SPEC Kit 345: Shared Print Programs · 25 SURVEY QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES The SPEC surveys on Shared Print Programs were designed by Rebecca Crist, Visiting Project Manager in the Center for Library Initiatives at the Committee on Institutional Cooperation, and Emily Stambaugh, Shared Print Manager at the California Digital Library. The ongoing need to optimize use of physical space in research libraries while ensuring preservation of and access to the scholarly record has led to a number of innovations in library collection management, including multi-institutional shared print programs. Shared print arrangements take many forms and involve many partners. As more libraries enter into shared print programs, it may be useful to compare and contrast models, agreements, business, and operational aspects to understand the value that each model provides to its participants. The purpose of this survey is to explore the extent of ARL member libraries’ participation in shared print programs, the type and scope of programs in which they choose to participate, the rationale for participation, the value and benefits the programs provide to ARL and other libraries, and the roles different libraries are playing in them. Although a related survey on print retention decision making was conducted last year, this study looks more deeply at issues specific to shared print collection strategies, business models, and operations. To best explore these aspects, this study includes two surveys: Survey of ARL Member Libraries. ARL libraries are asked general questions about all shared print programs in which the institution participates, goals and benefits of participation, rationale for participation, and services provided. This survey does not ask about the details of a single, specific shared print program but rather about a library’s participation in shared print arrangements in general. Survey of Shared Print Program Managers/Coordinators. Information about a specific shared print program is gathered from shared print managers/coordinators. This survey asks about specific business and operational models, strategies, goals, membership, collections, archiving progress, access, and other services.
SPEC Kit 345: Shared Print Programs · 23 make holdings more readily visible across institu- tions. Where there is no central catalog or institutions’ integrated systems are not uniform, sharing holdings information may be more difficult to execute. Endnotes 1 These figures are very likely to be under-reported or under-estimated. Shared print programs were asked to report either title counts, volume counts, or both whatever could be reasonably collected. When only titles were reported, monograph title counts were converted to volumes (estimated 1 title=1 volume) no attempt was made to estimate and incorporate volume counts for journal titles, resulting in a likely significant underestimation of volumes held. These figures do not include shared print programs that are in planning or have planned deposits. 2 Three shared print programs reported data for this survey some notable monograph programs did not. Maine Shared Collections Strategy and Connect NY reported more than 2.2 million monographic titles and PALNI/ALI reported more than 5 million monographic volumes subject to retention commitments. 3 Lavoie, Malpas, and Shipengrover. 2012, p. 26–28.