F e d e r a l    D e p o s i t o r y    L i b r a r y    P r o g r a m

 

[ Click Here For Information About the FDLP Desktop ] Home
About the FDLP
Depository Management
Electronic Collection
Locator Tools & Services
Processing Tools
Publications
Q & A
askLPS  ·  Calendar  ·  Contacts  ·  Library Directory  ·  Site Index  ·  Site Search
....................
 

ADMINISTRATIVE NOTES


Newsletter of the Federal Depository Library Program

[ PDF version ]  [ Back Issues ]
Cumulative Table of Contents Vol. 1 - present [ PDF ] ( includes current issue )


April 15, 2004

GP 3.16/3-2:25/05
(Vol. 25, no. 05)

Table of Contents

1
4
4
9
16


[ Back to the Table of Contents ]

Fugitive Documents Week
Nets 222 New Titles

"Help catch a fugitive from justice!" was the cry from March 29 – April 2, 2004, proclaimed as the first annual Fugitive Documents Week by the Fugitive & Electronic-Only Documents Committee of the American Association of Law Libraries Government Documents Special Interest Section (AALL GDSIS). During the week, librarians and other interested parties were encouraged to find and report fugitive documents to GPO so they could be classified, cataloged, included in the National Bibliography, and disseminated through the Federal Depository Library Program, resulting in 222 new titles. Susan Lyons (Rutgers Law Library) and Scott Matheson (Yale Law School Library) coordinated this effort for the Committee.

Background

Fugitive documents are defined as those documents of public interest or educational value, not classified for reasons of national security, which have not been acquired for distribution to Federal depository libraries or brought under bibliographic control through the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications.

Because of the nature of the problem, it is difficult to determine exactly how many fugitive documents there are. An estimate of 50% is often cited in the documents literature. There are recent indications that this may be a conservative estimate. A 1998 Inspector General review of the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) compliance with Title 44 depository requirements found that 78% of their applicable titles were not provided to the Superintendent of Documents for dissemination. In January 2000, a former director of the National Technical Information Service (NTIS) stated that there were as many as "50,000 gray literature NTIS titles" that were fugitive from the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP).

AALL GDSIS has been active in assisting GPO with identifying fugitive documents for several years. Their work dovetailed nicely with the Electronic Documents Working Group, which originated with the Depository Library Council. Together, these groups have identified fugitives and suggested classification numbers and distribution formats consistent with our guidelines. GPO appreciates the effort and thought that each volunteer puts into this process.

Reporting Process

On March 15, 2004, a message was cross-posted to the GD-SIS, LAWLIB, and GOVDOC-L electronic discussion lists, inviting people to participate in the first Fugitive Documents Week in two weeks’ time. Participants were asked to notify GPO, through the lostdocs form on the FDLP Desktop, of any Federal publications they came across that were not found in the Monthly Catalog print edition, the online Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP), or in OCLC’s WorldCat.

Statistics & Data Analysis

During Fugitive Documents Week GPO received 134 submissions to lostdocs originating from 18 different e-mail addresses. As shown in Table 1, GPO received 45 e-mails on Monday, the highest daily total for the week. This was followed by Wednesday with 39, Thursday with 36 and Tuesday with 12. Friday was the slowest day, with only 2 submissions.

3/29 – 4/2, 2004

Mon.

Tues.

Wed.

Thur.

Fri.

Total

E-mail Submissions to lostdocs@gpo.gov

45

12

39

36

2

134

Table 1: Submissions to lostdocs, 3/29 - 4/2, 2004

This promotional effort generated 857% more submissions to lostdocs in one week than were received for an average week so far in fiscal year 2004. Compared to the average number of submissions per week since the inception of lostdocs in April 2002, this represents a 436% increase. While there were 134 submissions during the week, many more fugitive documents were identified. Several e-mails referred to Web pages listing numerous documents that were not classified or cataloged by GPO, adding up to a total of 222 fugitive publications identified during the week.

E-mail Submissions to lostdocs@gpo.gov

FY 2002

April – Sept.

FY 2003

Oct. – Sept.

FY 2004

Oct. – Feb.

Total number

428

1702

293

Average # per month

71

142

59

Table 2: Submissions to lostdocs during fiscal year reporting

From the 134 submissions, the following agencies were identified as having fugitive titles that need to be "brought into custody":

  • Administrative Office of the Courts
  • Department of Agriculture
  • Department of Commerce
    • Bureau of the Census
    • National Institute of Standards and Technology
    • National Marine Fisheries
  • Department of Defense
    • Army. Command and General Staff College
    • Marine Corps. History and Museums Division
    • Navy. Naval Historical Center
    • Coalition Provisional Authority
  • Department of Education
    • National Center for Education Statistics
  • Department of Energy
  • Department of Health and Human Services
    • Center for Disease Control
    • National Institutes of Health
  • Department of Homeland Security
    • Federal Emergency Management Agency
    • U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
    • U.S. Coast Guard
  • Department of Housing and Urban Development
  • Department of the Interior
    • United States Geological Survey
  • Department of Justice
    • Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
    • Bureau of Justice Statistics
    • Executive Office of Immigration Review
    • National Criminal Justice Reference Service
  • Department of Transportation
    • Federal Aviation Administration
    • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
  • Department of the Treasury
    • Internal Revenue Service
  • Environmental Protection Agency
  • Executive Office of the President
    • Office of National Drug Control Policy
  • General Accounting Office
  • Merit Systems Protection Board

Conclusion

A crucial factor in handling fugitive documents is awareness. Efforts such as Fugitive Documents Week heighten awareness of the issue while at the same time functioning as tools to assist GPO in adding fugitive publications to the National Bibliography and disseminating them to depository libraries. During the 1st Annual Fugitive Documents Week, GPO received 134 e-mail submissions that in combination identified 222 documents from almost 30 agencies, now being worked through by the classifiers and catalogers. GPO looks forward to working with AALL GDSIS on future efforts to identify and acquire fugitive documents and make that information permanently accessible to the public.

For More Information

Fugitive Documents Week Web site:

http://law-library.rutgers.edu/fugitivedocs.htm

AALL. Government Documents Special Interest Section. Fugitive & Electronic-Only Documents Committee.

http://www.law.yale.edu/outside/scr/library/fugdocs/index.asp

Electronic Documents Working Group: A GPO – Depository Community Project

http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/tools/ewgroup/index.html

lostdocs@gpo.gov:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/tools/lostdocs.html


[ Back to the Table of Contents ]

Denise Thompson Selected As Information Technology (IT) Project Manager

Denise Thompson has been selected as an Information Technology (IT) Project Manger, a newly created position in the Information Dissemination (Superintendent of Documents) Office of Program Development. Her major responsibilities will be leading and participating in the integration of new technology programs and projects in support of Information Dissemination’s mission and initiatives.

Ms. Thompson began her career with GPO in 1973, working nights while completing her education requirements full time during the day. Ms. Thompson has since held a variety of staff and management positions involving the Superintendent of Documents Sales Service. In her most recent position as Chief of the Order Division, she managed the operation of all facets of the Division. This included the formulation of policies, procedures, techniques and systems to process customer orders. In her previous position as the Manager of the Program and Development Branch, Ms. Thompson coordinated and conducted Documents-wide planning and automated systems development.

Ms. Thompson has a B.S. from the District of Columbia Teachers College. She lives in Upper Marlboro, Maryland along with her husband, a printer with GPO, and her son and daughter.


[ Back to the Table of Contents ]

[The following were handouts presented at the Spring Council Meeting in St. Louis, MO.]

 

Depository Library Council Meeting Update, April 2004

Authentication/Public Key Infrastructure (PKI)

GPO has finalized the management control documents establishing the policies and practices for GPO’s PKI. The hardware and software required for the PKI operation is on site, and work is underway with the contractor who is assisting staff in the Chief Information Officer’s (CIO’s) organization on the PKI implementation. Once the PKI is fully operational, GPO will be able to begin digitally signing electronic files. The first digitally signed documents will be available on GPO Access in mid-Summer, starting with the Congressional Bills for the 108th Congress. A demonstration showing how a digitally signed file can be used for authentication will be presented during the GPO Access Open Forum on Wednesday, April 21, from 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Collection of Last Resort

  • GPO has developed a draft plan for a Collection of Last Resort that will proactively acquire, preserve, provide online access to, and make available copies of U.S. Government publications in all formats. The Collection includes preservation and access copies of digital objects and tangible publications. The draft plan is located at:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/clr.pdf

Comments on the draft plan can be submitted by e-mail to:

jrussell@gpo.gov

It will be discussed on Sunday, April 18, at the 7:00 - 9:00 p.m. plenary session.

  • GPO is about to accept nearly 12,000 volumes of the U.S. Congressional Serial Set from the Brooklyn (N.Y.) Public Library (BPL) for GPO’s developing Collection of Last Resort. BPL, which was designated a depository in 1908, has agreed to return this important resource to GPO, where it will become one of the cornerstones of the Collection of Last Resort. The Serial Set volumes will ultimately be placed in GPO’s dark archive, where they will be preserved as a backup for depository collections around the country. Libraries interested in transferring material distributed via the Federal Depository Library Program should contact Robin Haun-Mohamed, Program Development Specialist, at:rhaun-mohamed@gpo.gov

    Decision Framework for Federal Document Repositories

    GPO has observed with great interest the movement toward shared repositories, or shared housing agreements, that allow two or more libraries to eliminate some of the redundancy between or among their collections. These initiatives are still in the early stages, but they are very important since they could help us address preservation of the legacy government documents collections in Federal depository libraries by moving toward a smaller number of comprehensive sets of tangible publications that can be more readily preserved.

    GPO contracted with Center for Research Libraries (CRL) for the development of a Decision Framework for Federal Document Repositories that can be used to evaluate the level of assurance provided by print repositories based on their physical characteristics, resources, governance and other factors. While the framework is not yet complete, it is sufficient to permit us to begin active discussion about the essential characteristics of future repositories. The discussion draft is available at:

    http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/decisionmatrix.pdf

    Comments on the draft can be submitted by e-mail to:

    jrussell@gpo.gov

    It will be discussed on Sunday, April 18, at the 7:00 - 9:00 p.m. plenary session.

    Digitization plan

    GPO is working with the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and others in the library community on a national digitization plan, with a goal to digitize a complete legacy collection of tangible U.S. Government publications to ensure permanent public access. The intent is to make sure that the entire legacy collection is digitized for preservation purposes while providing access copies to be derived from the digitized preservation copies. Recent actions include:

    • GPO is conducting a survey of the depository community to develop a list of priority titles or series that should be among the early items to be digitized. There is a Web page with a list of the titles and series that have been identified to date. It can be found at:

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/legacy/priorities

    Libraries wishing to add to the list will have until May 8 to do so. Following the analysis of the recommendations, GPO will ask the community to rank suggested titles and series for digitization. The ranking period that will begin by mid-May and last for two weeks. The results will be disseminated to the library community before the summer library association meetings. The identification of priority titles for digitization will be discussed on Monday, April 19, at the 8:30 - 10:00 a.m. plenary session.

    • A meeting of experts on digitization and digital preservation was held at GPO in March. The meeting brought together practicing experts in the field of digital format conversion, as well as representatives of funding and other coordinating organizations, to discuss the current standards and specifications for the creation of digital objects for preservation and to put forward a proposed set of minimum requirements for digitizing documents for the legacy collection digitization project. The full report of this meeting may be found at:

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/about/reports/preservation.html

    Comments on the proposed specifications can be submitted from the webpage or by e-mail to:

    jrussell@gpo.gov

    It will be discussed on Monday, April 19, during the 8:30 - 10:00 a.m. plenary session.

    Depository Services Consultants

    GPO is working with the depository community to establish a team of 12 depository services consultants. The initial consultants will be housed at regional depositories that have agreed to sponsor them. Each consultant will visit libraries in their territory and participate in local and regional events. The interactions will provide training opportunities to partner libraries and additional opportunities for dialog. While the consultants will be GPO employees, they will be located in the community to work more closely with their assigned libraries. The intent is to share best practices and provide additional educational opportunities in order to strengthen depository service to the public.

    Proposals to host depository services consultants can be sent to:

    kotoole@gpo.gov

    LOCKSS

    GPO is working with Stanford University and Federal depository library pilot partners to explore the applicability of the Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe (LOCKSS) technology (www.lockss.org) for the FDLP. This effort is divided into two phases:

    • For phase I, GPO is preparing to install a LOCKSS cache that will receive test content from Sanford and participate in peer-to-peer auditing with other participating libraries and publishers.
    • For phase II, GPO has endorsed Stanford's National Science Foundation grant proposal, which tasks GPO with collecting e-journal content from agency Web sites, adding metadata and digital signatures, and disseminating that content to Federal depository library pilot partners through a LOCKSS server.

    WAIS Replacement

    GPO continues to work on procuring a new platform to replace the WAIS search and retrieval software for GPO Access databases. Several interim solutions are currently being evaluated with the CIO and his staff with a target to make a recommendation to the Public Printer by April 30, 2004. Implementation of an interim solution will enable GPO to take existing WAIS data off legacy systems quickly and to complete the effort to establish a geographically separate mirror site. It will also enable the conversion of legacy databases to XML coded files while GPO continues to evaluate alternatives for a new platform that will take full advantage of XML encoded documents and plans to migrate all databases on GPO Access first to the interim platform and then to a new platform. This approach will help ensure continuity and ease of use throughout the site and the XML coding will support greater functionality and inter-linking of data.

    OMB/GPO Agreement

    In June 2003, GPO and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) announced a compact that will allow Federal agencies to select their own commercial printers using standard contracts issued by GPO. Under this agreement, the Superintendent of Documents receives an electronic copy and two printed copies of every publication directly from the printer. This contract provision should help eliminate fugitive documents and bring many more titles into the Federal Depository Library Program as the OMB Compact expands to other Federal agencies.

    This agreement is currently being tested through a pilot project with the Department of Labor. Since the inception of the compact, there have been 109 offers made through the compact. 28 publications were selected from among the print orders submitted for cataloging and inclusion in the FDLP. PDF files are available for all of these titles. In addition, all of the files are being optimized for use in print-on-demand (POD). Those not selected were not within the scope of the FDLP.

    Science.gov

    Science.gov (www.science.gov) is an interagency portal that makes available selected authoritative scientific Web sites and databases of technical reports, journal articles, conference proceedings, and other published materials from science agencies throughout the Federal Government. GPO is currently working with the other Federal agencies in the Science.gov Alliance to enhance precision searching for Science.gov users and to improve public access to the Federal scientific information from each participating agency. Science.gov 2.0, scheduled to go live in May 2004, will implement enhanced searching capabilities, including fielded searches and improved search ranking. GPO will make the Federal Register and Code of Federal Regulation on GPO Access available via the Science.gov portal.

    Sales Program

    • A meeting of experts was convened in mid-March to discuss the future of the GPO Sales Program. The objective was to get advice and feedback on how to build a sustainable economic model for the GPO Sales Program that will generate $30 to $50 million in additional revenue for GPO annually. The model must be one that is acceptable to publishing agencies, complements free public access to government information through the FDLP, and avoids inappropriate competition with commercial publishing. A report on the meeting is available online at:

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/about/reports/econmodel.html

    Comments on the report can be submitted from the webpage or by e-mail to:

    jrussell@gpo.gov

    Discussion of this topic will be on Sunday, April 18, at the 3:30-5:00 p.m. plenary session.

    • GPO continues to identify publications that can take advantage of print-on-demand (POD) technology. The congressional materials formerly offered for sale by the Congressional Sales Office are now available exclusively via POD. In addition to GPO’s own production facilities, contracts with four private vendors that can produce POD are being utilized to make more titles available. A content management system is being developed to handle the press-optimized PDF files and a draft specification for these files has been developed, so that Federal agencies can supply GPO with press-optimized PDF for POD purposes. Currently, more than 27 percent of the publication titles in the Sales Program have been set up for POD and there is an effort underway for rapid expansion of POD offerings.
    • GPO is continuing work to implement the ONIX metadata standard and other publishing industry standards for its Sales Program. Adopting these standards will allow GPO to provide information to commercial publishing sales channels in an industry-recognized format that can be readily used to facilitate discovery and awareness of GPO’s sales items, thus giving the Sales Program much greater visibility worldwide.

    Economic Development Pilot Project

    GPO is working with the University of Arkansas, Pine Bluff (UAPB) to test the feasibility of an Economic Development Program (EDP) for Federal depository libraries located in economically depressed areas. This pilot project, located in UAPB’s Watson Library, seeks to create community awareness of existing Federal, state and county resources available for small business development in the local area. GPO has enhanced the depository’s collections by providing a dedicated computer workstation and a customized Web page template with links to area economic development agencies, small business concerns and minority business services and opportunities. GPO has also provided a collection of tangible resources to supplement the electronic resources. The EDP pilot also features training on Federal information products by staff from STAT-USA and the Census Bureau. Project measurements will include a user satisfaction survey and follow-up surveys on referrals. The goal of this pilot is to help better understand the relationship between the business community and a depository library with an active business collection.

    Statistics

    • Through February of FY 2004, 60 percent of the new titles brought into the FDLP have been electronic. In November, more that 71 percent of the new titles were electronic.
    • The number of retrievals from GPO Access in 2004 has averaged over 1 million retrievals a day. This equates to approximately 27 million standard typeset pages per day.

    What’s New on GPO Access

    • The Fiscal Year 2005 Federal Budget Publications are now available online at:

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy05/index.html

    • The Economic Report of the President, 2004 is now available on GPO Access at
    • New tool to help link to documents on GPO Access is now available at

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/help/linking.html

    • A new Federal Web site, Interagency Council on Homelessness is now hosted on GPO Access. It can be found at:
    • The Final House Calendar, 108th Congress, First Session, is now available on GPO Access at:

    http://www.gpoaccess.gov/calendars/house/search.html

    Upcoming Outreach

    June 5-10

    Special Libraries Association

    Nashville, TN

    June 24-30

    ALA Annual

    Orlando, FL

    July 2-7

    National Education Association

    Washington, DC

    July 11-13

    American Association of Law Libraries

    Boston, MA


    [ Back to the Table of Contents ]

    Summary of Meeting on the Future of the
    GPO Sales Program

    U.S. Government Printing Office
    Washington, D.C.
    March 16, 2004

    Comments can be submitted by e-mail to jrussell@gpo.gov, or online at

    www.gpoaccess.gov/about/reports/econmodel.html.

    Comments must be received by Friday, May 7, 2004.

    On Tuesday, March 16, 2004, Judith C. Russell, Managing Director for Information Dissemination and Superintendent of Documents, United States Government Printing Office (GPO) convened a meeting of experts to discuss the future of the GPO Sales Program. The basic objective of this meeting was to get advice and feedback on how to build a sustainable economic model for the GPO Sales Program that will generate $30 to $50 million in additional revenue for GPO annually. The model must be one that is acceptable to publishing agencies, complements free public access to government information through the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP), and avoids inappropriate competition with commercial publishing.

    A select group of experts representing Federal agencies, the Federal Depository Library community, and the information/ publishing industry participated in a daylong discussion of this issue. The participants were as follows:

    AGENCY REPRESENTATIVES:

    • Jane Griffith, National Library of Medicine

    • John Kavaliunas, Census Bureau

    • Kurt Molholm, Defense Technical Information Center

    • Hedy Rossmeissl, U.S. Geological Survey

    • Forrest Williams, STAT-USA

    LIBRARY REPRESENTATIVES:

    • Richard Akeroyd, New Mexico State Library

    • Dan Barkley, Chair, Depository Library Council

    • Bill Gordon, Former Executive Director, American Library Association

    • Steve Hinckley, University of South Carolina Law School

    INFORMATION /PUBLISHING REPRESENTATIVES:

    • Chris Burns, Independent Consultant

    • Daniel Duncan, Independent Consultant

    • David LeDuc, Software and Information Industry Association

    OBSERVERS:

    • Prudence Adler, Association of Research Libraries

    • Mary Alice Baish, American Association of Law Libraries

    • Lynne Bradley, American Library Association

    • Glenn King, Federal Publishers Committee

    • Susan Tarr, Federal Library Information Center Committee

    GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:

    • Bruce James, Public Printer

    • Judy Russell, Superintendent of Documents

    • Bob Willard, Strategic Marketing Officer

    The opening remarks by Public Printer Bruce James and Superintendent of Documents Judy Russell set the stage for the meeting. Mr. James explained that the GPO has five business areas:

    • In-house printing, primarily for the Congress, but also including the Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, and some other Executive Branch publications

    • Printing purchased from private sector printers on behalf of Federal agencies

    • Consulting services to assist agencies to design publications and write specifications necessary to produce them

    • The Federal Depository Library Program

    • The GPO Sales Program

    The FDLP and the Sales Program are both administered by the Superintendent of Documents and historically each program has taken advantage of the opportunity to procure copies of publications for distribution by "riding" agency print orders that come in through GPO’s Customer Service organization.

    The purpose of this meeting was to focus on the GPO Sales Program, which has been losing money steadily over the past few years, mainly due to the fact that many of the publications and subscriptions sold through the program are now available for free online via GPO Access and from other Federal agency web sites. Due to the declining sales, GPO is following the lead of many private sector companies and has begun to move to a print on demand model for most of the titles that it distributes in printed form. This will allow GPO to provide the most efficient and economic service to agency publishers and to the public, while reducing the risk of unsold inventory and out-of-print titles.

    Mr. James noted that the current model for distribution of digital information on the Internet was not anticipated. In the print environment, the Federal Depository Library Program and the Sales Program were complementary. GPO sent copies of printed documents to depository libraries, so that their patrons could come in and look at the documents, but if someone wanted a personal copy of a document or a library required additional copies, they could purchase them from the Superintendent of Documents.

    Mr. James made it clear the GPO is not going to sell the Congressional Record or Federal Register online. GPO is not going to sell the information that is already online through GPO Access. He said, "Forget it; it is just not going to happen." He also said that GPO will continue to put more information online at no fee and will continue to make it widely available for individuals to access through their own computers via the Internet.

    Nevertheless, he expressed the belief that there is an opportunity that GPO has never really addressed for revenue coming out of government information that is distributed via the Internet. For example, when a user pulls information from the Internet through a query, as currently occurs with GPO Access, the information is available at no fee, but if GPO pushes that information to the user via a subscription of some kind, the agency might charge for that service. Because such a service would be designed to accomplish business purposes, individuals and businesses might well be willing to pay for the convenience.

    He also spoke about the opportunity to partner with the private sector and using government information in conjunction with private sector information to create new revenue streams that have not previously existed. For example, many information companies supply data to their customers on a subscription basis, with fees of $10,000 a year or more. They may have only a few dozen or a few hundred customers for that product. Using the GPO web portal, GPO might be able to develop a means to sell that information by the drink or on demand, where an individual or a small business could come in and buy just what they need, just this one time. That would create a new revenue stream for the private sector company, and it would be a new revenue stream for GPO, as well.

    Mr. James urged the group to consider these examples and think outside of the box in that fashion. He also explained that GPO has informed potential partners that they will have to supply access to such joint products and services, even when they combine private sector content with government information, at no fee to the depository libraries, so the public can come in and access it. He noted: "We have yet to have anyone say that is a stupid idea; we won't do it." In general, these companies understand that GPO cannot go forward in a partnership with them unless there is some accommodation that takes into account access for depository libraries.

    Judy Russell then laid out the main objectives for the meeting. She noted that this is not a decision making group. GPO invited the participants and observers in order to benefit from their combined experience and obtain advice about how to proceed. The intent is to generate a document summarizing the meeting, which GPO would then share broadly with the all of the communities that have an interest to get some feedback before it goes forward. In doing this, GPO is making the assumption that there is both a genuine need and a real opportunity for a healthy Sales Program that recognizes the interests of the library community and those of the information industry and can assist publishing agencies in the proactive dissemination of their information to the public.

    There is a long tradition of free public access of government information products through the FDLP. Its roots are in a law passed in 1813 requiring the deposit of federal government information throughout the country for public access. The FDLP has been managed by the GPO for over 100 years and has served the country very well.

    There is also a long tradition for the sale of reproducibles (plates, negatives, etc.) to companies and organizations that wished to reprint government publications, and of finished products (publications, maps, posters, etc.) to the business community, law firms, libraries and the general public.

    As noted earlier, for many years the Sales Program and the FDLP co-existed and were complementary. Then in 1994 GPO Access was launched to provide online access to the Congressional Record, Federal Register, and other Federal government information. GPO Access began by offering no-fee service to federal depository libraries and paid subscriptions to others. However, 18 months later the paid subscriptions were dropped and GPO began to provide no-fee public access, not just to depository libraries, but also to the general public.

    GPO Access has been wildly successful. Currently, there are over 1 million files downloaded per day – the equivalent of 27 million typeset pages. However, the results of that action – and the simultaneous changes in agency dissemination from paper publications to posting on websites – have been devastating for the GPO Sales Program. Revenues have dropped from over $80 million to $30 million in 10 years. At one time GPO sold over 35,000 paid subscription to the Federal Register; now GPO sells less than 2,700 copies, while customers download in excess of 4 million free Federal Register documents per month. GPO Access has improved public access, but destabilized the Sales Program, which, in the past, was an important part of the overall revenue and income for GPO, making significant contributions to GPO's overhead and its economic well being.

    As the Public Printer said, this change was not anticipated. GPO did not develop a new model for the Sales Program in response to the vast amounts of information offered for no-fee public access on GPO Access and the World Wide Web. Over the past decade, the Sales Program declined rapidly, to the point where it was losing over $1 million a month, and draining the capital the GPO needs to invest in its future.

    GPO has taken a number of steps in the past year to reduce the losses and re-establish a sustainable Sales Program. However, what is needed is a new economic model that will generate additional revenue for GPO. The model must be acceptable to publishing agencies, complement free public access to government information through the FDLP, and avoid competing inappropriately with commercial publishing. This is a difficult task that requires both innovative ideas and careful planning.

    The Sales Program is suffering from a combination of factors. One is that agencies are ceasing to print many publications and instead offering information on their websites. Moreover, while there certainly are some in the public who still want to purchase print publications, increasingly, people are satisfied with electronic access or local printing of downloaded files. So the market for the resale of government publications has changed, and GPO has to look at different kinds of products and different ways to take those products to the marketplace.

    The participants were then given a chance to introduce themselves and give a brief summary of their thoughts on this issue. Here is a summary of the main thoughts and comments that came out of these introductory discussions:

    • Representatives from the library community affirmed the belief that the public has a right to no-fee access to all government information.

    • GPO needs to help smaller agencies meet their e-government mandates.

    • Marketing Efforts:

    • Aggressive exploration and identification of regular and niche markets can result in a very successful business model.
    • There may be an opportunity for GPO to provide publishing, publication, and to distribution services to state governments in return for a fee, and possibly sell these publications in the sales program.
    • There may be an opportunity for GPO to share revenue from the sale of government information with the publishing agencies.

    • Consideration needs to be given to the assumption that there is a need and space for the GPO Sales Program.

    • There may not be enough unique products or revenue opportunities in the market that will generate the level of revenue expected.

    • New business opportunities exist in taking the lead on issues like accessibility, security, and authentication—and then in turn selling these services to agencies [This comment relates to other business opportunities for GPO to sell services to Federal agencies, but not to the Sales Program].

    • GPO could offer services in unique identifiers, rights management, authenticated format, version control, forward referencing to updates, metadata, etc.
    • Publishing agencies might pay to get their publications included in GPO’s Catalog of Government Publications.
    • GPO could offer services to help publishing agencies reformat their publications to conform to print on demand specifications and standards.

    • GPO could target more international markets:

    • International customers could be expected to pay more for information that is free to domestic customers.

    • The aggregation and unification of information otherwise available for free is another possible new business opportunity.

    • With electronic information services, people buy the service, not the information. Similar information from a number of different sources could be combined and sold for a fee. This model is currently being used at STATUSA.

    • GPO should do cost benefit analyses and projected ROI reports for any new economic model it considers.

    • GPO could "push" information to customers for a fee.

    • GPO could partner with private industry to provide value-added services, such as booksellers, software companies, etc.

    • GPO should encourage cooperation between the public and private sector, not competition between the two.

    • GPO is encouraged to identify niche markets that do not interfere with the current nofee access online dissemination model or fee-based private sector services.

    After these discussions, four main points were deemed suitable for further discussion and debate for the remainder of the meeting. These are listed and discussed in more detail below:

    1. Is there a need and space for the GPO Sales Program?

    2. Is there a market opportunity for repackaging of government information otherwise available free?

    3. Should the new economic model involve both cost and revenue sharing with the publishing agency?

    4. Should the new economic model allow for cost and revenue sharing with:

    a. Non-Federal partners; or

    b. Non-Federal content?

    Issue #1: Is there a need and space for the GPO Sales Program?

    Most of the group agreed that there is a need and space for the GPO Sales Program. However, the space is a small one, in that it must fit in between the no-fee access provided from GPO Access and the fee-based services that are currently offered in the private sector. In essence, GPO cannot compromise its no-fee access, but also must not offer products that compete directly with the private sector.

    One attendee did not see a need and space for the Sales Program on the scale that the Public Printer sought, i.e., $30 to $50 million in additional revenue annually. The contention was that the Sales Program could not generate that volume of revenue unless GPO can find something that people want to buy and that the most lucrative opportunities were likely to have already been identified and addressed by private sector companies.

    A parallel was pointed out between GPO and non-profit organizations. In the nonprofit world, the associations typically have a narrow range of people whom they are serving with products that fit between no-fee public access and offerings from commercial publishers. The suggestion was made that GPO adopt a similar model — targeting niche markets, individuals, and small businesses.

    The following question was also raised: What would the effects be if GPO did not have a Sales Program? Most attendees seemed to agree that there is an inherent benefit to the public for GPO to have a Sales Program. While there would be other channels for the public to access Federal government information without the Sales Program (such as GPO Access, Federal agency web sites and the FDLP), public services would not be quite as robust as they were when there was a Sales Program. Furthermore, as noted above, at one time the Sales Program was an important part of the overall revenue and income for GPO, making significant contributions to GPO's overhead and its economic well being. It is to restore that balance that GPO is now seeking a new economic model for the Sales Program.

    Issue #2: Is there a market opportunity for repackaging of government information otherwise available at no cost?

    The second main issue presented was the possibility of GPO adopting a model in which it would still offer the same information for free through GPO Access and the depository program, but would also charge for that information repackaged in alternative ways. For example, there are other agencies, such as STAT-USA, that bring together and aggregate information from a number of different agency Web sites that otherwise are available for no fee. In essence, what the customer is paying for in this instance is the service of bringing the information together and displaying it in useful ways, not the information itself. It was noted, however, that there are many agencies and cross-agency collaborations that are offering similar services for no fee as well.

    Several participants pointed out that repackaging, changing the nature of the content, or the context in which that content is presented, could raise a red flag in the information industry since many companies in the industry perform exactly this function. Others noted that there is some room in there between a public need that won't necessarily be served by what the government can provide at no fee and what the information industry sees as a viable commercial product.

    Some participants offered the suggestion that GPO provide services whereby the customer can repackage content on their own. In this model, customers would have the opportunity to create archived or customized sites on a GPO server where they can retain and retrieve information. Another suggestion was to offer print-on-demand for publications that may not otherwise be available in print, including large documents retrieved from searches on GPO Access.

    The idea was presented that GPO could offer a service through which a customer could build a profile that specifies a subset of a publication (such as the Federal Register) or group of publications. GPO would send applicable content to the customer each time such content was added to the GPO Access databases. The opinion of industry participants was that GPO must be cautious in offering many new services to assure that they do not compete with private sector firms.

    Participants discussed the possibility of applying different pricing models for international customers. There may be some needs of the international marketplace that could be exploited without charging the domestic services. Some participants felt that international customers should not be charged for information they acquire from GPO. Others felt that international customers should receive nothing for free from GPO at all.

    However, there was some concern about both of these ideas from other participants. A grey area around this issue is that it is sometimes difficult to determine who is an international customer. Examples like Daimler Chrysler were cited as were AOL and other Internet service providers whose accounts could originate anywhere in the world.

    Issue #3: Should the new economic model involve both cost and revenue sharing with the publishing agency?

    The third issue presented was that of a possibility of cost and revenue sharing with publishing agencies. In the current model, GPO bears the cost (and therefore the risk) of riding print orders for the Sales Program, and in turn is the sole recipient of the revenue. The question was raised whether or not the sharing of both costs and revenues with the publishing agencies is a good model.

    The immediate reaction of the some of the agency participants was that many agencies do not have the authority or the ability to accept funds from GPO or anyone else. However, there are some models that could be adopted to overcome this problem. The idea was suggested that a model be developed where GPO could set up deposit accounts or "checking accounts" of sorts and agencies could use the funds in them to pay for printing or other publishing services they would normally purchase from GPO.

    Reactions to this model were that the amount of revenue coming in may not be enough incentive for agencies to want to do this. Agencies may in fact be sharing in GPO’s debt rather than making money. Suggestions were made that perhaps offering hosting services to agencies is a better model. The suggestion was made that GPO can use its size and unique position to leverage itself as a Web hosting provider for the Federal Government. [Again, this is comment relates to other business opportunities for GPO to sell services to Federal agencies, but not to the Sales Program.]

    Issue #4: Does the new economic model allow for cost and revenue sharing with:

    a. Non-Federal partners; or

    b. Non-Federal content?

    Non-Federal Partners

    In response to Bruce James’ expressed desire for GPO to partner with non-federal entities and private sector firms in order to generate revenue for the Sales Program, the participants were asked whether this it a reasonable approach for GPO to pursue.

    Most participants seemed to believe that it would be much easier for GPO to consider non-federal partners than seeking non-federal content. Industry would be concerned if GPO were seen as giving favoritism to one company over another. GPO must be sure to follow the proper procurement and contracting processes in order to be sure this does not happen.

    Several suggestions were made as to what kinds of partnerships could be formed. The first was to partner with booksellers such as Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble in order to make GPO and agency publications more visible to the general public. Another was to provide authentication and content delivery services for private industry firms. Once again, the idea was to leverage on those competencies GPO has formed in order to create mutually beneficial partnerships.

    Non-Federal Content

    Much of the discussions about GPO providing non-federal content as a new revenue stream were met with hesitation on the part of the participants. The contention was made that this could be potentially dangerous for GPO to try for a number of reasons, the most important of which being the issue of mixing federal and non-federal content. The end consumer could have difficulty distinguishing what information is official, public domain Federal information or what is not, even with authentication assurances.

    One area in which the participants seemed to believe there might be some space for nonfederal content is that of State government information. Some participants stated that if it were clearly denoted as to what kind of information is being presented at any given time, there would be no room for anyone to complain.

    Wrap-up Discussion

    A great deal of valuable information was obtained in this daylong meeting. While the group was not able to identify a concrete economic model for the Sales Program, a great deal of expert advice was offered that can be used as a baseline for developing the model. The comment was made that GPO was able to do more research in one day then could have been done over the course of several weeks. The suggestion was made that follow- up conversations be scheduled on this topic in the near future, to which GPO would bring specific ideas and examples of its planned course of action.

    It is also important to note that the ideas presented during the meeting were not only focused on the GPO sales program, but also identified other future revenue opportunities for GPO. These comments have been shared with the GPO New Business Development organization for review.

    Next Steps

    GPO will disseminate this report and seek comments from interested parties.


    [ Back to the Table of Contents ]

    Summary of the Regional Meeting
    October 2003 – Arlington, VA

    SWOT: Strengths, Weaknesses,
    Opportunities and Threats

    Prepared by The Regional Planning Committee
    for the Fall 2003 Regional Meeting

     

    In October, 2003, Regional librarians, their representatives, and representatives from states currently without a Regional depository library met in Washington, DC. The Regional Planning Committee, Vicki Barber of the USGPO, Dan Barkley (University of New Mexico), John Phillips (Oklahoma State University), Susan Field (University of Georgia), Sandee McAninch (University of Kentucky), and Bill Sudduth (University of South Carolina), developed a program that focused on the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) in the Regional library program.

    In the course of the 2.5 days of meetings, the participants worked through a series of exercises that reviewed the various components of services and duties performed by Regional librarians and their libraries. While there are a myriad of issues facing Regional libraries, the participants concluded that the following issues, highlighted and addressed below, will be pivotal in strengthening Regional depository libraries and the services they provide to their constituencies. The list and narrative developed will assist in redefining Regional libraries with respect to partnerships with GPO and their role in the 21st century.

    Weaknesses Into Strengths

    Monetary Support

    The Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) has been the cornerstone of no-fee access of Federal Government information to the American public since 1813. However, the burden to provide no-fee access to government information has, over the years, fallen on the hosting institutions and less on the Federal Government to a point where constructive measures must be taken to relieve this burden either through the appropriations process or with grants. In these times of shrinking library budgets along with more government information being made available in electronic products and formats, Regional libraries will need to foster economic relationships with the public and private sectors that will provide funding necessary to continue the investment already made. These relationships are crucial to assist the hosting institution’s ability to defray costs it absorbs through the variety of services provided (e.g., space, staff, maintenance, purchasing of ancillary print and electronic bibliographic tools). It is also imperative that GPO, in partnership with Regional libraries, work to provide financial assistance; either from Congressional appropriations or other means realized by GPO through cost savings measures that might be implemented.

    Retrospective Cataloging

    The lack of retrospective cataloging impedes access to historical information to the American public. It also inhibits access to a significant part of a Regional collection. It is imperative that Regionals, Selectives and GPO collaborate in joint cataloging ventures that make the information in these historical and important collections easily accessible. GPO, in partnership with Regional libraries, should provide access, support and expansion to these historical and important collections. Given the number of cataloging records available from various retro-conversion cataloging projects that have been conducted by Regional and selective libraries, GPO must engage and promote partnerships with Regional and selective libraries that have downloaded records into public bibliographic databases such as OCLC.

    GPO’s expertise in cataloging and the provision of complete cataloging records are well established; creating a national catalog of historic government documents should be a primary goal of the GPO/FDLP within the next five years. The product produced must be widely and freely available in national bibliographic databases, adhere to current and future cataloging standards. Emphasis should be placed on converting all pre-1976 collections currently available in Regional libraries. Additionally, methods to enhance the search capability of historic government information should be explored, and other projects that highlight and enhance the pre-1976 collections should be created.

    Retrospective cataloging of the pre-1976 collections is integral to the success of the FDLP. Regionals and GPO should form a partnership to catalog these historical collections. Digitizing the Monthly Catalog and creating a Union List for a national collection will improve public access to the information contained in these historical documents. A five-year goal is a reasonable approach; planning should begin immediately with the appropriate personnel so as to reach this goal.

    Training

    The GPO must cooperate with Federal agencies, experts in the field, and the depository community in providing training utilizing the latest technologies in order to educate all government information users of the products and services available to them via the FDLP. Rapid changes in electronic information technology have increased the need for training so as to effectively and efficiently access government information.

    There is a growing body of literature as well as tangible evidence that librarians new to the profession, in particular, government information librarians, are in need of more specialized training. As in other areas of librarianship, Regionals are faced with the "graying" of the profession and many librarians are well within retirement range. Many of these librarians have dedicated their professional lives to providing public access to government information and have done so in libraries that have provided separate space from other housed collections. This landscape is changing as libraries are combining their public service units and fewer library school graduates are specializing in government information. The results are that there is a shortage of well-trained and knowledgeable government information librarians to replace those who have recently retired. This trend has and will continue to have a detrimental impact on the services provided to the American public. This trend will not subside.

    GPO, in its capacity as the aggregator and disseminator of government information, along with professional associations such as the Government Documents Round Table of the American Library Association (GODORT), develop and implement adequate training programs that will address the aforementioned issue. There is a timely and useful amount of training materials currently available from GODORT and other library associations and organizations. GPO should aggressively engage in the collection and re-dissemination of these materials to provide information that addresses the needs, questions, and the "how-to's" of documents librarianship.

    The training component should emphasize the continued importance of the Regional and the FDLP. GPO must take the lead and, with the support of the Regionals, investigate current and future training tools and opportunities that will provide for government information literacy. Resource sharing is becoming the norm in the field and there is little reason why GPO and the Regionals should not fully invest themselves in current technologies and knowledge that will enhance the FDLP while continuing to serve the American public.

    Better Service to Selectives

    It is increasingly evident that selectives are beginning to feel the neglect of Regionals who are overwhelmed at their respective institutions. Historically, a fundamental role of a Regional was to provide advice, service, and leadership to the selective depository libraries in their state or geographic area. With the advent of electronic dissemination, shrinking staffs, loss of expertise through retirements, and a host of other situations, Regional service to its selectives varies from state to state, institution to institution.

    In order to provide better service to selective libraries that choose to remain in the FDLP, Regionals, with the assistance of GPO, must work in tandem to provide the service that was once fundamental to a Regional. At the very minimum, Regionals must take a more pro-active role in leadership by producing a state plan in consultation with selectives, engaging in more frequent visits to the selectives, developing better communication with each selective, and providing regular and timely training. These are all fundamental services that Regionals must provide. In order to do so, Regionals must have the full support of their administration along with GPO's assistance.

    GPO must assist in providing training through a consultants program as well as surveying the needs of selectives in today's electronic environment. Most importantly, the GPO must revise the disposal and administrative requirements that Regionals and selectives must adhere to. This administrative change, implemented as soon as possible, will create an environment whereby selectives will be able to perform better collection development (e.g., item selection) activities. In turn, these much needed and requested administrative changes will reduce the burdens of selectives to discard unwanted/or unneeded materials, free Regionals to devote more time to other issues, such as training, and overall provide GPO with some financial relief due to less printing of ephemeral materials.

    Further, GPO should capitalize on the best practices of education by providing videoconferencing for GPO-sponsored meetings (e.g., DLC), developing and enhancing Web-based tutorials as well as other training tools. Additionally, GPO might do well to examine the current state-based Regional configuration to determine if a geographical configuration would be a better alternative.

    However, the most important cornerstone, naturally, is the Regional librarian. That librarian must make a commitment to provide the best service possible to the selectives served. Whether it's creating a listserv to enhance communication, visiting selectives as much as possible, hosting training and meeting sessions, or ensuring that their administration fully understands the role and mission of the Regional library and librarian, the Regional librarian must assume responsibility for leadership in that Regional’s area. It is an understatement in acknowledging that every Regional librarian has a full plate, but it also equally and vitally important that the Regional librarian make the time in order to provide service to the selective depositories. Regional librarians must fully avail themselves of every opportunity to provide the services selectives need in this rapidly changing environment.

    GPO must clearly articulate GPO expectations, including those outlined in 44 USC 1911-1912. GPO has to begin to enforce the statutory guidelines, develop enforcement measures and, in some cases, step in and assist a Regional whose performance has not been acceptable to the selectives served. In some measure, selectives are withdrawing from the FDLP today because of poor Regional service. It's time that GPO interceded where appropriate, assisting the Regionals in meeting their obligations, and where necessary, looking for other institutions to host the Regional.

    Space Constraints

    Regardless of the hosting institution, every library today faces space constraints. Regional and selective depository libraries are all bursting at the seams because of the finite space a walled library presents. Library directors are also pressed to provide more space for other aspects of their collections and services that libraries now provide to their constituents. Directors are examining means by which they can curtail or even eliminate paper collections. The Regionals are being scrutinized.

    Regionals look forward to more information becoming available in electronic formats because physical space will become less of a concern. The corollary to this, however, will be the need for electronic storage that will proportionally increase. As GPO and other FDLP libraries explore digital concepts of information storage, retrieval and dissemination, Regionals will need to examine their practices and adjust accordingly.

    Obviously, Regionals will continue to impress upon their respective administrations the need for adequate space, archiving, and preservation of their "Legacy" collections. Further, Regionals should actively pursue partnership opportunities that would allow the migration of parts of their collections to digital formats. This would allow the Regionals to surrender their paper copies to GPO for their National Collection.

    New concepts include the opportunity to create shared Regionals based on either the current state model or on a newly defined geographic model. Some Regionals may avail themselves of storage opportunities that may exist or engage in selective housing agreements with department or branch libraries or libraries within a defined geographic area.

    Regardless, Regionals will continue to require space, whether physical or virtual, and GPO must help Regionals in acquiring that space. GPO is, obviously, limited in providing physical space to a Regional; however, it can assist that Regional when the hosting library administration requests that Regional surrender part or all of its paper collection. GPO should also provide computer storage, and equipment, as it moves to a more electronic environment. In order for Regionals to maintain their leadership positions within the FDLP, new partnerships and other creative solutions will need to be sought and GPO must take the lead and cooperate as these opportunities become available. GPO, in consultation with Regional libraries, should begin to develop a plan that will address this issue and make it available to the depository community in a timely manner.

    Regionals Not Equal in Resources and Support

    With the creation of a two-tiered depository program in 1967, the Regional library concept came into realization. Regional libraries were created in order to provide a depository of last resort for each state. Within that general concept, Regionals were to provide assistance to selectives in appropriate areas to include public service and access issues, advice, and assistance in selection and disposal. Nowhere in the law was it stated or suggested that all Regionals be equal in size, collection, expertise, resources, support, or other important characteristics.

    All Regionals do not have the same resources. Currently, no two Regionals enjoy the same access to the financial, physical, personnel and administrative support needed in today's environment. While many Regional libraries have strong support in some or many of these areas, in order to fulfill their current and changing missions, Regionals need more consistency and congruency to maintain and increase their viability. Due to these inherent inconsistencies, the concept of "good vs. not-so good" Regionals continues to be fostered.

    For Regionals to maintain their leadership position, GPO must acknowledge that all Regionals are not equal. While a shared responsibility exists to create more congruency, GPO has a responsibility to engage library administrations in the need for the continued existence of the Regional when that administration pulls their support or other resources from a Regional. As well, GPO must recognize when a Regional is in trouble and may need to surrender its status. Working with that Regional, as well as with the selectives served, GPO must find another hosting institution within that state or geographic area to assume the Regional responsibilities. GPO should not agree to allow a library administration to keep the Regional collection without fulfilling its other duties and obligations. While surrendering a collection must be a last resort, it is GPO's obligation to inform a library administration of the consequences of its decision to withdraw from the FDLP as a Regional participant.

    GPO has recently proposed the creation of a position entitled "field consultant." As proposed, these consultants would assist Regionals in a designated area and provide training, on-site consultations and advice to selective librarians. The consultants would assist the Regionals in fulfilling their duties and responsibilities.

    GPO should put forth efforts to provide training and orientation sessions for new Regional librarians. As heretofore mentioned, the "graying" of the profession will create ample opportunities in the not too distant future for younger professionals to fill the shoes of their predecessors. In this regard, GPO may want to provide assistance and articulate its expectations to the library administration when a vacancy occurs.

    One of the most significant problems is the lack of adherence to 44 USC 1911-1912 by many Regional libraries. Because GPO has never developed any punitive measures in the enforcement of these statutory procedures, some Regional libraries pay nothing more than lip service to the statutes. This is an incredible disservice to the selective libraries served and enhances the "good vs. not-so good" image that exists.

    GPO must enforce the requirements Regionals are required to follow in 44 USC 1911-1912. Further, it is time for GPO to develop and implement enforceable consequences to ensure Regionals fully adhere to the statutory responsibilities as dictated by 44 USC 1911-1912. Although adherence to these rules and guidelines may force some Regionals to abdicate their Regional designation, it may also create new opportunities for other institutions to host a Regional.

    Lack of Preservation of Historic Collections

    Given the acknowledged difference in Regionals including size, space, staffing and other resources available, it should be recognized that each Regional has separate and different means by which it maintains and preserves its historic collections. The library community and the American public would benefit greatly when GPO, in consultation with appropriate library groups familiar with preservation and archiving practices, develops training programs and guides to assist Regionals in the preservation of their collections. GPO must articulate their expectations as to how and what best practices Regionals should engage in to preserve and maintain the historic value and nature of these collections.

    Concurrent to this is GPO's engagement in collecting and developing standards that will result in a national digital historic collection. The Regionals applaud GPO's efforts in this arena and appreciate their efforts. Yet it is important to note that some Regionals, along with their selectives, have began their own digitalization projects and these efforts should not be ignored by GPO. Rather than continue on a separate path, GPO must gather the information from these projects, share them with the depository community, and enlist their advice and support. This is an excellent opportunity for GPO to partner with other libraries in order to provide reasonable alternatives to privately produced products.

    Lack of Support from Library Administrations

    Although not widely discussed outside of Regional circles, we must acknowledge that several Regionals face increasing pressure from their administrations to curtail their operations, scale back their paper collections, or outright discontinue their presence in the FDLP. This is the time to also publicly acknowledge these occurrences and allow these hosting institutions the opportunity to gracefully exit the FDLP. Additionally, this presents GPO and the Regional community with an opportunity to find other hosting institutions.

    However, it is clear that prior to allowing a Regional to leave the FDLP completely or partially, GPO should communicate the need for that Regional’s continued existence to the appropriate administrators (e.g., the Congressional District member, University Presidents and Deans, City Councils, etc.). Simple acquiescence by GPO is inexcusable, and substantial communication from GPO to the appropriate decision-makers at all levels must be fully engaged upon prior to allowing a Regional to surrender its status.

    When it becomes clear that the methods suggested above have failed and a Regional library will be lost, GPO must strictly enforce 44 USC 1911-1912 and be in a position to assume responsibility for that Regional collection, whether it remains in the hosting institution or becomes the direct property of GPO. GPO cannot allow a hosting institution to surrender its status yet retain its collection.

    Service to the collection is an essential function that cannot be provided once a hosting institution decides to curtail its participation in the FDLP. If there is no service, there is no access for those wanting to use the collection. Other issues such as preservation, maintaining the integrity of the collection, and the unavailability of Interlibrary Loan are also lost. Therefore GPO must insist that the collection be relocated so that there is no loss in service to the constituencies served.

    Lack of Marketing

    GPO has done a good job in providing a variety of marketing materials to Regional and selective depository libraries. The provision of signs, decals, bumper stickers, bookmarks have had a positive impact on the users of FDL's. It is now time however, for GPO to develop a nation-wide marketing strategy. A national campaign will realize only positive results as it will reinforce the role of the FDLP; entice non-users to examine a depository library, and bring favorable attention to the agencies and people who assist the public in locating government information in all formats.

    Many Regionals have engaged in marketing on a local or state level. GPO must assume more innovative measures, particularly those using current technology in investigating the many ways Regionals and selectives have marketed themselves and expand on those creative approaches at the national level. Additionally, GPO should work with other professional, government and academic organizations in developing national marketing plans that fall outside the Sales Program. For example, GPO might better capitalize on the use of its Web site by driving people to it in a manner similar to Google and other Web sites. GPO should investigate the best practices of other commercial and private Web resources and develop appropriate marketing strategies that will draw users to their Web site and resources.

    Regionals Based on Geographic Rather than State Boundaries

    Given that several Regional libraries are experiencing difficulties in maintaining their Regional status coupled with several Regionals serving multiple states, it may be time to re-examine the way Regional libraries and their selectives are currently organized. The state-based concept has served its purpose well and was designed in a time where government information was in an ink-on-paper environment. With the advent and widespread use of the Internet and electronic dissemination of government information, the state-base concept may have reached the end of its usefulness, and it is time to examine other means by which Regionals are designated, as well as what and how they best serve their communities and constituents in the digital environment.

    Several Regionals provide multi-state service. These Regionals do the best jobs possible; it is somewhat unreasonable to expect the Regional librarian to visit every library in each state. Further, the unique pressures of adherence to guidelines and laws, and in particular the disposal/weeding lists, are, if not overwhelming, very close to it.

    GPO and the existing Regionals must work in tandem to examine current configurations as well as 44 USC 1911-1912 to determine if there are better means by which Regionals can continue to exist and operate functionally. Some concepts that need to be reviewed include the creation of state cooperatives that provide multiple housing agreements, the creation of shared Regional responsibilities with another large selective in a geographic region, and the creation of Regionals based on wider geographic definitions.

    Threats into Opportunities

    Changing Technology

    As technology continues on its rapid evolution, the opportunity to provide access to a larger population increases. The advent of the personal computer and wide-spread use of the Internet have increased exponentially the amount of information available, as well as the number of people who now have access to that information. While underserved populations still exist, primarily in the rural areas of America, these populations are beginning to have opportunities to access information that once required a site visit to a Federal depository library.

    Regional libraries view these phenomena as a means to increase their visibility as well as to fulfill their mission in providing no-fee access to government information to their constituencies. In this regard, GPO shall provide assistance by developing marketing tools that assist Regionals in their responsibilities to selectives and outlying areas. The development of Web guides and tutorials by GPO and Regionals can be used for distance education purposes. It has been noted in many of the preceding categories, training from GPO and other Federal agencies is always beneficial. Flexibility with GPO technical requirements is needed, as many depository libraries are unable to meet these requirements that are dictated by technological advances. As alluded to earlier, Regionals are not equal; therefore GPO must realize that while the technological guidelines are a useful and needed approach, GPO must also accept economic realities that exist within each unique Regional library.

    Privatization of Information Services

    GPO must continue to remain cognizant of its historical mission--to provide no-fee public access to government information. In partnership with the Regionals, GPO must continue its role in educating Congress and the public on the value of library collections and the important role this partnership plays in the democratic process.

    As is always the case, monetary assistance to Regionals, whether in the form of privately produced bibliographic tools, database access, or other means, would help Regionals fulfill their missions. While Regionals have assumed the responsibility of buying privately produced materials, as GPO evolves into the electronic milieu, appropriate GPO funds once used for paper products will necessitate transfer to Regionals for their discretionary use.

    Loss of funding

    Hosting institutions are facing budgetary crises that negatively impact Regional libraries. It is imperative that GPO develop cost analysis tools and provide the resulting data to assist Regionals in convincing their administrators that hosting a Regional has numerous benefits that reach beyond simple economics. The cost analysis data can also be used as a means to induce Congress to provide increased funding to assist GPO and Regionals.

    Furthermore, cost analysis data can assist Regionals, working with their administrators, in determining internal/external priorities. The data can help plan what is and what is not possible in short and long-term goal development. The data may also be useful in fund raising, educating the public about available services and the need for additional resources.

    It's All on the Web

    The unfortunate perception that echoes across the library profession is the assumption that all information, in particular, government information, is on the Web. While there is some degree of validity to this perception due to increased electronic publishing and dissemination practices, all agree that the perception is misleading and needs correction.

    The opportunity to debunk this myth through education and training, via the Web and other avenues, can be achieved through better marketing and educational tools. Promoting the collection locally and regionally, highlighting the value of the Regional collection, and encouraging selectives to engage in more outreach are necessary for Regionals to combat the myths surrounding this perception.

    Reducing Staffing Levels

    As was mentioned earlier, Regionals are beginning to realize a shrinking of staff, including the professionals who manage the Regional. Out with the old, in with the new might work well in politics, but the institutional knowledge and history of our professionals is lost with retirements. New blood is always necessary but it’s important that the new professionals have a complete understanding of the past.

    It is incumbent upon GPO and the senior Regional librarians to institute mentoring practices that assist the new librarians taking our place. Collaboration becomes the key component as the transition is further realized. Concurrent with this transition is the move in many libraries to combine public service desks and change workflow processes and procedures. To assist in this transition, GPO and Regional librarians must develop and engage in successful mentoring projects. (Sessions could be conducted during DLC, ALA and other national, Regional and state meetings.) It will be necessary to renew institutional support and commitments, recruit new librarians for our profession, and ensure that as the torch is passed, the knowledge base and memory is part of that passing.

    Permanent Public Access at Risk

    The legacy collections housed in the various Regional libraries are at risk. Although some uniformity exists in collection holdings, each Regional has, over the years, engaged in collection activities that have filled gaps, collected fugitive documents, and performed cataloging to provide access to their collections. Yet, permanent public access to these collections becomes increasingly tenuous, particularly as more information becomes electronically available.

    There is an energy existing today that provides numerous opportunities between GPO and the Regional community to work on this issue. GPO has the connections with Federal agencies, including those that have grant funding available. There is a level of expertise residing in the Regional community that in partnership with GPO can assist in projects that will realize positive outcomes in retention of these valued collections. Working with NARA, tracking fugitive publications, and facilitating better communications between Federal agencies and the library community will result in continued access to Regional collections.

    Lack of Preservation Activities Leads to Disintegrating Collections

    Closely related to the above issue is the fact that the legacy collections are deteriorating. Regardless of preservation measures taken by each Regional library, librarians are realizing that documents produced in the late 1700’s have now begun to reach the end of their life cycle. While the physical loss of these collections is devastating, opportunities exist that in many ways can preserve and provide permanent access to these historic collections.

    GPO and a fair number of Regional libraries are investigating various digitizing methodologies and practices. Partnerships should be formed from the various projects now under consideration. There may be opportunities for GPO to acquire collections from selectives and Regionals that are withdrawing from the program and working with remaining Regionals in a search for storage facilities with controlled environments.

    Additional opportunities include GPO digitizing and providing electronic collections of all documents regardless of age, format, or form, and cataloging the collections, working in tandem with Regionals to develop complete sets.

    Library Administration Perceives Regionals as Irrelevant

    As more information becomes available solely in electronic formats, there is a new paradigm developing with library administrators suggesting that Regionals are becoming archaic and unnecessary collections. This paradigm also involves other issues heretofore mentioned such as space, disposing of paper for electronic equivalents, not filling positions when retirements or other circumstances create openings.

    GPO must work with library administrators in dispelling the myth that Regionals are obsolete. A sound plan developed by and articulated through GPO will have a louder voice than the Regional facing this perception. The opportunity to remind library administrators of the collection’s uniqueness, its historical significance and the various populations served are highlights that GPO should include in any communication with library directors.

    Loss of Selectives

    Perhaps the single most important issue GPO and Regionals face today is the continued withdrawal of selective depository libraries. While Regionals provide a host of services, advice, and training to selectives, the selectives are the cornerstone of the FDLP. Without them, the FDLP would not exist.

    Measures have been developed by the Depository Library Council that is a step in the right direction. Providing flexibility to selectives with respect to collection development is needed. Allowing selectives to move to a more electronic collection is a reasonable approach that Regionals must consider.

    While the loss of some selectives is not preventable, GPO and Regionals must engage selectives long before this drastic step is implemented. Mentoring, assisting the selective in marketing and promoting its collection, and devising and developing plans to assist the selective in remaining in the FDLP are steps in which GPO and the Regionals can engage. Additionally, Regionals must be able to provide service to that area should the selective withdraw, as well as search for another hosting institution.

    Obsolete/Impermanent Digital Information

    As migration of information increases to more digital information, including information born digitally, GPO must make certain that standards are developed that ensure permanency of this information. Federal agencies, such as Census, have already realized problems with the integrity of their electronic information due to rapid technology changes that render earlier versions obsolete. There is a demonstrated need for the preservation of historical Government information. Technology will continue to evolve rapidly and GPO must be at the forefront of this evolution.

    Partnerships with other Federal agencies and Regional libraries must begin immediately. Further, GPO must maintain current and acquire future technologies as they develop in providing permanent public access to digital information. These practices will also be essential in maintaining electronic information in usable formats.

    Timelines will be dictated by the evolution of technology, its cost, Congressional appropriations, and other factors that surround this issue. GPO must also factor into the equation that they are the leaders, and in some circumstances, the providers, in the evolution of technology. As well, GPO must recognize that partnerships will become more necessary in the storage, retrieval, access, and dissemination of electronic and digital information.

    Other

    There are several other categories that were developed through the course of the exercise. Staff retirements, loss of external funding which may lead to the loss of Regionals, and space have all been mentioned, and there is no need for repetition on these categories. They are important and should not be neglected.

    Conclusion

    As has been evidenced by this discussion, GPO, Regional libraries, and the FDLP face serious and long-term challenges as they migrate into the 21st century. Technology will drive and dictate these and other challenges that lie ahead. How the issues outlined above are resolved will either reaffirm the important role the GPO and the FDLP have in the future of government information access or cause its complete and utter demise.

    Yet is it also clearly evident that as other weaknesses and threats develop, the partnership that has evolved since 1967 between GPO and the Regionals remains strong, provides a number of solutions and alternatives through creative thinking and planning, and remains the fundamental vehicle for the collection and dissemination of government information.

    The history of this essential partnership is reflective of the changes that have been witnessed in society, technology, librarianship, and information collection, storage, retrieval, and dissemination. This partnership is forever linked with the democratic process as envisioned by the founders of our country. It is therefore of the utmost importance that this partnership continues on its path of offering no-fee access to government information.

    Thanks

    The Planning Committee along with the conference attendees wishes to thank the Government Printing Office for sponsoring this event. Without GPO’s financial, technical and staff support, this event could not have been successful.


[ Back to the Table of Contents ]

Administrative Notes is published in Washington, DC by the Superintendent of Documents, LibraryPrograms Service, Government Printing Office, for the staffs of U.S. Federal Depository Libraries. It is published monthly, onthe 15th day of each month; some months may have additional issues. Postmaster send address changes to:

The Editor, Administrative Notes
U.S. Government Printing Office
Library Programs Service, SLLD
Washington, DC 20401

Internet access at URL: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/adnotes/index.html
Editor: Marian W. MacGilvray   (202) 512-1119   mmacgilvray@gpo.gov


A service of the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office.
Questions or comments: asklps@gpo.gov.
Last updated: April 28, 2004 
Page Name:  http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/fdlp/pubs/adnotes/ad041504.html
[ GPO Home ][ GPO Access Home ] [ FDLP Desktop Home ] [ Top ]