John Stromquist represented WALDO which is the Westchester Academic Library Directors Organization. It is a multi-type consorutim, member driven, with library directors on the board. They focus on procurement. Incorporated, non-profit organization. All staff are contract staff and they have no physical office. They have 13 full members (who share an ILS), and 11 associate members (a shared union catalog). 400 limited members who are academic, and 400 plus public or special libraries.
WALDO arranges for partnerships including 9 New York Regional Library councils along with Connecticut, Rhode Island systems and academic networks in New Hampshire and New Jersey.
Provide overhead and management of procurement for members. Pass through all negotiated discounts. They add 5% administrative fee on the net price. There are 55 vendor contracts with over 1600 products. Annual growth over 25% ANNUALLY since 2000.
John discussed the history of WALDO, which used the MnSCU PALS system and was hosted at Westchester County and then at Mankato State. It was user governed, librarian managed, and had source code access.
Needed to leave Minnesota based system and had to create a new system. Old RFP system had massive meetings, choose a winner, and then try to negotiate a contract. So a new process was used. They assessed the marketplace for the top 2 or 3 vendors, interview current customers, and begin to negotiate contracts with top two vendors (ExLibris and Endeavor). Included provision to re-open negotiations with two years left (August 1, 2007). WALDO is completely uninterested in mastering technology. They have always purchased service. Negotiated a 5-year agreement. They began in January 2007 to look for a credible alternative to the current vendor.
That is when they began to look at open source ILS including the Georgia PINES system. They created a set of service requirements. Functionality of current system needed to be maintained. It had to be hosted, full software maintenance, and applications, plus a 24 x 7 help desk. They then created a 4 person technical exploration committee. They started with LibLime (KohaZoom) and Equinox's Evergreen. They found some missing academic functions, but in other areas had more that what they currently had.
John had some interesting perspectives on the legacy system vendors and the zero sum game which now exists in the library market place. He noted that III is the one financially sound legacy vendor. He wonders what will happen to the market as KohaZoom and Equinox get more market share. He outlined the full decision-making process. There was a detailed visit and process for looking at the system. They negotiated, and checked with other independent users on costs. Last month, they negotiated the final terms of the contract. On October 9, all concerned members agreed in writing to commit in principle.
WALDO got fixed pricing terms over the 5 year period. No annual increases, including everything in the price book. One-time implementation charges were spread evenly over the term. One-time development could be spread over the first three years. New orders have a 5% annual cap. There is a complicated multiple volume discount. All costs are included: migration, start-up, training, hosting, etc.
Core projects $282,000
Supplemental $210,000 [formerly known as "wish list"]
Contingency $200,000 [if not spent, will go to ILL system]
Total $692,000
Some items are currently being developed by others, and even the ILL may be developed by someone else, and therefore even that money may be saved. "You have to hang loose."
You have to support development. They have created an ongoing development fund. The funds collected may exceed a million dollars or more a year. 70% is earmarked for open source development, 25% earmarked for staff support, 5% is earmarked for training and education.
The project is scheduled to be completed in summer 2008. St. John's University (the largest member) is willing to stick its neck out, and do the pilot production. LibLime has signed a hold harmless, walk away contract. As a vendor trying to get into the academic market. They expect that the final migration will occur in the fall of 2008 and spring of 2009.
For the first three years of the contract, they will pay 20% of the one time implementation costs and 33% of one time development costs. Over the first three years, there is a break-even or minor savings. The savings in years 4-5 are 32% or more. After that the savings rise to 58%, for the largest library it is actually 88%.
Showing posts with label MNIUG. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MNIUG. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
MNIUG - Evergreen/Pines
Tim Daniels of the Georgia Public Library Service talked about the origin of PINES. Part of the inspiration was a solution to the Y2K issues along with a dream of the Governor to have a single state-wide library card.
It was developed, from scratch in just over two years. Has a large number of search features, clean look to the main page. Do allow customers to create own account and user name, plus change passwords.
For all member libraries to replace PINES would be $15 million plus annual maintenance costs of $5 million/year. And the PINES budget is only $1.6 million.
Got libraries to agree on a standardized set of policy rules.
Jason Etheridge of Evergreen talked about some of the details. The current OPAC is the third version, and they are about to trash it for a fourth version. The current version has code on the main page which lets you add Evergreen to the search box choices of search engines in Firefox (and other browsers?). It is open source, and others are making changes, and contributing back to the community.
He showed a search of a "meta-record" which had a single entry for all the various media types. Kind of like FRBR. He showed all kinds of records and examples and even the staff side of the system. Currently there is software which is resident, with much delivered over the web. They are moving to more web based.
The bibliographic record is a consortium record, but there are ways to add meta-data including local notes. Local and volume notes are not added as part of the MARC record. Can't answer question about authority control, currently based on matching algorithms.
It was developed, from scratch in just over two years. Has a large number of search features, clean look to the main page. Do allow customers to create own account and user name, plus change passwords.
For all member libraries to replace PINES would be $15 million plus annual maintenance costs of $5 million/year. And the PINES budget is only $1.6 million.
Got libraries to agree on a standardized set of policy rules.
Jason Etheridge of Evergreen talked about some of the details. The current OPAC is the third version, and they are about to trash it for a fourth version. The current version has code on the main page which lets you add Evergreen to the search box choices of search engines in Firefox (and other browsers?). It is open source, and others are making changes, and contributing back to the community.
He showed a search of a "meta-record" which had a single entry for all the various media types. Kind of like FRBR. He showed all kinds of records and examples and even the staff side of the system. Currently there is software which is resident, with much delivered over the web. They are moving to more web based.
The bibliographic record is a consortium record, but there are ways to add meta-data including local notes. Local and volume notes are not added as part of the MARC record. Can't answer question about authority control, currently based on matching algorithms.
MNIUG - Federated Searching
First to present were Mike Bloomberg from Augsburg College and Katy Gabrio from Macalester College. The two colleges share a server, but have "different instances" on that server. Augsburg went live just before school started, and Macalester went live mid fall with a soft launch, and will begin promoting it with the next semester.
The hardest part of the set up was deciding which databases to put in which groups. It was the meetings and getting the staff to agree on the grouping. The technical part was very easy. The trainer was there for a day and it was ready to go at the end of the visit -- from a technical end.
There are few and fewer citation only databases, and more are full-text. Mcalester went live on October 1, and in the first three weeks, without publicity, data says 1,000 uses (which maybe should be divided by 6 for the six databases searched).
Why chose? Ability to have "save my search" and "save my database" along with the ability to customize.
Second to present was Suzanne Conboy from III who talked about Research Pro. She had trouble logging into the interfaces at various libraries because of authentication and firewall issues. It makes me wonder about how hard we make it for our patrons at times. She went back to Power Point to show what options are available.
Carolyn DeLuca from the University of St. Thomas set up Serials Solutions (360 Search) at the beginning of the summer, and spent the summer tweaking the installation. There are a huge number of options for the pull down menu. They made their decision based on the fact that they are primarily serving undergraduates. The boxes are simply HTML which can be placed anywhere. They have over 300 databases, and tried not limit to the 75 most used. They kept access for the "native" searching primarily for the libarians. They took out the descriptions on the web page, and just added a clickable "i" icon which pulls up the description. It is a fairly clean looking product. Chose this product because it works well with the existing products and services which they already had.
Faculty were happy to see it, but don't know if the faculty are using it, or if the students are. Individual students are often thrilled. There are no usage modules, and they only get statistics from the original data base vendors.
Lindy Finifrock from Bethel University talked about WebFeat, where they have the Express version rather than the customizable version because of price. She showed their "Quick Search" which is a basic federated search. There are a limited number of choices for templates. Results appear as they are found, and you do not have to wait for the complete search to be completed. Can do relevancy ranking, and other sorting after the fact.
It was quick and easy. Choosing a book, opens a new window which then let's you have mjultiple windows open. Undergrads really like to use this, because they can quickly get the sources they need for their reports. They chose Webfeat in 2006, and chose it because of the great functionality and the price (i.e. low). Students have found it on the web page and/or portal, and seem to use it. [She noted that it was working more quickly at St. Olaf than it does on campus!]
The hardest part of the set up was deciding which databases to put in which groups. It was the meetings and getting the staff to agree on the grouping. The technical part was very easy. The trainer was there for a day and it was ready to go at the end of the visit -- from a technical end.
There are few and fewer citation only databases, and more are full-text. Mcalester went live on October 1, and in the first three weeks, without publicity, data says 1,000 uses (which maybe should be divided by 6 for the six databases searched).
Why chose? Ability to have "save my search" and "save my database" along with the ability to customize.
Second to present was Suzanne Conboy from III who talked about Research Pro. She had trouble logging into the interfaces at various libraries because of authentication and firewall issues. It makes me wonder about how hard we make it for our patrons at times. She went back to Power Point to show what options are available.
Carolyn DeLuca from the University of St. Thomas set up Serials Solutions (360 Search) at the beginning of the summer, and spent the summer tweaking the installation. There are a huge number of options for the pull down menu. They made their decision based on the fact that they are primarily serving undergraduates. The boxes are simply HTML which can be placed anywhere. They have over 300 databases, and tried not limit to the 75 most used. They kept access for the "native" searching primarily for the libarians. They took out the descriptions on the web page, and just added a clickable "i" icon which pulls up the description. It is a fairly clean looking product. Chose this product because it works well with the existing products and services which they already had.
Faculty were happy to see it, but don't know if the faculty are using it, or if the students are. Individual students are often thrilled. There are no usage modules, and they only get statistics from the original data base vendors.
Lindy Finifrock from Bethel University talked about WebFeat, where they have the Express version rather than the customizable version because of price. She showed their "Quick Search" which is a basic federated search. There are a limited number of choices for templates. Results appear as they are found, and you do not have to wait for the complete search to be completed. Can do relevancy ranking, and other sorting after the fact.
It was quick and easy. Choosing a book, opens a new window which then let's you have mjultiple windows open. Undergrads really like to use this, because they can quickly get the sources they need for their reports. They chose Webfeat in 2006, and chose it because of the great functionality and the price (i.e. low). Students have found it on the web page and/or portal, and seem to use it. [She noted that it was working more quickly at St. Olaf than it does on campus!]
MNIUG - Opening Session
The first presentation was an III Corporate Update from Bill Easton, Customer Sales Consultant and Suzanne Conboy, eProducts Specialist.
First to speak was Bill Easton. I was not life, so created these notes in Word and have pasted them here.
What does Rock Solid mean?
- Strong Foundation
- Growing
- Stable
- Independent
- Financially Sound
- “Rock ‘n’ Roll Edge”
- cool technology
Past year: grow number of systems 1250 servers/4000 libraries; percentage of libraries selecting Millennium 55+%
New Products developed: Circa – replacing the wireless workstation, inventory; can do quick check out, connected to server; Research Pro – replaces meta find federated search engine; Program Registration – calendar for programs and registration; Single Sign On – only have to sign on once (academic); Express Lane – self check; Article Reach – search and find articles and have them faxed (academic); Encore – starting to install, sold 70 systems so far; over 250 enhancements including printing and web management reports, new look and feel of client.
Rock Solid Tour: T-shirts for each IUG meeting
Top in ARL…positive cash flow; because healthy financially, can remain an independent company (privately held still) [Did he “protest” too much on this topic??]
“An alternative to vendors who change their tune”
What’s New in 2007
Web Management Reports: Circulation, Patrons, etc.; easy to run; direct export to spreadsheet; can use old reports
Program Registration – powerful software web based tool; can limit by type [if entered]; details; calendar view; can do listing
Path Finder Pro: any url address can be linked to by specific rules, example: every time you find DVD can automatically point to IMDB
Research Pro [Later]
Encore: demo – Link+ also federated searching of outside databases (Amazon, Google images, etc.)
This is Innovative’s answer to the “OPAC is broken”
Express Lane: GUI self check product [My Millennium]
Printing: new printing architecture for selected printing jobs; can control look, add logos, and export to PDF; using 3rd party template editor
CIRCA: Inventory control and will use any Windows compliant hand held wireless device
CS direct: http://csdirectiii.com/ppt/iug#15 (presentations from last meeting)
Suzanne Conboy's presentation was on the variety of eResources available.
She began with some statistics which were drawn from the OCLC 2005 Perceptions of Libraries and Information Resources which has a wealth of data, aggregated across age, geography. ONe conclusion is that it is overwhelming to find information on a library’s web site: too much information, too many choices. Libraries rate high in trustworthy and accurate. We need to improve in easy to use, convenient, and fast. Need to become “mother of all search engines.”
Discovery to Delivery Chain
Discovery
Research Pro
ERM
Encore
Pathfinder Pro
Discovery to Delivery Chain
ERM
Pathfinder Pro
Research Pro: Searching across multiple databases. Need to make it more convenient for our users. “Only federated search tool which you can place anywhere you want to make it easier for your users.” Completely customizable. Can easily save results and save favorite databases. West Bloomfield Township (MI?) intermingled format and subject. Can add any text anywhere on the page. Results are immediately presented, do not have to wait for all results to be returned and sorted. Enhancements planned: faceting of results; sorting of results; spell-check for search; toggle between languages; further integration with Webbridge LR and Encore
ERM (Electronic Resource Management tools)
Generally, these are staff tools. It can be used by the public as a discovery tool. So, they created a public web interface. You can use ERM to dynamically create information for web presentation. Use ERM to put much information in a single place. Examples: Cornell University “Find”; University of Colorado at Boulder [catalog = Chinook]; University of Arizona; Yale Law School; Leeds University; University of Queensland; Sonoma State University (California State University at Sonoma); Washington State University.
Showed staff views. No additional server needed; staff already trained on Millennium; customer support; IUG support
Easy to implement: comes pre-installed with resource records, no need to manually enter; comes the training and Quick Start; includes database free for the first year (CASE); already live in 29 ARL Libraries, 200 other libraries.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)