Thursday, May 25, 2017

What is a Discovery Service? ILS Update #3


 What is a library discovery service?

  • Discovery services are search engines designed for library users.
  • You can use one search box to search almost everything in the library collection (including physical books, eBooks, articles, multimedia and open access resources). 
  • After running a search, you can limit the results by date, subject or information format (books, articles, videos, etc.). Or mark a checkbox to expand your search beyond Armacost Library. 
  • Armacost Library's upcoming system migration will replace our traditional catalog with the Primo discovery service. 

What will it be like to use our new discovery service?


What will stay the same?

  •  The Armacost Library home page will still be your first stop to find books, articles and more. We'll integrate the new search interface into the tabbed search box and all research guides. 
  • All your favorite databases such as JSTOR, Business Source Complete and ProQuest Research Library will still be there, if you prefer to run searches directly in the database rather than in Primo. Use the library's Article Database page




When is this happening?

  • We will be going live with the new system on June 30, 2017.
     

 Where can I get more information?

Friday, April 28, 2017

End dates for Link+ borrowing: ILS Update #2

Migrating to a new Integrated Library System (ILS): Update #2



As Shana mentioned in her last post, migrating to a new Integrated Library System (ILS) is a major undertaking for our library, requiring careful planning and collaboration. This complex project has technological, conceptual, educational and philosophical dimensions.

As we learn more about the capabilities of the new systems we're adopting, we are thinking strategically about our goals and values, weighing risks and benefits, and making difficult tradeoffs. 

Last fall, we made the decision to migrate to Ex Libris Alma as our new ILS in order to pursue the benefits that come from a modern system architecture and interface design. We believe that our new system will be more interoperable, functional, and visibly easier to use. 

One of the few drawbacks of the new system is that it is currently incompatible with the popular Link+ borrowing network, to which our library has contributed for the last two years. Link+ is tied to the outdated system we are leaving, and the scope of its collection is decreasing as other libraries decide to make their own migrations. (For example, nine California State University libraries are also leaving Link+ and migrating to Alma - coincidentally on the same day as Armacost Library's move - decreasing its collection by a third)

As soon as we became aware that migrating to a new system might compel us to withdraw from Link+, we began investigating our options for replacing the functionality we'd lose. 
  • Link+ put a prominent request link directly into our catalog's interface, so we could search the holdings of other libraries immediately after an unsuccessful search of our local collection. Our new discovery system (Ex Libris Primo) includes single-click functionality for expanding a search to other libraries and for placing requests for items not found in our local collection. 
  • Link+ made managing requests easier for library staff, by automatically transferring descriptive records between libraries behind the scenes. Libraries with programming know-how are leveraging Ex Libris' advanced technology to create similar interconnections using traditional interlibrary loan. 
  • Another popular Link+ feature was the speedy courier delivery. Typically libraries offer courier service only as part of a formal resource sharing partnership such as Link+ or Rapid. Some libraries set up courier arrangements with each other outside of a formal partnership, but this requires footing the monthly bill for the courier service and negotiating a borrowing arrangement that balances each library's workload. 
Vendors are working to allow libraries running our new system to participate in Link+, and we're following those efforts closely. If the cost and technology lines up for us, we may be able to rejoin Link+ some day in the future. However, for now, we've had to set a timeline for withdrawing from this service, just as the CSUs are doing. The two dates you need to know are:

Friday, May 12 is the last day we will accept Link+ borrowing requests. 
Friday, June 2 is the deadline for getting Link+ items you've borrowed back to Armacost Library. 

We will only have a few weeks to get books back to the libraries from which we borrowed, so we need your cooperation in returning your Link+ books promptly. 

Thanks, and best regards,
Sanjeet Mann
Arts & Systems Librarian
Armacost Library

Wednesday, April 12, 2017

Public Broadcasting and the Budget Appropriation Process


In the previous posts in this series, I’ve presented perspectives on whether the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) should continue to receive funding, and reviewed the history of radio and television broadcasting to acknowledge the federal government’s role in managing scarce resources and promoting innovation in both media.


In this concluding post, I turn to a closer examination of what has to take place for a proposed budget cut to actually happen. I’ll rely on the excellent introduction to the budget process in A People’s Guide to the Federal Budget, available from the Armacost Library collection.

The executive and legislative branches of government share responsibility for determining federal spending levels. The process typically begins a year in advance when the president and cabinet members decide on policy priorities. (Thus, the current debate would impact the CPB in fiscal year 2018.) 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) instructs federal agencies how to submit their budgets in accordance with these priorities, and agencies submit proposed budgets for OMB approval. (In January, a document written by OMB staffers as they prepared these instructions for agencies triggered the New York Times article that drew widespread attention to the possibility of a CPB budget cut.)

Once OMB has approved agency spending proposals, Congress translates these executive branch guidelines into binding laws. It is important to distinguish between two types of Congressional laws affecting agencies – authorizations that give the agency legal permission to exist, and appropriations that commit the money it needs to operate. 

Federal agencies are gathered together into twelve budget requesting groups, and each group requires its own appropriations bill. The House and Senate each have responsibility for writing their own sets of appropriations bills which are eventually reconciled; thus twelve laws are required to pass a budget. (The Corporation for Public Broadcasting falls into the appropriations request for Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related agencies.)

Representatives and Senators sitting on the House and Senate Appropriations Committees are the influential women and men who write the spending bills. Each bill is delegated to a standing subcommittee, and the subcommittee Chair commonly has the privilege of writing the first draft (the “chair’s mark”). Committee and subcommittee chairs belong to the political party that won a majority in the most recent House or Senate election, and other committee members must negotiate with the chair if they want to revise the initial mark. Committee members regularly invite experts to advise them as they author their drafts. Many noteworthy hearings are broadcast live on C-SPAN. (The Chair of the House Appropriations Labor, HHS, Education and Related Agencies Subcommittee is Tom Cole (R-OK) and the Chair of the Senate Appropriations Labor, HHS, Education and Related Agencies Subcommittee is Roy Blunt (R-Mo). The House Subcommittee recently invited CPB officials to testify at a two hour hearing on March 28 that was recorded by C-SPAN.) 

Once the appropriations subcommittee finishes marking up an appropriations bill, it makes its way through the full committee and eventually is introduced for floor debate. This can take a long time as representatives propose amendments, earmark spending for favored programs or try to cancel out language favored by the other party. The schedule of committee hearings and floor debates is published on the House and Senate websites, and full remarks are printed in the Congressional Record published daily by the Library of Congress. Eventually, appropriations bills go up for a vote in each house of Congress. Once the bills are passed, a conference committee composed of members from the House and Senate have to resolve differences between the House and Senate versions of each appropriations bill before it can be signed into law by the President.

All budget proposals must follow this long and complicated process to take effect. There are many points in the process where lawmakers could propose a federal funding level similar to the $445 million the corporation has received in recent years (Corporation for Public Broadcasting 2015). There are also numerous points where you can influence your local representatives, whether they are serving on the appropriations committee, having their say on the bill during floor discussion or reconciling the House and Senate versions in conference.

Here’s a summary of the government information resources I mentioned above that can help you keep up with the latest updates on CPB appropriations, or any other legislation of interest:

·      Congressional Record: https://www.congress.gov/congressional-record 
·      House and Senate websites: https://www.house.gov and https://www.senate.gov
·      Office of Management and Budget (OMB): https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb
·      C-SPAN: https://www.c-span.org

Sanjeet Mann
Arts & Systems Librarian
University of Redlands

Sources

Corporation for Public Broadcasting. 2015. “CPB’s Past Appropriations.” March 24.  http://www.cpb.org/appropriation/history.

Kramer, Mattea. 2012. A People’s Guide to the Federal Budget. Northampton: Interlink Books.

Lafraniere, Sharon and Alan Rappeport. 2017. “Popular Domestic Programs Face Ax Under First Trump Budget.” New York Times, February 17. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/17/us/politics/trump-program-eliminations-white-house-budget-office.html