PCC Steering Committee Response to the Final report of the Task Group on SACO Program Development

Submitted to the PCC Policy Committee April 2004
(Approved May 2004)

At the November 2003 annual Policy Committee (PoCo) meeting of the Program for Cooperative Cataloging (PCC), members were asked to affirm the work of the PCC Task Group on SACO Program Development in approving the creation of a SACO Program with parameters and guidelines for membership. The vote on the TG recommendation to proceed with the implementation of an "official" SACO Program elicited spirited discussion and was narrowly affirmed.

Background:
Since the creation of a mechanism for non-LC libraries to contribute proposals for inclusion into LCSH there have been several internal LC studies that have found the SACO contribution mechanism, as it is currently structured, inefficient and less than cost effective. One study recommended that the current open program be transformed into an application and training based process to mirror the NACO/CONSER/BIBCO programs. As a result of discussions at the PoCo meeting in 2002 the Task Group on SACO Program Development was created. That task group submitted its final report in October 2003 and recommended, among other things, that the SACO component be developed that allowed for both a closed program (application/training, goal-based) as well as an open program whereby any individual/institution could continue to send proposals on an ad-hoc basis.

This recommendation was viewed by most PoCo members as having little benefit and that most PCC members would choose not to join and be held accountable to a minimum goal if there were others who could continue to send in proposals without any accountability. The question was subsequently referred to the PCC Steering Committee (SC) for final dispensation.

At the January 2004 meeting of the SC the following SACO Program structure was approved.

Structure of the SACO Program:

1. The SACO Program will be open to the membership of the PCC, and any institution that participates in the PCC's component programs (BIBCO/CONSER/NACO) may submit subject proposals via the SACO Web form, provided they have met the SACO requirements. This structure will assure that the workflow of timely processing of subject heading proposals will benefit those members that have contributed to the cooperative cataloging process in other ways.
2. An invitation will be issued to those institutions currently contributing only subject proposals to join the newly formed official program. The application process will consist of filling in an application/information form with an agreement/commitment to an annual numerical contribution goal of 10-12 proposals. This numerical goal would include a combination of new or changed LCSH heading and/or new or changed LC Classification numbers.

Application process:

1. Active PCC members will not need to apply to join SACO. As is the current practice, a subject-heading proposal will satisfy the membership requirement in this component program.
2. Proposals from individuals from non-PCC institutions will no longer be accepted via the SACO Program. A cataloger wishing to send forward a proposal will need to secure institutional support and commitment by filling in a SACO application form. The application will carry the information that will mirror, in as much as is possible, the information found in the application of the other component PCC programs.

Numerical goals:
Those institutions joining the PCC as SACO participants will be required to commit to the annual contribution goal of 10-12 new or modified proposals for LCSH headings and/or new or modified LC classification proposals or any combination thereof.

Training:
Applicants for SACO participation will be encouraged, although not required, to attend SACO/LCSH workshops. The PCC will continue to work with ALCTS/CCS to develop training modules that are easily accessible and cost effective and these courses will be highlighted and made available to those new members at a reasonable cost.

One time only contributions:
Institutions that do not wish to submit a SACO application but whose catalogers find that they have a need to send forward a subject proposal will be encouraged to contact the PCC liaison from PCC member institutions in their area or geographic regions for help in submitting proposals.

It is hoped that this new SACO Program guideline will become the impetus needed for current SACO contributors to join the PCC and encourage the development of regional SACO funnel projects. The appropriate information will be added the SACO Home Page and throughout the PCC web site.

PCC Governance
The PCC governance will be amended to read [additions in bold]:

SACO: Membership Levels: Affiliate (non-voting). As members of SACO, participants contribute proposals for subject headings to LCSH and classification numbers to LC Classification. [Institutions participating in the other PCC programs may submit subject proposals via the SACO Web form, provided they have met the SACO requirements. An individual institution may join this program or a group of libraries with a common interest may form a funnel project to contribute proposals via a PCC member coordinator.] Participants contributing only subject proposals are represented by the Secretariat.

There will not be any immediate changes made to the current SACO PoCo representation until at such time that a sufficient number of institutions have begun to actively participate in this newly-structured component of the PCC.

Impact:
In FY03 the participants who contributed only subject proposals produced 18.2% of all PCC SACO activity.

143 institutions contributed to SACO
92 participated in other PCC programs
51 contributed only subject proposals

• *13 contributed 12 or more proposals (Group A)
• **4 contributed 5 or more proposals (Group B)

34 contributed less than 5 (Group C)

*Among these, two are international participants
**Among these, one is an international participant

Group A produced 16.71% of the total PCC SACO activity. Those in Groups B and C produced only 1.4% of the total activity. Therefore, it is posited that the statistical impact on the PCC will be minimal. The Coop Team will disseminate information to all listservs regarding this process and provide a list of available PCC mentors on the PCC website.

If PoCo approves this proposal, an associated impact on PCC libraries may be the expenditure of time needed to mentor or partner with one-time subject contributors or to act as funnel coordinators. The PCC will work through its cadre of regional trainers and the CONSER/BIBCO Operations Committee members to identify mentors from PCC libraries that would be available to forward proposals on behalf of non-PCC catalogers who have the occasional need to create a proposal for LCSH.

SACO Program Parameters/Benefits:
The PCC Governance document does not list program parameters, requirements, benefits nor the mechanism for contribution. Traditionally these details have been left to the coordinators of the individual component programs and to LC and its data exchange partners. The decision to provide free or discounted documentation to SACO participants will be determined by LC management as appropriate. Support of SACO or LCSH training workshops at ALA conference venues will continue to be supported by LC as appropriate. On demand requests for training will continue to be paid for by the institution/association requesting the training, with LC continuing to support reproduction of training materials, etc. as appropriate.

Training/Documentation:
The Cooperative Cataloging Team in collaboration with CPSO, ALCTS and CDS will be primarily responsible for the development and maintenance of SACO-specific training documentation and for the delivery of the training. The Standing Committee on Training, either alone or in partnership with other relevant groups (e.g. ALCTS CCS committees or task groups), will support those efforts by assisting with the maintenance of ancillary documentation (e.g., the SACO Participants' Manual) and by providing training that may support the goals of the SACO program, such as the basic subject analysis workshop. The SCT may also advise CPSO, CDS and the SACO coordinator on the development of a curriculum for SACO contributors and assist in exploring distributed learning approaches to SACO training, either via the Web or other technologies.

Mechanism for contribution:
The mechanism for contribution will continue to be the SACO web form with enhancements developed by LC as resources permit. OCLC and RLG will be encouraged to plan future system developments that will facilitate the creation, review of and eventual FTP contribution of subject proposals to the LC authority file or other data files that may be developed for this program.