New Brunswick Collections Group Meeting Minutes
Library of Science and Medicine, Special Collections Room
Friday, December 13, 2002 - 9:30 am

Present: H. Dess [Chair], R. Gardner, H. Hoffman, K. Mulcahy, P. Piermatti, J. Sloan, M. Wilson, R, Womack, B. Hancock, K. Denda, T. Glynn, H. Perez-Gilbe, K. Wenke, T. Kuchi, J. Niessen, P. Libutti [Recorder], M. Lo, G. Smulewitz, F. Tehrani.

Attachment: NB Collection Group Budget Update December 12, 2002 (Excel)

1. Approval of Agenda:
   K. Mulcahy moved to accept the agenda presented. It was accepted.
   
   
2. Approval of prior meeting minutes:
   K. Mulcahy moved to adopt the Minutes as written. The Minutes were so adopted.
   
   
3. Budget update:
   H. Dess et al. [handout: NB Collections Budget Update and Summary, HMD, 12/12/02; see attachment] H. Dess provided a summary and update of current collection budget information. Some salient points:
   
   
   • The overall RULS state funds collection budget was up by approximately $712K over the prior year, due primarily to receipt of one-time funds and fund carryovers from 2002.
   • The New Brunswick state funds allocation was down $100K from the prior year, due primarily to shifts of funds from individual selector accounts to Central, reflecting the ongoing shift from print to electronic resources.
   • Central, overall, was up nearly a $1 M, with the lion's share of the funding used to support electronic packages.
   • Expenditure rate for NB approval funds (GEAB) appears to be progressing in line with expectations at this point in the fiscal year.
   • Total non-state funds available are down substantially, due to lower giving [recession] and the Foundation payout rate on endowments has reportedly been reduced from 4.5% to a more conservative 4%.
   • By way of historical perspective, in 1998, Central's budget allocation amounted to only 14% of the total RULS collections budget, and New Brunswick's share was 64%. Over the intervening period, Central's share has, by 2003, grown to 45% and NB's share has dropped to 41%. Again, this reflects the dramatic transfer of funding emphasis, from print to electronic resources, over that relatively short time period.
   
   Selectors reported details about specific funds. K. Mulcahy alerted selectors not to hold any state monies in reserve. He also reported that non-state funds had been allocated and selectors were advised to begin utilizing them. H. Dess reported that gift funds for the sciences were already fully committed for purposes other than monograph purchases (primarily bindery costs). This leaves only a reduced Phonothon allocation and lower than anticipated endowment funds to provide for all science monograph needs in 2003.
   
   

4. Annex Update:
   F. Tehrani provided a Report and answered questions from NBCG about Annex storage policies.
   
   

   • Materials to be stored in the Annex are now being accepted. Two full time staff members are involved with the Annex storage.
   • Materials are to be flagged by individual selectors, and then the materials will be removed from the shelves by Access Services and sent to the Annex. Duplicates are not accepted.
   • Space allocations are crucial: it was noted that space would be allocated on a "first come, first served" basis.
   • The Annex roof leak problem is not solved yet and is a matter of ongoing concern re potential water damage to stored items.
   • EDLAB would not be taken apart; teaching material volumes were integrated into the regular Education collection during spring 2002. Current elementary textbooks would make up the majority of the collection in EDLAB.
   • "Last Copy" refers to "Last Copy in New Brunswick".
   • Selectors noted that some periodical volumes were in poor shape; runs would be interrupted if sent into storage. The issue of "Journal in Print and in electronic format" was considered. The Annex document on storage did not deal with the issue of JSTOR access.
   • H. Dess concluded discussion urging further examination of issues raised. A re-issue of the Report was recommended by F. Tehrani. K. Mulcahy would post it.
     
     

5. Missing books report: (F. Tehrani)
   
   

   • F. Tehrani initiated selector discussion by asking how often selectors wished to see the report. "Quarterly" was the consensus.
   • A definition of "missing books" was requested and provided as follows: A "missing book " is one that was confirmed as "missing" by Circulation, following checking reports of missing items from patrons. The date confirmation of the search was the boundary for the status of "missing".
   • Distribution of the Missing Books Report would be electronic, on the T drive.
   • How selectors would annotate the status report was discussed, and included the following annotations: withdraw [record], replace [book]. H. Dess requested agreement on the report annotation.
   • The issue of ethics on books paid for by patrons after a patron reported the book as "lost" was discussed. Patrons have an expectation that books lost and paid for by them will be replaced on the shelves. It was observed that "Lost and Paid" is a status in IRIS. A special replacement fund (RPMX), from Central, is used for this area of collection management.
   • This agenda issue concluded with F. Tehrani stating that she would come to the January NBCG meeting with a list for selectors.
     
     

6. Gift book procedures: (H. Dess et al.)

   • Acknowledgement of gifts, rejection of gifts, and care in the handling of gifts from donors to other Rutgers funds were issues explored in this discussion. Selectors negotiate the acceptance, or rejection, and final disposition of gifts with donors.
   • Disposal of unneeded gift books may be effected via library book sales, donations to various African academic libraries, or as a last resort, discard. Thelma Tate is our official contact for donations to Africa, and selectors should contact her directly about arrangements.
   • Selectors are reminded that requests for appraisal by donors (for tax purposes) cannot be honored by selectors. Such appraisals are the province of outside specialists. "Review books" have the letter with the title on file.
   • Finding a work space large enough to handle large gift collections was a concern forwarded from R. Toyama. K. Mulcahy will look at gifts and the Annex as a possible space for use to meet Toyama's request.
     
     

7. Funding strategies [continued]:
   H. Dess reviewed the suggestions received to date from selectors for funding proposals covering various subject areas:
   
   

   • Support for media across all disciplines.
   • Science monograph support to meet explicit needs.
   • Foreign language materials.
   • Enhancement of Congressional collections.
   • Rutgers scholarship analytics and cataloguing microforms.
   • New collection area investment: Middle Eastern, Jewish Studies.
   • Support for new programs in Sciences, Social Sciences.
   • Completion of collection in 18th century microforms
   
   H. Dess requested that the originators of these suggestions provide additional details in a format that would be more suitable for submission to Julia Zapcic and transmit to him for coordination before the end of January.
   
   

8. Announcements:
   
   

   • H. Dess will send out the schedule for meeting dates for 2003.
   • K. Mulcahy noted that the NBLF meeting would consider one item only: R. Toyama's memo about personnel needs and vacant lines.
   • H. Dess gave a brief report on Science Direct, concluding with the announcement that patrons will not have access to anything earlier than 1995. A message should be put into IRIS on the limitations on access to backfiles of journal titles.

Adjournment