[Original post followed by the response.]
Colldvers,
I'm looking for comparable university libraries (approx 1 million +
volumes serving undergraduate and graduate programs), particularly in
the Southeastern US but not limited to it, that have experience with
offsite storage.
We've outsourced our offsite storage for the past 3 years. Now we're
interested in reviewing our options, comparing our experience with
others, discussing best practices for internal management of the
selection-retrieval process, etc.
Any and all suggested readings and contacts are welcome.
Emily Stambaugh
Collection Development Librarian
Z. Smith Reynolds Library
Wake Forest University
PO Box 7777 Reynolda Station
Winston-Salem, NC 27109 USA
==response====
From: Emily Stambaugh <stambae_at_wfu.edu>
Colldv-l,
Appended below are rough summaries of my conversations with librarians
from similar-sized libraries about off-site "shelving" experiences. At
the request of some, I have chosen to remove all institutional names.
If anyone on the list needs references, I can play referee.
Many have recommended the following title:
Library Off-Site Shelving by Danuta A. Nitecki and Curtis L. Kendrick.
(2001)
Others are preparing publications on this very topic. Keep an eye out
on the list for their announcements.
Thank you for your help.
Emily
=======================
Off-site Shelving or Shelving Relief
What other libraries do, conversation notes
Prepared by Emily Stambaugh, Wake Forest University
10/8/2003
Comparative Statistics as of 10/2003 (ballpark figures)
Key:
Library
Items in Collection
Items in Off-site Shelving
% of Collection Cost, FY2003
Cost per item/year
Library 1
2 million
In the hundreds of thousands…
Unknown
$100,000 annually
Unknown
Library 2
2.2 million
Between 700,000 and 885,000 approx. Lib adds 40,000 items per year
33-40%
$291,950, budget for FY2004 is $344,548, includes staff, overhead,
services, etc.
33 cents per book
Library 3
1.8 million
300,000 approx.
17%
Not available
Not available
Library 4
1.4 million
80,000 approx. Lib adds 21,000 items per year
6%
$47,000 FY2003, includes partial staff, all overhead + services, etc.
60 cents
Library 5
680,000
285,000
30-42%
$60-65,000, includes staff, overhead, services, etc.
(at start-up, annual overhead + maintenance was ~$79,000
21-23 cents
Common Assumptions and Guidelines
• Most libraries consulted follow the Harvard Model for off-site
shelving management.
• Most follow the 80% rule of thumb for shelf-space capacity in the
open stacks. In brief, the guideline suggests that stacks should not
be filled beyond 80%. When they are filled beyond that point stacks
management becomes prohibitively costly and quality of service is
significantly diminished.
• No library consulted has weeded their JSTOR titles yet, though one
is working on a consortial project that may lead to that.
• Only one of libraries consulted allowed users to physically access
to the facility on a limited basis by appointment. Most provided
regular paging service 1-2 times per day, or more frequently, from
Circulation.
From the library’s perspective, any or all of the following 3
components may be contracted (rented or leased from a third party) or
owned/managed internally. Consortial agreements may also be
implemented for any or all of the 3 components:
The Building. The library may chose to build its own facility, on its
own land, rent or lease an entire facility, rent or lease space in
another library facility or in a privately-owned document depository
building in the community. (Local communities may have companies that
serve as a document depository for libraries, banks, hospitals, and
others organizations with document storage obligations.)
Building Operations Management including physical maintenance of the
building and personnel to handle the pick up of boxes or trays for
storage, delivery to the building, barcoding and entry into the
shelving units, retrieval of items upon request, document delivery by
courier service or electronic document delivery and development of
transaction reports. Parts or all of these tasks may be outsourced or
managed by library personnel, typically Circulation staff.
Library Operations Management including the development of selection
criteria, physical selection of items to be moved to off-site
shelving, cataloging changes, preparation of boxes, bar coding and
development of management reports for cost, collection growth and
planning oversight.
Summaries from conversations with various libraries:
Internal Management, People, Processes, Selection and Reports
Library 1 sends bound periodicals and reference books to off-site
shelving. When an item goes to the off-site collection, it is assumed
the library has committed to keep it. Sections of the collections are
targeted for the off-site collection and weeding activity when the
shelf-space becomes impacted. There is no regular plan for review. The
library does not follow the 80% shelf-space rule of thumb. The shelves
are overfilled and the library is in a space crisis. As a general
rule, the library moves as many items to the off-site collection as
were acquired during the year.
There are two teams in the library; a Storage Team consisting of a
Collection Development Librarian, Head of Circulation, a cataloger,
Head of Reference and someone from Administration to negotiate the
building lease, and a Weeding Team consisting of a Collection
Development Librarian, Special Collections Librarian, Serials
Librarian, Government Documents Librarian, Head of Circulation and a
Reference Librarian. Faculty are not involved in storage decisions.
The Circulation department physically moves the items to the off-site
collection. The off-site collection is managed by one Circulation
librarian who pages items from the facility once per day.
In the annual report, Collection Development mentions the number of
volumes moved. No other statistics are reported and no other reports
are used.
Library 2 sends serials, monographs, A/V materials, most microfilm,
and special papers collections to the off-site facility. Serials that
have been cancelled or pre-1975 issues are sent to the off-site
collection with some exceptions. Monographs and analyzed monograph
sets are sent to the off-site facility on the basis of low use. The
library uses the 80% shelf-space rule of thumb, though the measurement
is done purely by observation (Stack Services doesn’t physically
measure every shelf for capacity). The library does not do much
weeding except for some old directories. Weeding projects are carried
out separately from storage projects. Subject specialists are
responsible for storage decisions and may chose to involve faculty in
some cases. Faculty interest in library management varies by
department. Off-site shelving was a difficult sell to faculty during
the planning period but initial resistance has been diminished by good
service. Employees of the library run the facility (3-4 support staff
plus 1 manager). They have ILL capabilities (Ariel) and faxes in the
facility. Retrievals are done 2 times per day.
The Systems Department produces a Report of Storage Candidates with
use figures when available or simply a Report by Location when use
figures are not available. Management reports are posted on the
website and include Reports of Retrievals and Origins of Requests (via
the Catalog, ILL, etc.) as well as general statistics.
Library 3 stores low use serials and monographs. The library has a
cutoff year for serials (pre-1980 volumes) with variations in certain
subject areas. Cancelled serials are considered for weeding or for the
off-site collection of the entire run. The library follows the 80%
shelf-space rule of thumb. Measurement of stack space is done by
statistical sampling and measurements are made in inches. After
significant bad publicity in a local newspaper, weeding is done
separately from storage decisions. Weeding is not a continuous
process, but a periodic project, and it does not keep pace with
volumes added, hence the collections continue to grow.
The Systems Department produces reports for subject specialists. The
collection development librarian and subject specialists mark up the
list with specific codes and detailed information about the item or
discrepancies between the item on the list and item in the stacks.
Then, they offer the lists to faculty who might be interested in
off-site selection decisions. Students cut up the cards once they’re
marked and reviewed and physically move the materials to Technical
Services.
Library 4 stores JSTOR journals, journals with incomplete runs,
theses, oversize monographs and boxes of unprocessed archival
materials. The library does not follow the 80% shelf-space rule of
thumb. The shelves are overfilled and the library is in a space crisis.
There is an Off-Site Shelving committee consisting of a Collection
Development Librarian, Head of Access Services, the Circulation
Manager, a Systems librarian, a Reference librarian and the Assistant
Director of the library. A separate weeding committee will be
established shortly. Faculty were initially involved in off-site
selection decisions, with varying degrees of support and resistance.
Circulation staff physically boxes the items for the off-site
collection. Employees of an independent document management and
retrieval company in the community manage moving the items to the
off-site location and retrieving the items.
Annual statistics are kept on the library website, including volumes
stored and volumes requested. Internally, circulation staff
periodically create adhoc lists of incomplete journal runs and low use
monographs in overcrowded stack areas for review. The lists are
distributed to subject specialists, but have received little feedback.
Library 5 send all bound journals, low use monographs (0 circulation
in the past 5 years), low use annual reviews, government documents and
shared resources with other libraries to an on-site Automated
Retrieval System. The current 2 years of journals are kept in open
stacks. As of 2001, the library has about 680,000 monographs in the
collections, 285,000 items (primarily bound journals) in an on-site
Automated Retrieval System. The system is linked to the OPAC so that
users can page items directly from the OPAC. All items entered are bar
coded and cataloged. Weeding was done heavily in the reference
collection when the facility first opened. Faculty were initially
resistant, but have found the ease of use and browsability on the OPAC
are satisfactory. Students are very happy with it – they prefer
requesting materials out of facility directly from the OPAC, with 10
minute delivery, rather than going to the stacks and figuring out the
call numbers.
Selection of items is done by Technical Services and the stacks
manager, part time. Students work in the facility to page items and
audit the contents of trays. Occasionally University Facilities
personnel and library systems personnel troubleshoot the cranes and
other hardware or software issues.
Many day-to-day transaction and audit reports are available from the
OPAC system and the library is currently developing management reports
to monitor collection growth.
Facilities and Costs
Library 1 – The University leases space for the off-site collection
and pays for it from the Administrative Services budget. The library
plans for space needs about 5 years into the future. Initially, the
library leased space in one facility and after 2-3 years, the owner
decided not to continue the lease. The library hired movers to move to
a new location. The collection development librarian took advantage of
the move to weed the off-site collection. The total bill last year for
off-site services was about $100,000.
Library 2 – The University renovated a building for the off-site
collection and expects to become a depository for the state. When they
began planning for an off-site collection, the library projected space
and costs for 20 years using financial rates supplied by the
University Treasurer. The library is planning a replacement facility.
The operating budget for FY03 was $291,950 and FY04 is $344,548. Of
the FY04 amount, $167,500 is salaries, including staff at the facility
and processing staff in the main library. Average costs are about 33
cents book/year.
Library 3 – The University built its own facility and it is staffed by
one person who pages material once daily, 5 days per week. The
facility has a 35 foot ceiling and follows the Harvard model with a
cherry picker. Retrieval is not managed by the library’s ILS. No cost
figures.
Library 4 – The library contracts off-site shelving management with a
local document management company in the community that also serves
banks, hospitals and other organizations with document storage needs.
The company moves boxes of items to the facility, shelves them, and
retrieves items upon request by circulation. The bill to the library
in FY03 was approximately $47,000 and at that time about 80,000 items
were in the off-site collection (costs included building maintenance,
personnel, shelving/retrieval and courier costs).
Library 5 - The library built its own state-of-the-art on-site
Automated Retrieval System. Items are stored in trays and retrieved by
robots (cranes). The building is physically attached to (forms part
of) the main library building. It can easily be expanded as needed.
Glass walls allow users to watch as items are retrieved. Users
request the items directly from the OPAC.
Approximately 285,000 items are stored in the system at an annual
operating cost of approximately $60-65,000. In its infancy, annual
operating costs were a bit higher, about $79,000. Recently, the
maintenance contract, was renegotiated to only $12,000. The building
engineer is here less than 1% at this point, and systems staff have
minimal activity, Circ staff is less than 50% FTE. . The building cost
approximately $2 million to build. While the initial capital
investment is high, the ongoing operating costs per item are quite low.
Cooperative Efforts
Library 1 – The library has joined a regional consortia that hopes to
establish a “library of record” agreement for JSTOR titles in print.
Currently, the consortia is creating a union list of JSTOR titles held
at each library. No “ownership” issues have surfaced yet.
Library 2 - The library built its own facility and expects to become a
depository for the state. Currently, the library rents space to
another campus library and another university library in the state.
From these other libraries, Library 2 only recovers costs. Library 2
and charges by the shelf; the current model is $65/shelf/year and they
average 195 books/shelf ($.33 book/year). They have a model for book
equivalents to help people plan for shelving of archival boxes,
microfilm, etc. but all charges are based on # shelves used.
Library 3 – The library does not intend to participate in any
consortia for off-site collections.
Library 4 – the library does not currently participate in cooperative
efforts.
Library 5 – the library offers space in the on-site facility to other
libraries for temporary storage and retrieval services while other
libraries undergo renovations. The library may consider cooperative
efforts to eliminate duplicate journal titles sometime in the future,
perhaps in a “last copy” type of arrangement.
Received on Tue Oct 21 2003 - 03:15:18 EDT