Time and Location of Meeting
November 3, 20031:30 pm - 3:00 pm 428 Library
- User Satisfaction Survey Plan
Outcome: Review plan
- Budget Update Distribution of $125,000 new one-time money
Kaufman and Burger
Outcome: understand purpose and distribution
- Review of Conference on the Future of the Library
Outcome: Review trends; identify input to Long-Range Advisory Committee
- Grant Process Update
Outcome: Review of current processes
- Streamlining Committee Work/August Committee Moratorium
Kaufman and Searing
Outcome: discuss ways to streamline committee work/consolidate committees
- Announcements and Updates
Paula Kaufman, Chair, Rod Allen, Bob Burger, Tina Chrzastowski, Barbara Ford, Lisa German, Peggy Glatthaar, Lisa Hinchliffe, Lyn Jones, Cindy Kelly, Tom Kilton, Betsy Kruger, Bill Maher, Beth Sandore, Diane Schmidt, Karen Schmidt, Sue Searing, Paula Watson, Karen Wei, John Weible, Joyce Wright
- User Satisfaction Survey Plan – BurgerCurrently the survey has about 15 questions; some questions contain multiple questions within them. Some of the questions include: Have you used any of the libraries in the past year? If no, why? What library do you use the most often? What services do you use most often? Are the libraries open frequently enough? During the semester? During finals? If there are additional budget cuts, what services would you be willing to give up?
There will be an incentive to fill out the surveys in the form of a gift certificate. The survey will come out in February with analysis starting in March. What would the Divisions like to see on the survey?
- Budget Update Distribution of $125,000 new one-time money – Kaufman, BurgerThis money comes from the Provost as a result of complaints from students. $90,000 – $100,000 will be given to libraries so they can be opened additional hours. If you didn’t make cut-backs in hours you won’t get any additional funds. Send Bob proposals for additional hours and additional hours at finals. They are due to him by November 10, 2003.
- Review of Conference on the Future of the Library – Kaufman GSLIS students will be writing reports on the discussion sessions and they will be posted on the web when we get them.
Watson – Abby Smith stated that the big libraries will get bigger and the small libraries smaller. It will be up to the bigger libraries to take responsibility for print preservation and digital preservation. And Cliff Lynch talked about the cost of doing this.
The Long-range Advisory Committee will be thinking about how to help the campus determine reallocation of resources that will help the Library, help the national community of libraries, and the national scholarly community become bigger.
Kilton – Sarah Thomas gave concrete examples of peer institutions and what’s being done at them, such as collaborative study designs. Seeing them graphically on the screen was a big help and might be a good way to inform our university administrators or used at our retreats.
Kruger – One thing that stands out from listening to Geoff Freeman is that we don’t really have a coherent vision for the main library. Freeman sees phenomenal potential in these old libraries. He could inspire development dollars.
Jones – We need resources to put our visions into some sort of graphics. Maybe not on the scale of Murray’s, but something we can show people.
Paula has asked the Services Advisory Committee to think about space in this building.
Kruger – Freeman said MIT has 40% of it’s collection in a storage facility but is moving some back to campus. As libraries look at how to use space in these old buildings, if often does entail moving materials to high density shelving facilities and the impact of that on user accessibility needs to be looked at.
Maher – Freeman made a compelling case for the need to have a comprehensive look at the library building as a whole. Buildings like this have spaces that are impossible to create and establish in a new building.
Sandore – Print session – The teaching faculty who were there were emphatic about the Library needing to incorporate more spaces where users can actually interact with collections, resources, each other, and librarians. They would like to see more seminar rooms where faculty could come and teach for credit courses and gathering places where students and faculty can come together and talk to each other.
Jones – The president of the Friends Board was there. He was really impressed with the conference. A couple of the points that he picked up on, from the standpoint of a group that wants to advocate for the Library, included the discussion about some smaller schools that have decided to just maintain a core collection and to meet additional needs through interlibrary borrowing to do that. We really need to find a way to emphasize that we are carrying the burden of the collection for these smaller libraries. We need to find a way to get that message to the governor and the legislators. A number of speakers addressed the topic of a print collection versus everything electronic.
Paula’s expectation from the conference is that the Long-range Advisory Committee will determine a set of recommendations that gives us direction but not dictation about choices and strategies. We also need discussion between the Library faculty about these issues. She welcomes any suggestions about how to continue discussions at faculty meetings in ways that are productive.
- Grant Process Update – SandoreBeth is signing off on grants now that Bart has retired. The grant proposal writing process is on the web athttp://door.library.uiuc.edu/administration/services/policies/gift_grant.htm. The policy will be updated soon and will include a check list. Beth will let you know when that is ready. Paula signs off on them as unit executive officer, Beth co-signs them, and Bob is the back-up. The biggest difference between proposal processes is proposals where the Library receives money, which need to be reviewed more stringently, and proposals for donations.
You need to give Beth and the Business Office about three weeks to look them over, make up any budgets, and get them to Grants & Contracts. Grants and Contracts want them at least five days before due date. If asking for donations clue in the Development and Collections offices too.
Any grant that goes to a foundation or corporation needs to go through Lynnette Marshalls office and can be funneled through development.
The Library of Congress has appropriated $100 million to be matched by private funds or other funds to make it a $200 million project—National Digital Information Infrastructure Preservation Program (NDIIPP). We and GSLIS are the co-PIs on a proposal that is almost done. It has an incredible number of partners—from NCSA to Carol Livingston’s operation to seven or eight state libraries, OCLC, Michigan State and others. It’s a close to $3 million project over three years. We have the matching money in hand; it’s a 1:1 match. OCLC is providing a big chunk of the matching money. We were able to pull this project together thanks to John Unsworth from GSLIS and Beth Sandore on our faculty.
The focus will be on ways in which to automate the selection and description of individual digital items. This is a preservation program for materials that are in digital format. We are going to be evaluating on a number of repository software programs to understand what they are and what they do because these things will stay in repositories and then be retrieved from repositories.
The proposal is due to LOC by November 12, 2003. Joanne Kaczmarek, Bill Mischo, and Tom Habing are helping Beth in tandem with John Unsworth and GSLIS.
- Announcements and UpdatesBurger – The Director of Facilities applications were due last Friday and they will be determining who they are going to interview. Please attend the interview sessions when they are posted.
K. Schmidt – When you accept a large donation, please let Lyn or Karen know. Often times they come with special requests; like returning anything we don’t keep.
Kelly – The Staff Service recognition awards will be November 14 from 2:00-4:00pm, 3 rd Floor Levis.