14 · SPEC Kit 296
25 of these, plus a few others, will microfilm mate-
rials for patrons. Seventy-five provide instruction
or presentations either in Special Collections or in
the classroom for on-site patrons 30 of these report
also providing instruction to off-site patrons. A
high number (56 or 72%) provide materials to pa-
trons of other libraries via ILL, but only 16 make
ILL requests for their own patrons. Forty-eight re-
spondents (62%) conduct research for off-site pa-
trons, which is somewhat higher than expected,
but only 26 of these conduct research for on-site
patrons. Two others conduct research for on-site
patrons but not off-site patrons. Slightly fewer
than half of the respondents (37 or 47%) contact
patrons to alert them about acquisitions that might
satisfy their needs or interests. A few libraries also
report that they provide other services, including
in-house and online exhibits, referring patrons to
other libraries and researchers who can assist with
their research, and making presentations to com-
munity or school groups.
Fees for on- and off-site patrons are approxi-
mately the same for each type of service provided,
indicating that most libraries typically do not dis-
tinguish between the two types of patrons. A major-
ity of the service fees, such as fees for digital repro-
ductions or microfilm, tend to be the same regard-
less of whether the patron is on-site or off-site. Fees
for photocopying services do vary between on-site
and off-site patrons, though, costing almost $0.50
more per page for off-site patrons. Respondents’
comments also reveal that multiple libraries charge
a minimum fee in addition to the per-page cost for
off-site photocopying requests. The difference in
photocopying fees probably can be attributed to
the difference between self-service copying for on-
site patrons and copying completed by staff mem-
bers for off-site patrons. It is interesting to note that
21 respondents charge for staff time in conducting
research or creating reproductions for both on- and
off-site patrons and three others charge for staff
time only when assisting off-site patrons.
Reproductions of Special Collections holdings
are delivered to patrons using a variety of meth-
ods. Traditional methods, such as having patrons
pick up reproductions at the service desk or de-
livering to patrons via regular mail, are two of
the most popular methods. Delivery via e-mail is
comparable to delivery via regular mail, with 72 re-
spondents using e-mail and 77 respondents using
regular mail.
Sixty-five respondents (82%) have reference/
public service policies for Special Collections. These
documents include general policy and procedural
manuals, registration policies, copyright statement
and reprographics policies, retrieving/reshelving
policies, and access policies. The other 14 respon-
dents (18%) do not have these policies, though one
states they generally follow the policies of the refer-
ence department.
Public Service Transaction Tracking
Only four of the 75 respondents (5%) do not track
the number of public service transactions. Over
90% of the libraries track the number of reference
questions and instruction sessions/presentations
given in Special Collections. Between 75% and 77%
of the libraries track the number of items retrieved
from the stacks and the number of instruction ses-
sions/presentations given in the classroom. Over
60% of the respondents also track the number of
items reproduced and the number of directional/
information questions received.
Fewer than half of the respondents record public
service transactions according to patron status or
category (e.g., faculty, student, staff, etc.), but rath-
er simply record the total number of transactions
regardless of patron categories. For those libraries
that do track transactions by patron category, most
patrons are visiting researchers, graduate and un-
dergraduate students (including both individual
students and students visiting as part of classes),
and members of the local community.
It is no surprise that of the twenty libraries with
the highest service transaction statistics, twelve
are among those libraries with the highest staffing
levels. In particular, libraries with high transaction
totals also have a higher number of FTEs for librar-
25 of these, plus a few others, will microfilm mate-
rials for patrons. Seventy-five provide instruction
or presentations either in Special Collections or in
the classroom for on-site patrons 30 of these report
also providing instruction to off-site patrons. A
high number (56 or 72%) provide materials to pa-
trons of other libraries via ILL, but only 16 make
ILL requests for their own patrons. Forty-eight re-
spondents (62%) conduct research for off-site pa-
trons, which is somewhat higher than expected,
but only 26 of these conduct research for on-site
patrons. Two others conduct research for on-site
patrons but not off-site patrons. Slightly fewer
than half of the respondents (37 or 47%) contact
patrons to alert them about acquisitions that might
satisfy their needs or interests. A few libraries also
report that they provide other services, including
in-house and online exhibits, referring patrons to
other libraries and researchers who can assist with
their research, and making presentations to com-
munity or school groups.
Fees for on- and off-site patrons are approxi-
mately the same for each type of service provided,
indicating that most libraries typically do not dis-
tinguish between the two types of patrons. A major-
ity of the service fees, such as fees for digital repro-
ductions or microfilm, tend to be the same regard-
less of whether the patron is on-site or off-site. Fees
for photocopying services do vary between on-site
and off-site patrons, though, costing almost $0.50
more per page for off-site patrons. Respondents’
comments also reveal that multiple libraries charge
a minimum fee in addition to the per-page cost for
off-site photocopying requests. The difference in
photocopying fees probably can be attributed to
the difference between self-service copying for on-
site patrons and copying completed by staff mem-
bers for off-site patrons. It is interesting to note that
21 respondents charge for staff time in conducting
research or creating reproductions for both on- and
off-site patrons and three others charge for staff
time only when assisting off-site patrons.
Reproductions of Special Collections holdings
are delivered to patrons using a variety of meth-
ods. Traditional methods, such as having patrons
pick up reproductions at the service desk or de-
livering to patrons via regular mail, are two of
the most popular methods. Delivery via e-mail is
comparable to delivery via regular mail, with 72 re-
spondents using e-mail and 77 respondents using
regular mail.
Sixty-five respondents (82%) have reference/
public service policies for Special Collections. These
documents include general policy and procedural
manuals, registration policies, copyright statement
and reprographics policies, retrieving/reshelving
policies, and access policies. The other 14 respon-
dents (18%) do not have these policies, though one
states they generally follow the policies of the refer-
ence department.
Public Service Transaction Tracking
Only four of the 75 respondents (5%) do not track
the number of public service transactions. Over
90% of the libraries track the number of reference
questions and instruction sessions/presentations
given in Special Collections. Between 75% and 77%
of the libraries track the number of items retrieved
from the stacks and the number of instruction ses-
sions/presentations given in the classroom. Over
60% of the respondents also track the number of
items reproduced and the number of directional/
information questions received.
Fewer than half of the respondents record public
service transactions according to patron status or
category (e.g., faculty, student, staff, etc.), but rath-
er simply record the total number of transactions
regardless of patron categories. For those libraries
that do track transactions by patron category, most
patrons are visiting researchers, graduate and un-
dergraduate students (including both individual
students and students visiting as part of classes),
and members of the local community.
It is no surprise that of the twenty libraries with
the highest service transaction statistics, twelve
are among those libraries with the highest staffing
levels. In particular, libraries with high transaction
totals also have a higher number of FTEs for librar-
