1 / 14

ASERL Disposition Database As a Collection Management Tool

ASERL Disposition Database As a Collection Management Tool. Bill Sudduth, University of South Carolina Liza Weisbrod, Auburn University Adam Haigh, Lander University. “ Proposed Southeast Region Guidelines for Management and Disposition of Federal Depository Library Collections”.

mizell
Download Presentation

ASERL Disposition Database As a Collection Management Tool

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ASERL Disposition DatabaseAs a Collection Management Tool • Bill Sudduth, University of South Carolina • Liza Weisbrod, Auburn University • Adam Haigh, Lander University

  2. “Proposed Southeast Region Guidelines for Management and Disposition of Federal Depository Library Collections” • Built upon goals of IMLS grant • Drafted by the ASERL Deans’ FDLP Task Force • Approved April, 2010 at ASERL’s membership meeting • Proposed the ASERL Disposition Website where offers lists would be posted

  3. University of Florida’s Role • Host the disposition database • Register users (Docs staff) • Provide support to users (Docs and IT staff) • Ongoing enhancements (IT staff)

  4. Are Depositories Using It?Registered Users *Kentucky – 95% (19 of 20) *Florida – 85% (29 of 34) Delaware – 80% (4 of 5) Tennessee – 77% (17 of 22) *S.C. – 70% (14 of 20)^Virginia – 68% (23 of 34)^Alabama – 73% (16 of 22) ^Mississippi – 64% (7 of 11) * IMLS Grant participant Maryland – 61% (14 of 23) Puerto Rico – 60% (3 of 5) N.C. – 56% (19 of 33)^Louisiana – 67% (18 of 27)Georgia – 17% (4 of 23) DC – 12% (4 of 34) Virgin Islands – 0% (0 of 2) Total – 61% (191 of 314) ^ Steering Committee members

  5. Politics and the Disposition Database • Original purpose of the DD was to assist COE collection building • First concern, retention of items within the state/region • GPO’s concern – the database must reflect guidelines for disposition of materials

  6. Current Disposition Process • See – ASERL Disposition Database LibGuide– “When Will an Offer be Available to Me” tab • Primary Regional – regional in state of library • Within 24 hours (posts after midnight) • 5 days exclusive access; 45 days of access to offer • Primary Selectives– selectives in the state of library • Available on day 6 (40 days of access to offer) • ASERL CoE- items within the COE’s scope as defined by Needs List • Available on day 11 (35 days of access); non-COE falls under “Other” • Other Regionals in SE • Available on day 26 (20 days of access to offer) • Other Selectives in SE • Available on day 31 (15 days of access to offer)

  7. Disposition database as of Tuesday, March 25, 2014 • Offers lists – 2216 pages • South Carolina 251 pages (6 libraries) • 88 pages of ED materials • 14 items listed by SC depositories • U. of South Carolina’s current claims ( 3 items) • U. of South Carolina’s Needs list (59 pages)

  8. Database Usage – Discards by Libraries in SoutheastThrough October 31, 2013 • Univ. of Miami (FL) 115636 • Virginia Tech (VA) 34933 • FL International (FL) 23256 • CSU (SC) 14464 • TN Tech (TN) 13672 • Lander (SC) 11717 • Stetson (FL) 9891 • Lake Sumter CC (FL) 9571 • Chattanooga PL (TN) 8366 • Mary Washington (VA) 7745

  9. Collection Building – Claims by Libraries through October 31, 2013 • Central Florida 3114 • Mississippi 2395 • Kentucky 1997 • South Carolina 1515 • Clemson 1471 • Georgia Tech 1224 • TN State Library 700 • U.S. Senate Library 680 • Louisville 593 • Florida 463 • Auburn 458 • Lander 416

  10. Filling the Gaps – Extent of Needs Lists as of October 31, 2013 • Florida 21582 • Kentucky 8032 • Mississippi 634 • South Carolina 580 • Virginia 437 • Vanderbilt 359 • US Senate 346 • VA State Univ. 91 • Others • Auburn (29) • Lander (5) • Winthrop (5)

  11. Offers from SC DepositoriesOctober 1, 2012-October 31, 2013 • Number of libraries – 13 libraries • Private academics (2); public academics (7); • Law; public libraries (2); state library • Lists – 200 (about 15 per month) • Items offered - >31000 • Average list has about 160 items • Three libraries have submitted >35 lists

  12. Offers from SC SelectivesNovember 2013-February 2014 • Total offers - 72 lists; 9 libraries • Total items – 10,391 • Average – 148 items per list • Lists over 1,000 items (1) • Lists with 500-1,000 items (6) • Lists with 100-500 items (12) • Lists with < 100 items (41)

  13. Most frequently offered classes • C 3 Census Bureau • Y 1.1/2 Serial Set • A Agriculture • TD Transportation • HH Flood Insurance • EP EPA

  14. More information • ASERL – Collaborative Depository Library Program • http://www.aserl.org/programs/gov-doc/ • Disposition Database Guide • http://guides.uflib.ufl.edu/ASERL-DispositionDB • List of Available Agencies by SuDocs stem • http://www.aserl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/SuDoc-Stems-Yet-to-be-Chosen.pdf • How to Become a Center of Excellence • http://www.aserl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/BestPracticesUpdate_2013_01.pdf • Contact Bill Sudduth sudduthw@mailbox.sc.edu 803-777-1775

More Related