From lpsmail@access.digex.netFri Feb 16 12:19:05 1996 Date: Thu, 15 Feb 1996 16:07:28 -0800 From: Shipment Reply to: Discussion of Government Document Issues To: Multiple recipients of list GOVDOC-L Subject: ADNOTES: REMARKS AT ALA MIDWINTER: SHEILA MCGARR THE MESSAGE BELOW IS FROM ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES, VOL. 17, #04 (Feb. 15, 1996) DEPOSITORY SERVICES UPDATE Remarks by Sheila M. McGarr Chief, Depository Services Federal Documents Task Force Government Documents Round Table American Library Association Midwinter Meeting January 20, 1996 Good morning. I would like to bring you up-to-date on the activities of Depository Services. While other units of the Library Programs Service are primarily oriented toward the processing and distribution of publications, the focus of Depository Services is on the functioning of the individual libraries and their relation with each other and GPO. Outreach The 9th annual Interagency Depository Seminar is planned for May 29-June 5, 1996 in Washington, DC. "New" documents staff (3 years or less experience in this field) are the target audience for the program. Sessions are conducted by GPO, Bureau of the Census, Office of the Federal Register, Patent and Trademark Office, etc. The preliminary agenda and registration form was announced in the October 15, 1995 issue of Administrative Notes. There are still openings for "boot camp" and the closing date for registration is February 29. The 5th annual Federal Depository Library Conference will be held from April 15-18, 1996 at the Washington National Airport Hilton in Crystal City. The Depository Library Council will meet concurrently with the conference. The preliminary agenda for the conference was announced in the December 15, 1995 issue of Administrative Notes and on GOVDOC-L. A revised agenda will appear in the February 15, 1996 issue of Administrative Notes and on GOVDOC-L. The program is a mixture of Federal agency electronic initiatives and presentations from documents librarians on their use of electronic Government information. Proceedings from this conference will be issued in mid-1996. Publications The Depository Library Council endorsed the work of a Council subcommittee who revised the nearly 20-year old Guidelines. The Guidelines for the Federal Depository Library Program will be printed shortly as Federal Depository Library Manual Supplement 2. Each depository will receive a copy and it will be posted on the Federal Bulletin Board for downloading. The Guidelines are also supplied to potential depository libraries. Given the transition to electronics, we will reevaluate the Guidelines every 2 years. Twenty-seven depository librarians volunteered to evaluate documents for a revision of the Superseded List. Their names, addresses, and agency assignments appeared in the January 15, 1996 issue of Administrative Notes. Documents staff are encouraged to contact the committee members with suggestions for the Superseded List. With evaluation, compilation, and review stages, the enlarged list will likely be available by Fall 1996. At the recommendation of the Depository Library Council, the draft self-study, to be used in advance of an inspection, was printed in the November 25, 1994 issue of Administrative Notes. Many librarians whose documents operations were inspected throughout 1995 completed the self-study and found the process good preparation for the on-site inspection. We plan to issue the self-study as Federal Depository Library Manual Supplement 3 by June 1996. For the first time in anyone's memory, GPO was included in the Federal Agency Reports section of the 1995 edition of the Bowker Annual. We have submitted an article which we anticipate will appear in the 1996 edition of the Bowker Annual this summer. Inspection Activities Libraries which were last inspected in 1989 and 1990 are tentatively scheduled for inspection for the remainder of fiscal year 1996 in the following states: Arizona, Arkansas, California, Maine, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Vermont, and Virgin Islands. Inspectors will contact depository librarians by telephone approximately 6 weeks in advance to confirm the date for the compliance review. As recommended by the Depository Library Council at its October 1995 meeting, the "Recommended Minimum Technical Guidelines" for computer work stations will be required of all depositories by October 1, 1996. This information was distributed to library directors by first class mail, to documents librarians in depository shipments, and in the December 15, 1995 issue of Administrative Notes. You may be wondering how this change will affect a compliance review by the depository library inspectors. The lack of suitable computer equipment will be evaluated in the same manner as a lack of map, CD-ROM, or microfiche cabinets; insufficient shelving or microfiche readers and reader/printers; water damage, etc. The depository operation will be rated as being in non-compliance with the Physical Facilities portion of the audit. A library will not be placed on probationary status because of one deficiency. Three categories out of seven must be deficient to warrant probation. Biennial Survey Under Title 44, U.S.C. section 1909, "designated depository libraries shall report to the Superintendent of Documents at least every two years concerning their condition." Since 1947, the Biennial Survey of Depository Libraries has been that instrument. As my telephone number was the "Biennial Survey Hotline," I can report on a few amusing incidents. Even though we required that only the 2 page answer sheets be faxed, several libraries also faxed back the entire 12 page booklet. Some libraries still do not know their depository library number! A library reported multiple congressional districts as their service area while we asked in which district is the library located. We also noted a number of discrepancies in reported congressional district from the 1993 to 1995 surveys. When that happened, I requested that the library fax back the page from the Congressional District Atlas with "x marks the spot" of their library. Some librarians called me to report spilling coffee or making errors on the answer sheets. Using U.S. Fax Watch to quickly obtain replacement copies of the booklet and answer sheets was a success and speedier than our mailing out new sets by "snail mail." After a successful pilot test in 1993 using the Teleform software, responses to the 1995 Survey were received by fax. On the whole the fax software worked well. There were, however, irreconcilable differences between our equipment and some libraries' fax machines which crashed our system. In those cases, they either mailed the survey back or faxed to another machine and we manually transferred the information to blank answer sheets and refaxed it to the Teleform machine. Because of its tabulation feature, I can report on some highlights today. After notices in Administrative Notes, shipment boxes, and GOVDOC-L, plus telephone calls by my staff and nagging by the regionals on our behalf, we are only missing 9 Surveys out of 1381 depositories. We still have to clean up the data especially on those questions which were not answered at all or too many answers were marked. We plan to issue a publication similar to the 1994 Electronic Capabilities Survey for the 1995 Biennial Survey. [A handout showing preliminary results of the 1995 Biennial Survey was distributed at the GODORT meeting and appeared in Administrative Notes, v. 17, #2 (1/15/96).] There was interest in updating the estimated number of users per week [167,700] reported in the Users of Academic and Public GPO Depository Libraries" study conducted by Peter Hernon and Charles McClure in 1988. But we had no time and no funding to pre-test or conduct sampling. Instead, we asked, "on average, how many patrons use the depository each week?" Based on the responses from all types of libraries, the estimated magic number is 188,203. The final Biennial Survey question asked "[I]f electronic media and online services replace most paper and microfiche distributed through the FDLP in the next 2 years, would your library retain depository status?" 95 libraries answered no and 42 left it blank. On December 7, we sent out letters to each of those libraries asking them to clarify their reasons. To date, 62 libraries (45.2%) responded. Types of libraries getting letter # % Law school 28 17.9 Federal 5 7.5 Federal court 9 13.6 Public 30 10.6 Academic 55 7.2 State or county law 3 5.4 State library 3 6.3 Special 4 16.0 Of the 137 libraries, three were regionals (1 state library and 2 public). The librarians commented on the FDLP no longer being an exclusive source for Government information; obligations remain but costs [primarily equipment] increase; FDLP will be a misnomer as it gravitates toward an electronic access program; access will likely be restricted to the computer literate; and the Federal Government is shifting the financial burden to the local and state governments. % Staffing Implications 17.5 Lack of Public Service staff Lack of patron expertise Training of patrons of staff to use new systems GPO subsidize travel for training Financial Budget shortfall-not keeping pace with inflation 26.3 Mushrooming costs for equipment Hardware acquisition and upgrades Software acquisition and upgrades Telephone line installation Internet fees Printers GPO subsidize toll free number to Internet Higher salaries for staff expertise Costs: toner, diskettes, paper 12.3 Need technology grants 8.8 Products Uniform graphical interfaces 8.8 Software standardization Identify/Archive/Preserve 10.1 Other library priorities 8.8 Automation Upgrading OPAC Installing LAN In conclusion, many depository libraries will have to accelerate their plans to obtain public access computer work stations and deal with the demand for local printing and downloading. The need to provide users with assistance in using electronic access service must be balanced with providing access to historical Government information in print and microformats. In the electronic environment where the FDLP is free to all, public service [the "intermediary" role] becomes the defining characteristic of a depository. Libraries which intend to continue as depositories should have a strong commitment to public access.