14 · Survey Results: Executive Summary
operated by the California Digital Library and a con-
sortium of contributing institutions, and 29 of those
offer training and support for the tool (Q8 &9).
A rough indicator of the breadth of RDM support
at the responding libraries is whether they have gone
beyond online resources to add training on DMP
preparation and/or consultation on DMPs for grant
proposals. Forty-eight libraries offer consultation ser-
vices. Ten began in 2010, 23 in 2011 (again due to the
NSF DMP requirement), 12 in 2012, and 2 more in
2013. Thirty-three of these 48 also provide DMP train-
ing. At 25 institutions DMP support is also provided
by various other departments, most frequently the
office of research and office of sponsored programs
(Q10–Q12).
Most direct consultations (other than workshops)
are done via e-mail/chat/phone (94%) or meeting
with researchers at their office, lab, or other location
(92%) (Q13). Of all consultation methods used, many
respondents commented that workshops, training,
and tutorials have provided the most contacts. One
commented on a unique way they get consultations:
“In addition to providing our contact information to
faculty through departmental grant administrators
and our partners in the institution, faculty can also
indicate that they would like a consultation through
our internal grant tracking system.”
While all 48 libraries that offer DMP consultation
services interact directly with researchers, it was chal-
lenging to gauge the extent of engagement, and how
many researchers are actually looking to their library
for DMP assistance. When asked about the number
and depth of consultations, only 28 libraries reported
that they kept track of the number of consultations
(Q14). About half of that group reports having more
than 10 consultations since their DMP service began.
Seven of the ten libraries that started in 2012 and 2013
have consulted on fewer than five plans total. Only
two libraries average more than three consultations
per month. It is possible that there was confusion of
what we meant by “DMP sessions” in our survey
question, which had aimed to measure individual
one-on-one consultations via any means, e-mail, face-
to-face, etc. One response to this question was 300
DMP sessions. This high number may have included
number of participants in group sessions the next
highest number was 96 sessions.
When asked which departments/fields of research
at their institutions use the DMP services, the majority
reported that natural sciences, social sciences, engi-
neering, and humanities use them at least occasional-
ly (Q17). Overall, most of the libraries that are offering
more than online DMP resources are receiving mod-
est participation from their researcher communities.
If more funders add DMP requirements for proposals,
and/or increase compliance and accountability for the
quality and follow-through on plans in the next few
years, use of these services should be resurveyed, ide-
ally with more detailed usage metrics and qualitative
details on models of service provision.
RDM Services Other than DMP Preparation
Helping researchers prepare data management plans
for grant proposals is a relatively focused category of
service, and for many of the libraries surveyed, an en-
try point into this relatively new area of support for the
research process. The survey next explored whether
libraries offer services beyond DMP assistance, and
asked about nine categories of additional RDM ser-
vices that we expected some portion of ARL libraries
to offer (Q18). A majority of the 54 responding librar-
ies (36 to 48) offer eight of the nine services, including
data management best practices (both online resources
and workshops), helping researchers identify (and
apply) appropriate metadata standards, research file
organization and naming, data citation, data sharing
and access, and data storage and backup. The last two
services are commonly offered by both the library and
elsewhere on campus. Only 14 libraries provide help
with securing &anonymizing data. Half said this is
only offered elsewhere, such as by the institutional
review board, privacy office, or research compliance
office. In addition to the listed services, a few libraries
report they support data publication, data rights man-
agement, and analog to digital image data conversion.
Data Archiving Services
Even with moderately enforced requirements to share
datasets from grant projects, publications, and other
research by public funders such as NSF, most of the
operated by the California Digital Library and a con-
sortium of contributing institutions, and 29 of those
offer training and support for the tool (Q8 &9).
A rough indicator of the breadth of RDM support
at the responding libraries is whether they have gone
beyond online resources to add training on DMP
preparation and/or consultation on DMPs for grant
proposals. Forty-eight libraries offer consultation ser-
vices. Ten began in 2010, 23 in 2011 (again due to the
NSF DMP requirement), 12 in 2012, and 2 more in
2013. Thirty-three of these 48 also provide DMP train-
ing. At 25 institutions DMP support is also provided
by various other departments, most frequently the
office of research and office of sponsored programs
(Q10–Q12).
Most direct consultations (other than workshops)
are done via e-mail/chat/phone (94%) or meeting
with researchers at their office, lab, or other location
(92%) (Q13). Of all consultation methods used, many
respondents commented that workshops, training,
and tutorials have provided the most contacts. One
commented on a unique way they get consultations:
“In addition to providing our contact information to
faculty through departmental grant administrators
and our partners in the institution, faculty can also
indicate that they would like a consultation through
our internal grant tracking system.”
While all 48 libraries that offer DMP consultation
services interact directly with researchers, it was chal-
lenging to gauge the extent of engagement, and how
many researchers are actually looking to their library
for DMP assistance. When asked about the number
and depth of consultations, only 28 libraries reported
that they kept track of the number of consultations
(Q14). About half of that group reports having more
than 10 consultations since their DMP service began.
Seven of the ten libraries that started in 2012 and 2013
have consulted on fewer than five plans total. Only
two libraries average more than three consultations
per month. It is possible that there was confusion of
what we meant by “DMP sessions” in our survey
question, which had aimed to measure individual
one-on-one consultations via any means, e-mail, face-
to-face, etc. One response to this question was 300
DMP sessions. This high number may have included
number of participants in group sessions the next
highest number was 96 sessions.
When asked which departments/fields of research
at their institutions use the DMP services, the majority
reported that natural sciences, social sciences, engi-
neering, and humanities use them at least occasional-
ly (Q17). Overall, most of the libraries that are offering
more than online DMP resources are receiving mod-
est participation from their researcher communities.
If more funders add DMP requirements for proposals,
and/or increase compliance and accountability for the
quality and follow-through on plans in the next few
years, use of these services should be resurveyed, ide-
ally with more detailed usage metrics and qualitative
details on models of service provision.
RDM Services Other than DMP Preparation
Helping researchers prepare data management plans
for grant proposals is a relatively focused category of
service, and for many of the libraries surveyed, an en-
try point into this relatively new area of support for the
research process. The survey next explored whether
libraries offer services beyond DMP assistance, and
asked about nine categories of additional RDM ser-
vices that we expected some portion of ARL libraries
to offer (Q18). A majority of the 54 responding librar-
ies (36 to 48) offer eight of the nine services, including
data management best practices (both online resources
and workshops), helping researchers identify (and
apply) appropriate metadata standards, research file
organization and naming, data citation, data sharing
and access, and data storage and backup. The last two
services are commonly offered by both the library and
elsewhere on campus. Only 14 libraries provide help
with securing &anonymizing data. Half said this is
only offered elsewhere, such as by the institutional
review board, privacy office, or research compliance
office. In addition to the listed services, a few libraries
report they support data publication, data rights man-
agement, and analog to digital image data conversion.
Data Archiving Services
Even with moderately enforced requirements to share
datasets from grant projects, publications, and other
research by public funders such as NSF, most of the
