[Eril-l] Building upon Susan Swogger’s observation, librarians need to achieve equity/fairness across the disciplinary spectrum. Given the extreme variances in cost, use, and potential audience, UNC has created a prioritization model that standardizes for th...
luke_swindler at unc.edu
Tue Oct 6 16:26:26 PDT 2015
Building upon Susan Swogger’s observation, librarians need to achieve equity/fairness across the disciplinary spectrum.
Given the extreme variances in cost, use, and potential audience, UNC has created a prioritization model that standardizes for these various factors and allows it evaluate all databases in tandem via the use of the following absolute scale:
* • Priority 1 = Essential (must have): a core resource integral to supporting a program and so necessary that the library needs to fund it if at all possible; the expectation is that the resource will get high use or at least heavy and on-going use among its primary audience
* • Priority 2 = Important (should have): a major resource for a program; the expectation is that the resource will get substantial and on-going use among at least its primary audience
* • Priority 3 = Useful (could have): a significant resource for a program; the expectation is that the resource will get appreciable use among its primary audience
* • Priority 4 = Marginal (would have if funds permit): directly relevant to supporting a field within a program; the expectation is that the resource gets at least occasional use of from it specialized audience
This methodology also has the advantage of being relevant to any size library.
On Oct 6, 2015, at 3:41 PM, Swogger, Susan <sswogger at email.unc.edu<mailto:sswogger at email.unc.edu>> wrote:
Good advice! I’d add that it’s important to look at each DB in context – is it for a small or large group? Is it core to that group? Is its content unique among your subscriptions? What percentage is being actively used? And the like. If your VPPA is only give numbers without context that’s all they’ll know to look at as a measure of value.
From: Eril-l [mailto:eril-l-bounces at lists.eril-l.org] On Behalf Of Melissa Belvadi
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2015 1:44 PM
To: Thomas, Karen <Karen.Thomas at delval.edu<mailto:Karen.Thomas at delval.edu>>
Cc: eril-l at lists.eril-l.org<mailto:eril-l at lists.eril-l.org>
Subject: Re: [Eril-l] Database cost per use statistics
Scale (as in economies of...) is everything. What is your undergrad and grad FTE?
You probably shouldn't compare your cost/FTE to an institution that has 50,000 undergrads if you have only 2,000.
Also if you have a professional consortium negotiating your prices, that can very well affect your price and thus your cost/fte.
We generally have MUCH better costs/FTE for products with consortial deals than those without.
That said, we're a public university with a total FTE of just under 4,000, a few hundred of which is graduate level, mostly education, nursing, and business.
If we're comparable to you, contact me directly, and I'd be happy to share at least some of those stats.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Eril-l