Minutes

A meeting of the Boston Library Consortium, E-resources Task Force was held on May 12, 2003, at the Boston Public Library. In attendance were: Sandy Brooke from Williams College, Spencer Clough of the State Library of Massachusetts, Joe De Veer of MBL/WHOI, Cecilia Roberts of Boston University, and Laura Walters of Tufts University. Also in attendance was Barbara Preece, ex officio.

1. The database inventory was reviewed by Ms. Walters to find databases that were purchased by any five, or more, libraries. It was pointed out that the last task force believed that purchases should be made through NERL or NELINET before purchasing through the BLC.

2. Targets for joint purchases were as follows:
   The American Chemical Society Journal
   ABI/INFORM
   AMICO
   Beilstein Crossfire
   Cognet
   Current Index to Statistics
   Engineering Information Village
   FIS Online
   IEEE Explore
   JSTOR
   LION (Literature online)
   World News Connection
   
   
3. The following databases were proposed as candidates for the Central Buying Fund:
   Books in Print
   GPO Access
   The Oxford-English Dictionary
   Ulrichs
   
   

A meeting of the Boston Library Consortium, E-resources Task Force was held on February 3, 2003, at the Boston Public Library. In attendance were: Sandy Brooke from Williams College, Spencer Clough of the State Library of Massachusetts, Joe De Veer of MBL/WHOI, Anne Nolan of Brown University, Cecilia Roberts of Boston University, Jay Schafer of University of Massachusetts at Amherst, and Laura Walters of Tufts University. Also in attendance was Barbara Preece, ex officio.

1. Decision making model: the board of directors had requested the task force reconsider the evaluation measures. Discussion followed of various proposals for evaluating databases. A scoring formula was proposed and accepted for incorporation into the decision making model.

2. The formula consists of: the total institutional evaluation scores on a scale of 0 to 2. A threshold score of 13, (equal to 1/3), must be met.
   
   1. 0 = this database is of little value to the member library.
      
   2. 1 = this database is valuable to the member library and would be retained if the BLC purchases it.
      
   3. 2 = an essential database, the member library would purchase it even if the BLC would not.
      
      
3. This task force believes a standardized template for evaluation needs to be created by the buying task force. The template may include the following considerations:
   1. Quality of content
   2. Curriculum
   3. Usage
   4. Interface
   5. Technical reliability/support
   6. Overlap with institutional resources
   7. The interdisciplinary nature of the database
      
      
4. Evaluation: under section 3a, evaluation will occur once per year, per title

A meeting of the Boston Library Consortium, E-resources Task Force was held on Thursday, October 24, 2002, at the Boston Public Library. In attendance were: Sandy Brooke from Williams College, Spencer Clough of the State Library of Massachusetts, Joe De Veer of MBL/WHOI, Cecilia Roberts of Boston University, Jay Schafer of University of Massachusetts at Amherst, and Laura Walters of Tufts University. Also in attendance was Barbara Preece, ex officio.

The meeting convened at 1:05. Laura Walters was selected as the task force leader, with Spencer Clough as the secretary.

1. Reports on compiling a union list of electronic format databases
   1. Members reported on progress with contacting libraries
   2. BLC administration will compile the list once libraries have reported to their task force contacts
   
   
   
2. Decision making model
   1. The decision making model for the central buying fund task force is take into account the diversity of the constituent members of the BLC
   2. The BLC Board has accepted the central buying fund model, allocating funds of $40,000 for purchases over the next two years
   3. The e-resources task force needs to focus on the selection criteria, not necessarily the selection procedure
   4. It was determined that the central buying fund task force should consist of five representatives to include at least one representative from each of the following:
      1. A state university
      2. A large private institution
      3. A small private institution
      4. A special library
   5. It was determined that each representative shall serve for two-year terms on a rotating basis
   
   
   
3. Selection Criteria
   1. The task force is hard pressed to articulate selection criteria that completely accommodate the differing missions of the member institutions
   2. Discussion followed to consider the need to differentiate between one-time purchases versus on-going purchases
   3. The task force rejected the possibility of finding subject oriented criteria that would be common to all institutions
   4. Emphasis was made that the special libraries would have input into the selection of any databases
   5. The general view of the task force is that purchases should not require a unanimous agreement by all member institutions, but shall be selected by a consensus of task force members
   6. It was suggested that all members would eventually receive benefits from the database selections as inequities at any one time would be balanced by future selections over the course of years
   7. The task force reviewed the product of the prior task force and made several changes to the representation section and the criteria section of that decision making model
   
   
   
4. The next task force meeting was set for January 9th, 2003, from 10 to 1, at the BLC
5. The meeting adjourned at 3:00

1. We reviewed our charge and broke it down into 2 parts: central buying fund (first paragraph of charge) and buying club (second paragraph of charge).
   
   
2. The Central Buying Fund: we have been asked to develop a decision-making model that includes ways to implement the cost-sharing model that the Board will develop. We decided that we would develop this model in time for the Nov. 8th report. Laura will send out a copy of the decision-making model developed by the first e-resources task force. The BLC Board did not accept this model. Laura will also ask for clarification from our board liaison, Bernie Margolis, as to why the model was not accepted.
   
   Action Item: Develop central buying fund model at October meetings to meet Nov. 8 deadline.
   
   
3. Buying Club: we have been asked to put together a list of e-resources currently purchased by BLC members to identify possible titles that can be purchased through a BLC-license as a way to save costs. We decided to each take 2-3 BLC institutions and to ask them to provide us with a report that lists: database, vendor, and how purchased (BLC, other consortium, or individually). We will ask for this list in electronic format by Dec. 15th. The schools and their contacts are:
   
   • Cecelia-BU, BC, BPL
   
   • Joe-MBL, MIT, Northeastern • Spencer-State Library, Umass Boston, Umass Dartmouth
   
   • Jay-Umass Amherst, Lowell and Worcester
   
   • Sandy-Williams, Wellesley, UNH
   
   • Anne-Uconn, Brown
   
   • Laura-Tufts, Brandeis
   
   Action Item: Contact libraries by Oct. 7 and ask them to send us the list by Dec. 15th.
   
   After we have received the lists in December, we will work with the BLC office to amalgamate into one list. We will then identify titles for BLC purchase.
   
   
4. Next meeting: October 24, 1-3, BPL, conference room 4. We will select a leader and a secretary. The secretary takes minutes and writes the reports.