The role of charity in collection building four models for cooperative collection development
1 / 19

The Role of Charity in Collection Building: Four Models for Cooperative Collection Development - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

The Role of Charity in Collection Building: Four Models for Cooperative Collection Development. Presented by Sharolynn J. Pyeatt Harold B. Lee Library Brigham Young University June 28, 2008.

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'The Role of Charity in Collection Building: Four Models for Cooperative Collection Development' - dextra

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The role of charity in collection building four models for cooperative collection development

The Role of Charity in Collection Building:Four Models for Cooperative Collection Development

Presented by

Sharolynn J. Pyeatt

Harold B. Lee Library

Brigham Young University

June 28, 2008

The role of charity in collection building four models for cooperative collection development

Rather than focus on market niche,libraries should consider their needs and opportunities based upon their position along the maturity continuum.

Start up mature libraries
Start-up ----------------------------------- MatureLibraries

  • Start-up:

    -- Policies and practices still under construction

    -- “Anything is better than nothing.”

  • Mature:

    -- Sense of tradition

    -- Well established and documented policies and procedures

    -- “We only value monetary gifts”

Gift model categories
Gift Model Categories

  • Goodwill

  • Networked

  • Mediated

Goodwill transfers
Goodwill Transfers

  • Spontaneous efforts

  • Donors = individuals or small groups

  • Generally one-time transactions

Networked transfers
Networked Transfers

  • Based on existing personal and/or professional relationships

  • Possible expanded donor base

  • Either one-time or continuing efforts

Mediated transfers
Mediated Transfers

  • Third-party charitable organization serves as bridge been donor and recipient organizations

  • Multiple levels of intermediate organizations are possible, e.g., one collects donations and another distributes

Models of networked transactions
Models of Networked Transactions

  • Person-to-person

  • Good-home

Models of mediated transfers
Models of Mediated Transfers

  • Redistribution

  • Local-supply

Person to person model
Person-to-Person Model

  • Desired materials may be either general or specific in nature and scope, as determined by recipient.

  • Supply success is contingent upon donating partner’s ability to influence donor-partners.

  • Book selection parameters established and broadcast to donors prior to actual collection.

  • Project costs generally paid by donating entity, but are negotiable between parties.

  • Fuzzy understanding of import/export regulations; guidance needed at project point of origin and at final destination.

Good home model
Good-Home Model

  • Donating party wishes to downsize its collection for library-specific reasons:

    • Change in collection development direction(s)

    • Space limitations

    • Preference for digital over print resources

  • Well-built collection has value beyond the sum of its parts, better serves needs of other libraries/patrons

  • Willingness to find better home for collection

  • Link between parties founded on personal and/or professional networks

Redistribution models
Redistribution Models

  • Most complex model

  • Supply from which donated materials are drawn comes from current inventory (as defined by the organization)

  • Contractual obligations and government regulation may restrict how redistribution agencies are able to respond to requests

  • Communication between all parties is essential

    -- What terms are negotiable, which are not?

    -- How are responsibilities and costs shared/divided between parties?

    -- What is the process? What does one need to know to maximize a successful outcome for all parties involved? Who does one need to know?

Local supply model
Local-Supply Model

  • Designed to minimize barriers found in other models

  • Book requests are treated as though a request for cash.

  • Requesting library/organization bears responsibility for determining what is needed and to locate a supply source. i.e., The potential recipient must present a detailed and specific need and a plan to meet the need.

  • Geographic proximity exists between supplier and recipient, preference is given to local (to the recipient) suppliers

  • Verification and accountability are important components of this model.

Hopes for the future
Hopes for the Future

  • New model based on lessons from e-commerce: and Deseret Book’s Chapters of Hope ( )

  • Non-profit, humanitarian-based clearinghouse which links potential donors and suppliers in a way that personalizes individual contributions.

  • Beneficiaries can establish a needs profile, i.e., a wish list of desired information resources.

  • Suppliers are selected based on proximity to final destination of acquired materials.

References cited
References Cited

  • Curzon, Susan Carol. (2005). Managing Change: a How-to-do-it Manual. New York : Neal-Schuman Publishers.

    Websites Consulted

  • Brother’s Brother Foundation, Pittsburgh.

  • Deseret Book.

  • Chapters of Hope

  • CH advertisements



  • International Bookbank

  • LDS Humanitarian Services,19749,6208,00.html

Questions posed during interviews
Questions Posed during Interviews

In comparing the various models presented in my paper, I am looking for answers to the following questions:

  • Tell me how your program works. 

    In review, the following questions were asked, if necessary. 

  • Who initiates contact and the transfer of materials:  the potential donor or the potential recipient.  (If clarification was needed, the questions was expanded with the following explanation: In at least one model, the donating library is looking for the best home of an existing and valuable collection.  e.g., BYU’s Harold B. Lee Library donated over 6,800 monograph items related to Catholicism that were not duplicated in Notre Dame’s library system.  Most researchers would never have thought to look at BYU to do research about the Catholic Church.

  • Does the donating entity or intermediary solicit funding or materials from other sources?

  • What type of materials are donated? New vs. used, specialized vs. general, target audience, etc.

  • Is/was there professional guidance in the selection/collection-building process?  Professional guidance refers to whether professional librarians, individuals with subject expertise or other specialized knowledge were consulted during the initial acquisition process.

Questions continued
Questions, continued

  • How much time did the donating entity spend collecting/gathering the materials to be shipped?

  • What is the national origin of the materials shipped, i.e., where were the items being shipped published? If the local environment does not support a publishing industry, from what sources are materials acquired?

  • What is the pre-shipment assessment process? At the recipient level? At the donor level? Are the materials to be donated evaluated for usability?

  • How are costs allocated, i.e., who pays for what?  (storage, shipping, tariffs and taxes, etc.)

  • Who is responsible for researching intermediaries?

  • Who is responsible for researching and guaranteeing compliance with any import/export laws or otherwise applicable regulations?

  • Is there an ongoing commitment between the giving and receiving institution(s)? Between either or both institutions and the relevant intermediaries

  • What post-shipment evaluation processes are in place?  i.e., Did the project meet the goals and expectations of the donor?  Of the recipient?