9 SPEC Kit 352: Collection Assessment
increased understanding of the scope and breadth of collections by librarians and changes to collection
development policies or priorities.
In terms of more objective forms of outcomes, nearly two-thirds experienced an increase in
funding targeted to building or enhancing a collection, and more than a third indicated that funding for
overall collection development had increased as a result of collection assessment reports. A smaller set of
respondents (18 or 28%) indicated that they had changed their funding algorithms or formulas as a result
of collection assessments.
As expected, collection assessment outcomes serve a variety of purposes specific to collection
management, including supporting shared collecting initiatives with partner libraries, informing funding
and collection development decisions, de-selection and weeding practices, and changing approaches to
approval plan initiatives.
Challenges
Respondents were asked to describe the top three challenges encountered at their library when assessing
collections. This question was purposefully open-ended to generate the most comprehensive list and 54
respondents described challenges that fell into seventeen broad thematic categories:
Challenge Responses %
Consistency and quality of data 31 23%
Staffing, time, or cost constraints 27 20%
Expertise issues 20 15%
Data integration 15 11%
Data acquisition 13 9%
Communication 8 6%
System and/or hardware deficiencies 7 5%
Organizational culture 7 5%
Volume of content to be assessed/overwhelmed 5 4%
Application 4 3%
Grand Total 137 100%
Issues with data acquisition, integration, consistency, volume, and quality were the most
commonly cited challenges, accounting for close to half of those reported. Data were also mentioned in
other categories, including being overwhelmed, system deficiencies, and expertise issues. It is clear that
librarians are frustrated by the lack of consistent data and standards, as well as the inability to integrate
the myriad of systems easily. Typical comments included:
“Messy data. Oftentimes, the data that is used to inform assessment decisions is messy,
inconsistent, problematic, and full of caveats.”
“Data over time is difficult, since we have changed the ILS a number of times, and not all data
was migrated, and querying the underlying database must be done in another fashion.”
“Not having good benchmarking data for meaningful comparisons.”
The other major sets of issues are with resources, or lack thereof. These may be lack of staff, time
(which could also be considered lack of staff ),financial resources, and expertise. These represent at least
35% of the challenges, given that they could also apply to the issue of being overwhelmed and some of the
data issues. Typical comments included:
“Resources to encourage an expectation of assessment, this includes personnel and collaborating
across teams.”
increased understanding of the scope and breadth of collections by librarians and changes to collection
development policies or priorities.
In terms of more objective forms of outcomes, nearly two-thirds experienced an increase in
funding targeted to building or enhancing a collection, and more than a third indicated that funding for
overall collection development had increased as a result of collection assessment reports. A smaller set of
respondents (18 or 28%) indicated that they had changed their funding algorithms or formulas as a result
of collection assessments.
As expected, collection assessment outcomes serve a variety of purposes specific to collection
management, including supporting shared collecting initiatives with partner libraries, informing funding
and collection development decisions, de-selection and weeding practices, and changing approaches to
approval plan initiatives.
Challenges
Respondents were asked to describe the top three challenges encountered at their library when assessing
collections. This question was purposefully open-ended to generate the most comprehensive list and 54
respondents described challenges that fell into seventeen broad thematic categories:
Challenge Responses %
Consistency and quality of data 31 23%
Staffing, time, or cost constraints 27 20%
Expertise issues 20 15%
Data integration 15 11%
Data acquisition 13 9%
Communication 8 6%
System and/or hardware deficiencies 7 5%
Organizational culture 7 5%
Volume of content to be assessed/overwhelmed 5 4%
Application 4 3%
Grand Total 137 100%
Issues with data acquisition, integration, consistency, volume, and quality were the most
commonly cited challenges, accounting for close to half of those reported. Data were also mentioned in
other categories, including being overwhelmed, system deficiencies, and expertise issues. It is clear that
librarians are frustrated by the lack of consistent data and standards, as well as the inability to integrate
the myriad of systems easily. Typical comments included:
“Messy data. Oftentimes, the data that is used to inform assessment decisions is messy,
inconsistent, problematic, and full of caveats.”
“Data over time is difficult, since we have changed the ILS a number of times, and not all data
was migrated, and querying the underlying database must be done in another fashion.”
“Not having good benchmarking data for meaningful comparisons.”
The other major sets of issues are with resources, or lack thereof. These may be lack of staff, time
(which could also be considered lack of staff ),financial resources, and expertise. These represent at least
35% of the challenges, given that they could also apply to the issue of being overwhelmed and some of the
data issues. Typical comments included:
“Resources to encourage an expectation of assessment, this includes personnel and collaborating
across teams.”
