F e d e r a l D e p o s i t o r y L i b r a r y P r o g r a m ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES Newsletter of the Federal Depository Library Program ------------------------------------------------------------------------ May 5, 2002 GP 3.16/3-2:23/06 (Vol. 23, no. 06) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Responses To Recommendations Depository Library Council · Fall 2001 1. Scheduling Council recommends that the Government Printing Office (GPO) implement the following schedule changes beginning with the Fall 2003 Council Meeting: a. Retain the Sunday night through Wednesday afternoon meeting schedule, but move the Fall Orientation session for new Council members to the Thursday immediately following the meeting; b. Consider concurrent or consecutively scheduled meetings with other library conferences (e.g. state associations, Public Library Association, Association of College and Research Libraries). Rationale: Moving the orientation to Thursday would provide more time for this valuable session, and would give new Council members background information from their first meeting to help them better understand GPO operations before their visit. This schedule change would also not require non-Council members, many of whom pay some or all of their own expenses, to spend more money to stay additional time. Having Council sessions in conjunction with other organizations' meetings might increase the size of the audience, including librarians not primarily responsible for government information in their respective institutions. Program opportunities might be enhanced by collaboration with these other organizations as well. Response: Scheduling for the Council and Fall Conference Meetings requires a great deal of coordination and planning, not only with Council members and GPO staff, but also in relation to other activities in the greater Washington metropolitan area. The nation's capital can be a difficult place in which to schedule meetings, and GPO tries to be as flexible as possible in order to obtain the best possible rates for the council/conference meeting rooms and hotel rooms for those registrants who require overnight accommodations. The orientation session for new Council members is most effective at the beginning of the Council meeting, thus allowing new Council members to be better informed of the mission and operation of the Library Programs Service (LPS). Moving the orientation session to Thursday extends the Council members' stay by at least one more day, thus incurring additional costs for GPO and for Council members in the length of time they must spend away from their institution. Therefore, we plan to retain the Sunday night through Wednesday afternoon meeting schedule, but move the orientation session for new Council members to Sunday afternoon. We believe the problems arising from scheduling Council/Conference to run concurrently or consecutively with other organizations' meetings would exceed the benefits, and could present unworkable scheduling difficulties for attendees, presenters, and LPS. LPS reviews the evaluations after each Council/Conference meeting, and a frequent comment is that there are too many competing events and sessions. Many attendees also mention that it is difficult for them to be away from their libraries for the full duration of the Conference. GPO now contracts for hotel space and Conference facilities up to three years in advance, another factor that makes concurrent or consecutive scheduling with other events problematic. GPO believes that it is in the best interest of the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) and the majority of attendees to continue scheduling our Conference as a stand-alone meeting. 2. Virtual Depository Collections Council recommends that GPO study the feasibility of a virtual depository library collection. If feasible, Council further recommends that GPO draw on the expertise of the depository library community to serve their Congressional district through an online depository collection and supporting services by carrying out a pilot project. Rationale: In light of the increasing predominance of online resources in the FDLP, GPO should consider the possible modification of the depository relationship. Exploring the concept of virtual depository collections with the depositories GPO could positively publicize the electronic transition, the fact that the majority of the new depository materials (60%) are now disseminated online, and the new roles that libraries have in building web and catalog resources for the distance learner/customer. Response: FDLP program managers have discussed the concept of a depository library selecting only those items made available in online format. Nothing in the statute or practice categorically precludes such a selection profile once a depository library has been established. According to 44 U.S.C. 1909, libraries must have at least 10,000 books, other than government publications, to remain a depository library. As the law has not changed, this is still a requirement, even for a library that wishes to adjust its item selection profile to receive only online titles. GPO is working with the regional librarian at the Arizona State Library, with whom the idea for this recommendation originated, and the University of Arizona in Tucson, which has expressed interest in focusing on online only resources. We have also had discussions with two other libraries in Arizona that may be interested in collecting only electronic resources once the project has been developed. We will be working to develop an evaluative framework to ascertain that the needs of the immediate user community and the Congressional district are adequately met, and that a depository which establishes an all-electronic item selection is able to be evaluated in the Biennial Survey, self-study, and inspection on an equal and fair footing with a traditional depository. The pilot project is expected to begin in fall 2002, with staff from the University of Arizona Library, the University of Arizona School of Information Resources and Library Science, and the Library Programs Service working together to develop plans to implement and evaluate the one-year project. Periodic progress reports will be developed during this period. A baseline initial assessment will be followed by informal subsequent assessments during the year, and a final assessment will take place by the end of the pilot project. Council will be kept abreast of the progress of the pilot project on a regular basis. 3. Integrated Library System (ILS) Council recommends that GPO provide a written update by the Spring 2002 Depository Library Council meeting on the progress of the potential acquisition of an Integrated Library System. Rationale: In the 1999 spring meeting Council recommended that GPO investigate the feasibility of acquiring an Integrated Library System. Council continues to believe that benefits to both GPO and the depository community exist. Additionally, GPO was receptive to the idea of an Integrated Library System but was unable to make a full resource commitment to an Integrated Library System acquisition due to its involvement with the Year 2000 compliance efforts. It is also likely that the migration from GPO's use of a variety of legacy systems to a single Integrated Library System would help streamline internal processes as well as increase responsiveness to the Depository Community. Response: In the fiscal year 2002 appropriation, GPO received general approval from Congress for systems modernization. LPS intends to acquire an up-to-date cataloging and library data management system. Our goal is to decide what to purchase, and to commit the funds necessary to purchase a commercial off-the-shelf Integrated Library System (ILS) within the next year. LPS operations will undoubtedly change to make use of the capabilities of a new system, although all of the details of such changes cannot be predicted at this time. LPS expects to use the ILS to support cataloging, classification, acquisitions, serial check-in, preparation work for conversion contracts, library selection and address information, and to provide distribution information to the Lighted Bin System. To date a working group of LPS staff has: + Looked at current systems in use by LPS and their functions. + Developed a statement of work to obtain the services of a library automation consultant. The consultant will assist us with defining our user requirements and with developing the criteria for selecting between competing systems. + Begun to define system requirements. + Begun to define data migration strategies. + Begun investigating existing ILS offerings. + Begun investigating training opportunities to prepare for an ILS. + Queried other libraries that have obtained and implemented an ILS. + Received input from the depository library community regarding interface requirements and service needs. + Begun to work with Materials Management Service, Network Systems, the Office of Information Resources Management, and other GPO personnel. + Developed material to request project approval from the Joint Committee on Printing. 4. Superseded List Council recommends that GPO develop principles that clearly articulate how depository libraries should manage editions of superseded, tangible materials for which the current edition now appears solely in an electronic format. Further, Council urges GPO to provide links to URLs in the electronic Superseded List. Rationale: Because the last compilation of the Superseded List is approximately 5 years old and more products once distributed in a tangible format have migrated to the electronic environment, the need for an updated Superseded List is critical. Council believes that a statement directing the management of tangible superseded material now available in an electronic only format is necessary, particularly when the tangible material is less than 5 years old. Linking URLs will assist depository libraries in the maintenance of material that is superseded on a regular basis. Council appreciates the time and effort of GPO and volunteers from the depository community and is looking forward to the new, electronic list in the very near future. Response: LPS has worked with depository librarians to update the printed 1996 Superseded List, and the revised version is available on the FDLP Desktop at . This data is an extension of the 1996 List as records from the revised Superseded List are complemented with information from the Substitution List. LPS has revised the preliminary pages of the 1996 Superseded List to develop the "FDLP Guidelines for Determining Superseded Materials," available at . The Guidelines provide guidance on product retention for superseded titles, including the case when a tangible title has been superseded by an online product. These Guidelines were also published in the March 15, 2002 issue of Administrative Notes. For the future, LPS is investigating the possibilities of attaching supersession information and other FDLP-specific data to the bibliographic records in the ILS. 5. Awareness Council recommends that GPO expand efforts to increase awareness among library administrators as well as library users of the unique contributions and benefits of the FDLP in the continuously changing information environment. Rationale: Council recognizes that diverse constituencies may be unaware of the Program's contributions and benefits. In light of recent trends that include more information offered virtually and a decline in the number of depository libraries nationally, increased promotional and marketing efforts are vital. These efforts should not only be aimed at the various constituencies in the library community (administrators, reference staff, and bibliographers) but at the faculty, business, students, government, and the general public. Response: In early November 2001 a GPO working group was convened to develop a marketing strategy to increase awareness of the FDLP among various constituencies. Led by the Chief of the Promotion and Advertising Branch, with representation from Library Programs Service (LPS) and the Office of Electronic Information Dissemination Services (EIDS), the Group has drafted a marketing plan around the theme "U.S. Government Information: Make the Connection at Federal Depository Libraries." 6. Inspections Council recommends that GPO continue to reorient the depository "inspection" process as mandated in 44 U.S.C. 1909 to a more positive learning and training experience. Whenever possible, the designated inspector should request that a representative from the depository's regional and/or a local peer expert be included as part of the visiting team. Moreover, GPO should train inspectors how to conduct sessions with ranking library officials to the best advantage for depository operations. Rationale: Council recognizes concerns among certain libraries regarding the inspection process, noting that nomenclature and emphasis may contribute to a negative perception. It is the sense of Council that a change in the use of the word "inspection" to a more positive term, such as "site visit" may facilitate the sharing of expertise, best practices, and other positive outcomes. These outcomes can be further served by requesting the presence of a regional or local peer expert during the visit, as that person can provide support for the depository coordinator. Finally, Council believes that specialized training will allow inspectors to communicate with library officials on a more equal basis. Response: The depository library inspection is the "firsthand investigation of conditions" required of the Superintendent of Documents in 44 U.S.C. 1909. The "firsthand investigation" or site visit has two major components. GPO staff act as consultants to the depository staff and administration, offering insights about best practices and suggesting alternatives in the operation of the depository. GPO staff also examine the depository to ascertain compliance with fundamental program requirements, such as free public access and proper maintenance of the depository collection. GPO views the on-site inspection as a time for depository staff to learn more about the FDLP and the depository community, and GPO staff make every effort to emphasize the consultation function of the visits. GPO always contacts the regional library prior to inspecting in that state, and encourages regional librarians to accompany the LPS inspector for on-site evaluations. The regional librarian has always had the option of sending another person when he/she is not available on the day of the inspection. Training depository library inspectors is an on-going process. LPS is in the process of training two new inspectors, and will schedule training sessions as appropriate. While the inspectors continue to look at all the areas shown in "Preparing for a Library Inspection," there has been a change in emphasis from strict adherence to the Guidelines, Federal Depository Library Manual and Supplements, and the Instructions, to a more results-oriented approach. Emphasis is placed on access—physical and bibliographic—to depository resources located in the library and available via the Internet. In response to this recommendation, a session entitled, "Discussion Session: Inspections & Addition of Peer Experts to Accompany Inspectors for On-Site Library Inspections" has been included as part of the Spring 2002 Council meeting. This session builds upon several other training sessions and presentations on the inspections and self-study processes that have been included in the Federal Depository Library Conference and Council meetings. 7. Self-Studies Council recommends that GPO assess the value and effectiveness of the self-study process for depository librarians and GPO. Rationale: Council would like to know whether the self-study process is working to improve depository library operations and the inspection process as anticipated by GPO and depository community. Council also would like to know if the self-study adequately helps GPO determine whether or not a formal inspection is warranted. Response: In December 2001, libraries in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Michigan were requested to submit self-studies of their depository operations. Most of the self-studies from those states have been received and LPS' Depository Services staff are reviewing the studies as well as evaluating the effectiveness of the self-study process. While the self-study has been helpful in helping new librarians understand the role of their depository collection in their library and the FDLP, it is an extremely time-intensive undertaking for all parties. A minimum of six months elapses from the time a self-study is requested until the earliest date that the library could be inspected. Libraries are generally given three months to return the self-study, then two months are taken to receive and evaluate the self-studies for a contiguous area, and then inspections are scheduled, providing at least four weeks advance notice for the libraries. Out of 63 self-studies called for review, 60 libraries returned the self-study on time. Three libraries have been contacted and advised their self-study submission is late. In response to this recommendation, a session has been scheduled for the discussion of the self-study process and its relation to library inspections during the Regional Meeting at the Spring 2002 Council meeting. 8. Geographically Separate Backup for GPO Access Council recommends that GPO proceed as quickly as possible to create a geographically separate backup for GPO Access and the Electronic Collection. Council also recommends that GPO begin working toward a complete mirror site, with full content and functionality, for GPO Access and the Electronic Collection. Rationale: Preservation of electronic government publications in GPO archiving initiatives is vitally important for guaranteeing permanent public access to these core government publications and other content-rich government information resources. The events of September 11th clearly demonstrate the strong need for redundancy of data storage at remote sites. A complete geographically separate backup and mirror site will allow GPO to better serve the needs of a growing user base. Response: Pursuant to our goal of establishing a geographically separate mirror site and backup facility for GPO Access, an onsite inspection of potential locations in GPO facilities was recently completed. Based on what was learned, a cost benefit analysis is being performed to determine the optimal location for this new facility. When this analysis has been completed, the location for the new site will be selected and work will begin as soon as practicable. In late 2001, in the aftermath of September 11, Congress provided $4 million to GPO in supplemental transfer authority for emergency preparedness (P.L. 107-117). Establishing a geographically remote mirror site and backup facility for GPO Access will utilize a portion of these funds, in addition to other project funding from the Salaries and Expenses appropriation to the Superintendent of Documents. Beginning with the most frequently used GPO Access resources, GPO will steadily add to the resources and data at this facility until it is a complete mirror site for GPO Access. This will include the portion of the FDLP Electronic Collection Archive maintained by GPO. 9. Geographically Separate Backup for Partners Council recommends that GPO investigate the feasibility of providing a geographically separate site for the FDLP partners and agency partners to store data contained on the partner sites. Rationale: If partners are responsible for locating their own geographically separate storage sites, GPO may or may not have easy access to the data or know where the backup is located in the event of a disruption at a partner site. By providing a data storage site for the FDLP and agency partners, GPO enables the partners to store data contained on their sites in a geographically separate facility. In the event of a disruption at a partner site, GPO can easily retrieve the stored data and assist the partner site with restoring public access to the data. Response: Two options for providing a geographically separated backup storage site are being investigated at this time. GPO is currently investigating the establishment of a backup facility separate from GPO Central Office in Washington, DC, and as development of that facility progresses, possibilities may exist to include partner data. GPO is also actively working with OCLC, Inc. on the establishment of OCLC's Digital Archive services. GPO expects to store material in OCLC's Digital Archive with supporting preservation metadata, and could conceivably place partner material in this arrangement as well. Both these options are developing rapidly, but some details remain to be clarified, particularly with regard to costs. We will continue to monitor developments and communicate with Council and our partners as it is feasible and appropriate. 10. Distribution of Electronic Publications Council recommends that GPO and a working group of Council examine the concept of establishing the systematic distribution of Federal government electronic publications through the FDLP in order to assure further redundancy in free public access to that body of information. Rationale: In response to concerns for permanent public access to electronic government information expressed by some in the depository community, Council believes that GPO and the Council working group should examine the following issues: legal issues; issues including technology; authenticity and data integrity; feasibility; and the nature and level of interest in pursuing the proposed distribution concept in the depository community. Response: LPS staff is participating in the discussions of the Electronic Distribution Working Group that is examining the concept of establishing the systematic distribution of Federal Government electronic publications through the FDLP. One of the Working Group's tasks is to develop a model or a proposal describing the ideal system for the distribution of electronic publications to depository libraries. The proposal should address the purpose and goals of electronic document distribution through the FDLP, the short and long-term responsibilities of participating libraries, and technological issues including authenticity, security, and data integrity. GPO has reviewed the legal issues for an FDLP electronic publication distribution system. The salient point is that the law governing the FDLP has not changed. Consequently, the responsibilities of libraries for their depository collections have not changed either. Therefore, under existing law every regional depository would be required to participate, and would have to permanently preserve, maintain, and provide access to every electronic publication in the FDLP. This requirement may place a disproportionate burden on regional depositories in an area of responsibility and development that differs significantly from earlier expectations. The impact of this must be addressed in any proposal. One of the Working Group's tasks is to determine the nature and level of interest in pursuing the proposed distribution concept. It has been suggested that libraries be surveyed as to whether they favor a program of electronic distribution that emulates the traditional FDLP for tangible publications. Before any such survey can be responsibly conducted, the Working Group must clarify what responsibilities would be incumbent upon participating libraries from a program designed in accordance with existing law. Library administrations should not be expected to commit their libraries' resources to an electronic version of the traditional FDLP without knowing the scope of their responsibilities. 11. Shared Bibliographic Information Council recommends that GPO appoint a working group to examine options for Federal Depository Libraries to share bibliographic information about government publications with GPO Cataloging Branch with the goal of sharing this cataloging information with all participants in the FDLP via GPO cataloging records. Options to be considered might include: 1. Sharing information to aid in the identification, description, and subject cataloging of Federal government publications via the process developed for the Electronic Publications Working Group; 2. A pilot project in which national libraries would contribute cataloging records for online publications to GPO Cataloging Branch; and 3. A pilot project in which other Federal Depository Libraries would contribute cataloging of Federal publications to GPO Cataloging Branch. For options 2) and 3), only libraries currently qualified to participate in the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC) would be eligible for participation in pilot projects. Rationale: Council appreciates the panel discussion by representatives of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging held at this Depository Library Conference. This presentation stimulated discussions of the several options for Federal Depository Libraries to share cataloging records or bibliographic information needed to create cataloging records with other FDLP participants via GPO cataloging records. A working group is needed to examine the feasibility of these options, weighing the benefits of augmenting the cataloging available for government information products outside the current GPO cataloging workflow and distribution of that cataloging to FDLP participants against possible negative impact on GPO Cataloging Branch's workload. Response: GPO's Cataloging Branch, as the national authority for cataloging U.S. Government publications in all formats, actively supports the goal of sharing bibliographic information with other libraries through participation in all national cooperative cataloging programs. However, the administration of a cooperative cataloging program requires a different level of commitment and resources than does participation in such projects. Council's recommendation to establish a working group to investigate options for sharing bibliographic data is not feasible at this time, in part because the acquisition and implementation of an ILS may bring significant changes in LPS' ability to share bibliographic data. Not only is LPS devoting significant resources to planning for and acquiring an ILS, but LPS lacks sufficient personnel to establish and successfully work with such a group. The Cataloging Branch has experienced a serious loss of staff and has yet to replace a number of essential staff members. Within the past twelve months the Branch has lost both of its section chiefs (one to promotion, one to retirement) and 30% of its catalogers (all to promotions elsewhere). The Cataloging Branch's current top priority is to address this crisis of recruitment and retention, and LPS is working closely with GPO's Office of Personnel Service to develop solutions. GPO intends to defer any action on this recommendation until such time as LPS' Integrated Library System is in place, and the Cataloging Branch is fully staffed. However, this deferral should not impede depository or other libraries from joining together to share bibliographic data, as the panel discussion suggested during the October 2001 Federal Depository Library Conference.