Minutes

1. Our Final Report:
   We discussed generally what should be included in the final report. This should not repeat anything from our Interim Report. We will note our survey, the workshop and for recommendations, we might include: having higher level administrators on task forces; having funding guidelines available; and having the BLC evaluate LibQUAL+™ as an assessment tool for consortial initiatives. Barbara will send out an email to which we can add suggestions as they come up.

2. The Workshop:
   The announcement was sent out to several listserv's. There was a mistake in the link to the output measures task force, although it is correct on the BLC web page. Pam will ask Melissa to resend so potential attendees will have the correct link. So far, Melissa has received 5 rsvps. Pam will be sure that our four names are on the list of participants.

   Pam will remind presenters that we need their biographical information. Donna will introduce the speakers. Barbara Preece may have a conflict on May 27th, but she will have the BLC portion covered. Pam has tweaked the schedule so the workshop will run 1:00 - 4:00 - no later to avoid traffic problems.

   There will be no microphone in the center of the room, but the venue is small enough that questions from the audience can be heard. Nancy reminded us we will need to send thank-yous to the presenters after the workshop.

3. Next Conference call:
   We'll request a conference call be set up for Thursday, May 22nd from 9:15 - 10:15.

1. Flyer for the workshop
   Nancy has created a great electronic flyer for the BLC to send to all relevant members, possible participants. Pam has not yet heard from Barbara Preece, so it may be better to take the presentation times off the flyer for now, with a more detailed paper flyer handed out at the workshop. If Pam does not hear from Barbara today, she will go with the generic "BLC Initiatives and Assessment" as the topic for Barbara's presentation.

2. Who does what?
   Pam will check on the following arrangements:
   • Will the BLC print off paper copies of the program?
   • Will there be someone on hand for technical problems?
   • Does the BLC provide nametags and directional signs?
   • Is it possible to have a microphone in the middle of the floor for Q&A?
   • Confirm title of Barbara Preece's presentation.
   • Collect biographical info from presenters.
   • Follow up with presenters the week before the workshop. Pam has also graciously agreed to introduce the workshop and speakers.

   Nancy will be at the registration desk; Donna will guide participants to the Mezzanine Conference Room; Barbara will fill in where needed. The BLC has set the rsvp date for 5/20 and will call the caterer four or five days before the conference.

3. Other Business
   Final report: we should review the final reports from other task forces and discuss this during our next conference call. Barbara will request that be set up for next Tuesday, May 13th, 9:30-10:30.

1. Speakers for our workshop
   Pam has been in touch with all the participants in our Output Measures Workshop scheduled for May 27th. In the order of appearance, they will be: Jo-Ann Michalak, Director of the Tisch Library, Tufts, with a summary of assessment at Tufts; Edward Oberholtzer, the head of the Tufts assessment team; Dan O'Mahony, Brown, will address Brown's use of LibQUAL+ as an assessment tool; Brinley Franklin, UConn will talk about UConn's use of E-metrics; and Barbara Preece will tie in assessment with BLC initiatives. Pam will request that participants stress the "why" of assessment over the "how". She will also encourage them to defer time for questions and answers until the end of the meeting. Pam will follow up with the speakers to get biographical information and titles of their talks.

2. Venue
   Melissa has reserved the Rabb Lecture Hall at the BPL for the meeting. However, this space is rather large and has some technological difficulties. Pam will inquire if we can reserve the smaller Mezzanine Conference Room (if it has the necessary hookups) instead. We have an adequate budget and arrangements for refreshments.

3. Things left to be done
   1. We will talk about and draw up an announcement, which we can discuss at our next conference call.
   2. After the workshop, we will write our final report.
   3. We will write thank-you notes to the speakers.
      
      

4. Next Conference call
   We will request a call for next Tuesday, April 29th, 9:30 - 10:30.

N.B.: The Task Force is very grateful to Pam for all the time and effort she's put into these most complicated and time-consuming details of the workshop!

1. Speakers for our workshop:
   Pam reported that it looks like we have a full slate of speakers for the Output Measures Workshop. These will include Dan O'Mahony from Brown speaking on LibQualt+; Franklin Brinley from UConn and chair of the Statistics and Measurements Committee, ARL, on E-metrics; Jo-Ann Michalak from Tufts addressing local assessment; and Barbara Preece speaking on BLC initiatives assessment.

2. Format of the meeting:
   We drew up a tentative outline for the meeting. Following a 10 minute introduction, speakers would average about 40 minutes each, with a 30-minute break in the middle, with time at the end for questions and answers. The workshop will run from 1:00 - 4:30. Nancy has confirmed that the Rabb Auditorium includes the technology we need, with sufficient notice. Between our conference and these minutes, Pam has found a tentative date, May 27th, that seems convenient for all involved.

3. Next conference call:
   We'll set up our next conference call for next Wednesday, April 23rd from 9:30 - 10:30.

1. Setting up our output measures workshop
   The program will include some general coverage of assessment tools and methods with a few BLC librarians sharing their experiences with specific tools: LibQUAL+ and E-metrics. Various parts of the program will last about 45 minutes each, with a half-hour break in the middle of the afternoon.

2. Speakers:
   Pam has contacted, and she and Donna will continue to contact potential speakers. The logistics of balancing everyone's available dates may take some time and many emails. Barbara Preece or someone from the BLC will address the BLC's role in output measures. /PAM, DONNA

3. Venue:
   Nancy contacted Melissa and got the free dates of the Rabb Auditorium at the BPL for May and early June. Melissa can arrange for refreshments after our registration closes (for a head count) about a week before the workshop. An electronic flyer should go out as soon as possible. /NANCY

4. Next Conference call
   We are set up for our next call on Wednesday, April 9th from 9:30-10:30.

1. Possible Speakers for the output measures workshop:
   Our last few conferences have centered primarily on possibilities for speakers for our spring workshop. Ideally, we would like to have a primary speaker to present an overview of assessment - design, the basics, and tools to use. BLC librarians who have worked with specific programs, such as LibQUAL+ and E-Metrics, could then share their experiences.
   
   We find we're having budget constraints. The BLC has let us know that a budget of $1,000 for a speaker is not feasible. We hope to have a budget of about $500 to set up this workshop. We'll continue to discuss names and make contacts.
   
   
2. Our next conference call:
   Thursday, March 20th, from 9:00 - 10:00.

1. Possible venue for workshop
   Barbara Preece communicated to Nancy that the BLC, that is, Melissa, can assist with room reservations, whether at the BPL or at another BLC library, if we want. Melissa would make sure there is sufficient furniture and equipment. They would take care of electronic invitations. If we create paper invitations, the BLC will distribute them. The Management Council suggested the workshop be a half day and reiterated their suggestion to use BLC members as presenters; BLC members do not get honoraria. (We agreed that this seemed to get away from our original goal to examine output measures for BLC initiatives - 24/7, Virtual Catalog, etc). As for location, we do want to keep the meeting in Boston or Cambridge. We should consider a date for May; April is too soon.

   In order to make the best use of a half-day workshop, we agreed that an afternoon would be best, the program running from 1:00 - 5:00 with a break in the middle.
   
   

2. Possible workshop presenters
   We continued to consider names for a primary speaker who would address assessment conceptually - design, options, and so forth. We will continue to consider names and brainstorm online up until Friday noon (March 7). We need to get the main speaker first to determine the rest of the program. Pam learned that UConn has used LibQUAL+ and has the names of both people involved. We still have a possible speaker from Brown. Nancy and Barbara learned of a possibility from UMass-Amherst, who has been very involved with E-metrics on the ARL level. Pam will contact MIT for another possible E-metrics name.

3. Next Steps
   
   Our possible outline for the workshop is:
   
   1:00 - 2:30 Primary speaker
   2:30 - 3:00 Break (coffee and cookies)
   3:00 - 3:40 20 minutes each: presentations on LibQUAL+ and E-metrics
   3:45 - 4:30 Questions and discussion
   4:30 - 5:00 Primary speaker wraps-up
   
   

   We then discussed a list of possible questions and issues to present to the potential speakers. Pam will send the task force a summary of these. /DONE

4. Next conference call
   We will set up our next call for 9:30 - 10:30 on Monday, March 10th. /Barbara

1. Logistics of our future workshop:
   After talking with Melissa, Nancy is now waiting on further information from Barbara Preece on the possible venue for our workshop. It may be that we can use the Boston Public Library (BPL)'s Rabb Auditorium, which seats about 200 and has the facilities and technology setups for presentations. The BPL has another conference area, as well. We cannot request a budget until we know who are speaker(s) will be.
   
   
2. In line with the BLC's charge to look for speakers within the BLC, we discussed several possibilities:
   Daniel O'Mahony, Coordinator of Government Docs at Brown has expertise in using and analyzing the data from LibQual+. He's made in-house presentations at Brown and is very good.
   MIT and UMass-Amherst are members of Emetrics. Pam has a contact at MIT; Barbara knows someone at Amherst and Nancy will check their library page.
   /Pam, Barbara, Nancy
   Marianne Burke, from UVM Dana Medical Library, is leading a breakout session - "Using LibQual+ to Improve Customer Service" at a NETSL Conference on April 4th (Nancy will attend). Although not part of the BLC, Marianne may be a useful contact.
   
   
3. Look for best practices in BLC libraries:
   Rather than concentrate only on libraries that use off-the-shelf assessment programs, we should review our survey results to determine who answered this question most cogently. Tufts, for example, answered at great length, each of their four libraries described their assessments methods. Brown has had a Library Users Needs Team (LUNT) for the past 4-5 years, who conduct surveys, focus groups, and use LibQual+. Although they are not focused exclusively on outputs, they do have data on user satisfaction. Those libraries that are just beginning to use LibQual+ might like to share their experiences in getting started with the program and their decisions to use it. Donna will send the task force all the raw data from our survey. Donna - DONE
   Pam will look at UConn's library page for information about their assessment practices. /Pam
4. Continue to consider contacting Peter Hernon as a general speaker:
   Pam and Barbara received good reports on Peter Hernon as a speaker. He's reputed to be very approachable, but we need to consider how to contact him. We should be explicit about the information we want. The task force will check his publications for content, co-authors' names. Perhaps if Peter Hernon is not available, he can make a referral. /ALL
   
   
5. Set up the next conference call for Wednesday, March 5th, 9:30-10:30. /Barbara

1. Management Council's charge: word from the Council that we should contact BLC members who have done assessment narrows down our charge. Pam will send us that survey question to identify these institutions (Brown, MIT). Pam/Done
   
   
2. Expanding the charge: it would be nice to supplement this kind of presentation (by an individual or panel) with a speaker who would deal with concepts, the broader picture - a speaker such as Peter Hernon (Simmons). We should build on the Council's advice.
   
   
3. Contacting speakers: We can contact BLC members more informally and follow up with a letter. We would have to be more formal if we contact Peter Hernon, perhaps initially with email and follow up with a phone call. Perhaps we should contact Peter Hernon first to determine the budget we need to request.
   
   
4. Logistics: when we're ready with a program, Nancy will contact Melissa for a place, date and time. Nancy/future
   
   
5. The April NETSL program on assessment was discussed but will occur too late to be helpful. It was decided not to solicit input from our COI since that has been pretty moribund.
   
   
6. Next conference call: we will talk again on Wednesday, February 26th from 9:30 - 10:30 (and notify Donna). Barbara
   
   

1. Steps to date on considering speakers for our workshop:
   Pam had forwarded an ACRL/NEC message to the group. We noted that ACRL uses Peter Hernon's book in its online(?) course. Pam will be contacting the 24/7 Task Force.
   
   Nancy noted that the VirCat Task Force is trying to tie in the union list of serials with the Virtual Catalog. That group's program will involve looking at vendor programs for their new software. They do not plan on presenting the survey from U of Michigan re: the virtual catalog and collection development, user satisfaction and turnaround time. Our task forces are not really aligned.
   
   
2. Next steps:
   Nancy pointed out that the Management Council meets on 2/13; during the following week, we should decide whom to contact and get a letter together (Nancy will contact the Staff Development Committee for letters they used). Barbara Preece suggested our program be presented before the final report on April 11. If we have our program later, we'll add it as a follow up to that report. Nancy will review how much lead time is needed, how we should advertise, determine the audience (according toBarbara) and possible sites for the presentation. We should expect a good audience; this is a timely topic. / Nancy
   
   Pam has compiled a list of all the names we've discussed in past meetings:
   • Peter Hernon, Professor at Simmons, has written prolifically on assessment
   • Chuck Friedman, U. of Pittsburgh, on evaluation design
   • Jim Self, UVA, on using and understanding statistics
   • Collen Cook, Executive Associate Dean, Texas A&M, has written on the pilot for LibQUAL+ at Texas A&M
   • Julia Blixrud, ARL Director of Info Services
   • Danuta Nitecki, Associate University Librarian, Yale; on assessment.
   • Martha Kyrillidou, Senior Program Officer, Statistics and Measurement, ARL, who spoke at MCCELPHI.
   • Maureen Sullivan, consultant, Maureen Sullivan Associates.
     (Thanks, Pam, for getting this list together).
     
     
3. Set up next conference call for Wednesday, February 19, 9:30 - 10:30 and Inform Donna / Barbara

1. January 31 Interim Report
   There were a few suggestions to clarify points in Pam's report. Pam sent out a revised version later in the day. When Donna incorporates Wellesley's response to our survey, the report will be complete. Pam would like final responses to the report by 10:00 am Friday. She will submit the report to the BLC by noon, Friday./Pam, Donna
   
   
2. Output Measures Workshop
   We have not heard more on this topic from Barbara Preece, who was at ALA last week. From our survey responses, we assume the nature of the workshop should be general - what's available, rather than concentrate on specific tools. Pam has had no additional responses from the consortia Barbara contacted; the two responses received are not very useful. We can consider what kinds of generalities we want and put those ideas forward to the BLC. Perhaps the Board will react and clarify their perception of the workshop.
   
   In the meantime, we can consider possibilities for speakers. Reviewing the literature for names, contacting speakers bureaus at BLC institutions, and questioning local professional organizations and Simmons for names may be a good start. Nancy will communicate with NELA; Pam, with ACRL-NEC and ACRL national; and Donna, with Simmons. Possible speakers will be the focus of our next meeting./Nancy, Pam, Donna
   
   
3. Miscellaneous
   Nancy contacted a member of the VirtCat Task Force re: what they are doing to survey the virtual catalog and/or how the U of M survey fit in, but has not heard back. Pam will contact the 24/7 Task Force about their survey and how we might collaborate. /Pam
   
   
4. Next meeting
   Set up our next conference call for Thursday, February 6, 9:30 - 10:30. / Barbara
   
   

1. Bringing Donna up to date:
   Pam summarized the last few conference calls for Donna, including updates on the status of our January 31st report, our deliberations over the spring workshop, other assessments past (such as the U of M evaluation of our Virtual Catalog's impact on collection development) and future.
   
   
2. Interim Report
   Donna will compile the results of our survey on Thursday, January 23 and will have the results to us soon. She will write a couple of paragraphs to summarize these results for the report. As we've noted before, the report will be short, and will include our looking into possible workshops and our questions to other consortia. Nancy will summarize her workshop questions (see 4 below) for the report. Pam will have an initial draft of the report to us by Friday, January 24. /Donna, Pam
   
   
3. Consortia questions:
   Barbara Preece forwarded our (Pam's) questions to other consortia via a consortia listserv, with responses coming back to Pam. Pam has received two to date, one from VIVA (Virtual Library of Virginia), who had recently enjoyed a one-day presentation on statistics by a UVA librarian, Jim Self. Another response was from BC ELN, from British Columbia. Pam will forward those and any future responses to the group. /Pam - Done
   
   
4. The workshop:
   Nancy once again wrote to Barbara Preece for her, Barbara's, expectations from a workshop, and to clarify the nature of our audience. From Elaine Martin's package, there seems to be 4 reasons to do an evaluation and assessment tools should be designed accordingly. The bottom line from Donna's survey seems to be that we're not statisticians; and how do we get the basics. Perhaps people are interested in more general concepts (less specific than LibQual+), what works best, quantitative versus qualitative, how to customize. Our presenter would have to be someone with the breadth of knowledge to explain all levels. But we do have to look for someone on the east coast (more restrictive than in the past). Is Check Friedman from U Pitt too far away? Jim Self from UVA? Nancy will cut and paste the original message to Jo-ann and Elaine, two board members, who possibly did not receive the original from Ann Montgomery Smith. /Nancy
   
   
5. Other Assessments:
   Barbara Preece had encouraged us to talk with the 24/7 task force who want to evaluate their program. Pam will "talk" with those folks, and Nancy, with the Virt Cat Task Force. /Pam, Nancy
   
   
6. Next Meeting
   We will set up our next conference call for next Tuesday, January 28 from 12:30 to 1:30/Barbara
   
   

1. Communications from Barbara Preece:
   1. She, Barbara, will send Pam's proposed questions to a list of consortia directors and will forward the answers to Pam.
   2. The 24/7 Task Force wants to assess the effectiveness of 24/7; Barbara suggested the two task forces might get together on this.
   3. We expect Barbara will get back to us re: Ann Montgomery Smith's email to Jo-Ann, Elaine and Barbara to clarify the nature and audience of our workshop. There will be or has been a Council meeting recently, so perhaps something was decided there.
   
   
   
2. The Workshop:
   We theorized that perhaps we want to bring in someone who does assessment, have breakout sessions in the afternoon. Perhaps the packet from Elaine Martin was to provide a framework. Is the idea to select a tool or invent one? Let people know what's out there or how to invent one in-house? Or both? Even LibQual+ could be used along with an in-house survey. We need to keep the responses from our survey in mind while we consider workshop ideas. We will post the workshop question again to Barbara if we haven't heard by next Tuesday/Nancy.
   
   
3. January 31 Report
   This report can be a bit short and include:
   1. results of our survey (if Donna is available for the analysis);
   2. the clarification of our charges;
   3. the questions sent to other consortia; and
   4. a workshop update./Nancy, end of January
   
   
   
4. Arrange our next conference call for Wednesday, January 22 from 3:30-4:30/Barbara
   
   
5. 5. Email Donna about the next call vis a vis her schedule; let her know minutes of recent meetings are available/Barbara.

1. Output Measures Workshop:
   Pam had forwarded us the responses to this question from our survey. The answers were quite varied. Having someone tell us how to conduct an assessment on our own would be too broad for one workshop. We might want to consider two speakers: one to give us an overview and a second, to concentrate on one specific topic or tool, such as LibQual+. The workshop could focus on a library's using assessment tools, on a general how it's done. Nancy will talk with Ann about the make up of the audience; Ann might want to ask Barbara Preece what she has in mind/ NANCY.
   
   
2. Proposed questions to other consortia:
   Pam had forwarded us 5 questions to consider:
   1. What tools does your consortium currently use to assess and evaluate consortium initiatives (e.g., focus groups, surveys, LibQual+, E-metrics)? The parenthetical examples will be lumped under distinguishing categories.
   2. What consortium initiatives have you assessed? Add "and why?"
   3. Question number three was deleted to be replaced with a question about analyzing results
   4. How are results being used? Or words to that effect
   5. How are consortia communicating results and subsequent actions to members?
   6. We added What training in statistical analysis has been provided to members?
   Barbara Preece may already have questions of her own in mind.
   
   
3. Miscellaneous:
   We all received material from Ann forwarded to her from Elaine Martin at UMass Medical School. We need clarification on where this material and Chuck Freedman's program logic models fit in.
   
   
4. Arrange next conference call for Thursday, January 16 from 1:00 - 2:00/BARBARA

1. Discussion of where we are with our charge:
   1. Consider packet of information from Elaine Martin. Only Nancy has received this. Although the information is health-related, it concerns logical model development and may serve as a guideline for creating a framework or model for our assessments. Elaine refers to Chuck Freedman at the University of Pittsburgh who works with "program logic models"
   2. Mark Sandler at the University of Michigan has been working with the BLC to evaluate its virtual catalog, eg. as a collection development tool, gathering data on delivery and user satisfaction. We need to ask Barbara Preece about this evaluation and determine how it fits in with our charge. Nancy will forward us the information she has from that U of M survey
   3. We need to determine if the virtual catalog and 24/7 are the only two initiatives the BLC is interested in assessing. There are also the cooperative buying and reciprocal borrowing programs to consider
   4. We will read an article Nancy has sent us from "Library Network". Trend number 9 in that article gives us new names to research/ALL, by Thursday
      
      
2. The workshop:
   1. We need to find out from Barbara Preece more about the expected workshop, that is, who is our audience?
   2. Pam will send out the answers to "what kind of workshop would you like" from our survey. These are quite diverse/DONE.
3. Next steps:
   1. Barbara will request a conference call for Thursday, January 9th from 1:00 - 2:00
   2. During Thursday's call we will brainstorm about questions to forward to Barbara Preece to send out to consortia who do assessments
   3. Donna will tabulate the results of the survey for inclusion in our next report/Donna, during or right after week of January 20th

1. Output Measures survey:
   As of November 19, Donna had received 9 out of the 19 surveys sent. She reported there is a great variety among the responses from the very short to verbose. There will be no more reminders, but our cut off date will be December 9th. Of immediate interest are suggestions for presentations.
   • Donna will send out the raw data, arranged by topic, to the Task Force. We can look for trends and highlight unique responses. / Donna - later
   • Donna will cut and paste answers about program suggestions
     
     
2. Program/presentation on output measures:
   Barbara Preece has recommended that we stay close to the eastern seaboard in our search for presenters. Some names that came up were Peter Hernon, Simmons, author of Action Plan on outcomes assessment in libraries; Danuta Nitecki from Yale; Martha Kyrillidou from ARL, who spoke at MCCELPHI and also Julia Blixrud from ARL; and Maureen Sullivan, a consultant in the Massachusetts area, who is probably knowledgeable about survey instruments. We should perhaps consider two speakers, one to tie output measures in to the curriculum and student learning, and another to concentrate on the nuts and bolts of measurement tools.
   • Continue to suggest names of presenters and note where they're from / task force
   
   
   Nancy has been looking at the ARL postings. The ARL has links to key components in programming. Also, she learned from former Staff Development Committee members that their main program interest was LibQual+. Note: There is a link from the ARL and LibQual+ page to information on consortia involvement. Nancy noted that the NY3Rs consortium got the cost of the program down per institution through consortial purchasing. Also, the deadline for participation in the '03 LibQual+ is December 6, too soon for us to consider this year.
   
   
3. Interim Task Force Report 11/8:
   Nancy had asked Melissa if we got feedback on our interim report. The report is on the Management Council's agenda for this week; we may have clarification on our charge by Friday (11/22).
   
   
4. Set up conference call for Tuesday, 12/3 from 1:00 - 2:00 / Barbara

1. Output Measures survey:
   Ann Montgomery Smith emailed the survey to all BLC library directors on 11/5
   • A reminder will be sent out on 11/11 for the 11/12 deadline; this will be the only follow up for non-respondents /Donna will draft reminder to send to Ann
     
   • Task Force members will examine raw data; respondents can remain anonymous/Donna will send data after 11/12
     
   • Survey results will be analyzed /Donna et al - method of analysis to be determined after results are received
     
   
   
   
2. Output Measures COI:
   • Send out a welcome incorporating, from Pam's draft, questions #1. What would you like from the COI? #2 If you are in other active COI's, what makes them work? And #4. If the Task Force were to post URLs for online articles about output measures, would you be interested in reading and discussing them? /Pam - DONE 11/5
     
   
   
   
3. Task Force Report for 11/8:
   • Incorporate all suggested changes and additions from Task Force members / Pam - DONE 11/5
     
   • Incorporate changes suggested during the conference call: 4c request Board/MC confirm our understanding of the charge; V. add COI discussion under "Next Steps"; relocate the NEASC report and make it Appendix A; change survey to Appendix B /Pam - DONE 11/5
     
   • Send version 2 of the report to task force /Pam - DONE 11/5
     
   • Final suggestions for the report due to Pam by 11:00 am on Friday /task force members - by 11/8
   
   
   
4. Gather further information:
   • Contact other consortia or members by phone /Pam, with others as needed - later
     
   
   
   
5. Presentation/Workshop:
   • Contact Barbara Preece about the budget and possible schedule for a presentation/workshop /Pam
     
   • Contact former members of the Staff Development Committee, who recommended investigating LibQual+, for their ideas on presentations /Nancy
     
   • Poll members of the COI for their ideas /task force members
     
   • While reading relevant articles, look for names of possible presenters /task force members
   
   
   
6. Set up conference call for Tuesday, 11/19 from 11:00 - noon /Barbara - DONE 11/7

1. Assessment tool survey:
   1. Add question to survey re: what kind of presentation would be of interest/Donna - DONE
   2. Get contact information for BLC libraries from BLC web site/Donna - list of BLC library directors is on the web site
   3. Do analysis of survey results/Donna - after November 12
   4. Timing of the survey - dates were altered: the survey will be sent out Tuesday, November 5 with results due on November 12
   5. Write summary for head of survey/Pam - DONE
      
      • Include definition of "output measures" in survey introduction/Pam - DONE
      
      • Post raw data from survey to task force listserv/Nancy will ask Donna to do after November 12
      
      • Bring Donna up to speed on October 30 meeting/Nancy
      
      • After November 12, do follow up calls to get back unreturned surveys/Pam, Nancy
      
      
2. COI for output measures:
   • To encourage activity on the listserv, send out welcome to new members, inform them about November 5 survey, encourage input re: topics of interest/Pam, by November 5
   
   
3. Send ARL list of LibQual+ users to the task force listserv/Nancy - DONE
   • Contact some consortia with questions about LibQual+, about purchasing the software as a consortial deal (perhaps BLC's role?)/Pam - later
   
   
4. Draft task force report and incorporate NELA and NEASC reports/Pam - Done, 10/31
   • Task force members to react and make suggestions in color/all - in progress
   • Include links to relevant sites, articles, etc./all
   
   
5. Set up next conference call for week of November 4/Barbara - in progress

1. Send URL for University Libraries Group to task force listserv / Pam--DONE.
   There is not much info on the ULG page, apart from a list of participating libraries. Of BLC libraries, Northeastern and Tufts are members; they could be resources for additional info on the ULG.
   
   
2. Create assessment tool survey for BLC member libraries, send to task force listserv / Donna--DONE
   
   • Add question to survey re: what kind of presentation would be of interest / Donna
   • Get contact info for BLC libraries from BLC Web site / Donna (she'll need help collating contact info if info isn't readily available on BLC Web site)
   • Analysis of survey results / Donna. Most of the info will be qualitative; it will be hard to get meaningful numbers from it, and from a small survey pool of 19 BLC libraries, but Brown has a software package to run results through.
   • Timing of survey: Donna recommends 1-week for response time. Send out survey Nov. 4, due Nov. 11 / Donna
   • Write summary for head of survey / Pam, by Oct. 29
     
     
3. From LibQUAL+ and EMetrics Web sites, make list of BLC libraries using these two tools, send to listserv / Nancy-- DONE
   BLC libraries using LibQUAL+ : UConn and Brown
   BLC libraries employing ARL EMetrics: UConn and UMass/[Amherst?]
   - Post participating library groups or consortia to task force listserv / Nancy
   
   
4. Start BLC COI on output measures / Pam, by Oct. 11-- DONE
   21 people responded to Pam's message to the BLC listserv, expressing interest in the COI.
   - Post to COI to welcome / tba, we'll discuss at Oct. 30 meeting
   - Query COI re: presentation / tba, we'll discuss in future
   
   
5. Update Barbara Lerch on meetings to date / Nancy--DONE
   
   
6. Post action items to task force listserv / Pam--DONE
   
   
7. Post our version of the basic charge to the listserv for revisions, then to the BLC / Pam
   - Still to do / Pam, will post to list Thursday afternoon, Oct. 25
   
   
8. Ask Barbara Preece re: speaker fees and expenses, and the timing of a presentation (should it take place before or after our final report is due, April 11?) / Pam
   We're awaiting response from Barbara P. re: funding; Barbara had some preference for having the presentation before April 11, so it could be included in the final report
   
   
9. Respond to Melissa Petze re: minutes and meetings / Pam
   - Post action item lists from our three meetings to date to Melissa Petze, to go to BLC / Pam
   
   
10. Set up two conference calls before initial report is due, Nov. 8 (1st draft due to task force listserv Nov. 1) / Barbara L.-- DONE
    
    
11. Read articles in "Evaluating the twenty-first century: the Association of Research Libraries new measures inititative, 1997-2001," in the Journal of Library Administration, v. 35, no. 4--DONE
    
    

1. Our interpretation of our charge, clarifying what we've decided to do / Pam will write
   
   
2. Brief description of our meeting and working processes
   
   
3. Creation of COI; response rate from interested BLC members / Pam
   
   
4. A summary of the survey questions; include survey as an appendix / Pam
   
   
5. Survey results ready for interim Jan. 31 report / Pam
   
   
6. Preliminary plan for presentation / Pam
   
   
7. Report from NEASC session at NELA / Nancy will write, send to Pam
   
   
8. Initial survey on use of LibQUAL+ and E-Metrics among BLC member libraries / by Nancy, to Pam
   
   
9. Links to LibQUAL+ and E-Metrics sites / Pam
   
   
10. Links to sites and online articles / all
    
    

• Send URL for University Libraries Group to listserv / Pam
• Create survey for BLC member libraries, send to listserv / Donna
• From LibQUAL+ and EMetrics Web sites, make list of BLC libraries using these two tools, send to listserv / Nancy
• Start BLC COI on output measures / Pam
• Update Barbara Lerch on meetings to date / Nancy
• Post action items to listserv / Pam
• Post our version of the basic charge to the listserv for revisions, then to the BLC / Pam
• Ask Barbara Preece re: speaker fees and expenses, and the timing of a presentation (should it take place before or after our final report is due, April 11?) / Pam
• Respond to Melissa Petze re: minutes and meetings / Pam
• Set up two conference call meetings, October 23 and 30, before initial report is due, Nov. 8 (1st draft due to listserv Nov. 1) / Barbara L.
• 11. Read articles in "Evaluating the twenty-first century: the Association of Research Libraries new measures inititative, 1997-2001," in the Journal of Library Administration, v. 35, no. 4 / all

1. Bring Donna and 4th TF member up to speed / Nancy
   
   
2. Send TF members links to relevant literature / Nancy
   
   
3. Meet with with board liaison Ann Montgomery Smith to clarify charge / all
   
   
4. begin work on Action Items 1-3 from the charge:
   
   1. Identify and monitor assessment... measures being developed by other library agencies / Pam
   
   2. Determine what assessment... measures... BLC members use / Nancy
   
   3. Contact NEASC... about their plans for assessment... measures / Nancy
   
   
5. write initial report by Nov. 1, for TF review; due to BLC on Nov. 8 / Pam