June 21, 2017 Meeting of Library Faculty Meeting

Time and Location of Meeting

June 21, 20173:00 pm - 4:00 pm 126 iSchool

Agenda Details

Agenda

1.    Call to Order

2.    Standing Items:

2.1    Adoption of the agenda – Bill Mischo

2.2    Approval of the Minutes of the April 2017 Faculty Meeting

2.3    Report of the University Librarian (15 minutes – Bill Mischo)

2.4    Executive Committee Report and Discussion (15 minutes – Nancy O’Brien)

3.    Discussion Topics

3.1    Working Group on Library Grants, Outreach, and Training (15 minutes –Carissa Phillips, Daniel Tracy)

4.    Lightning Talk

4.1    Update on the Illinois Experts Researcher Profiles System (10 minutes – Mark Zulauf)

4.2    ClimateQUAL Implementation Team—Report (10 minutes – Cindy Ingold)

4.3    VuFind Account Based Recommender (10 minutes – Jim Hahn)

 5.    New Business

 6.    Announcements

 7.    Adjournment

Minutes Details

Minutes

1.  Call to Order- Bill Mischo called the meeting to order at 3pm

2.  Standing Items:

2.1  Adoption of the agenda – Adoption of the agenda – Adopted as distributed

2.2  Approval of the Minutes of the April 2017 Faculty Meeting – Approved with revisions by Nancy O’Brien and Cindy Ingold.

2.3  Report of the University Librarian (15 minutes – Bill Mischo)
The Library Budget hearing was held in May. This is the annual meeting with University Administration—the Provost’s Office. Some years this meeting has also included the Campus Budget Oversight Committee, but they were not present this year.  We had been asked to absorb a 3% budget reduction on our operations. Our total Library budget is approximately $41.5 million. $11.5 million is Library IT fees and $17.4 million is collection budget. We were asked to take out a 3% budget cut out of the remainder, which comes to about $600,000. We provided the campus with information about how we would absorb a 3% cut. We also asked for $1.1 million in recurring funds to address very serious collection needs. We asked for that in a couple of different ways. One of those was to receive $360,000 a year for 3 years. We have done a lot of work on the collections budge and were able to identify, for next year, about $453,000 in savings; some through budget reallocations and cuts in some of the funds—about $130,000 in cancellations of journals. We received a letter last week that we are going to be allowed to take back 1% of our budget cut—$300,000—and apply that to collections. We are going to take the $600,000 cut in operations, but we only have to return 2%—$400,000—to campus. The other $200,000 is for collections.

Next year in terms of the collection budget, we are going to be in very good shape. We’ll have money to cover inflation, new purchases and money to roll over to the following year to address the $450,000 we need for inflation for the following year. We are still 16th among ARL libraries in collections budget. Our ratio of collections budget to total budget is still smaller than a large number of our peer institutions in the Big Ten. This will go some ways in trying to resolve some of the problems we have been facing. We are going to be faced with another budget cut next year—2-3%. We took a $600,000 cut this year. We took an $800,000 cut the year before and a $700,000 cut the year before. All together, we are looking at $2 million in cuts out of our operations budget in the last three years.

If we get another cut, we are going to have to reduce services. We will have to look at really difficult situations—staff layoffs, cutting programs. We basically have $100,000 in our budget that is left, so if there is a $400,000 or $600,000 cut next year, it will be a lot more painful. Having said that, if we do have reserves, the campus is committed to supporting the services we provide.  We would welcome ideas and any thoughts on what we can cut back on and where we can save money.

Library system issues. We have established a much closer working relationship with EBSCO. If you remember our checkered history with discovery systems, we bought Primo and had it for 3 years and did not actually roll it out to the public. All our user tests were very negative and did not compare to what we were doing with Easy Search. We let our Primo subscription lapse. EBSCO has made an enormous amount of progress with their Discovery Service, which is by far the best system for doing a search. What’s hot now is the Digital Library Platform (DLP). It is a platform where you can run all your discovery/delivery services. That includes your integrated library system, your circulation system, online catalog, and web-scale discovery system. Most of the systems that are going up today, including our system with CARLI are DLPs. EBSCO has started up an open source project called Folio. We are going to be involved in the Folio project. Jim Hahn has received a $15,000 EBSCO Folio Innovation Grant. You will be hearing more about Folio.

Paula Carns asked about operational budget cuts. Mischo replied that the unit operations budgets will be sent out in a couple of weeks. At the point the Library will have a clearer idea regarding how we will take the $600,000 cut. A good amount of the operations cuts will come from central funds and IT funds.$300,000 of IT fees are funds we get every year. .  Units will be notified when the final decisions have been made.. The collection fund will have the same base fund, and the library will postpone the AUL for Research search, and will only call for interim AUL for User Services, but not for AUL for Research. The AUL for Research position might be combined with other’s duties and will not be filled until John Wilkin is back. He will have two AUL positions to fill. In general, we will have less positions open and will look for existing positions to take on more duties.

2.4  Introduction.
Susan Avery, as the search committee chair, introduced Kate Lambaria, the Acting Music and Performing Arts Librarian.

2.5  Executive Committee Report and Discussion (15 minutes – Nancy O’Brien)
EC has met seven times since the April faculty meeting.

EC meeting summary:
 
In general activities, EC appointed members to Peer Review Committees, appointed members to full professor review subcommittees of FRC and PTAC, replaced committee members as needed, modified committee charges, and approved position descriptions and search committees for previously approved hiring requests.

The Final Report of the Digital Humanities Needs Assessment Working Group was accepted and posted for comments; a final report for an Innovative Fund related to mapping University of Illinois history was accepted; and the final report from the First floor Central Service Point Planning Group was received and will be sent out for comments at the end of June.

EC extended the Framework for Strategic Action to 2021, with responsibility for follow-up and refreshing the goals assigned to the AULs.

EC is discussing various option for filling the AUL positions for User Services and Research.  Some duties will be temporarily reassigned. For example, HathiTrust liaison responsibilities will be managed by Harriett Green, Reports of Non-University Activities will be handled by the Dean’s office, and sabbatical requests will be handled by the Executive Committee Vice Chair.

EC reviewed hiring requests for faculty positions and, due to budget issues, approved filling positions for which there are current lines. (English, UGL Head, RBML curator).

EC reviewed committee vacancies and volunteers and has begun the process of making committee appointments and reviewing committees with the possibility of disbanding some.

EC received an update on the AP Promotion Implementation process which seems to be moving along well.

Emerita status for Beth Namachchivaya was approved.

EC discussed a recent memo from the campus Promotion and Tenure committee which outlines areas for improvement, such as having multiple authors of evaluations in the dossier, selecting only external reviewers who are at peer institutions or having strong justification for others, and making sure that external reviewers are not co-authors or co-Principal Investigators on grants.

A new Advancement campaign to generate funds for the University from donors will begin in fall 2017 and the Library’s goal is $35M.

Cindy Ingold had a question about whether EC also discussed about what we will do with UGL training. Nancy replied that this will be joint effort by UG faculty, Curator of Rare Book Library and English Library. With the budget cuts, the library will look at more merged positions, and current personnel to take on more responsibilities.

3.  Discussion Topics

3.1  Working Group on Library Grants, Outreach, and Training (15 minutes –Carissa Phillips, Daniel Tracy)

(See attached PowerPoint)

Beth Namachchivaya provided some background information before Dan’s presentation. The working group was formed last Dec. and with a one year charge. The goal is to collect input about what types of training, mentoring needs, what are the sustaining ways to drive the library as a flagship organization in research.

In 2008, Beth worked with a graduate assistant to gather 8 years of grant information, and held a number of focus groups. Several points came out of that study:
Library wide recognition of those who get grants
Workshops and training on how to get grants
Strategy foundation for research
In 2016, the library grant policy was revised. The existing policy has been in place 15 years and is outdated.
The working group revised the policy, and established workshops to support grants training.

Tracy’s presentation reported on updates from the Grants Outreach and Training Working Group. He asked for feedbacks from faculty on the topic. He talked about the survey the working group has done, and reported the findings, the key needs are identified. The group had developed a new form to help with applying for grants. He also mentioned what the group plans to do to streamline the communication and asked for feedback on “if workshops on applying for grants were offered, what topics would be of interest?” Also, they would like feedback on the general issue of mentoring. Any thoughts about particular mentoring structures, such as shadowing.

Cindy Ingold asked whom to send feedback to? Dan said it is ok to send it to him.
Karen Hogenboom asked whether there a way to volunteer to be shadowed? Dan says they are working on that. The idea is that if some indicated they would like to shadow someone, an individual will be identified for that person to shadow. They might do a call to find out who’s interested.

Mischo said it would be useful to have a list of people who have received grants over the last 10 years. Beth mentioned the web for that purpose, to pull comprehensive active reports to track grants. She said that it takes time in preparation to help shape grant application, and to have a group of people who have experience in grant writing will be superb.

4.  Lightning Talk
4.1  Update on the Illinois Experts Researcher Profiles System (10 minutes – Mark Zulauf)
(Please see attached PowerPoint)
Mark updated what’s new with the Illinois Experts Portal. The portal is a collaborative project between the Library and OVCR with 2500 profile seats for all tenured faculty and specialized faculty. It runs on Elsevier’s Pure research information management software, which is used by over 60 institutions. The current content include job titles, and affiliations plus publication info, and since the launch in spring 2016, the main focus is on adding content. Mark also talked about other features including in-house query for Banner data connection to the ORCID registry, additional import modules like Elsevier, and new web service API, etc.

Qiang Jin asked how many faculty members profiles in the portal, Mark said they have no hard numbers. The profile may also provide social media links. The publication info includes journal articles and book chapters. OCLC records are also good to provide better information.

4.2  ClimateQUAL Implementation Team—Report (10 minutes – Cindy Ingold)
(See attached PowerPoint)

Cindy reported on ClimateQual survey and discussed what ClimateQUAL measures, why did the library do this, what did we learn and the timeline of Climate QUAL at the library. She also provided the Implementation Team’s key recommendation.

4.3  VuFind Account Based Recommender (10 minutes – Jim Hahn)
(See attached PowerPoint)

Jim talked about VuFind Account Based Recommender. He demonstrated the VuFind Web app overlay and updated privacy policy for users and also the recommender API. (see attachments) and showed a video about how this app works.

Paula Carns asked how far back the circulation data is, Jim said we have used Voyage for about 12-13 years.
 
5.  New Business
No new business

6.  Announcements
No announcement

7.  Adjournment — meeting adjourned at 4:19pm