggest ways of bringing these groups/systems together. Donna Dixon will begin such a map using the Nylink membership map at http://www.nylink.org/membership/Memberloc.htm as a model and will circulate it to the working group during the week of August 18 for comment before posting it to the wiki. She will also update the working group charges to reflect this suggested change in direction and circulate to the group prior to our next scheduled conference call on August 21.

We reviewed the agenda for the Resource Sharing Summit. Anchor speakers Rush Miller and Katie Birch have been booked; a preliminary agenda and registration is up at http://www.nylink.org/sharing/nyrss/ We still need to finalize the breakout groups and roundtables; the suggestion was made to have a presentation or information from the Orbis/Cascade group at the summit. Mary-Carol Lindbloom, Executive Director of the South Central Regional Library Council, will be replacing Betty Maute in the group.

Next conference calls: August 21, 1-2:30 pm September 12, 1-2:30 pm October 3, 1-2:30 pm

Recorder: Donna Dixon

Other Statewide Delivery Services

Kathy-Nylink — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 11:37:51 CDT

Colorado Library Courier: http://courier.clicweb.org/

Pennsylvania: Interlibrary Delivery Service of Pennsylvania:
The Interlibrary Delivery Service (IDS) of Pennsylvania's purpose is to provide a cost effective efficient delivery service linking all types of libraries to support timely resource sharing throughout the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. As an incorporated not-for-profit membership organization, IDS is supported by a state/local partnership which includes a state subsidy and local dues. Through IDS, member libraries share print and non-print library resources to meet the information needs of end users. This year IDS membership includes 1,114 libraries which comprise the service area of the Interlibrary Delivery Service of Pennsylvania. This total includes 222 Full Member libraries and 892 sites which are Affiliates of Full Member ("Parent") libraries

Wisconsin [South Central Library System
Delivery Service]: http://www.sclsdelivery.info

DeliveryGroup-Sept.2008

Kathy-Nylink — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 11:22:57 CDT

Delivery Call Sept. 16
Present: Francie, Sonja, Amy, Debby, Jeff, Cindy, Kathy
Cindy attending Moving Mountains: Are there models similar to hub options? Are there models similar to tiered options?
What else is out there? Resource Sharing Summit: The agenda has been updated; see http://nylink.org/sharing/nyrss/default.cfm
Delivery group can add questions to survey discovery group plans to send out prior to summit; need to get more specifics
For round-table discussions or break-out groups, present the different scenarios [see wiki].
Debby will add a tiered delivery option to wiki-all contribute thoughts

Consider a tiered model with multiple couriers?
What is the most important criteria for delivery? [Ask at summit]

Direct attendees to wiki prior to summit, but also send scenarios ahead of time Flat rate is ideal: easier for budgeting and easier to understand [vs. per package] Other models For states with a statewide delivery system, what is it and how does it work? Is it truly statewide? Don’t necessarily throw it out models that are state funded
Ones to look at: Delivery in Wisconsin, Colorado, Pennsylvania

Delivery Call Sept. 29
Present: Francie, Sonja, Amy, Debby, Jennifer, Carol, Cindy, Kathy
Cindy reported back on Moving Mountains: One scenario described: spoke and wheel [similar to a hub model].
Also spoke of home delivery-in Tampa-state funds it

Tiered delivery: how would you guarantee delivery time? Would need to clarify this.
Concern: connecting different libraries with different couriers

Patron paying for borrowing: In academics: users expect not to pay for service; also at publics. At one public system, pay up front if borrowing is out of system, requests dropped dramatically. Charging the users is a local decision.

Look at UPS campus ship-subsidized in some regions in NY. UPS is per-item Can we get a large courier to commit to a flat rate? Currently payment for large couriers is by weight and by region. Can we get all libraries in NY to participate?

Discussion of purchase-on-demand: Library buys book vs. borrows-may be cheaper. Need to have criteria in making decision. What is the determining factor in buying vs. borrowing? Is there a price point? How does this fit into the concept of delivery? [Ask at summit]
Currently being done at Cornell-see if they are coming to summit and if thet will discuss.

Delivery Working Group Members

Kathy-Nylink — Mon, 29 Sep 2008 14:13:54 CDT

Members of the Delivery Working Group are:

Carol Clemente, Binghamton University
Debby Emerson, Rochester Regional Library Council
Amy Heebner, New York State Library
Sonja Landes, SUNY College at Geneseo
Jeff Katz, Bard College
Jennifer Morris, Pioneer Library System
Francie Mrkich, Columbia University
Eric Neubacher, Baruch College
Kathleen Gundrum, Nylink
Cindy Hajeck, Nylink

August 21, 2008

DonnaDixon — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:19:45 CDT

Nylink Resource Sharing Discovery Working Group
Minutes from Conference Call August 21, 2008

Present: Donna Dixon, Nylink; Maribeth Krupczak, New York State Library Division of Library Development; Julie Cunningham, CUNY Graduate Center; Bart Harloe, St. Lawrence University.

Some housekeeping items: Claire Gabriel of Manhattanville College is leaving the working group, having accepted a new position. We will leave her spot open, and thank her for her work on the group.

For the upcoming Resource Sharing Summit in October, members of the Discovery and Delivery Working groups will be given a $50 discount on registration, bringing cost for their attendance down to $70. In addition, if one’s library is a Premium member of Nylink, that cost can be drawn from the $500 professional development credit or one of the two free seats at Nylink events that Premium members have may be used.

We discussed whether we should still survey, and if so, are there questions we should add, change, or remove? As brought up on the previous call, attendees today agreed that the time for such a survey has passed and that our time as well as the community’s time would be better spent conducting an inventory of discovery tools and cooperative resource sharing systems in New York, to include schools (the OPALS schools catalog was mentioned).

Donna created a rough online map as a model for presenting such an inventory, but it was agreed that in addition to a map that might show overlays, a matrix would be desirable (because there are multiple tools and systems being used by individual libraries or systems). She will endeavor to get a rough draft of the matrix out by August 27 so that we can review it and add to it prior to the September 12 call. We might also use the map/matrix to facilitate a discussion presented by the Discovery group at the Resource Sharing summit (and include it in packets). Using this, we can look not only for linkages, but for holes, and then explore short-term and long-term solutions for how we might be able to knit disparate systems and communities together, and come up with some pilot possibilities to proposed.

Donna will send out a link to Cyril Oberlander’s August 6 IDS conference presentation to the group (done), so we can discuss and be prepared with questions for Cyril for the September 12 conference call. Highlights of the presentation were the concept that “discovery isn’t the problem, service is,” and the need to create and nurture a culture of cooperation.

In that vein, we discussed the NYS Statement of Guiding Principles that Julie Cunningham had drafted, and how to use it. Maribeth suggested some additional language that would be inclusive of library systems and the State Library, and also some introductory language regarding Regents policy and support for resource sharing. That has been added to the version of the Principles on the wiki (at http://nyrss.wetpaint.com/page/New+York+State+Guiding+Principles+for+Resource+Sharing)

For the next Resource Sharing Summit, we still need to finalize the breakout groups and roundtables. Julie Cunningham is still available to serve on the planning team and Donna will ensure that the internal team at Nylink includes her on the next conference call.

Next conference calls:
September 12, 1-2:30 pm
October 3, 1-2:30 pm

Recorder: Donna Dixon

Discovery Working Group Members

DonnaDixon — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:42:18 CDT

Deborah L. Bendig, Systems Librarian
Onondaga County Public Library System

Email: dbendig@onlib.org

Julie Cunningham, Chief Librarian
The Graduate School and University Center, CUNY
Email: jcunningham@gc.cuny.edu

Susan Currie, Associate Director of University Libraries
Binghamton University
Email: scurrie@binghamton.edu

Donna Dixon, Director of Member Programs
Nylink
Email: dixond@nylink.org

Bart Harloe, University Librarian

St. Lawrence University
Email: bharloe@stlawu.edu

Maribeth Krupczak, Library Development Specialist Division of Library Development

New York State Library

Email: mkrupcza@mail.nysed.gov

Mary-Carol Lindbloom, Executive Director
South Central Regional Library Council
Email: mclindbloom@lakenet.org

Cyril Oberlander, Associate Director of Libraries
SUNY College at Geneseo
Email: Cyril@geneseo.edu

Jon Penn, Resource Sharing Librarian
Nylink

Phone: (518) 443-5444 or (800) 342-3353

Email: pennj@nylink.org

Jen Stelling, Marketing Services Librarian Nylink

Phone: (518) 443-5444 or (800) 342-3353

Email: stellingj@nylink.org

About this Wiki

nylink_js — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 13:03:31 CDT

In June 2007, members of New York’s library community came together in Saratoga Springs for a Resource Sharing Summit to discuss and share ideas regarding the future of resource sharing in New York State. To continue the conversations, outcomes of the summit included:

Creation of a Discovery Working Group and a Delivery Working Group.
Plans for a second resource sharing summit, scheduled for October 23-24, 2008, at the Holiday inn in Saratoga Springs.

There are two Working Groups, Discovery and Delivery. To learn about the members of the groups and their charges, please see their individual pages.

March 6, 2008

DonnaDixon — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:46:17 CDT

New York Resource Sharing Discovery Group Notes from Conference Call, March 6, 2008 All members of the group were present except Jon Penn.

Virtual Retirement farewell to Jean Currie! We will miss you!

Jean has proposed that Betty Maute of SCLRC, who attended the Resource Sharing Summit in 2007, replace her on the working group. The group agreed. Welcome, Betty!

Deb Bendig is no longer in a position to co-chair. Donna Dixon asked for members of the group to notify her if they would be willing to serve.

It is requested by the group that Deidre Dowling of Nylink come to the next meeting or call to update us on plans for the Resource Sharing Summit in October 2008.

The draft survey was discussed, and it was agreed that it would be put up on the wiki for all to review (done, revision effective 3/19). We need to mount the revised survey in Zoomerang and send it to the group to vet it by taking it. We discussed having the survey sent to Nylink’s director contacts and the 3R’s directors as well.

Report/discussion on work of Delivery Group (Kathleen Gundrum of that group to join us)

Planning for joint Delivery/Discovery Working Groups meetings in April and June.

Dates and topics for next conference call

Survey Questions for Discovery

Anonymous — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:10:15 CDT

Last updated 3/19/2008 2:47 PM NY Delivery & Discovery Working Groups, 2007-2008 Survey to identify need for statewide catalog and/or statewide discovery tool: NOTE: We would need to develop a drop down menu where bulleted lists appear.

Introduction: As an outcome of the New York State Resource Sharing Summit, June 5-6, 2007 the summit participants identified the need to establish two working groups to study the issues of Discovery and Delivery. One of the charges of the Discovery Group is to research the need for, and feasibility of, a statewide discovery tool or tools.

To that end, we ask you to complete this survey which will help us find out what libraries currently use to discover their information content and what they might need to do this more effectively. Thanks so much for your time. If you need more information about the Summit, including the members of the Working Groups, you can go to http://nylink.org/nyrsswiki/default.php?n=Main.Homepage For more information on Resource Sharing initiatives nationally, see the Rethinking Resource Sharing website at http://www.rethinkingresourcesharing.org/ .

Basic Information questions:

Library Name and Location

Describe your library

Public
Medical
School
Academic
Other (Please describe)

2. How do your library users search for information?

3. Would it be useful to have a “front end” to your online catalog that searches many other resources as well (databases, digital collections, other libraries, WorldCat, etc.) · Yes · No

4. Do you need help in identifying discovery tools? · Yes · No

5. Do you need training about discovery tools (identifying, implementing, demonstrations, using). · Yes · No

6. Would you allow your materials and records to be part of a statewide shared catalog? · Yes · No

7. If not what are the barriers?

8. Do you see value in a shared statewide discovery tool that supports resource sharing?

9. Where are the electronic records for your library materials?

Local System/catalog only
Local system + OCLC
Union catalog or locally shared system?
Regional or statewide system?
Other? (Please desribe)

Discovery Tools Questions

1. What discovery systems are you currently using? Choose as many as apply to your situation.
· Opac only
· Opac + another system ·
Union catalog with consortium (Connect NY, SUNY Union, Borrow Direct, other)
System Catalog (Public Library system, School Library system)
· Encore http://www.iii.com/encore/splash.html
· Aquabrowser http://www.medialab.nl/
· Endeca http://endeca.com/byIndustry/media/libraries.html
· Library Thing http://www.librarything.com/
· Primo http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/PrimoOverview
· Worldcat.org http://www.worldcat.org/
· Worldcatlocal.org (a localized version of worldcat.org) http://www.oclc.org/worldcatlocal/
· VuFind http://www.vufind.org/
· Evergreen http://www.open-ils.org/
· LibraryFind http://libraryfind.org/
· Grokker http://www.grokker.com/
· eContent Searcher and Analyzer http://www.tdnet.com/site/page.asp?ID=460A&Parent=457
· Other (please describe and/or please add URL)

2. Are there areas not covered by any discovery tools you are using? Please describe.

3. If you are participating in a resource sharing consortium, please choose from the list below. Choose all that apply.
· RLG Shares http://www.oclc.org/programs/shares/default.htm
· OCLC http://www.oclc.org/resourcesharing/default.htm
· CRL http://www.crl.edu/ · IDS http://illiad.lib.geneseo.edu/ids/
· Connect NY http://www.connectny.info/screens/mainmenu.html
· Local 3R’s (SCRLC. CNYRLC, etc.) · NYLINK http://nylink.suny.edu/sharing/
· SUNY Connect http://www.sunyconnect.suny.edu/
· RAPID https://rapid2.library.colostate.edu/PublicContent/AboutRapid.aspx
· Docline http://www.nlm.nih.gov/docline/
· LVIS http://www.cyberdriveillinois.com/departments/library/who_we_are/OCLC/programs_and_services/lvis_description.html ·
Other Reciprocal Partners (Please describe)

4. Are you using a federated search tool? If yes, which one?
· 360 Search http://www.serialssolutions.com/ss_360_search.html
· Webfeat http://www.webfeat.org/
· Metalib http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/category/MetaLibOverview
· Research Pro http://www.iii.com/mill/digital.shtml
· Google Scholar http://scholar.google.com/ 5

. Do you share your library content via another tool? Please indicate all that you are using:
· Del.icio.us http://del.icio.us/
· Facebook http://www.facebook.com/
· MySpace http://www.myspace.com/
· FURL http://www.furl.net/
· Blog (for more information about Blogs, see Google’s site at https://www.blogger.com/start )
· Wiki (for more information about wikis, see Wikipedia’s entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki )
· Flickr http://www.flickr.com/
· LibraryThing http://libraryfind.org/
· Second Life http://secondlife.com/
· Other (please describe)

6. Are you currently using any commercial on-demand systems such as Amazon or Barnes and Noble? If so, how are you using them?
· Purchase on demand and then adding to collection
· Purchase on demand, send directly to user, then add to collection?
· Purchase on demand for course reserve only?

7. Have you or your constituents ever used a commercial book rental program such as Bookswim (http://www.bookswim.com/ ?