Doc. E1

CONSER membership considerations

March 2003

Developed by Jean Hirons with assistance from Jim Stickman (University of Washington)

There are currently 4 categories of CONSER membership: full, associate, enhance, and affiliate. The membership review will focus on the first three categories; affiliate membership involves companies, such as EBSCO, and does not need revision at this time.

Background

The last review of membership took place in 1993-94 and resulted in the categories below. The steady growth of the program since that time has led to an expanded Operations Committee and concerns for future expansion.

This review of the CONSER membership structure is being held in conjunction with an assessment of the CONSER database and its coverage of serials (expected in 2003-2004). A PCC Assessment Task Force will review PCC records to determine how they are best meeting the needs of the library community. As a preliminary to that assessment, Hirons presented a suggested membership strategy to the PCC Policy Committee in 2002 that identified three areas for program expansion: coverage and maintenance of records for electronic serials, publication patterns, and more international participation and coverage of non-English language serials. While this strategy was approved, the findings of the assessment survey may lead to further areas of coverage that CONSER will need to target. It is hoped that a revised membership structure, if needed, will be in place to accomplish the defined needs of the program at that time.

The subject of membership has been on the agenda for the CONSER Operations Committee for the past several years and was the focus of an At Large meeting in 2001. Non-members made it clear that they would like to participate; however, they felt that the statistical requirements were too steep. CONSER members pointed out the costs of training, documentation, and continued support of members as being the reasons for the requirements and these continue to be serious concerns.

Goals of this review:

1. Assess membership categories and contributions and recommend changes to increase the ability to meet program goals.

2. Assess ways to expand the program while making effective use of limited funding support.

3. Assure the continued effectiveness of the CONSER Operations Committee.

4. Recommend new strategies for cost-effective training of new members.

General questions for consideration

· How is the current environment with electronic serials affecting CONSER members' ability to meet statistical goals, for example:

o Use of the single record approach

o Moving to a single electronic record for all e-versions

o Possible cutting of print subscriptions

o Increased need for maintenance

· Is maintenance becoming as important as record contribution?

· Should current and near-term budgets be a consideration in any reshaping of CONSER?

· Is it possible to enable smaller contributions while providing cost-effective training?

· Should we consider more creative approaches, such as CONSER funnels, or trial memberships?

· Should CONSER aim for coverage and less at numerical goals?

Full membership level

Background

This category includes the national libraries of the U.S. and Canada, universities and research libraries. (Prior to 1994, national membership was a separate category.) Eligibility for full membership is based on expected contributions to the database; however, a number of smaller institutions have been grandfathered into this category over the years.

Statistical analysis

There are currently 24 libraries in this category. The required number of record transactions per year is 400 of which 150 are new records or first time authentication. In FY 02, three libraries did not meet the minimum requirements for a variety of reasons (e.g., ILS implementation). Looking at the attached statistics, it is evident that there is a wide difference between the record contributions of the various full-level members. There are a number of what we might call "super" libraries, those who produce 2000 records or more. These institutions include LC and the larger universities where there are multiple catalogers and often a number of different departments involved in CONSER cataloging. There is a much greater number of libraries who contribute under 1000 transactions a year. These are generally smaller institutions where there may be only one or several CONSER catalogers.

Other aspects of full level membership

A policy-level representative is named for each full-level institution and that representative may be nominated to serve on the PCC Policy Committee. Operations-level representatives are expected to participate actively in CONSER meetings, discussions and task forces, help train new participants, mentor new CONSER Enhance members, and provide input to documentation review.

Financial considerations

OCLC contributes up to $400 for a representative to attend the CONSER Operations meeting in May. Training for new full members is conducted by other CONSER full-level members, either in their own or in the new member's institution. Training usually lasts 3-5 days and is followed by a review period. Full members receive a free copy of the CONSER Editing Guide and CONSER Cataloging Manual.

Questions for consideration:

· Are the current quantitative requirements for full membership reasonable?

· Are the contributions to CONSER (e.g., training, task force participation) reasonable?

· Is one category sufficient to encompass the range of contributions of current members?

· Is the current funding structure for full members equitable?

Associate level membership

Background

This category was set up in 1994 to enable smaller and more specialized libraries and organizations to contribute to CONSER. The basic differences are in the required number of contributions and the fact that associate institutions are not eligible to serve as CONSER representatives on the PCC Policy Committee. The number of new associate members has remained relatively small and there may be some misunderstanding as to the expectations for members at this level.

Statistical analysis

There are currently 6 institutions in this category. In FY 2002 only three made the basic requirement of 200 transactions with 75 new records. This category also includes the USNP (newspaper project) participants as a group project.

Other contributions

While there is no policy representative named for these institutions, operations representatives may be just as actively involved as full members. There is no difference in the cataloging contributed and associate-level members are expected to be fully competent CONSER catalogers.

Financial considerations

Associate institutions receive the same level of travel funding as full-level members (i.e., up to $400) to attend the Operations Committee meeting. Training for associate members is handled in the same way as full members, i.e., there is one-on-one training either in another CONSER institution or in the home institution. Three days of training are recommended followed by a review period. Associate members receive a free copy of the CONSER Editing Guide and CONSER Cataloging Manual.

Questions for consideration

· Are the current quantitative requirements for this level reasonable?

· Will the current requirements allow for the types of contributions that may be needed in the future?

· Are the other expected contributions to the program reasonable?

· Is the funding model reasonable given the lower requirements of associate members?

CONSER Enhance

Background

This is the newest level of membership. It was established to enable more libraries to update and maintain CONSER records. However, CONSER Enhance members do not authenticate new records. This category was set up with title changes in mind; however, the inability of the Enhance member to authenticate the record for the new title makes this level less than ideal for this activity. But it has worked very nicely for those making specific contributions, such as MeSH subject headings, publication patterns, and URL and PURL maintenance. Joining as an Enhance member has been the first step to CONSER membership for some and has enabled libraries to contribute that would otherwise not be able to meet the current requirements for the associate level. With the increase of electronic resources and the eventual inclusion of integrating resources into the CONSER database, this category may become even more important.

Statistical analysis

There are currently 5 institutions in CONSER Enhance, with another 10 libraries contributing publication patterns via this category. Two potential new enhance libraries are currently being trained. The requirements are a total of 75 maintenance transactions per year. During FY 02, all of the members exceded this number, with one exceeding 1000!

Other contributions

CONSER Enhance members are invited to serve on task forces and participate as actively as they are able to. Those who joined to maintain records (as opposed to addition of subject headings) have been very actively involved in CONSER standards, training, and documentation.

Financial considerations

There is no financial support for CONSER meetings; however, enhance members are invited to attend. Training is limited to mentoring via email so there is no cost to the institution for this training and less of a burden on other CONSER members. Gratis documentation is not provided to CONSER Enhance members.

Questions for consideration

· Is CONSER Enhance still the best model for title changes?

· What are the best uses for this level of membership?

· Could some of the existing members be moved up to associate level?

· Should we more actively recruit for members at this level?

International considerations

There are no separate categories for international members. There are currently three CONSER libraries outside of the U.S. The National Library of Canada was a founding member of the program and has been actively involved ever since. The Hong Kong Science and Technology University and the National Library of Wales joined in 2000. NLC and Hong Kong are full level members; Wales is an associate member.

The prospect of adding more international participants raises issues of training, funding, and communication. PCC currently has a task force working under the Standing Committee on Training that is addressing some of these issues. However, CONSER should also consider how further international participants might best fit into the membership structure; whether the current model is sufficient or whether a different category or model is necessary.

Questions for consideration

· What are the benefits and challenges of having international participation in CONSER?

· How can the program best accommodate their needs?

· Is the current membership structure sufficient?

· Are there different approaches that might be taken?

CONSER Statistics by category of membership for FY 2001-2002