MaterialslinkedfromtheFebruary13,2012LibraryCommitteeAgenda.
S UPPORTING A TOP 10 L AND G RANT L IBRARY O R E G O N S T A T E U N I V E R S I T Y L I B R A R I E S F E B R U A R Y 2012 OregonStateUniversityseekstorankamongthetoptenlandgrantinstitutionsintheUnitedStates.1
Achievingthisgoalrequiresimprovinginfrastructurethoughtargetedinvestments.Inparticular,increased
fundingforOSULibrariesCollectionswillbenecessarytosupportfacultyandstudentsuccess,enhance
researchandteaching,andimprovetheReturnonInvestment(ROI)forOSULibraries(OSUL).
Currently,OSUL’sbudgetreliesonstatefundingandothersources,including:




E&G$3.2MCollections
TRFrange$550,000‐$750,000FY09‐12
Libraryfines,$118,000fy11(3.6%)
Giftfunds
Thecurrentbudgetstructure,togetherwithannualinflation,hascreatedanumberofchallengesforOSUL.
1)OSULcanonlysupporttheexistingcollections,whichincreaseinprice7–9%annuallydueto
inflation,bycuttingsubscriptionsandholdingpositionsopen.2
2)ThegrantawardedTechnologyResourceFeesprovides17‐23%oftheOSULcollectionsbudget.
ThismeansthatahighpercentageofOSUL’sbudgetrestsonanunstable,variablefundingsource.
3)Libraryfinescontribute3.6%toOSULbudgets,butthisamountdecreaseseveryyearandmany
librariesnationwideareceasingtocollectfines.
4)OSULemploysmanystrategiestocontaincosts,includingseveralrecommendedbythe2011
reportRedefiningtheAcademicLibrary.Theseincluderightsizingtheprintcollection,aligning
purchaseswithdemand,reducingscholarlypublishingcosts,andexternalizinglower‐valueactivity.3
While OSUL has met these funding challenges with a variety of innovative, cost-saving measures, it is
clear that the existing funding model is inadequate to raise OSUL to match libraries at top ten land grant
institutions. The OSUL Faculty Senate Library Committee recommends increasing support to $9.43M by
2016 to match the median of OSU peers, to maintain existing collections, and to provide access to new
content.
Target:IncreasesupportofOSULibrariesCollectionsBudgetto$9,426,000by2016.
1OregonStateUniversity.StrategicPlanPhaseII2009‐2013.OSUStrategicPlan.Retrievedfrom:
http://oregonstate.edu/leadership/strategic‐plan.
2Bosch,S.,Henderson,K.,&Klusendorf,H.(2011).PeriodicalsPriceSurvey2011:UnderPressure,TimesareChanging.
LibraryJournal.Retrievedfrom:http://www.libraryjournal.com/lj/ljinprintcurrentissue/890009‐
403/periodicals_price_survey_2011_.html.csp.
3TheAdvisoryBoardCompany.(2011).RedefiningtheAcademicLibrary:ManagingtheMigrationtoDigitalInformation
Services.Washington,DC:TheAdvisoryBoardCompany.Retrievedfromhttp://www.theconferencecircuit.com/wp‐
content/uploads/Provosts‐Report‐on‐Academic‐Libraries2.pdf.
OSUFacultySenateLibraryCommittee,February2012
1
P EER C OMPARATORS ComparedtoOUSdesignatedpeers,OSULcollectionsreceivetheleastamountofsupport.
OUS‐Designated Peer Institutions
Library Collection Expenditures, 2010
Expenditures: Expenditures: Current Journal Expenditures: Current Journal
Current Journal Subscriptions, Expenditures: Subscriptions
Subscriptions, Expenditures: Michigan State, Current Journal Expenditures: Arizona, 6843220
Expenditures: Books, Journal
8403953 Current Journal Subscriptions, Expenditures: Current Journal Backfiles, Other Materials
Subscriptions, UC‐Davis, Current Journal Subscriptions, North Carolina 6433259
Subscriptions, Expenditures: Expenditures: Expenditures: Expenditures: Purdue, 8620570
State, 6771171
Expenditures: Expenditures: Colorado State, Expenditures: Expenditures: Books, Journal Books, Journal Books, Journal Books, Journal Books, Journal Current Journal 5325586
Backfiles, Other Backfiles, Other Backfiles, Other Backfiles, Other Books, Journal Books, Journal Backfiles, Other Subscriptions, Backfiles, Other Materials, Materials, Materials, North Materials, Backfiles, Other Materials, Oregon State, Colorado State, Michigan State, Carolina State, Oregon State, Materials, Arizona, 4380688
Materials, UC‐
3307883
1502605 3781391
2216066
365417 Purdue, 1081535
Davis, 2992877 OSULalsohasthelowestexpendituresperFTEstudent.
OSUFacultySenateLibraryCommittee,February2012
2
Total Library Expenditures per FTE Student, 2010
Total Library Expenditures Per FTE Student, North Carolina State, $864.43 Total Library Expenditures Per Total Library FTE Student, Expenditures Per Colorado State, FTE Student, $609.49 Michigan State, $544.04 Total Library Expenditures Per Total Library Colorado State
FTE Student, Expenditures Per Total Library Arizona, $734.41 Michigan State
Total Library FTE Student, UC‐
Expenditures Per Expenditures Per Davis, $657.65 North Carolina State
FTE Student, FTE Student, Purdue, $597.33 Oregon State, Oregon State
$532.57 Purdue
Arizona
UC‐Davis
LibraryexpendituresperR&DdollarfallinthemiddleofOUS’speers.
Total Library Expenditures per R&D Dollar, FY2009
Total Library Total Library Expenditures per Expenditures per All R&D $, All R&D $, FY2009, North FY2009, Michigan Total Library State, $0.07 Carolina State, Colorado State
Total Library Expenditures per $0.07 Total Library Expenditures per All R&D $, Total Library Expenditures per Michigan State
All R&D $, Expenditures per All R&D $, FY2009, Purdue, FY2009, Colorado $0.05 All R&D $, FY2009, Oregon North Carolina State
State, $0.05 FY2009, Arizona, State, $0.05 Oregon State
Total Library $0.04 Purdue
Expenditures per Arizona All R&D $, FY2009, UC‐
UC‐Davis
Davis, $0.03 T H E I M P A C T O F C A M P U S G R O W T H O N OSU L I B R A R I E S C O L L E C T I O N S B U D G E T OSUFacultySenateLibraryCommittee,February2012
3
WithOSUgrowingattherapidpaceofeightpercentovereachofthelasttwoacademicyears,OSULfaces
additionalchallengesinsustainingcurrentcollectionsandnegotiatingreasonablepricesonnewresources.
NearlyhalfofOSUL’sexpendituresonthemostexpensivedatabasesarecontingentuponthesizeoftheOSU
studentbodyandrelateduniversitygrowth.Informationproductvendorsfrequentlydeterminetheirpricing
basedoncampuscharacteristicssuchasstudentFTE,numberoffacultyorstudentsinadepartment,overall
demandonoruseoftheresource,andevenresearchoutput.ThismeansthatOSUL’Spricesincreaseasthe
studentbodycontinuestogrowandmorefacultyarehiredtosupportthem.
NewdegreeprogramsalsodriveOSUL’scosts.From2009‐2011thelibrarywouldhaveneeded
approximately$65,000innewmoneytoadequatelysupporttheproposednewprogramsintheirfirst
year;$40,000ofthistotalwouldbecomeongoingcosts.Thissupportrangedfromaddingcriticaljournals
(e.g.NatureClimateChange),tonewdatabases(PAIS‐apublicaffairsdatabase),tonewprintoronline
bookcollections.
TO A TTAIN S UPPORT AT THE L EVEL OF OUS P EERS Scenario1(Note:OSULwillnotreachourpeers’mediansusingthisscenario)
Step1:
Overthenextfouryearsadd4%peryearforatotal16%increase.
3,200,00+128,000=3,328,000(yr1)
3,328,000+133,120=3,461,120(yr2)
3461120+138,444=3,599,564(yr3)
3,599,564+143,982=3,743,546(yr4)
3,743,546TotalBudget2016
Step2:
Afteryearfourtiethecollectionsbudgettostudentgrowth.OSUexperiencesgrowthof1.8%‐2%peryear.
1.8%3,743,546+67383=3,810,929
2%3,743,546+74870=3,818,416
Scenario2
ToreachthemedianofOUSpeers,OSULibrariescollectionbudgetwouldbeincreasedby66%or
$6,226,000.Distributedacross4yearslookslikethis
3,200,000+1,556,500=4,756,500(yr1)
4,756,500+1,556,500=6,313,000(yr2)
6,313,000+1,556,500=7,869,500(yr3)
7,869,500+1,556,500=9,426,000(yr4)
9,426,000TotalBudget2016
OSUFacultySenateLibraryCommittee,February2012
4
OSUFacultySenateLibraryCommittee,February2012
5