ceirc caul s electronic information resources committee presentation to era forum 12 may 2008

1. CEIRCCAUL�s Electronic Information Resources Committee presentation to ERA Forum 12 May 2008

3. Who is CEIRC? The committee 3 CAUL members, 1 CONZUL member 2 datasets coordinators CAUL Executive Officer historically includes CSIRO representative The program CAUL, CONZUL, external participants The �secretary� negotiation, administration, record-keeping (35 years in university libraries, 13 in CAUL)

5. Who is CEIRC (cont) 1994-1997 NPRF funding, AUD2m over 3 years, for paid �trials� of online services for all universities decisions by CAUL committee, DAWG from mid-1995 coordinated by CAUL EO funds handled by AVCC year 3, access limited to web-only services 1998 to date members asked to subscribe to trialled products CAUL EO started �negotiating� with vendors Agreements made with LexisNexis, Britannica, Gale (IAC), Research Libraries Group et al (in 1996) CEIRC established to replace DAWG, with annual fee formalisation of guidelines for external participants in 2000 review of program in 1999 and 2007

6. Selection & Evaluation How do products/vendors get to the CEIRC table? Members send vendors to CEIRC Members ask CEIRC to seek consortial offer and/or improved (licensing) conditions Vendor approaches CEIRC (web site) CEIRC alerts member to new product/options

9. Selection & Evaluation (cont) How does CEIRC come to an agreement? �negotiation� - content; licence; pricing model; trial checklist for negotiation, vendor �form�, model clauses presentation - web site offers page, information providers page communication - email to datasets list, collation of interest and/or confirmations commitment (or not) � notification to vendor, invoicing (native currencies), licence renewal cycle � calendar year

10. CEIRC and ERA Treated as another �vendor� � aim to save members� time Analysis of ERA offers c/f CEIRC offers some products overlapped with CEIRC products some ERA offers for academic institutions designed to match current CEIRC offers Coordination of responses Very time consuming for very low level of interest Products of general interest, but not high priority Institutions won�t change products because of price i.e. not necessarily interchangeable with other similar products

11. ERA and CEIRC (cont) CEIRC results product x � better under ERA if FTE<6,000 otherwise not product y � better under ERA for all FTE and participation levels product z � no way to achieve ERA participation levels which improve on CEIRC price only World Book Online new to CEIRC expressions of interest from 2 CAUL members confirmation from one � the other preferred to keep calendar year invoicing ??? what about other academic institutions i.e. those which are not universities and not members of CEIRC?

13. Why does CEIRC work for us? Closed group, focussed interests, individual choice Transparent (vendor & institution), fair Efficiencies at the business end consistency, communication channels, knowledge base, flexible, responsive light touch administratively, legally Improved access (most common) � increased content, licensing, site licences, predictable price Improved price (does not work where market penetration already high) � in exchange for more subscribers and improved vendor revenue

14. Conclusion? Review indicates members value the program proof in the number of products (> 150), the increasing take-up over time, and the high level of renewals recognise limitations imposed by operating as a group may be slow to finalise (can start early and join group later) packages rather than pick and choose Review indicates that vendors ambivalent value the program most when they lack the infrastructure prefer to deal direct with members when they have the staff respond to members� request to work with CEIRC

15. Diane Costello CAUL (Council of Australian University Librarians) http://www.caul.edu.au/ caul@caul.edu.au