ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES NEWSLETTER OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM Vol. 20, no. 05 GP 3.16/3-2:20/05 February 25, 1999 LIBRARY PROGRAMS SERVICE UPDATE REMARKS BY GIL BALDWIN DIRECTOR, LIBRARY PROGRAMS SERVICE Before the Federal Documents Task Force Government Documents Round Table American Library Association Philadelphia, PA January 30, 1999 Good morning, everyone! I'm pleased to appear before you today in my new role as Director of the Library Programs Service (LPS) and I want thank Mr. DiMario and Mr. Buckley for giving me this responsibility. Many of you know that I've been part of LPS for many years--not quite long enough to have experienced the year 1900 problem, but at least long enough that print to electronic is not my first format transition. This is an exciting time to be part of the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), as we work through the changes that will carry the program forward. This morning I want to highlight several developments in LPS, and to lay some groundwork for topics that will be covered in the combined Federal Documents and Cataloging Committee session tomorrow. I will cover three very inter-related aspects of building the FDLP Electronic Collection: incorporating archiving into our processing routines; migrating from print media to electronic products; and a new model for partnerships. FDLP Electronic Collection As many of you know, we have developed and published a policy defining GPO's management of the electronic Government information products made available through the FDLP. This policy is contained in our paper called Managing the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and Planning Document, also known as the Plan, or sometimes as the little red book. I had a few copies available at the San Diego fall Council meeting, but since then we've published it and distributed copies not only to every depository but also to an extensive list of Program stakeholders and interested parties. Naturally, it's on the Web, too, and the URL is in our handouts. I can't stress enough how important it is for us and the Program to have gone through this process. The Plan is the framework upon which we are beginning the steps to build and manage the FDLP Electronic Collection in a real-time working environment. Now LPS is engaged in evaluating how some of our earlier efforts to incorporate electronic Federal Government information products into the FDLP stack up against the Plan. We are looking for opportunities to expand the Collection and integrate functional activities and services. Most especially we are test-driving methods of archiving agency information products to make good on the commitment to permanent public access. This fall, we reviewed our family of cataloging and locator services, initially with an eye toward identifying and reducing possible areas of overlap. This process included a variety of people from LPS, joined by staff from the Office of Electronic Information Dissemination Services (EIDS). It was a very constructive exercise, and we are beginning to apply the policies laid out in the Collection Plan to our production environment. Judy Andrews from James Madison University, who is one of our Electronic Transition Staff, and Laurie Beyer Hall of LPS, have been leading this effort. Laurie will be part of the program tomorrow morning, and she will show you in some detail how we envision our "life-cycle" processing. In the Plan, the FDLP Electronic Collection is described as having four components. As we developed the Plan, several of us felt that the most challenging area of the Collection is what we called Category 3. Not to be confused with Area 51, Category 3 includes in the Collection any electronic resource that we bring under some type of bibliographic control, whether through full cataloging or one of the locator services. We were concerned that expanding the scope of the Collection in this fashion, without having some degree of control over the electronic products themselves, could lead to difficulties in providing permanent public access to those products. The thrust of our internal discussions was how to "elevate" Category 3 products into Categories 1 or 2, which include products either under the direct control of GPO or one of our program partners. Now we're exploring ways to do that, by incorporating data archiving into our processing workflow. Initially we are testing archiving on a GPO server, but we are looking toward the day when FDLP electronic products will also be routinely archived at partner sites. New Models for Partnerships The third leg of the implementation triangle is the emerging new model for partnerships, one in which GPO takes a much more active role. To date our content partnerships either involve inactive agencies, or they follow the Department of State--University of Illinois Chicago (UIC) model. In the State/UIC partnership it's the agency and the University which are the most active partners, while GPO's role is to act as a guarantor, a safety net for the content in case one of the primary partners backs out. As some of you know, we have experienced problems in identifying other agencies that are interested in becoming active partners in the State/UIC mold, probably because it calls for such proactive participation from the agency. We are now looking for partnership opportunities that emphasize an active role for GPO and a depository institution, and can accommodate a less active role on the part of the agency, beyond the initial creation of the information product. What I would envision is a depository library identifying a body of Government information that fits that library's collection development policy, possibly along subject lines. The library or its parent institution would agree to commit server space and associated resources to archive products from one or more agencies that fit this partnership profile. GPO would locate, evaluate, and apply bibliographic control to appropriate electronic products. We would advise the publishing agency that their product is being incorporated into the FDLP Electronic Collection, and establish a channel for the agency to notify us about significant changes in the product or its location. Then we would archive the electronic product, either at the partner site or on a GPO server. George Barnum of our Electronic Transition Staff has been working on a model agreement along these lines and we hope to have something to test soon. A few weeks ago, George and I did our Electronic Collection presentation for the Federal Publishers' Committee and we've gotten a couple of interesting leads out of that. One of these is with NOAA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and they've got some really interesting electronic products that they are interested in finding an archiving partner for. These are great products, in subject areas like meteorology, ecosystem management, oceanography, marine mammals, and global change. So any of you who might be interested in partnering with LPS and NOAA to provide permanent access for this kind of information, please let us know. I want to thank George and Judy for their efforts on our Electronic Transition Staff and their contributions to LPS. Many of their efforts these past few months reflect LPS' initial realization of the policies and plans for the FDLP Electronic Collection. We are now at the point when it's time to get our hands dirty and make permanent access happen. With plans in hand, we're taking the real world steps of the electronic transition. As in any transition period, our work is divided between maintaining and enhancing the traditional functions that relate to the management of tangible Federal Government information products, and developmental activities. But for the moment we're out of the study phase and onto making permanent access work in a production environment. I'd like to put in a plug here for joining our Electronic Transition Staff for the 1999-2000 "term." Once again, we're looking for a couple of people who would like to spend a year in GPO helping us with the behind-the-scenes work of the electronic transition. You may have seen my announcement on GOVDOC-L last week, and there's a handout here about the opportunity. So don't be shy - come up and make yourself known. Migrating Products from Print to Electronic Two years ago we proposed phasing out certain FDLP titles which were distributed in microfiche when an official, reliable electronic version was available from the agency. Subsequent discussion revealed that the library community felt our proposal was premature. The principal reason for concern was our inability to guarantee permanent access to the electronic versions. Now that we are moving toward data archiving as part of our workflow, we feel that we are in a position to allay those permanent access issues. This is another direct result of implementing the FDLP Electronic Collection Plan. Robin Haun-Mohamed, Chief of our Depository Administration Branch, will cover this in more detail tomorrow, including the criteria we have identified for carrying out these product migrations. I want to stress this is not product conversion--we are not taking a print product and using technology to produce an electronic version. These are cases in which there are official, essentially equivalent, versions in both print and electronic media, and we are selecting a version for the FDLP. These decisions are based on expected usage, reliability, completeness, and so on, but our decisions must take into account the expectation of the Congress that this program will become increasingly electronic in nature. But while changing the FDLP dissemination format for existing products is one issue, we also find products new to the FDLP, that are available both from the agency Web site and in print. In these cases, we will generally bring the electronic version into the program, but we are not attempting to secure the print version unless it is of extraordinary value. 1999 Biennial Survey Let me turn now to the 1999 Biennial Survey, which will take place this fall. I appreciate all of the effort and interest of the Depository Library Council's Statistical Measurement Committee (SMC) in the Biennial Survey. With their assistance, we believe we have developed a survey that meets the needs of LPS and will be beneficial to the depository community as well. Following up on the discussions that took place at the San Diego Council meeting, LPS prepared a draft survey that is nearly complete. We are in the late stages of completing the Survey design and we will circulate a draft to the depository library community this spring, in order to provide you with sufficient advance notice about the Biennial Survey. The purpose of the Biennial Survey is to report on the conditions in the depository libraries. The draft survey is based on the questions asked during an on-site inspection and questions posed to depositories in the self-study evaluation process. We felt that using these tools as the basis for the survey is the best and most consistent way to evaluate the condition of depository libraries. Some questions are also asked to provide feedback to inspectors so they may better fulfill their advisory role with depository librarians and library directors. The new Biennial Survey will: * Enhance our ability to knowledgeably manage the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP); * Assist us in carrying out our consultant role with depository librarians and administrators; * Allow GPO to report to Congress on the state of the FDLP; and * Reduce the reporting burden on individual depository librarians in their variety of institutional settings. While not all of the questions in the draft discussed in San Diego were incorporated, we believe that the intended results of those questions can be derived from this revised instrument. Most importantly, this survey is answerable by all types of depository libraries with any type of organizational configuration. Some problems and possible negative ramifications for individual depositories were recognized in responding to the cost-related questions. While we agree that those questions should be included in the Survey, LPS has placed them in an optional section, to be completed at the library's discretion. This approach should provide LPS with data on the financial contributions to the FDLP made by individual depositories, but it will not force any library to divulge financial information that the library feels may jeopardize its continued participation in the FDLP. FDLP Internet Use Policy Guidelines Last fall there was considerable discussion on access issues, particularly with Internet use policies and how local library policies relate to the free access requirements of the FDLP. In San Diego we presented draft FDLP Internet Use Policy Guidelines. The draft has been reviewed by Depository Library Council and our General Counsel, and I'm please to announce that these Guidelines have just been published in the January 15 issue of Administrative Notes, and are included in our handout package. The new Internet Use Policy Guidelines build upon the Depository Library Public Service Guidelines for Government Information in Electronic Formats, published last September, and the 1998 Recommended Specifications for Public Access Work Stations in Federal Depository Libraries, published last June. In general, our position is that all depository libraries must offer the general public free access to online Federal Government information provided through the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP). This follows the same principle of free access that governs the use of traditional depository materials, as provided in Section 1911 of Title 44, United States Code. Depository libraries should have a written access policy that addresses the issues regarding obtaining FDLP information on the Internet. One thing articulated in these new Guidelines is that all depository libraries are expected to provide access to the products in the FDLP Electronic Collection. This of course includes everything on GPO Access. Access to online Federal Government information provided through the FDLP must be available to any library user free of fees or other restrictions, such as age, residency status, or filtering software. This is the same principle of free access that governs the use of traditional depository materials. I hope that this policy statement will be helpful to you in working through access issues in your local setting.