FAU Libraries Budget Reduction Planning Site

In anticipation of possible cuts to the FAU Libraries’ materials budget in 2009/2010, 2010/2011 and perhaps further, the Electronic Resources and Collection Development Units embarked on a project to rank the electronic resources/databases received via subscriptions by the FAU Libraries. The purpose of the project was firstly, to identify core resources that should not be cancelled if at all possible. Secondly, resources deemed not to be core were to be evaluated based on specific criteria, receiving a final numerical score. Based on that final score, a priority ranking was assigned.

The feedback received from the 2007-2008 Faculty Survey: Electronic Resources and the informed recommendations of subject specialist librarians were utilized in determining which resources would be classified as core and which should be be included in the ranking process. Electronic resources/databases funded by outside sources such as the Florida Center for Library Automation (FCLA), the Florida Electronic Library (FEL), and electronic journal packages such as Elsevier, Springer, Oxford, etc., were not included in the process.

This quantitative approach enables the FAU Libraries to make cancellation decisions in a way that is fair to all and maintain the integrity of our collection. Although the library does not anticipate the need to cancel a significant number of electronic resources for 2009/2010, we are making the list of core and non-core resources available for viewing and feedback.

Criteria:

    Team Rank: Ranking determined by team of subject librarians organized by broad disciplines: Arts & Humanities, Multidisciplinary, Science & Technology, Social Science.

    Access: Considerations include technical reliability, open URL or Z39.50 compliance, ease of use, accessible remotely, plug-ins, special accounts needed.

    Breadth: Includes the impact on research and/or curriculum needs, and the number of users affected. The number of users affected will be determined by identifying
    the departments associated with the resources.

    Cost-Effectiveness: Can be determined by using inflation rates and usage statistics. A rate of increase will be determined by determining the percentage of increase over a
    2 to 3 year renewal period. The Task Force will not use a cost per search, but will compare like statistics and comparable databases.

    Uniqueness: Defined as materials covered and overlap with other sources.

    Priority 3:  These resources could be cancelled with the least damage to library services.  A small number of users would be inconvenienced or underserved, other access options
    may be available, or the resource may be redundant to some extent.

    Priority 2: The cancellation of these resources would more severely damage library services.  A greater number of users would be inconvenienced or underserved, other access
    options may be limited, or the resource is less redundant.

    Priority 1:  The cancellation of these resources would cause the greatest damage to library service.  A greater number of library users  would experience significant inconvenience. 
    The collections would be severely weakened.