SOPAG December 11, 2002 Meeting Minutes
SOPAG Task Force on Government Information
Meeting , December 11, 2002
Announcements: New member Lee Leighton, replacing Patricia Iannuzzi, was introduced.
Statistical Survey results (DeDecker)
The UC/Stanford GILS conducted a survey of UC and Stanford government information collections. Sherry DeDecker cooperated with Janet Martorana (UCSB, chair of the GILS Steering Group) on the survey, which covered size of collection, type of processing and classification, location, and collection strengths. It was recognized that some campuses would be unable to provide data in the requested categories, but data for selected campuses and totals would help provide a general picture of the overall scope of collections and changes between 1994/5 and 2001/2.
In reviewing the data, it was clear that there has been a major reduction in the amount of print received. There appear to be, among the depository items, a low number of unique titles. Also 50 per cent of the UCLA collection is in storage, which provides some opportunities.
ACTION: Trisha will contact UCLA to determine what level of bibliographic access is available for the stored collection.
ACTION: Sherry will work with Patricia Cruse to resolve any remaining gaps or questions in the data, and the data will be distributed to GILS. Sherry will summarize the conclusions that can be drawn from the data. Reactions and observations from the GILS group will also be requested.
Documents Data Miner Statistics (DeDecker and Cruse)
Trisha distributed data obtained via the Documents Data Miner that showed in table and chart form the receipt of government documents by campus by format from 1997-2002 fiscal years, again demonstrating a significant reduction in both paper and microfiche receipts. (Documents Data Miner is a web based tool developed by the Wichita State University in partnership with GPO: http://govdoc.wichita.edu/ddm)
ACTION: The Task Force’s final report will draw as appropriate from the data collected by both the GILS survey and the Documents Data Miner Statistics
Report from UC/Stanford Government Information Librarians Steering Group Meeting (Cruse, Kennedy)
ACTION: Linda reported briefly; she will forward minutes when available. Trisha summarized Mellon grant activities; she will forward a written report.
UL’s RLF Planning Task Group Charge (Pritchard)
ACTION: Sarah outlined the draft charge (to be discussed at the 12/12-13 UL meeting); she will forward the written version shortly.
State Documents Retention (Kennedy)
Linda reported briefly on her 11/21 visit to the California State Library and distributed a summary of the meeting and a copy of the retention policy for state documents.
ACTION: The committee will recommend in its final report that the University develop a Memorandum of Understanding with the CSL to the effect that retaining a copy of a state document, providing it can be quickly delivered in print or electronic format to any user at any campus, meets the spirit of the retention requirements established by the CSL.
Options for CD-Rom Access (Cruse, Kennedy)
It would be desirable to address the issue of preservation and access to existing CD-ROMs, and floppy diskettes in campus collections. The UCSD GPO data Migration project http://ssdc.ucsd.edu/dmp/ to preserve data distributed on floppy diskette could play a role.
Following up on the matrix discussion at the October meeting, Judy distributed a draft matrix that illustrated some of the relationships between the categories and formats with which we are dealing. We will draw from these for illustration as necessary.
Outlining our Report (Kennedy)
Between this agenda item, and all the others, the majority of the meeting was spent discussing specific concepts and strategies that will be part of the final report.
ACTION: Linda will revise the draft outline to include the day’s discussion.
Communication and Feedback:
Linda met with the GILS steering group, which includes Trisha, and has talked with Margaret Mooney by phone. It is important to gather feedback from the GILS group in developing our recommendations. Much of the development of UL thinking about shared collections is occurring simultaneously with the work of the committee, via Sarah we are being brought up to date. It will be important to share this thinking with all selectors, not just the government information librarians, since ultimately the shared collections strategies will affect all subject areas. We earlier agreed that input in developing recommendations will be sought from groups such as GILS and the map librarians, and that when campus positions are sought, we will go through SOPAG.
ACTION: Linda will prepare an Interim report to be presented to SOPAG before its January 17th meeting. SOPAG will be asked for feedback on ongoing communication needs. Also, Trisha will suggest to the GILS Steering Committee that a statewide GILS meeting be scheduled in February to discuss our work and tentative recommendations. The SOPAG Task Force will plan to meet the day after the GILS meeting.
Revised outline by Jan 1, Interim report to SOPAG by Jan 15, GILS meeting mid-February, draft report by ? , Final report by March/April.