1 / 22

Consortial Purchasing

Consortial Purchasing. One model out of many …. Diane Costello. Overview . CAUL/CEIRC CEIRC administrative model Some principles. Why form a Consortium?. Reduce costs - Discount for volume

zuzela
Télécharger la présentation

Consortial Purchasing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Consortial Purchasing One model out of many …. Diane Costello

  2. Overview • CAUL/CEIRC • CEIRC administrative model • Some principles

  3. Why form a Consortium? • Reduce costs - Discount for volume • Increase access - To all titles owned by the consortium; to publisher’s list; to aggregator’s packages • Reduce work • Information gathering • Trial coordination • Licence negotiation • Price negotiation

  4. Principles • Better price and/or conditions than possible as a single institution • Entry level which allows the largest number to participate • Advantages for larger institutions • Information gathering -> web site • Simplify administration

  5. … and the Publishers? • Single point for wide distribution of information • Single point of contact for negotiations • Single invoice … but • Maintain (or increase) bottom line

  6. CAUL • 38 AVCC member libraries; • 1965 - Committee formed; • 1992 - name change to “Council”; • 1995 - full-time executive officer, office staff now 2fte • Secretariat, Committee support, Cooperative activities (Statistics, ULA, Performance Indicators, CISC), Liaison/Representation, Current awareness, Web site, CEIRC program.

  7. CEIRC (CAUL Electronic Information Resources Committee) • NPRF funds $2m 1993-1996 for datasets • “Trials” of ISI Current Contents, Academic Press IDEAL, IAC Expanded Academic ASAP, etc • Evolved into consortial purchasing • Committee recommends policy to CAUL • CAUL Office handles day-to-day • Now includes CSIRO, CONZUL (38+25 total) • CEIRC Levy

  8. CEIRC (2) • Guidelines for external participants • Guidelines for licences - no strict model • Checklist for “negotiations”but • No preferred pricing model • No minimum participation • No schedule of negotiations

  9. CAUL Office • Instigation via member, publisher or office • Distribution of information re product, licence, price & trial via email list • Negotiation/liaison re price & conditions • Maintenance of details on web site http://www.caul.edu.au/datasets/ • Participation list, IP addresses, contacts • Invoicing & payments

  10. Decision-Making • Self-selected consortium vs National Site Licence • “Buying club” • National Site Licence - an ideal which requires either • top-sliced or additional funding or • internal agreement about what is wanted and how much the individual institutions are prepared to pay for it

  11. Decision-Making (2) • Changing environment --> Changing decision-making processes • Each product assessed independently • Licence conditions • Overlap between products • Choice of interfaces • Datasets Coordinator - coordinates communication & decision by given date!

  12. Cost-Sharing • Determined by publisher & passed on to group eg • Subscription history (current spend) • Percentage discount by volume • # Institutions • # Databases • # Titles • EFTSU / FTE - all or discipline-specific • Carnegie Classification

  13. Cost-Sharing (2) • Determined within Consortium eg • Equal share • FTE-based • Usage-based • Resources budget, or • … a combination of the above eg 50% equal share (entry level) + 50% FTE-based • … or what it is worth to the institution eg NAAL (Alabama)

  14. Cost-Sharing (3) • Gaining consensus • Current Contents - 50% fixed + 4 tiers based on FTE (+ choice of interface) • MathSciNet - Costs of current subscribers reducing with added subscribers • ProQuest5000 - Minimum entry cost per institution + Minimum total cost

  15. CAUL Agreements 1996- • 55 agreements, 36 full-text, 4 factual databases, the rest bibliographic • Half commenced in 2000 or later • burgeoning of available electronic products • increasing willingness of publishers to deal with consortia • Billing handled centrally (28) • local office or agent • Average number of participants 20 • Highest number 40 (ProQuest5000, PsycINFO)

  16. Issues • Publishers • Site definition (16 Oz single-campus univ) • Bundling print with online (mainly UK) • Maintaining bottom line • Premium for electronic and/or enhanced product eg WoS • Access to “purchased” data & archiving

  17. Issues (2) • Members • Variation in size / wealth / research emphasis / discipline base • Cost-sharing parameters • Competition • “Subsidy” of less well-resourced institutions • Relative gain, rather than the NAAL ideal • Agreement on priorities

  18. Issues (3) • For the new consortium: • content - find a product that many own/want • coordinate - volunteer, employee • contribute - to the cost of running the group • confide - know your starting point by sharing information about current expenditure • communicate - web, lists

  19. Issues (4) • (The New Consortium - cont.) • knowledge about your group members - • physical sites • # staff (professional & total) • access mechanism eg IP addresses, intranet requirements • government/department legal/purchasing requirements • consider - whether an agent can assist, act as a broker eg DA, EBSCO, Swets etc

  20. Pause .... • Very similar deals being done by a wide variety of consortia internationally • Value in sharing information • Value in clubbing together in discipline-based groups • Value in a group facilitator • not distracted by “regular job” • knowledge base

  21. Pitfalls …. • Setting unachievable deadlines • rolling start-dates possible • Creating unnecessary legal obstacles • with the publisher or with each other • Shift in cost centres - from personal & laboratory subscriptions to Library • Unsustainability - the “big deal” leaves little room for flexibility

  22. … and progress • Cheaper than list prices • Access to more titles • Shift in licence conditions eg ILL, course packs, single institution vs multi-site etc • Unbundling of print from electronic • More trust --> Simpler licences

More Related