Appointed by: Barbara Dewey
Project: Assess Collection Development Policies and Collecting Directions for the SCL to develop/update Collection Mission Statement.
Overview and Statement of Need: Since the merger of the three special collections units (Historical Collections and Labor Archives, Penn State University Archives, and Rare Books and Manuscripts) to form the Special Collections Library in 1999, there has not been a systematic review of collection development policies or collecting roles. This has led to some inefficiencies and overlap between collections and potential drift from Library and campus strategic directions. To strengthen and focus Penn State’s special collections, we recommend forming a review team to evaluate the SCL’s existing collecting policies and related data sources, compare with the library, campus, and national directions, and in the context of available and projected resources, make recommendations for revising existing collecting activities and suggest areas where more development is needed. If possible it would also be valuable to bring in an external expert to review the final reports and recommendations. Such information would be of great value in planning futures needs and resources and for the overall development, growth, and fund-raising for the SCL.
Review Team Composition: The review team is compromised of subject specialists from the library faculty (Bill Brockman, chair, Henry Piscotta, Amy Paster), the library’s assessment expert Alan Shay, the head of library development Amy Yancey, and a member of the campus faculty (Deryck Holdsworth). Jackie Dooley, Jennifer Schaffner, or Merrilee Profitt (all OCLC Program Officers) would be good potential choices for the external reviewer. All have worked extensively with special collections issues and projects.
Potential Methodology: Special Collection staff would gather or document existing collection development policies with the unit heads adding information about future directions and plans. This documentation should include information on the uniqueness of Penn State’s collections as well as complementary or competing collections at other repositories. Acquisitions funding data as well as a list of endowments used for acquisitions (and spending restrictions) should be included. Areas developed largely through Gifts in Kind should be noted.
The Review team would look at these reports, meet with staff as needed, and determine what other data points are required to aid the assessment. Such data might include:
- Interviews with Unit Heads and other staff involved in collection development
- SCL responses to 1998 ARL Special Collections survey and 2010 follow-up survey conducted by OCLC; also recommend reviewing resulting reports by ARL and OCLC
- Overall collection use data by unit for the past 10 years (number of onsite researchers)
- Instruction statistics (not all maintained by SCL)
- User call slips by year – potential to create some more granular use data through analysis
- Analysis by use of catalog records (subject breakdown, etc.) Most books and archival materials are now reflected in the catalog
- Materials collected for recent space analysis (includes tactical plans)
- CIC special collections staff benchmarking data
- If possible, a break-down of annual acquisitions made through purchase and by GIK
- Annual insurance reports by unit
- Data on special collections maintained in other UP units and at the campuses
- Library Strategic Plan, Core Council Report and response
Potential Timeline:
March 2012: Review Team appointed and SCL staff gathers collection development data for team
April - July 2012: Review Team assesses data submitted and determines if only information is needed
July - August 2012: Report developed
September 2012: Review Team report submitted to SCL and Deans
October 2012: External reviewer examines report and related materials; makes site visit
November 2012: External reviewer submits report
November - December 2012: SCL staff review report, update collection development policies and strategic direction; holds forum for Library staff to discuss result and new directions
Report:
