Reports

The Direct Delivery to Patrons Task Force recommends that the BLC Board encourage individual member libraries to implement direct desktop delivery of non-returnables to their own patrons. While all but four of the member institutions can transmit electronic copies between libraries, only six currently forward these items on to the requesting patrons electronically (see appendices 1a and 1b). The Task Force further strongly recommends that every BLC library (including every branch with its own OCLC symbol) acquire Ariel technology or its equivalent and fill non-returnable requests electronically by scanning the documents and sending these files to the requesting library, in lieu of paper copies. These two steps should logically precede any implementation of direct delivery from lender to end-user.

Ariel is the software used by virtually all BLC members to electronically transmit materials between libraries. While several mechanisms now exist to transfer these files directly to the patron, Prospero software appears to be the most viable option, particularly since it can be downloaded for free (see appendices 2a and 2b). Prospero was developed as a companion product to enable borrowing libraries to forward electronically received materials directly to the requesting patron's desktop.

The latest Ariel release now includes the functionality of Prospero. It purports to provide an easy interface between the patron requesting an item and the OCLC ILL utility used to process the interlibrary loan requests (see appendix 3). Unfortunately, the Task Force was not able to identify any library that successfully uses this new version of Ariel, so we cannot recommend its purchase at this time. Furthermore, Ariel was recently sold to Infotrieve. Therefore, the Task Force recommends that the BLC reevaluate this product in a few months to determine its effectiveness as a delivery tool to both libraries and individual patrons. If found to be effective, the Task Force recommends that the Board investigate a group purchase of Ariel software or an equivalent to facilitate direct desktop delivery by the borrowing library to its own patrons.

The Task Force does not recommend direct transmission between lending library and requesting patron at this time. Although technically feasible, in reality the management of such requests (updating, tracking, troubleshooting) would be extremely cumbersome and time consuming for both libraries (borrower and lender). The one consortium that had such an operation (the Washington Research Library Consortium) uses in-house management software and a shared library system to make the process work (see appendix 4).

Instead, the Direct Delivery to Patrons Task Force recommends that the Board authorize the Virtual Catalog Functionality Task Force to incorporate a direct delivery component into their charge to investigate software products that "provide searching and unmediated requesting of non-returnable materials within the Consortium." Development of such a product would presumably resolve the complex record management challenges that direct delivery entails.

A survey of BLC directors showed that there is cautious interest among 13 of the 16 responding institutions for direct delivery of returnables to patrons (see appendix 5b). Currently only one member library offers its patrons the option of home delivery, although several offer on-campus courier service to offices and departments. Concerns about tracking requests, liability for lost materials, and mailing costs were cited as potential obstacles to mailing loans directly to patrons.

Furthermore, the recent evaluation of the Virtual Catalog, conducted by an outside consultant, showed only minimal interest in direct delivery of returnables by its BLC patrons (see appendix 6). Therefore, the Task Force recommends that further investigation of direct delivery of returnables be tabled at this time.

The Task Force did not plan or implement any programs, but instead recommended that certain steps be taken by individual member libraries so that direct delivery to patrons can be reconsidered for implementation in the future.

The Task Force did not use any BLC resources other than staff time and the conference call technology.

The Task Force met in Boston once (at the initial training session), at UMass Worcester twice and via conference call once. All additional communication was done via email and phone.

1. Meetings held so far:
   
   
   1. 9/26/02 - Task Force Training Meeting at Northeastern University
   2. 10/29/02 - Discussion of preliminary findings; preparation of Interim Report
   
   
   
2. Activities/Accomplishments to date:
   
   
   1. Results of BLC survey on Current Practice and Future Interest in Direct Delivery (Sue Swanson)
      
      
      1. Received 13 replies (out of 19 questionnaires sent to BLC libraries)
      2. All respondents are interested in pursuing direct delivery of non-returnables
      3. 11 respondents are interested (with some reservations) in direct delivery of returnables
      
      
      
   2. Current software/technology available for direct delivery (Judy DeLottie)
      
      
      
      1. 6 methods of direct delivery were evaluated
         1. Email
         2. DocView
         3. DocMorph
         4. Yale's EDD
         5. Adobe Acrobat Capture
         6. Prospero
            
            
      2. Prospero was determined to be the best system available currently because it meets 6 major criteria:
         1. Ariel compatibility
         2. Low cost (software is free)
         3. Copyright compliance
         4. Handles large/multiple files
         5. Ease of use for patrons
         6. Ease of use for library staff
            
            
   3. Current practices in other consortia (Jane Fama)
      
      
      
      1. 6 methods of direct delivery were evaluated
         1. Washington Research Library Consortium
            
            1. Consists of 7 academic libraries
            2. Provides direct delivery of non-returnables
            3. Uses Ariel and Prospero
            
            
         2. MOBIUS
            1. Consists of over 50 academic libraries in Missouri
            2. Do not currently provide direct delivery to patrons
            
            
         3. Northeast Research Libraries
            
            
            1. Consists of 18 academic research libraries.
            2. A subset of the consortium (the Ivy League Libraries with the exception of the Harvard Libraries uses "Borrow Direct" as their direct delivery system. They hope to extend the service to other consortium members in the future.
      
      
      
   4. Literature search (Ellen Keane)
      
      1. No pertinent information was found concerning other libraries/consortia's use of direct delivery to patrons
      2. One article of interest concerned an individual (Mark Anderson) who operates a direct delivery service Booklend.net with his own collection of books
   
   
   
3. List of Communities of Interests with which the task force communicates:
   
   
   1. Circulation
   2. Interlibrary Loan
   
   
   
4. Requests:
   
   
   1. Funding - none
   2. Resources - none
   3. Board/MC queries - Five library directors still need to complete "Survey of Future Interest" query that was sent to Board members by Merrily Taylor of Brown University. They are from Boston Public, Boston University, MIT, Tufts and U Mass/Boston.
   
   
   
5. Next Steps
   
   
   1. BLC survey follow-up to obtain specific information on direct delivery of non-returnables (Sue Swanson/Joan Thompson)
      
      1. Identify which, if any, libraries not using Ariel
      2. Identify the which libraries are currently using Prospero
      3. Identify which libraries using Prospero deliver material directly to a patron's email account and which libraries are using a Web server
      
      
   2. Prospero software follow-up (Judy DeLottie)
      1. Get specific information regarding costs for the installation of Prospero
      2. Get information on system requirements and specifications
      3. Get information concerning degree of IT support required for Prospero installation and maintenance
      
      
      
   3. Current practices in other consortia follow-up (Jane Fama/Ellen Keane)
      1. Contact by phone the libraries that didn't respond to the prior email
      2. Contact the Washington DC consortium again (since they use Ariel and Prospero) in order to get more information about:
         1. Their experiences with direct delivery of non-returnables
         2. How they deal with copyright restrictions
         3. How they deal with solving patrons' problems concerning receipt of their materials
         4. Turn-around time
      3. Get information from the Vermont consortium about how they do direct delivery of returnables
      4. Find out more about Mark Anderson's direct delivery service, Booklend.net