New Brunswick Collections Group Meeting Minutes
Friday, May 13, 2005
Library of Science and Medicine

Present: Calhoun, Cassel, Dess ,Fetzer, Finlay, Gardner, Hartman, Hoffman, Howard, Kesselman, Lo, Mardikian, Mulcahy, Mullen, Shepard, Vazquez, Womack, Wu, Zhang

Agenda: Approved with modifications. Janet Howard will sit in for Mary Page, Judy Gardner was not able to attend the meeting.

Minutes: Minutes of previous meeting approved.

Budget Update: Dess updated budget information for year to date – Summary sheet distributed. “D” funds will roll over after July. The 2006 budget will depend upon Rutgers’ allocation from the state. – won’t get until at least July.

Knowledge Initiative is going forward, as yet we have no detail on what journal packages are included. Sewell will distribute information shortly.

NBCG election results:

NBCG Head:


Soc. Sci.




Arts & Hum.


K. Mulcahy will e-mail tenured members for volunteer to fill out one year term as Arts & Humanities head, so that he can give full attention to responsibilities as head of NBCG.

Next meeting: June 10 – we will have special refreshments to thank those team leaders who have served their terms, and to welcome our new team leaders. Thanks to all.
We will experiment with holding the meetings in different libraries. At next NBLF meeting (next Friday) will also discuss having NBCG, ISSG etc.meetings combined or sequentially with NBLF.

Fund Code Revisions: special CDC subcommittee report describes new fund code principles. While not yet formally approved by CDC, expect only minor changes. Will go into effect for new fiscal year. This is the biggest change in fund code operations since 1993 – impetus for change was to give bibliographers oversight of materials now charged to Central Funds – ELPX will be eliminated and subject fund codes assigned.
Every Purchase Order in ELPX will be identified by broad area and specific subject.

Vazquez asked that journal packages and titles included be listed in a conspicuous website rather than incorporated into “Indexes and Databases”. Especially because of the practice of canceling print when a title is included in a package. Bibliographers should be notified or at least be able to find out easily what has happened to their titles.
Lo reminded us to contact RUL_Serials with problems of holdings, subscriptions etc.

The question of what exactly “archival rights” means was interpreted as a commitment on the part of publisher to make archives available in perpetuity whether or not we continue subscriptions in the future.

There were conflicting opinions on whether Central Funds will be provided to subject bibliographers to restore subscriptions to journals which are dropped from packages (to which we had prior subscriptions).CDC reportedly agreed that they would– but this policy is buried in old minutes Howard will follow up on this question, with Bob Sewell). In practice it has not always happened. When print is ordered to restore a title dropped from online package – the library with the longest historical run will get to keep the print.

When ordering a new journal, selector will decide location of print – separate category from fund code. There are potential complications of this proposal especially in regard to Government Documents, and Reference (but potentially others)--- will be investigated.

Directors Station: This is a SIRSI product, part of UNICORN which must be ordered separately. It is on order for RUL, but we are in queue for implementation. This is a management system with ability to produce reports and statistical analyses.

Dess will ask M.Page to resubmit the list of Central titles that was distributed to demonstrate the new proposed fund codes and ask that this include: further clarification of the codes, an explanation of the codes, and of what is included in the list.. Does it include all ELPX titles or just an example?

GOBI: J.Howard discussed some of the questions we had about GOBI. It seems to be working well. J.Howard will check on why some of us are not getting e-mail confirmation at the time our orders are actually submitted to Yankee (by Acquisitions). Also will investigate why some titles in search output seem to be repeated – either as duplicates coming up on same search - or as titles, apparently identical, repeated in following week’s automatic update. Will also investigate why the reasons bibliographers indicate on back of slips of returned Approval books do not appear later in Gobi. This would be useful in identifying problems with the profiles.

Mulcahy distributed some examples of the reports you can get from Yankee showing our acquisitions and how they compare with “peer” institutions. J. Howard pointed out that our firm orders, input via Unicorn, may not be showing up in these statistics. We are working hard on implementing direct ordering to Yankee which would alleviate this problem.

Wu suggested looking also at Publishers Pick and Academic Essentials to get the most out of our limited discretionary budgets.

Hartman thanked Acquisitions for quick turnaround time on recent orders. J.Howard reported that Acquisitions is testing obtaining shelf-ready materials with a small subset of books from selected publishers on Camden’s very limited approval plan. Buying “shelf-ready” would save money and staff resources. But , since we cannot return shelf-ready material, profiles should be very accurate. We requested that we be notified well before any such program goes into effect.

Vazquez mentioned that Yankee does not include all of the relevant “area studies” books from publishers they report as included in their list. Will work with Yankee to find out why.

Disaster Planning: Ian Bogus and others are working on an emergency plan for NB libraries. Want each library to prioritize what would be preferentially salvaged in case of emergency. Shepard noted that it is more economical to have a contract with a freeze-drying company than to hire them on an “as-need” basis. Mullen suggested digitizing unique materials –if that can be done without compromising the integrity of the item.
Further discussion obviously necessary – if time permits we may invite Ian Bogus to one of our meetings.

Missing Book Reports: Suggested that we each look at Access Services missing book reports – pass on questions to Dess who will discuss with J. Gardner. Reminder that missing books can be replaced using RPMX funds – should be same item or one in closely related field.

Miscellaneous: Mulcahy: suggested comparing holdings of our “peer libraries” when asking for funds for databases and other resources. Showing the administration that, for example, 74% of ARLs receive “Literature On-Line” should be additional argument in addition to our usual “our faculty need this resource”.

Mardikian/Fetzer: As of May 23 (for 4 to 5 weeks) will be installing sprinkler system in parts of LSM 1st and 2nd floors involving Reference and Govt. Documents.. Material in the areas will be inaccessible from 7 3 pm, after which requested items will be paged by Access Services. Bibliographers for QP-RG Reference area will pull some essential titles to go on RESERVE during the work (Note added after the meeting: we subsequently were informed that we would not be blocked from obtaining books from the affected areas; limited access would be permitted during certain time periods).

Mullen: OVID is changing its interface. We should be notified in advance so can modify teaching materials and get training. Dess will investigate.

Respectfully submitted:
Helen Hoffman
May 13, 2005