SPEC Kit 345: Shared Print Programs · 95
If yes, please briefly describe service. N=2
Not exactly a third party, but UC’s SRLF does handle deselection of duplicates for libraries that provide JSTOR holdings
for archiving and deduplication.
We are working with SCS to develop deselection lists for monographs.
Answered No N=2
Collection analysis can be performed by the Florida Virtual Campus, which maintains the ILS for each state university.
We have not yet arranged for third party services, but we would like to arrange for third party selection/deselection
services for participants in the future.
41. Is the final decision to deselect a group or local decision? N=20
Group decision 6 30%
Local decision 14 70%
42. Where does deselection of duplicate holdings available for ingest occur? N=16
At the supplying library 11 69%
At storage facility or remote location 4 25%
Other location 1 6%
Please specify the other location. N=1
Supplying library is supposed to deselect duplicate holdings prior to submission, but the uniqueness of materials is
confirmed upon ingest into FLARE.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
43. Please enter any additional information that may assist the survey authors’ understanding of your
shared print program. N=5
As previously stated, PALCI Shared Print Archive Holders have agreements for retention the rest of the PALCI
membership benefits from these agreements.
Each of our four member institutions has different rules, requirements, and approaches to selecting materials for the
Collaborative Print Retention Program. We’ve developed a program that aims to accommodate all of this diversity.
The group agreed to focus principally on science, technology, engineering, and medicine (STEM) areas, with a
preference for chemistry and physics. We focused on STEM because these are the disciplines in which publishers seem to
have moved most aggressively in the direction of electronic publishing. However, members also expressed an interest in
dealing with at least one publisher that would give us experience with titles in the social sciences and/or humanities—a
role eventually assigned to the publisher Annual Reviews (AR). Although the technical challenges of shared print
If yes, please briefly describe service. N=2
Not exactly a third party, but UC’s SRLF does handle deselection of duplicates for libraries that provide JSTOR holdings
for archiving and deduplication.
We are working with SCS to develop deselection lists for monographs.
Answered No N=2
Collection analysis can be performed by the Florida Virtual Campus, which maintains the ILS for each state university.
We have not yet arranged for third party services, but we would like to arrange for third party selection/deselection
services for participants in the future.
41. Is the final decision to deselect a group or local decision? N=20
Group decision 6 30%
Local decision 14 70%
42. Where does deselection of duplicate holdings available for ingest occur? N=16
At the supplying library 11 69%
At storage facility or remote location 4 25%
Other location 1 6%
Please specify the other location. N=1
Supplying library is supposed to deselect duplicate holdings prior to submission, but the uniqueness of materials is
confirmed upon ingest into FLARE.
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
43. Please enter any additional information that may assist the survey authors’ understanding of your
shared print program. N=5
As previously stated, PALCI Shared Print Archive Holders have agreements for retention the rest of the PALCI
membership benefits from these agreements.
Each of our four member institutions has different rules, requirements, and approaches to selecting materials for the
Collaborative Print Retention Program. We’ve developed a program that aims to accommodate all of this diversity.
The group agreed to focus principally on science, technology, engineering, and medicine (STEM) areas, with a
preference for chemistry and physics. We focused on STEM because these are the disciplines in which publishers seem to
have moved most aggressively in the direction of electronic publishing. However, members also expressed an interest in
dealing with at least one publisher that would give us experience with titles in the social sciences and/or humanities—a
role eventually assigned to the publisher Annual Reviews (AR). Although the technical challenges of shared print
