[Several readers pointed to this information. Thanks to
Paul Metz, Lucia Snowhill, others. ja]
You may also want to look at information being collected by Kate Corby,
Past Chair of ALA-EBSS. The URL for the web page is:
http://www.lib.msu.edu/corby/education/doe.htm
and related. also from Kate's work on this issue:
12 April 2004
Comments: To: "EBSS-L_at_email. uncc. edu (E-mail)"
<EBSS-L_at_email.uncc.edu>,
"Education Librarians Michigan (E-mail)" <edlibrarians_at_umich.edu>,
LIBREF-L_at_LISTSERV.KENT.EDU, AERA-CR_at_ASU.EDU, sla-dedu_at_lists.sla.org
Sent to multiple lists. Please excuse duplicates.
On March 18th, the Department of Education named a contractor for the
ERIC database. They picked Computer Sciences Corporation. CSC is a
major U. S. corporation. According to Hoover's "CSC is one of the
world's leading information technology (IT) consulting and outsourcing
firms. CSC provides its clients with a wide array of services such as
application development, consulting, network design, and systems
integration. About half the company's business comes from IT services it
provides for other companies. CSC counts many corporate giants,
including
Bombardier, Motorola, and the UK's Royal Mail among its clients. It's
also a top IT service provider for the US government, receiving more
than
$2.5 billion in annual revenues from various contracts with the Defense
Department." The company is in the S&P 500 and ranks #175 in the
Fortune 500.
CSC is the company that holds the current contract for the ERIC
Processing and Reference Facility. In March of last year (in other words
about a month before the Draft Statement of Work appeared) they acquired
DynCorp. According to a ProQuest abstract of a Defense Daily article:
"DynCorp will be combined into CSC's Federal Sector business unit, which
will have about $6 billion in annual sales from the U.S. government. The
enlarged company now ranks as the third largest U.S. federal IT
contractor and a top 10 DoD contractor, CSC said." Why do we care? --
because DynCorp holds the current contract for the ERIC Document
Reproduction Service. (Yes, all who have troubles with E*Subscribe, it
is true!)
Among the other members of the former ERIC system, this firm seems to
have a good reputation. They are known for reliability and
competence. This is good and may mean that the new ERIC will also be
reliable and well produced. Certainly this means that the people
developing the new ERIC will have an understanding, and I hope, an
appreciation of the quality of the product. On the possibly worrisome
side, Computer Sciences Corporation is a huge contractor - not just for
the United States government, but for other entities as well. Their web
page at <http://www.csc.com/ has a news section, but the $34.6 million
contract for ERIC didn't ever rate a mention. When I looked in late
March
they were touting a helicopter deal in excess of $400 million. In early
April they are mentioning a group of awards for $327 million and another
$46 million for Medicare cards. This contract award has also not gotten
the press attention that I had expected, given the attention given to
the
contracting process. This might mean we will have less visibility if
concerns do arise. So far I have had excellent response to my inquiries
to them.
People want to know how this will work out, and of course we don't
know. I will share with you my thoughts and plans. I welcome
suggestions from all. I am tracking the ERIC developments because I want
to understand the new product. I want to be sure to be aware of the
decision-making process and opportunities for input by the library
community.
But the contractor is only one side of the equation. The Department of
Education also has a huge role. I tried calling the contact listed on
the Department's News Release, but got the traditional government
shuffle
until I wound up at the desk of ERIC Director, Luna Levinson. She was
out of the office but returned my call promptly. Unfortunately I was
out
when she called, so I decided against further phone tag and sent an
email. I asked about whether the new contract was available online and
how one might best follow and have an impact on the development of the
new ERIC product. She gave me a contact name and I have asked that
person for a copy of the new contract - actually just the "Statement of
Work" portion. She closed with "I assure you that work has begun and
that
information will be made available to everyone."
Many people know that I'm a fairly straightforward person. In my email
I
said "My concern is that until now, the information I have found about
the process from [Department of Education web] pages has been after the
fact --- what the Department did rather than what they plan to
do." There was really nothing in Dr. Levinson's reply that spoke
directly to that concern. Still I feel that the mood is generally
upbeat
about these latest developments. I will continue to pursue further
information, but I don't see any reason for alarm at this point.
I have no reason to believe that any steps in the process outlined in
the
Statement of Work will be eliminated, but clearly the schedule may need
to be revised. I had created a timeline based on the anticipated award
date, and have now revised it as much as possible from the Statement of
Work (SOW). If I am later able to see the actual contract language it
may need to be revised again. The Statement of Work calls for a Public
Forum, within two months of Contract award "for soliciting input about
making the database highly useful to educators, researchers, and the
general public" (SOW p.7). In mid-May there were to be usability and
performance tests, although these did not specifically demand public
input, they would now be due before the public forum.
Similarly the list of sources for items to be indexed is not due until
mid-October in the timeframe established by the SOW. But the new
product
is to go live July 1, so it seems likely one of those dates has been
adjusted.
I know many are interested in the "brief written assessment of the ERIC
Thesaurus" (SOW p. 14) that would now be due in mid-September, after the
system is already to be operational. With the exception of the one
public
forum there is really no major call for public input in the Statement of
Work. ALA has been in touch with the Department of Education and made
them aware of the expertise that Librarians could bring to some of the
development tasks that lie ahead. Let's hope that our offer will be
heard.
As always, I'll keep you posted as new developments arise, and thank you
all for your support, in forwarding ideas and new information to me.
Thanks for your interest,
Kate Corby
Education and Psychology Reference Librarian
Michigan State University Libraries
100 Library
East Lansing Michigan 48824
(517) 432-6123 ext. 121
FAX (517) 432-8050
http://www.lib.msu.edu/corby
Received on Wed Apr 21 2004 - 03:04:55 EDT