• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

NATIONAL LIBRARY FOR HEALTH NHS LIBRARY AND KNOWLEDGE DEVELOPMENT NETWORK

NHS INTERLENDING & DOCUMENT SUPPLY SERVICE

STRATEGIC BUSINESS CASE NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

VERSION CONTROL

Sections were written by Helen Bingham and Ben Toth, with extensive contribution from Interlending and Document Supply Task Group (Appendix D) Version 1.0 following consolidation, peer review and consultation. 6TH MAY 2005 Version 2.0 following further review by members of the business case team. 13TH JANUARY 2006 Version 3.3 following further review by members of the business case team. 6TH FEBRUARY 2006 Version 3.4 following further review by members of the business case team. 30TH MARCH 2006 Version 3.5 following consultation with library community JULY 2006 ST Version 3.6 following consensus reached at ILSD meeting (21/06/06) awaiting 31 JULY comments on specific sections by various people and re-pagination 2006 Version 3.6.1 incorporating comments from Steve Glover and Colin Davies 23RD awaiting comments on specific sections by various people and re-pagination AUGUST 2006 Version 3.6.2 incorporating comments from members of the business case 11TH SEPTEMBER team awaiting comments on specific sections by various people 2006 Version 3.6.3 following ILSDS meeting (22/09/06) 4TH OCTOBER 2006 Version 3.6.4 incorporating critical success factors v3 and the amended case 18TH study OCTOBER 2006 Version 3.6.5 incorporating revised definitions of options following workshop 26 JANUARY consultation with library community 2007

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 2 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project CONTENTS

SUMMARY ...... 56 STRATEGIC CASE ...... 67 INTRODUCTION ...... 67

1. CONTEXT ...... 6 7 2. VISION, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ...... 7 8 THE CURRENT SITUATION IN THE NHS ...... 78

3. PROCESSES ...... 7 8 4. COSTS ...... 8 9 5. LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF NHS-OWNED RESOURCES ...... 8 9 6. REGIONAL RESOURCE-SHARING NETWORKS IN THE UK ...... 9 10 7. NATIONAL DOCUMENT DELIVERY CO-OPERATIVES ...... 10 11 8. COMMERCIAL OR MEMBERSHIP OR FEE-BASED DOCUMENT DELIVERY SUPPLIERS ...... 11 12 9. PILOTS WITHIN THE NHS ...... 11 12 10. LIBRARIES IN OTHER SECTORS ...... 12 13 DRIVERS FOR CHANGE ...... 1213

11. CLINICAL GOVERNANCE ...... 12 13 12. EFFICIENCY ...... 13 14 13. MOBILISATION AND STEWARDSHIP OF NHS KNOWLEDGE RESOURCES ...... 13 14 14. A CHANGING WORKFORCE ...... 13 14 15. USER NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS ...... 14 15 16. ADVANCES IN DOCUMENT DELIVERY SERVICE DESIGN ...... 14 15 17. TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT IN RELATION TO DOCUMENT DELIVERY ...... 14 16 18. TRENDS IN PUBLISHING ...... 15 16 19. DIGITAL ARCHIVING ...... 16 17 THE INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE: SELECTED SCHEMES IN OPERATION IN OTHER COUNTRIES . .1617

20. USA AND CANADA ...... 16 17 21. THE NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND) ...... 17 18 22. ICELAND ...... 17 18 23. AUSTRALIA ...... 17 18 DEFINITIONS AND SCOPE; CONSTRAINTS AND DEPENDENCIES ...... 1819

24. SERVICE ...... 18 19 25. TECHNOLOGY ...... 18 19 26. CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS ...... 18 20 BENEFITS AND RISKS (HIGH LEVEL) ...... 2021

27 . BENEFITS ...... 20 21 28. RISKS ...... 21 22 ECONOMIC CASE ...... 2223

29 . INTRODUCTION ...... 22 23 30. INVESTMENT GOALS ...... 22 23 31. SOME KEY CONSIDERATIONS ...... 23 24 32. OPTIONS FOR DELIVERY ...... 23 24 33. OPTIONS APPRAISAL ...... 25 27 COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT CASES ...... 2728

34. COMMERCIAL CASE ...... 27 28 35. FINANCIAL CASE ...... 28 29 36. PROJECT MANAGEMENT CASE ...... 29 30 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 3031 APPENDIX A - SELECTED INITIATIVES IN DOCUMENT DELIVERY DESIGN ...... 3233

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 3 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project APPENDIX B - SELECTED ADVANCES IN DOCUMENT DELIVERY TECHNOLOGY ...... 3536 APPENDIX C - MODELLING THE FULL COST OF DOCUMENT SUPPLY ...... 3738 APPENDIX D - INTERLENDING AND DOCUMENT SUPPLY TASK GROUP ...... 4142 STRATEGIC CASE ...... 6 INTRODUCTION ...... 6

1. CONTEXT ...... 6 2. VISION, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ...... 7 THE CURRENT SITUATION IN THE NHS ...... 7

3. PROCESSES ...... 7 4. COSTS ...... 8 5. LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF NHS-OWNED RESOURCES ...... 8 6. REGIONAL RESOURCE-SHARING NETWORKS IN THE UK ...... 9 7. NATIONAL DOCUMENT DELIVERY CO-OPERATIVES ...... 10 8. COMMERCIAL OR MEMBERSHIP OR FEE-BASED DOCUMENT DELIVERY SUPPLIERS ...... 11 9. PILOTS WITHIN THE NHS ...... 11 10. HIGHER EDUCATION LIBRARIES ...... 12 DRIVERS FOR CHANGE ...... 12

11. CLINICAL GOVERNANCE ...... 12 12. EFFICIENCY ...... 13 13. MOBILISATION AND STEWARDSHIP OF NHS KNOWLEDGE RESOURCES ...... 13 14. A CHANGING WORKFORCE ...... 13 15. USER NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS ...... 14 16. ADVANCES IN DOCUMENT DELIVERY SERVICE DESIGN ...... 14 17. TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT IN RELATION TO DOCUMENT DELIVERY ...... 14 18. TRENDS IN PUBLISHING ...... 15 19. DIGITAL ARCHIVING ...... 16 THE INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVE: SCHEMES IN OPERATION IN OTHER COUNTRIES ...... 16

20. USA AND CANADA ...... 16 21. THE NETHERLANDS (HOLLAND) ...... 17 22. ICELAND ...... 17 23. AUSTRALIA ...... 17 DEFINITIONS AND SCOPE; CONSTRAINTS AND DEPENDENCIES ...... 18

24. SERVICE ...... 18 25. TECHNOLOGY ...... 18 26. CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS ...... 19 BENEFITS AND RISKS (HIGH LEVEL) ...... 20

27 . BENEFITS ...... 20 28. RISKS ...... 21 ECONOMIC CASE ...... 22

29 . INTRODUCTION ...... 22 30. INVESTMENT GOALS ...... 22 31. SOME KEY CONSIDERATIONS ...... 23 32. OPTIONS FOR DELIVERY ...... 23 33. OPTIONS APPRAISAL ...... 25 COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT CASES ...... 26

34. COMMERCIAL CASE ...... 26 35. FINANCIAL CASE ...... 27 36. PROJECT MANAGEMENT CASE ...... 28 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...... 29 APPENDIX A - SELECTED INITIATIVES IN DOCUMENT DELIVERY DESIGN ...... 31 APPENDIX B - SELECTED ADVANCES IN DOCUMENT DELIVERY TECHNOLOGY ...... 34 D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 4 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project APPENDIX C - MODELLING THE FULL COST OF DOCUMENT SUPPLY ...... 36 APPENDIX D - INTERLENDING AND DOCUMENT SUPPLY TASK GROUP ...... 40

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 5 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project Summary

“The large volumes of references retrieved through the various electronic sources, library financial constraints and stock limitations has increased the need for efficient document delivery services”

Price, SP., Morris, A., Davies, JE An overview of electronic document request and delivery research. The Electronic Library 1996 14(5) 435-438

This is the strategic case for an interlending and/or document supply service (ILDS) for the NHS. It sets out in principle why the NHS should invest in ILDS services for the NHS and the high level options for the services.

ILDS is a process/service by which NHS staff obtain the full copies (in digital or paper format) of references found in databases, catalogues, bibliographies, reading lists and related. The NHS has existing arrangements for ILDS, but there is an opportunity to align these services with the changing needs of the NHS and improve the efficiency and equity of service delivery. (strategic case)

The specific investment goals are: supporting clinical governance; patient choice; improving equity for NHS staff and saving their time; saving NHS library staff time; improving value for money for NHS library services. (economic case)

There are several options for ILDS. (economic case paragraph)

There is unanimous agreement among the business case team that valuable staff time freed up as a result of streamlined document delivery could be put to better local uses. (commercial and financial cases)

A group of NHS librarians is developing the case for the National Library for Health and National Knowledge Service. (project management case)

Case study: a typical scenario

A nurse does a literature search in CINAHL (a database covering nursing and allied health). She finds a reference to an article which looks useful but it is not available in full-text via either local or national collections, so she rings her Trust Library to ask them to obtain it for her.

The Trust Library advise her that they require a signed copyright declaration from her before they can process her request, and ask her to print off a request form from the library website, complete it and post it to them.

The library assistant who processes inter-library loans first searches her own catalogue, then a regional list to see if the article is held in a nearby library with which there is a co-operative arrangement. The item is not available within the region, so she searches the Nursing Union List of Journals and finds that it is held at a library in Worcester. A request for the item is despatched by email, with the details cut and pasted from the original requesters email, augmented by delivery address details.

The item arrives as a photocopy three days later and the requester is emailed to notify her. She comes in the same day to pick up and pay for the item.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 6 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

Strategic Case

Introduction

1. Context

1.1. This proposal considers the case for an NHS-wide interlending and document supply (ILDS) system. Each year, NHS libraries obtain some 500,000 documents (journal articles, books, reports and other publications) on behalf of NHS staff who require them for purposes of patient care, education, continuous professional development, management decision-making and research. These are documents that are not accessible to them locally (i.e. not held in the local NHS library, and not locally available in electronic format), so must be sourced from elsewhere.

1.2. Statistics collated by LKDN indicate that in 2003-04, NHS libraries spent £1.2m in the business of locating, obtaining and delivering documents for staff. This figure excludes the cost of library staff time, document transmission and operational overheads. See Appendix C for modelling the full cost of document supply.

1.3. NHS libraries have developed regional and national resource sharing networks to support this activity. They also use national libraries to fill requests, notably the British Library and specialist national libraries such as the BMA Library. NHS librarians have developed methods for locating, requesting, processing and delivering documents, according to locally-available information and communications technologies and financial resources. Systems tend to be intensive of library staff time and reliant on local library staff knowledge.

1.4. ILDS services are highly valued by users of NHS libraries, and typified by high standards of customer service. They are key to mobilising the wealth of knowledge resources that exist within the NHS. However, because they have been and continue to be developed and funded locally and regionally, variations in the standards, costs and methods of document delivery services exist across the country.

1.5. Document supply is subject to a complex range of sometimes conflicting influences, from efficiency drives within the NHS to trends in international publishing and developments in ICT. The increasingly complex electronic environment in which libraries operate introduces both opportunities and barriers for document access and sharing. It is time to review whether the current mosaic of systems is the most equitable and efficient way of connecting NHS staff with the documents that they need to meet the governance requirements of today’s modern and patient-focussed NHS.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 7 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project 2. Vision, aims and objectives

2.1The vision is a system to enable all NHS staff to easily access the documents that they need, at the time, in the place, and in the format that they need them, in ways that are affordable and that deliver value for money to the NHS.

2.2 The system must meet the requirements and reflect the preferences of NHS staff. It must meet the requirements of organisations and of the NHS as a whole, in terms of staff, resources, technological and legislative requirements, and strategic fit.

2.3 This case considers possible approaches to this challenge, from the status quo option, to options that will require significant new investment, for instance in procuring a national automated document delivery management system, moving to primary reliance on a commercial provider, or developing electronic document archives.

The current situation in the NHS

3. Processes

3.1End users request documents in various ways (e.g. by completing request forms that they give or post to their local librarian, by phoning or e-mailing their local librarian, by completing request forms on library websites). Signed copyright declarations are required for printed copies as the CLA NHS Photocopying Licence has not been renewed in March 2006. Library staff source and process incoming requests in a variety of ways, depending on the systems and sources available to them. Documents that are available locally will be photocopied and posted or faxed, or downloaded and e-mailed to requestors. Documents that are not available locally will be sourced from regional networks, higher education, national sources or commercial suppliers, and requested by post or fax or electronically. Documents are supplied by post or fax or in electronic format, for forwarding to the end user.

3.2The traditional role of library and information services in providing ILDS has become increasingly complex. Library staff must search many different sources, using different interfaces, and therefore manage user requests in multiple systems. Some NHS libraries rely on manual, paper-based systems to manage document supply, others use in-house developed databases, modules of their computerised library management system, or standalone software packages to streamline the processes involved. WinCHILL (http://www.winchill.co.uk/) is very popular with a number of NHS libraries. Designed and marketed by the Kostoris Medical Library, Christie Hospital NHS Trust, it allows library staff to check the availability of journal titles simultaneously, hence saving A considerablenurse does a staff literature time. search in CINAHL. She finds a reference to an article which looks useful but it is not available in full-text via either local or national collections, so she emails the details to her Trust Library to ask them to obtain it for her.

The Trust Library emails her back to let her know that they have received the request and are dealing with it, also that she will need to call in to pick up the request and pay for it.

The library assistant who processes inter-library loans first searches her own catalogue, then a local list to see if the article is held in a nearby library with which there is a co-operative arrangement. The item is not available locally, so she searches the NULJ list of titles and finds that it is held at a library in Worcester. A request for the item is despatched by email, with the details cut and pasted from the original D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.docrequesters email, augmented by delivery address details. 8

The item arrives as a photocopy three days later and the requester is emailed to notify her. She comes in the same day to pick up and pay for the item. NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

4. Costs

4.1 It has already been noted that NHS libraries in England currently spend over £1M p.a. on ILDS, and that this excludes the costs of library staff time, document transmission and operational overheads. Moreover, the preceding section describes a situation whereby the majority of documents are obtained via ‘free’ exchange within reciprocal networks: none of the costs associated with this activity appears in records of library expenditure. The only expenditure that is recorded is that spent on obtaining documents from commercial suppliers or other organisations which charge, and the cost of belonging to selected schemes. To provide some examples, the British Library currently charges £4.75 plus VAT per photocopy by mail (or £4.25 plus VAT by Secure Electronic Delivery) and £7.60 per book loan (as of 3/8/2006); the BMA Library charges £2.50 plus VAT per photocopy by mail or email and £2.50 per book loan (and £70 per library per year for membership) (as of 3/8/2006), Higher Education libraries typically charge 10p-20p per sheet, the fee for membership of the Nursing Union List of Journals currently stands at £60 per library per year (as of 3/8/2006).

4.2 The extent to which these costs are passed onto end-users varies across the country. The majority of NHS libraries charge their users a flat fee of between 50p and £2 for each item obtained; however a significant number do not charge their users, or only charge them for items that must be obtained from the British Library. In addition to enabling partial or full cost recovery for libraries, end-user charging does tend to make users consider whether what they are requesting is really important to them. The opposing view is that charges discourage users from requesting what is important, and disadvantage those users whose local library does not hold the journals or books that they require.

4.3 Finally in this section, it should be noted that users of electronic databases and journals are often presented with the option of by-passing libraries to order documents directly from publishers, but this involves pay-per-view charges of anything up to £16 per item. Also available are pay per view documents from other suppliers. For example, British Library Direct charges £15-20 per article. It is believed that most NHS staff are not prepared to pay this type of amount from their own pockets for documents required in connection with their work.

5. Location and distribution of NHS-owned resources

5.1 There has been and continues to be significant investment in printed journal and book collections within the NHS, funded by the NHS and partner institutions, including higher education. Local collections are developed in response to the needs and anticipated needs of local health communities and students on placement within the NHS. Whilst many are multi-disciplinary, others focus on specialist subject areas, e.g. mental health. Library stock retention policies are locally and regionally determined and increasingly influenced by pressure on space and cost of subscription. Some of these libraries are managed by higher education (HE) institutions and/or are joint operations serving both HE and the NHS.

5.2 Electronic journals, particularly those available on an open access or NHS wide basis, erode the distinction between local and remote holdings which has been the D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 9 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project mainstay of document delivery in the past. The NHS is making significant investment in electronic resources. The NHS ‘National Core Content’ service provides NHS family members in England with variable access to some 1200 electronic journals, and a small but growing number of electronic textbooks. Electronic resources purchased at regional, SHA or local level are supplemented with the Core Content collection.

5.3 The growth in electronic resources available directly to end-users via their computer desktops is inevitably making an impact on document delivery services. Recent years have seen the number of items requested starting to level off or reduce, and this is directly attributable to improved access to electronic resources. However, electronic journals are: o expensive, o attract VAT, o access to them, in terms of archive and perpetuity, is subject to control by publishers, o licensing and access restrictions have led to libraries serving more than one NHS organisation and/or a HE organisation being charged 2 or 3 times by a publisher to provide a formerly available print document in electronic format to all NHS and HE stakeholders, o current issues may be embargoed, o access may be only via IP address, o publisher licences sometimes mean that electronic resources may not be used for document supply purposes (i.e. they may not be supplied to users in organisations not covered by the licence), o journals published prior to 1995 are often not available electronically, o sometimes missing diagrams, charts, or graphics, o too complicated to access for some NHS staff due to interface issues, resulting in more library staff time required to print out articles and possible copyright charge implications. Despite the significant growth in electronic journals, future libraries will undoubtedly continue to combine electronic and print resources, and it is in this context that any document delivery system must be developed.

6. Regional resource-sharing networks in the UK

6.1 Inter-lending schemes cover the following geographic areas:-  Eastern England (EDEN)  London (LENDS)  North East England and Yorkshire (ULSERS)  North West England (LIHNN)  South of England (SENDS)  South West England (SWRLIN)  South Yorkshire and North Derbyshire (SULOS)  West Midlands

6.2 No two of these schemes are identical in their operation, but most have the following characteristics in common:  they reflect the boundaries of former regional health authorities, and are administered by the successors to regional library units. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 10 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project  the units have their own dedicated staff, responsible for maintaining a web catalogue of journals and books, as well as assuring the quality of the data therein. However, some of the projects rely on librarian involvement from those in other jobs or contracted out support.  a cooperative philosophy, whereby NHS libraries do not charge each other for document supply.  a mixed membership of NHS, specialist and higher education libraries. It is common for non-NHS libraries to charge for each transaction, in order to recover their costs, unless there is a contractual relationship (as below).  a mainstay of several of the schemes outside London is a large university health sciences collection - normally a medical school e.g. the Walton Library at Newcastle University. The arrangement is usually a contractual one, and NHS staff can often go directly to the university and bypass their local NHS library if they wish (which is discouraged in other scenarios).  some kind of load-balancing mechanism, so that libraries with large in-depth collections, or highly-specialised ones, are not over-used. Some schemes recognise ‘last resort’ status for these kinds of library; others have ‘first resort’ status, whereby a large library absorbs most of the traffic; some allow certain libraries to only publicise titles unique to that library; some allow charging per transaction, and many have a series of ‘concentric rings’, where local SHA libraries are tried first, and then the search is broadened out according to an agreed protocol. These algorithms are complex for staff to administer, so software which can automate the process, such as WinCHILL, is popular.  The NHS library local to the member of staff generally acts as gatekeeper to the document delivery system. Library customers are discouraged from dealing directly with the library which holds the item they want, unless it is one of the large contracted libraries described above. This is achieved by not publicising web-based union lists, or by placing them behind access controls.  A stock disposal policy. Most schemes try to maintain back-runs of important journals somewhere in the system.

7. National document delivery co-operatives

7.1 There are two national co-operative networks:

 Nursing Union List of Journals (NULJ, http://wads.le.ac.uk/li/clinical/nulj_homepage.htm). This is a cooperative network of NHS, specialist and HE libraries, whose members must carry a minimum of nursing stock in order to qualify. There is a membership fee to cover administrative costs, but document supply itself is free. The website has a union list of holdings.

 Psychiatric Libraries Cooperative Scheme (PLCS, http://www.plcs.nhs.uk) This runs along similar lines, but there is no minimum mental health stock required in order to join. One large library charges members for document supply on a transaction basis.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 11 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project 8. Commercial or membership or fee-based document delivery suppliers

8.1 The list of commercial or fee-based document delivery suppliers currently runs to over 60 organisations, mostly US-based (http://www.library.vcu.edu/tml/docsupp/). Although in theory NHS staff could use any of these systems directly (including the British Library), in practice, the professional associations, such as the Royal College of Nursing, the Royal Society of Medicine or the Chartered Society of Physiotherapists are most frequently used. Document delivery is charged for on a cost-recovery basis, or gratis if the item is supplied from the institution’s collections.

8.2 The BMA library is unusual in marketing its services both to its personal members, and to libraries. The Royal College of Surgeons of England library also supplies directly to libraries. However, the largest and predominant document delivery supplier by far is the British Library Document Supply Centre (BLSDC) (http://www.bl.uk/docsupply ). As the most expensive option, NHS libraries often treat it as a last resort, when all other schemes have been exhausted.

8.3 The new A-Z product being provided by the National Core Content has a module that could be purchase which would allow either:

 pay - per - view, or  unmediated requests seamlessly sent to single linked supplier e.g. BL, or  mediated requests sent to 28 key centres to approve before sending on to suppliers.

Linking this module to a resolver would ensure that requests were only sent once NHS content had been checked.

9. Pilots within the NHS

In NHS there are 2 pilot project related to document delivery in the NHS. These pilots will share common evaluation criteria and reporting mechanisms.

North West The North West Health Care Libraries Unit has secured funding to pilot the Dialog automated document requesting software. Dialog is the current supplier of clinical bibliographic databases to the NHS. Dialog software already enables linkage between records in its database (i.e. references to journal articles) and the full-text of these articles, where these have also been purchased through the NHS, so that end users can directly access the articles that they find whilst searching. This pilot will additionally investigate the use of Dialog software to allow end users to make point-of-search requests for articles that are not available electronically, with rules to determine the sources and charges. Apart from the technology, the pilot offers the opportunity to scope the use of a standard set of such ‘rules’. As of August 2006, there is plan for a roll out across the North West pending minor changes with the software.

Trent Trent SHA has funded one Trust library service to test the effect of allowing end users un- mediated access to inter-library loans, using the document delivery service to be developed by Dialog. This is a large acute Trust, with a relatively high volume of inter- library loans, all of which are currently mediated by the library service. The intention is that end users will be able to request inter-library loans purely on the basis of perceived need D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 12 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project to support their work, with delivery directly to themselves for a trial period of six months. The effect of this access on the volume of loans requested will then be monitored to see if the numbers increase markedly, stay roughly the same or decrease. Costs will also be evaluated. Commencement of the pilot will be dependent on the speed with which the Dialog document delivery service evolves.

South West The South West Regional Library and Information Network (SWRLIN), recently piloted VDX – Virtual Document Exchange (http://www.fdgroup.com/fdi/products/vdx4.html), a software product from OCLC PICA. The software is available with a web based interface. It enables the automatic searching of suppliers’ catalogues and the electronic sending of requests for papers and books not held locally to a range of predetermined locations, locally, regionally and nationally. The system provides the library with a management environment that enables both electronic and printed delivery of information to the library and to the user direct. Requests may be placed by the user from any web-enabled PC, or ‘mediated’ through the Library.

Unfortunately, the software was not able to meet the needs of the pilot sites and the product is no longer being trialled in the South West. It is anticipated however that the lessons learnt in the pilot, currently being evaluated as part of the project, will prove invaluable in developing the strategic business case.

10. Libraries in Other Sectors

10.1 HE libraries in the UK rely almost exclusively on the British Library for the supply of articles that are not available either locally or electronically; some are considering offering (and paying for) publisher pay-per-view to their users, as some US academic libraries already do. Whilst there may be no direct parallels between the needs and preferences of Higher Education (HE) user communities and NHS user communities, it is worth noting that the number of requests for journal articles that HE libraries receive from students and academic staff has declined in recent years. It is likely that this is in large part due to increased investment in electronic journals.

10.2 In terms of the inter-lending of books, the CURL (Consortium of Research Libraries) Monograph Interlending Study, which was sponsored by the British Library and conducted in 2003 http://www.curl.ac.uk/projects/Monographfinal.pdf recommended the adoption and implementation of a 'BLDSC Plus' option that would involve the British Library forming a consortium with a range of partner libraries willing to provide monograph inter-lending services to defined service standards and charges. Follow-up work was provided in the form of the Monograph Interlending Project (MIP) http://www.curl.ac.uk/projects/#MonographInterlendingProject. However, the MIP has now concluded and they have no plans to do further work in this area. Cost was a major factor in the decision not to pursue this scheme.

Drivers for change

11. Clinical governance

11.1 “Clinical governance is a system through which NHS organizations are accountable for continuously improving the quality of their services and safeguarding high

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 13 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project standards of care by creating an environment in which excellence in clinical care will flourish” (Scally & Donaldson, 1998). A prerequisite of this high quality care is the provision of relevant, high quality information, at the time and place that the clinician needs it since “increasingly, neither clinical decisions nor health policy alone can any longer be comfortably based on opinion alone” (Scally & Donaldson, 1998). This information must be available to every member of health care staff.

11.2 The procurement of an ILDS system will enable clinicians to receive the information they need via ‘just-in-time’ processes. An additional advantage of a national system would be the scope for greater integration between document requesting and clinical decision-making, through technological linkages with such innovations as Map of Medicine.

12. Efficiency

12.1 In its response to the Gershon review of public sector efficiency the Government is committed to: share and rationalise back office services where possible; make better use of NHS buying power; and make better use of staff time. 1 The benefits of an NHS wide document delivery service are firmly aligned to ‘Gershon savings’, by sharing and rationalising; making better use of NHS buying power; and saving staff time through the use of modern systems.

13. Mobilisation and stewardship of NHS knowledge resources

13.1 A related driver is the need to ensure that NHS ‘knowledge’ (published learning from NHS research and experience, and information resources that the NHS has purchased) is available and freely accessible to the NHS. A national document delivery system could help optimise this access, and help inform and rationalise local retention and archiving policies at a time when demand on physical space for local library collections is at a premium.

13.2 Developing shared repositories and use of BioMed Central have the potential to improve access to NHS knowledge resources

14. A changing workforce

14.1 Library services need to support flexible working and learning within the NHS, and provide equitable access to information by an increasingly diverse and distributed workforce. These demands are stretching fixed local library budgets increasingly thinly. Inequities that already exist because libraries pass on different charges to their users, are further accentuated because more specialist and non-traditional library users are less likely to have their needs met through local collections.

14.2 The provision of document delivery services is undeniably intensive of library staff time, and the opportunity for saving staff time is accompanied by the opportunity for modernising library staff roles and delivering added-value services through involvement in areas of growth such as managed learning environments where

1 http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/801/75/sr2004_ch8.pdf D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 14 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project library staff have much to offer in the organisation , retrieval and training inherent in these systems. .

15. User needs and expectations

15.1 The growth in ease of web-based searching, coupled in the NHS with a culture that encourages the seeking of evidence to support clinical practice, means that end users are increasingly likely to identify resources which are not available locally in print format. The fact that an increasing number of resources are available electronically, tends to increase expectations that all should be available electronically so that they may be accessed immediately at the point of need. End user demands for self-service, ease of use, speed of response and seamless service have been identified in the OCLC Environment scan, and in terms of document delivery this suggests an expectation that searching and requesting are seamless and can be done without use of a librarian as an intermediary, or, where there is a mediated service, that documents are received electronically, and users can be kept up to date with the progress of their request.

15.2 It is however, likely that by no means all NHS staff currently share these expectations, for reasons of skill, IT access or preference. Much evidence about user expectations is anecdotal, with little known about the relative importance that NHS end-users attach to the various factors surrounding document access, such as speed of delivery, quality of content, or personal service. It is clear, however, that any future system must be user focused and intuitive to use, at the same time enabling library staff to mediate on behalf of their clients when required.

15.3 In terms of the types of documents required by NHS users, it is not known whether the majority of documents requested by the majority of NHS staff are available within the collective resources of the NHS. Neither do we know how many requests are for items over 10 years old or know how many documents are not pursued because they are not available immediately.

16. Advances in document delivery service design

16.1 Recent document delivery projects have looked at ways of reducing library staff involvement in document delivery processes. Appendix A summarises the results of several projects and initiatives. These point to the advantages of unmediated document ordering, for both end-users and libraries, including ease of ordering and opportunity for discovery of related items for end users, service reliability, lower unit costs, higher fill rates and faster turnaround times, and ease of management and monitoring for library staff. However, bringing together several document delivery services into an integrated unmediated service that would meet the diverse range of needs of the NHS user community would be a further challenge, as would management monitoring in the relatively much more complex NHS environment.

17. Technological advancement in relation to document delivery

17.1 There are now several commercial providers of software for peer-to-peer document delivery transactions, whilst technological advances in web browsing, resolvers and D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 15 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project open linking software have made end-user searching easier, and the improved technical interoperability between systems has enhanced the scope for combining searching with document requesting and retrieval. Technology is advancing rapidly. Appendix B summarises the views of several commentators, and lists some technical standards that are relevant to document delivery processes.

18. Trends in publishing

18.1 Many of the main health journals to which NHS staff require access are now available electronically. However, individual titles are often expensive to purchase. Recognition of the difficulty this causes has led some publishers and aggregators to develop offers of many different titles bundled together. These bundled offers typically include some high value titles but also many titles which are significantly less useful. Archive access to e-journals can also be problematic. Some publishers and aggregators do not guarantee to provide archive access beyond the life of a contract and older material is often not available at all. Where older material has been digitized and made available there is often a charge applied to legacy backfiles. Publishers may offer legacy backfiles free or at a cost depending on the wishes of the learned society on whose behalf the journal is published. Access to e-journals is also an issue and is often complex, for example relying on IP authentication, which does not work in the NHS. Moreover, of particular importance in the context of this business case, is the fact that e-journals often have prohibitive licensing restrictions, which prevent their use for document supply to non- subscribing libraries or individuals. These limitations on the usefulness of e- journals, coupled with customer preference and limitations on IT access for some NHS staff, are the main reason why NHS libraries have, for the most part, continued to maintain significant holdings of print journals.

18.2 The main challenge to the traditional subscription-based publishing model is emerging from the open access publishing movement. There are two main approaches to open access. In one, authors cede copyright to traditional journals but retain the right to deposit an electronic copy in a digital repository. The other model is based on an author-pays model in which journal articles accepted for publication are charged for the right to publish. A growing number of healthcare journals are now being published in this format and both the NHS and HE have shown a willingness to support this model. Emerging evidence suggests that open access articles are cited earlier, more frequently and more accurately than conventionally published articles, vindicating this approach. In a parallel development, some universities have also begun to set-up institutional repositories in which their academic staff can deposit work. In response, some conventional publishers have begun to develop initiatives of their own which move at least partly towards open access, for example making archive access more freely available (e.g. BMJ Publishing Group, which has committed to making the archive of all material over one year old freely available).

18.3 There are now over 1,260,000 articles indexed in Medline freely available either via Open Access or delayed access to backfiles (search of Medline August 2006). In 2005/2005 some of the major funding agencies such as the National Institutes for Health (NIH), the Wellcome Trust, and Research Councils UK have published policy statements requiring grant holders to publish in Open Access forums where access is free or free shortly after publication. Compliance so far has been poor. The number of freely available articles will continue to grow but a large proportion of D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 16 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project material will remain behind subscription barriers. Article processing fees by which open access is funded will continue to rise thus hindering a large scale movement towards open access. Continued inflation in journal subscription costs will lead to fewer titles being available to users thus maintaining a requirement for document supply. 18.4 The mixed economy of traditional subscription-based publishing and open-access publishing is likely to persist for the next few years at least, but with continuing growth in the number of open access journals, it is vital that NHS users are encouraged to fully exploit them.

19. Digital archiving

A related trend is towards archiving journals in electronic format, often known as digital preservation. The whole run of the British Medical Journal will be freely available on the Web within the next 3 years for example, and there is every chance that runs of other important journals and books will be digitised in the near future.

The international perspective: selected schemes in operation in other countries

Inter-lending and document supply schemes operating in other countries may point to existing models that are compatible with some of our options. There is variation in organisational structure, document formats involved, pricing, and evaluation information for each model explored and this is not a comprehensive overview. More published research would need to be made available to evaluate the comparative cost-effectiveness of these models. Nevertheless, it is of interest to decision-makers to be aware of systems used in other countries.

20. USA and Canada

Medical libraries in the USA and Canada generally use an ILL request and referral system for journal articles called DOCLINE. Developed by the U.S. National Library of Medicine, DOCLINE has been web-based since 2000. Participating libraries agree to post their journal holdings, including volumes and years held, to a database called SERHOLD and to give their best effort to process ILL requests from other libraries. Each library sets up a routing table of other libraries from whom they would like to request articles. The table is arranged such that larger libraries do not receive all the requests. An electronic funds transfer service (EFTS) has been set up by the University of Connecticut Health Center for the administration of fees. A useful feature of this system is that libraries can temporarily deactivate their participation in the system if they are short-staffed or are facing other challenging circumstances. DOCLINE accommodates web-based document delivery and requests for documents found in MEDLINE via PubMed. PubMed’s Loansome Doc feature allows the public to affiliate with a medical library for the purpose of requesting medical articles.

21. The Netherlands (Holland)

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 17 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project The Netherlands are working towards a decentralized model for nation-wide ILL services. This program is not specific to medical libraries. University libraries began using the OCLC (Online Computer Library Center) PICA cataloguing and ILL system in 2001. The OCLC system (NCC/ILL) takes advantage of the Netherlands Central Catalogue Interlibrary Loan system that has been in place for approximately twenty years. The NCC/ILL system involves a shared catalogue which includes collections of special libraries, public and university libraries, and the national library. The national system, primarily used for scientific articles does not fully meet the needs of the scientific community, accounting for 55% of all document deliveries and 11% of book ILL requests.

The Netherlands Institute for Scientific Information (NISI) has been operating a document delivery service in collaboration with the German National Library of Medicine in Cologne. The Technical University Delft also process requests for scientific articles. The Netherlands proposes to use Z39.50 and OpenURL technology to build a decentralised, networked ILL system. The ILL routing network would be centralized administratively, while the catalogue component would remain decentralized (i.e. institutions would share their catalogues through standardized technology).

22. Iceland

In 2001, a group of librarians in Iceland negotiated a collection of 8000 e-journals that may be accessed by anyone in Iceland. Access is recognised by IP address. It is difficult to determine the long-term impact of freely available e-journals on ILL requests as no general decrease in ILL requests appears during the years 2000- 2003 in the statistics kept by the National and University Library of Iceland. Iceland is looking into Aleph500 (http://www.exlibris-usa.com/aleph.htm) to improve access to e-journals and to improve ILL and document delivery. This is a highly flexible system.

23. Australia

In 1997, several academic libraries in Australia and New Zealand began a project using Fretwell-Downing Informatics (FDI) software to route ILL requests and assist with document delivery. The project expanded to include non-profit libraries in Australia and New Zealand. In 2002, the Western Australian Group of University Librarians (WAGUL) started to use FDI’s VDX software to manage all document delivery between four different libraries. WAGUL found it essential to develop service level agreements between libraries in order to protect the competitive environment valued by their parent institutions. System configuration also required a large amount of collaboration. Although this was time-consuming, the collaboration efforts carried over into other initiatives. WAGUL are continuing to fine-tune their ILL and document delivery services.

GratisNet (http://www.gratisnet.org.au) is an example of a web-hosted consortial ILL scheme in the health library sector in Australia.

Genoni and Jones (2003) caution that a shift in library collections toward shared licensed access threatens the diversified collections that allow libraries to meet the needs or potential needs of users. Collection evaluation may become an increasingly important component of consortial ILL programs. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 18 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

Definitions and scope; constraints and dependencies

24. Service

24.1 Document delivery is a supply chain service. It can be user- or library- initiated and relates to the process between identification of an item through a bibliographic record or other metadata and the receipt of the full text of the item by an end user. Document supply is a synonym, and inter library loan is one method of document supply.

24.2 The service scope in this business case includes the complete document delivery chain, i.e. all stages and intervening processes between user initiation and delivery to end user. The process may include intermediaries or be unmediated.

24.3 As a minimum, the case will include the supply of journal articles, but it is desirable to include consideration of the supply of books, reports, e-learning objects, etc, as it will be essential that a supply system for journal articles dovetails with existing and possible future systems for the supply of these other types of document.

24.4 The case will consider the supply of documents to all ‘NHS family’ members, to reflect the strategy and policy of the National Library for Health and National Core Content. Thus it will include supply of documents to students on placement in NHS organisations, to social care staff, and to independent and charitable sector staff providing care to NHS patients. It will not include supply of documents to NHS patients, but must take into account and again be able to dovetail with developments in this area.

24.5 The scope includes the NHS in England, but it is desirable to include options for extension to home countries.

25. Technology

25.1 In the context of document delivery, technology includes a wide range of process, manual and digital, including scanning, transmission by e-mail and traditional postage. Technology includes a link resolver system such as SFX, making use of standards such as OpenURL and Digital Object Identifier (DOI).

25.2 The minimal technology scope would cover just the technology to enable a specific document delivery service. A maximal scope would establish a technology framework to support different and evolving models of document delivery.

25.3 For accessing these services via N3 NHS network it is essential that library and information services are high on the priority list for connection

26. Critical success factors

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 19 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project 26.1 Meet quality standards: Quality of service is a key critical success factor. The new system must deliver added value for end users. Standards (delivery times, quality, “fill rate’’, customer care) must be as good as or better than at present.

26.2 Ease to use: Ease and convenience of use is another critical success factor. The system must be intuitive to use and not require significant training and support. At the very least, the system must not create more barriers than exist now for those end-users who have poor IT access and/or poor IT skills. Ideally for end users, locating and requesting documents are integrated, with the facility to incorporate requests from a number of databases.

26.3 Speed: The system must be able to cope with both routine and urgent requests.

26.4 Request tracking: The system must include provision for tracking requests and enable provision of a request history for end users.

26.5 Minimal errors: The system must have the potential to reduce errors in the document requesting and delivery process.

26.6 Flexible managed environment: There is the need for the system to manage an environment that enables both electronic and printed delivery of information direct to the user as well as the library. The sytem must encompass the delivery of journal articles and the supply of books, reports, and e-learning materials.

26.7 Fit with local IT: The system must be manageable and affordable within the IT infrastructure of the NHS, and take into account the ICT that is available to end users, including those who work from home or have no access to NHSNet NHS network, and to libraries. Interoperability is key - it must interface with existing and planned IT systems.

26.8 Fit with organisational structures: The system must be manageable and affordable within NHS organisational and economic structures, but also independent of organisational re-structuring and boundary changes.

26.9 Financially affordable: The system set-up and maintenance costs cannot be met through local library budgets. There is a risk that an improved system could increase costs, through being able to satisfy what is currently unmet demand. The system must therefore fully exploit free resources, and include a mechanism to support users to be selective in their choice of documents to request, allowing the charging back of costs to end-users as appropriate.

26.10 Fit with library workforce: The design of the system should take into account the NHS library workforce, acknowledge that prompt document delivery is key to customer relations and patient care, and consider current and future library staff skills, capacity and roles.

26.11 Fit with NHS partners: The system should be able to embrace partner organisations and their library resources (e.g. HE and FE, social care, independently contracted organisations), to allow for delivery of services to NHS staff by non-NHS organisations, and delivery of services to staff contracted to the NHS but working

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 20 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project outside it. There is a risk that certain key NHS libraries may be unable to meet the demands of a national system due to increase in workloads.

26.12 Meets legal requirements: The system must be compliant with legislative requirements (e.g. Copyright, Data Protection, Disability Discrimination) and publisher licences. These are significant constraints on any document delivery service.

26.13 Risk-free requirements: Introduction of the system should not disrupt document access or de-stabilise existing document delivery or publishing systems in any unforeseen, damaging way. Human resource capacity and technical and project/change management skills must be available at the required level to support implementation.

26.14 Fit with national IT: There is a need to ensure a good fit between the document delivery system and strategic initiatives such as National Knowledge Service, National Library for Health. NHS Common User Interface, and with operational initiatives and pilots in the NHS (including the NLH Technical Design Authority Enterprise/Information Architecture, Single Search Engine, Health Library and Information Service Directory (HLISD), document delivery pilots, NHS OpenURL resolver, national A-Z journals list software, library management systems), and with the growth in managed learning environments (MLEs).

Benefits and risks (high level)

27. Benefits

27.1 Document requesting and supply services that save users time, that are simpler to use and access, and that combine searching and requesting.

27.2 Document requesting and supply services that support equitable access for all, and that ensure that it is as cheap and easy to obtain documents that are not held locally or available electronically, as those that are.

27. 3 Reduced or eliminated risk of staff not having access to good quality evidence simply because it is not readily available.

27.4 Document requesting and supply services that directly support clinical governance, by enabling all staff groups to have just in time access to information at the point of need.

27.5 Scope for service modernisation through streamlining, and linkage with IT systems at national and local level.

27.6 Significant time savings for library staff, and opportunities for library staff workforce modernisation. Library staff released from administrative work involved in processing requests, in order to develop and deliver other types of value-added services.

27.7 Improved mobilisation and stewardship of NHS print and electronic library resources. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 21 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

27.8 Saving of space currently used for local library archives, allowing, for instance, reconfiguration of existing library premises as learning resource centres.

27.9 Potentially reduced unit costs and containment of overall expenditure on document delivery by maximising the use of local, regional and national resources.

27.10 Raise the profile of library and information services within the NHS.

28. Risks

28.1 Interrupting document supply or de-stabilising existing document delivery or publishing systems in a damaging way.

28.2 System(s) developed now being out-of-date in five years time because of the fast rate of technological change and developments in publishing and storage of information.

28.3 Changes in library staff roles and ways of working may cause anxiety.

28.4 Reduction in customer contact element of front line service.

28.5 Needing to make decisions in the absence of research-based evidence (e.g. on user needs, values and preferences, on demand for documents over ten years old).

28.6 Increasing costs through satisfying currently unmet demand.

28.7 In an organisation as complex as the NHS, “one model will not fit all.”

28.8 The delivery of the system may be compromised by the delivery of national IT projects.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 22 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

Economic Case

29. Introduction

29.1 The strategic case for a document delivery service for the NHS has now been presented. This section sets out the investment goals for the service and the main options for delivery. These will be refined and evaluated if the high level business case is approved.

30. Investment Goals

30.1 Based on the benefits identified in the strategic case, the investment goals are:

30.2 To minimize variations in service delivery by enabling all NHS staff to have equal access to document delivery services.

30.3 To save the user time, by enabling him/her to obtain the full text of bibliographic references. Saving time does not necessarily mean automating document delivery services, although for some users self-service will be welcome. The following scenarios are illustrative of other ways in which users’ time may be saved:  By enabling a user to highlight a series of bibliographic references in a results set and pass them in electronic format to a library service to obtain full text on their behalf.  Enabling a user to highlight the bibliographic data on any web page and either pass the data to a resolver manually or have the page ‘auto link enabled’.  Enabling forms based requests, either mediated or unmediated.

30.4 To increase value for money by seeking to decrease the unit cost of document delivery. For example, by:  enabling the NHS to continually seek the best price from competing document delivery services.  integrating document delivery with archives of electronic full text.

30.5 To contain the overall NHS expenditure on document delivery, for example by:  routing requests to the most cost effective delivery option, which may be mediated or unmediated photocopying at a local library.  highlighting to users the cost of the documents they are requesting, even if users are not paying for items directly.  assisting users to request only genuinely required documents, through support and training.  enabling the NHS to set individual quotas for document delivery services, and for users to pay directly above the quota.

30.6 To support patient choice by dovetailing with mechanisms developed to enable NHS patients and the public to obtain full text documents.

30.7 To support clinical governance by enabling all NHS staff to have rapid access to full text references in clinical settings.

30.8 To support modernisation by integrating document delivery with Connecting for Health services. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 23 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

30.9 To save the time of library staff, for example by:  giving users a self-service option.  streamlining the process of mediated document requesting.

31. Some key considerations

31.1 A streamlined document delivery service has the potential to increase overall costs by satisfying unmet need and demand. It is vital that any document delivery system should address this issue. One way will be to ensure that as far as possible users request freely available (e.g. open archived) copies of papers, and it is vital that the document delivery system can use emerging technologies and services such as Open Archives and Open URL.

31.2 There is an opportunity to build in a service that helps users improve the relevance and quality of the items they wish to order – some form of intervention (electronic and/or person based) between finding references and ordering them.

31.3 The document delivery system has dependencies on the NHS search environment and the NHS Copyright Licensing Agreement.

31.4 The document delivery system must support (and be supported by) the evolving NHS Library Service Framework.

31.5 Current document delivery services support relations between library staff and between library staff and users. An example of this approach is the telephone contact made between libraries when processing urgent requests. Service redesign should continue to support these relations, including any user training necessary to utilise a new service.

31.6 The cost of any new service should not be met by reductions in local library budgets or staff. This is because a) libraries are already relatively poorly funded and staffed, and b) there will be opportunities to switch resources to other activities. These other activities include support for clinical librarianship; clinical governance; Map of Medicine development; training (for example CASP, Connecting for Health, and information literacy); and supporting health information for patients and public.

32. Options for delivery When considering the options for delivery, a wide ranging approach is taken at this stage so that as many potential models as possible can be considered. The high- level options shown below range from the current through to enhancements of existing services to new models and include “do nothing” (i.e. retain the status quo), invest more in access to electronic content rather than in document supply, creating a national union catalogue and having a mix of models. The feasibility and costs of these options will be evaluated objectively during the options appraisal process (see 33.2). This should allow for the option most beneficial to the NHS to be identified. There is no assumption at this stage that the preferred way forward is a single, national ILDS system.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 24 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project The following long list option sets have been identified, to be explored through the Treasury Greenbook framework2 refined through consultation, and further analysed to establish a preferred way forward:

a. Retain status quo of regional coordination, rather than national Rely on the continued coordination of document supply services on a regional basis as now, rather than developing national initiatives. Under the terms of this option, there will be no further development of the business case although there will continue to be expenditure in the NHS, through regional and other initiatives at this time.

b. Centrally funded guidance Make a small amount of national investment to improve document delivery services. Ways in which a ‘do minimum’ investment could contribute to enhanced end-user services include: a baseline survey of ILL practices across the country, training for library staff, development of evidence-based, good practice protocols, setting up a national interlibrary loan e-mail list, and developing an interlibrary loan request form on the NLH website. Centrally funded continuing professional development programme for interlending and document supply. This could include the development and provision of workshops and best practice guidance.

c. Enhance existing networks Enhance existing co-operatives. Enhance existing interlending and document supply partnerships by ensuring standardisation of service, software systems and participation. Enhance existing interlending and document supply networks by investing in software and services that meet standards for interconnectivity between different library management systems.

d. Vendor-provided document delivery Vendor-provided document delivery module Add a document delivery module to core content databases and/or the NLH single search engine. This would allow users to order documents direct from libraries, publishers or other suppliers within an electronic environment Funding for articles supplied would likely need to come from end users or from a finite NLH budget. Add a document delivery module to core content databases and/or the NLH single search engine. This would allow users to order documents direct from publishers or other suppliers without using library interlending forms or procedures. Funding for articles supplied would likely need to come from end users or from a finite NLH budget.

e. Increase link resolver services Increase link resolver and pointer services Set up additional link resolver and pointer features within search engines and bibliographic databases that are available to NHS staff, such as NLH single search engine, Google Scholar, Dialog Databases, and PubMed. This will expand on the routes available to full text for NHS staff. Link resolver services would enable users to seamlessly access full text without having to search separate information sources. Pointer services would include links to pay per view and other document delivery options. Set up additional link resolver features with bibliographic databases that are commonly available to NHS staff, such as A-Z journal lists and PubMed. This will expand on the full text links available through the DIALOG databases, offering

2 http://greenbook.treasury.gov.uk/index.htm D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 25 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project increased full-text access to NHS staff. Link resolver services enable users to seamlessly access full text without having to search separate information sources.

f. Improve access to National Core Content, locally/regionally subscribed journals, and open access journals Improve access to full-text electronic resources through National Core Content, locally and regionally purchased electronic journals and books, and open access journals such as those freely available on the Internet; BioMed Central, PubMed, UK PubMed, publications and those stored in Open Repositories Improve searchability of the National Core Content, open access and archived journals and ensure best evidence is what end users find first. Also, improve stability and currency of current NCC and provision of quality titles that are more directly relevant to users, including those engaged in evidence-based commissioning and service planning.

g. Libraries to review subscriptions by negotiating a different model for article and journal access with vendors NHS libraries negotiate a national or regional aggregated journal collection, informed by existing subscription and ILDS data, comprising open access and commercial ‘gold’ titles (vs bundles), and pay-per-view deposit accounts. Once the number of articles ordered from a particular title reaches a pre-agreed level, NHS libraries would get the title for free. Open access with or without embargo must form part of the subscription terms. Switch from subscription to delivery with NHS libraries cancelling journal subscriptions by negotiating with vendors to allow libraries to set up pay per view deposit accounts, up to the value of a subscription. Once the number of articles ordered from a particular title reaches a pre-agreed level, a subscription automatically begins.

h. Outsourcing of document supply Outsourcing of document supply Document delivery service would be provided solely by an external supplier. This option could explore various approaches to payment, funding and routing of requests. Document delivery service would be provided by an external supplier. This option could explore various approaches to payment, funding and routing of requests

i. National interlending of books and other library materials, using a centralised cataloguing system A national catalogue that facilitates library staff and users to locate books, journals (including full-text electronic access to articles) and other library materials This would include links to the collections of the BMA, Royal Colleges etc but would include filters for regional locations to be accessed first. ILLs would be between libraries and mediated by library staff using a national agreed level of service with individual libraries choosing the scope of service offered. Within this should be agreements on collection development policy. Funding could be considered for a national deal for interlending software for ordering and record-keeping. A long-term goal would be a particular library management system, to encompass catalogue and facilitate national level interlending. The software would be centrally maintained. The decision whether to migrate would likely lie at a regional, rather than a local level. Offer libraries the option of migrating to a particular library management system, to facilitate national level interlending. The software would be centrally maintained. The decision whether to migrate would likely lie at a regional, rather than local level. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 26 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

j. Provide the ability for individual catalogues and journal union lists to link into a single search engine – eg COPACNational interlending of books and other library materials, using a decentralised cataloguing system Offer libraries access to a centrally maintained software, which facilitates the import and/or export of catalogue records from/to a central catalogue, while allowing local/regional use of preferred, technologically compatible library management software.

k. Open Access Model New option – Encourage NHS staff to publish in Open Access Journals and/or deposit their publications in NHS archives perhaps forcing a culture change in the publishing industry and their pricing.

kl. A mixture of two or more of the options listed above.

33. Options appraisal

33.1 At this stage it is more important to identify a range of potentially viable options than to narrow them down to a preferred way forward.

33.2 The following approaches will be applied at the Outline Business Case stage to identify those options that most strongly support the investment goals and critical success factors:

 SWOT analysis by benefits case team  User and stakeholder workshops (to include library assistants) – for confirming and weighting benefits  Cost benefit analysis, including full economic cost analysis and sensitivity analysis

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 27 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project Commercial, Financial and Project Management Cases

34. Commercial Case

34.1 At this stage, the commercial case consists of an overview of the market for document delivery solutions, including a range of factors that bear on the commercial deal that will deliver best value for the NHS.

34.2 Much of the material is included in the Strategic Case. Of note:

 ILDS represents the ‘order fulfilment’ part of the supply chain in libraries. Following identification of a document through a bibliographic reference in a catalogue or database, a document delivery service enables an authorised user to obtain a full text copy of the document (typically a book, report, journal or paper).  There is a pre-existing internal market for ILDS in the NHS. This market is valuable, but its cost effectiveness needs to be considered in the context of the next iteration of this business case and the broader strategy for NLH. The evidence to date (Wilson, 1999) suggests it is much cheaper to base document supply in the NHS on local circuits than on an outsourced model.  There is a range of commercial suppliers. However, the market is changing rapidly as the Internet offers new ways to deliver documents. Any commercial arrangement must reflect the need for change within the lifetime of the contract .  There are a number of important strategic-operational considerations that need addressing to achieve the best value for the NHS, including the balance between stock holding and delivery, and mediated and unmediated delivery.  Outside the NHS context users appear to find unmediated services acceptable More research will be needed to understand user needs in the context of NHS and health libraries.

34.3 A cost of document supply model is available in Appendix C

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 28 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project 35. Financial Case

35.1 The NHS commits around £1.2 million per annum in direct costs for document delivery3 and a further unquantified amount (possibly as much as 25% of the cost of administrative staff salaries) on indirect costs.

35.2 The number of BL requests from the NHS in 2003-4 was 157,000. The number supplied via local networks was around 250,000. The remaining 90,000 documents were supplied from other sources, including the BMA library.

35.3 A next step in developing the business case will be the demonstration that any new service is affordable. The potential sources of funding for an NHS document delivery service are:

 New central funding  Levy on StHAs  Directly from end users

It is conceivable that a service could be funded from one or more of these sources.

3 Financing NHS Libraries. Robert Huggins Associates 2005. The average expenditure per NHS library on Inter Library Loans in 2003/4 was just under £4000. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 29 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project 36. Project Management Case

36.1 The business case is being developed as part of the National Library for Health Programme, which is part of the National Knowledge Service.

36.2 The business case will continue to be developed collectively by NHS librarians, and be subject to peer review from NHS libraries and approval by NKS, via NLH Programme Advisory Board.

36.3 If the case proceeds to OBC stage consultancy, either from within NHS Connecting for Health or externally, will be sought.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 30 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

Bibliography

Antelman, K (2004). Do open access articles have a greater research impact? College and Research Libraries, September 2004.

Archibald, D; Burrows, T; and McDonald, C. (2003) How the west was one: using VDX to redevelop cooperative document delivery services in Western Australia. Presented at the Interlending and Document Supply International Conference in Canberra, Australia, October 2003. Accessed at http://www.nla.gov.au/ilds/abstracts/ArchibaldD.pdf 14/3/06..

Bell, A, Bower G. and Whitehurst, D (2004). Docusend: the one stop, integrated, document delivery broker service: final report. Available http://www.docusend.ac.uk/final.pdf (Accessed 14/3/06.)

Birch, K (1999) The Documents Direct project: evaluating commercial document suppliers. New Library World vol. 100, no. 1150, pp. 207-212.

Birch, K (2000) Documents Direct: a case study. Presented at 2000 CURL Conference. Available http://www.curl.ac.uk/presentations/2000conference/Birch%20presentation %203rd.PPT (Accessed 14/3/06.)

Birch, K and Young, I A (2001). Unmediated document delivery at Leeds University: from project to operational system. Interlending & Document Supply vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 4-10.

Bowler, J (2003) Unmediated document delivery: the issues and possibilities. The Australian Library Journal vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 327-339.

Brophy, P (2003). Single article supply: a report to the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC)

Carmel, M J (1988). Library resource sharing in the National Health Service: benefits and limitations. Interlending & Document Supply vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 12-16.

FAQ DOCLINE -- What is DOCLINE®?. Accessed at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/services/doc_what.html 14/3/06.

Genoni, P and Jones, M (2003). Consortia and collections: enhancing interlending effectiveness. Presented at the Interlending and Document Supply International Conference in Canberra, Australia, October 2003. Accessed at http://www.nla.gov.au/ilds/abstracts/GenoniP.pdf 14/3/06..

Hlynsdottir, Þ and Gylfadottir, Þ (2003) ILL/DD in Iceland before and after nationwide access to 8,000 e-journals – the story so far. Presented at the Interlending and Document Supply International Conference in Canberra, Australia, October 2003. Accessed at http://www.nla.gov.au/ilds/abstracts/Thorny.ppt 14/3/06..

Jackson, M E (2004). The future of interlending, Interlending & Document Supply vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 88-93. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 31 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project

Jackson, M E (2004) Assessing ILL/DD services study. Association of Research Libraries (ARL) bimonthly report 230/231. Available http://www.arl.org/newsltr/230/illdd.html and http://www.arl.org/stats/newmeas/ill_flyer.html (Accessed 14/3/06.)

Morris, A; Woodfield J and Davies, J E (1999). Experimental evaluation of selected electronic document delivery systems. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science vol. 31 no. 3, pp.135-44 (Reports results of research to test and analyse 5 different document delivery systems according to requesting and delivery times, document quality and coverage).

Morrow, T (2002). EASY does it: a fresh approach to electronic article supply. Presented at VALA 2002 Conference. Available http://www.vala.org.au/vala2002/2002pdf/25Morrow.pdf (Accessed 14/3/06.)

National Network of Libraries of Medicine Document Delivery Plan. Accessed at http://www.nnlm.gov/libinfo/docline/docdelplan.html 14/3/06.

Paden, S L (2001). Web-based Loansome Doc, librarians, and end users: results from a survey of the Southeast Region. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 263-271.

Robert Huggins Associates (2005). Financing NHS libraries

Scally, G and Donaldson, L J (1993). Clinical governance and the drive for quality improvement in the new NHS in England. BMJ vol. 317, pp. 61-65.

Stapel, J (2003) Going Dutch: towards a multitiered networked ILL service for the Netherlands. Presented at the World Library and Information Congress, Berlin, Germany, 5 August 2003. Accessed at http://www.kb.nl/hcc/ifla2003/ifla2003.html.14/3/06.

Thomson ISI (2004) The impact of open access journals: a citation study

Wilson T (1999) Cost benefit analysis of a regional database of documents: a case study based on the SWRLIN union catalogue. University of Southampton Health Care Libraries Unit.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 32 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project Appendix A - Selected initiatives in document delivery design

Documents Direct http://www.leeds.ac.uk/library/docdel/pubs.htm of University of Leeds (Birch 1999, 2001, 2002)  The project aimed to examine possible alternatives to the established collection development model by:  Offering a just-in-time policy  Assessing costs and benefits of on-demand single article supply  The project involved the testing of unmediated document ordering and delivery from different suppliers to academics and researchers.  The British Library’s Inside Web service was the most often used supplier for various reasons:  Ease of use for users  Its multi-disciplinary database which facilitated discovery  Reliable and predictable service performance  Easy service management for staff  The project concluded that:  Unmediated document ordering offers a value-added service with benefits such as current awareness and linked document delivery, order monitoring, control and speed of delivery.  Unmediated document ordering is a cost-effective alternative to traditional interlibrary loans.  The range of titles ordered demonstrates the value of access over holdings because no title has been ordered significantly to justify purchase.  Documents Direct started in 3/1999 and ran as a project until 3/2000. It has now become a service available to all schools in the University of Leeds and with over 700 registered users.

EASY: Electronic Article Supply http://www.illos.lancs.ac.uk/easy.html of University of Lancaster and Ingenta (Morrow 2002)  How EASY works:  Document requests submitted through the ILLOS 2.1E web interface are automatically checked for availability under the EASY service.  Institutional subscriptions are verified and, if appropriate, the document is offered to the requesting user for free download or E-mail delivery. No processing is required by document supply staff.  Documents not covered by institutional subscriptions but available under EASY terms and conditions are flagged as such and passed to document supply staff for mediation, where users can choose to access the document via EASY or obtain it by traditional document supply means.  Privileged users can be granted unmediated access rights, allowing direct ordering of EASY documents without processing by document supply staff.  Electronic documents are delivered by E-mail to the end-user, or direct to the user's web browser (subscription documents only). Alternatively, documents can be E- mailed to the document supply office.  The project was conducted from 3/2001 to 6/2002. D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 33 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project  The project evaluation of EASY cannot be located.

Docusend: Integrating Document Delivery Services http://www.docusend.ac.uk/ of JISC (Bell, Bower & Whitehurst 2004)  The project objectives are:  Bringing together a wide variety of document delivery services in an integrated one- stop service, transparent to the user  Permitting requesters to choose from a range of supply methods and provide a request profile service to customers  Testing the potential for end-user requesting  Supporting and underpinning cross-searching of databases by linking document delivery requesting to a number of JISC initiatives already established, under way, and awaiting future development  The project uses VDX software provided by Fretwell Downing Informatics (FDI) to handle the complex routing and management transactions involved. The VDX software was originally housed at EDINA but later transferred to the FDI managed service operation owing to the failure of recruiting a dedicated technical officer.  Although building on the work of the Lamda consortium http://lamdaweb.mcc.ac.uk/, Docusend investigated ways in which the set of supply sources could be broadened beyond HE to other types of libraries and the commercial sector, incl. publishers.  The original intention of the project was to develop a fully operational service. However halfway through the project, for various issues encountered, the project moved from the possible establishment of a full service to the demonstration of a Proof of Concept.  The evaluation of the project in meeting the objectives:  To bring together a variety of document delivery services in an integrated one-stop service, transparent to the user > Moderately successful >> rolling out to supply libraries proved to be problematic; the project was unable to extend the testing to a commercial publisher  To permit requesters to choose from a range of supply methods > Very successful  To allow customers to provide a request profile > Very successful  To test the potential for end-user requesting > Very successful  To support and underpin cross-searching of databases by linking docdel requesting to a number of JISC initiatives already established, under way, and awaiting future development > Moderately successful >> differences in the delivery timetables of JISC initiatives  Other issues encountered include:  Lack of progress in the take-up by library management system vendors of the ISO/ILL standard  Complexity in the technical aspects of the propriety software which requires a series of special applications and alternations  Complexities of Docusend’s interoperability with non-Lamda sources of supply  Nature and scale of the task required in order to secure the involvement of commercial content providers in Docusend  Lack of comprehensive information about document delivery traffic patterns in the UK

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 34 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project  Increasing awareness of the potential role which eprints might play in document supply  The project was completed in 11/2004.

Secure Electronic Delivery (SED) of British Library  A document delivery method by email containing a hyperlink to the document and Adobe Reader 6.0 or later.  SED can be chosen as the document delivery method for requests made via different document supply services, incl. 1) ARTweb for registered accounts; 2) Articles Direct for unregistered accounts; 3) LEXICON for both registered and unregistered accounts

ARL Assessing ILL/DD Services Study (2004)  ARL has undertaken a third study of the performance of interlibrary loan and document delivery (ILL/DD) operations in 72 North American research, college, and governmental libraries in 2001/2.  New to this study is a focus on user initiated, or unmediated, ILL services which includes INNReach, URSA, Loansome Doc, ILLINET Online, RAPID, and user-initiated use of commercial document delivery suppliers.  This study confirms informal, institution-specific studies and speculations that user- initiated services provide better service to users than mediated ILL. Overall, user- initiated services have lower unit costs, higher fill rates, and faster turnaround times than mediated ILL.

Cost benefit analysis of a regional database of documents. Tina Wilson (September 1999)

Found the cost of a document supplied by one NHS library to another to be £0.71, compared to the cost of a BLDSC supplied document of £5.10 (or more if the request is urgent)

CORSALL: Collaboration in research support by academic libraries in Leicestershire (2001)

Compared the cost of a local network with a commercial service (BLDSC). It found that a local document delivery service is more expensive than the BLDSC service. The main cost driver is staff time. The conclusion needs to be considered in the context of the NHS, where there is a much higher ‘fill rate’. http://www.library.dmu.ac.uk/Research/CORSALL/Report/

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 35 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project Appendix B - Selected advances in document delivery technology

 Portals support the ability to discover print and electronic resources in one search. It is much too early to predict the potential drop in ILL/DD requests, but portals offer the hope of reducing the number or at least moderating the increase (Jackson 2004).  Enhancement to library catalogues supports better searching experience (e.g. relevance ranking, linking to external resources) and/or allows the catalogues to serve as search targets of portals (Jackson 2004).  Bibliographic items will be easier to identify, though users will continue to use a variety of online catalogues, portals, gateways etc. (Jackson 2004).  Accessibility to documents in electronic format was greatly enhanced by the spread of open linking software (Bell, Bower & Whitehurst 2004).  There is continuing growth in the number of open access journals (Bell, Bower & Whitehurst 2004).  The development of eprint repositories was gradually picking up pace, and the potential for free and direct access to either an institution’s own output or the output on a particular subject area is large (Bell, Bower & Whitehurst 2004).  The Open Archives Initiative develops and promotes interoperability standards that aim to facilitate the efficient dissemination of content (Bell, Bower & Whitehurst 2004).  Web browsers offer a universal interface and the emergence of standard protocols facilitates the searching, requesting and retrieval of documents by lay users (Bowler 2003).  Ariel, developed in 1990, provides an electronic document delivery software package that manages the scanning, communication and printing of paper-based documents (Bowler 2003).  Libraries will be using a blend of mediated and user-initiated services, though the proportions for individual ILL units may vary significantly (Jackson 2004).  Turnaround time will be faster, but user expectations will have also increased, so that for many requests, turnaround time will still not be fast enough (Jackson 2004).  Technical Standards  ISO ILL (ISO10160/1) protocol http://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/iso/ill/ permits 2 different ILL applications to exchange messages about an ILL transaction; supports the mediated inter-lending process, and thus excludes the step of how patrons submit requests to their ILL units.  OpenURL http://library.caltech.edu/openurl/ standardizes the syntax for transmitting a package of metadata to a link resolver; helps users determine whether the library has a print copy, a full-text copy, whether an ILL or document delivery request can be generated, whether the item is available from a commercial document supplier, or whether another library might own the title.  OAI-MHP (Open Archives Initiative’s Metadata Harvesting Protocol) http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/openarchivesprotocol.html is a mechanism for data providers to expose metadata from their repositories or archives; permits portals to discover content that may have been hidden, and may serve as an alternative to building a physical union catalog.  NISO Z39.83 http://www.niso.org/standards/index.html circulation interchange protocol governs communication between 2 circulation applications or between a library’s circulation and ILL applications.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 36 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project  Generic Electronic Document Interchange (GEDI) (ISO 17933) http://www.rlg.org/gedistand99.html or http://www.iso.org/iso/en/ISOOnline.frontpage defines an electronic document format and describes the Interchange mechanism; enhances unmediated document delivery and improves turnaround times.  NISO Z39.50 http://www.niso.org/standards/index.html allows standardized searching across databases

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 37 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project Appendix C - Modelling the full cost of document supply

National document delivery business case

Meeting 22 April 2005

Estimating whole cost of document supply

1. Progress to date:  Identification of articles on assessing costs of a) supplying items for loan and b) supplying photocopies of journal articles  Identification of factors to be taken into account when calculating costs for document supply options, particularly staff time

2. Sources on assessing costs  Cost benefit analysis of a regional database of documents: a case study based on the SWRLIN Union Catalogue. (Wilson 1999). Compares direct cost of BL supply (request forms) with direct costs of local library reciprocal supply (staff time & materials); costs shared by both systems are excluded. The article also examines the costs and benefits of maintaining a central cataloguing system. Timings are based on a fairly typically sized postgraduate centre library Available: h ttp://stlis.thenhs.com/hln/database/web/wdcsearch.htm

 CORSALL: Collaboration in research support by academic libraries in Leicestershire. Final Report. (Bloor 2001). Chapter 5. Costs of a local document delivery service (3 participating libraries) compared to the costs of obtaining items from BL. Timings based on 3 HEI, namely, De Montfort University, Loughborough University, and the University of Leicester Available: http://www.library.dmu.ac.uk/Research/CORSALL/Report/

 eKAT/ Bloomsbury Healthcare Library (BHL), London book loan agreement with Essex and Bedfordshire & Hertfordshire SHAs. Rupert Williams. February 2005. BHL as first resort service

 LKDN statistical returns 2003/04: average cost document supply /library = £3,700 excluding staff time (requires confirmation?). Personal communication. National Document Delivery Business Case meeting held on 28 February 2005

3. Factors to be considered in calculating cost of document supply

Factor (staff time first) Estimates Note Source Requesting library 2 mins for 2 cost per item = time x CORSALL Time required locally to check catalogues hourly rate of ILL staff 2001 each request against 4 mins for 4 catalogues of other libraries in catalogues scheme Savings on processing (for both loanable items, such time could be made by as books, & journals) combining holdings into a union catalogue (one for books, one for D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 38 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project journals) but costs incurred in maintaining union catalogues. SWRLIN 1999 Carmel (1988) has Average look up time in 0.48 mins for shown that the more searching regional database photocopies resources need to be for an item 0.5 mins for loans checked for locations, the less effective the resource sharing process Supplying library Loans: Cost per item = total CORSALL 12 mins to locate and processing time x hourly Processing time despatch; 10 mins to rate of ILL staff re-shelve returned items (CORSALL) 1.48 mins average time checking post and searching SWRLIN shelves; 3.41 mins average time returning to office, despatching, receiving returns and reshelving (SWRLIN)

Photocopies: CORSALL 20 mins to locate, photocopy and despatch an article and then re-shelve journal (CORSALL) SWRLIN

1.48 mins average time handling post and checking shelves; 2.91 mins BHL 2005 average time copying For 2005 estimated at and despatching £2.00 (SWRLIN) 20 mins may be on conservative side 20mins work per book loan for A&C grade 3 (from receipt to despatch) Cost of photocopying £0.20 (average 10 CORSALL pages@ £0.02 per page at 2001 prices) Stationery costs £0.70 per book loan Envelopes, labels, print BHL 2005 toner etc; maybe a little high but left in the SLA calculations because staff costs are probably too low Record keeping e.g. notifying end-users, collection of statistics Staff costs 11p per minute Based on average SWRLIN D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 39 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project (1999 figures) salary A&C grades 2 and 3; mid-point of the 2 scales; basis of a working week of 1500 hours recommended by 10p per min (2004) Carmel (1988) BHL 2005 For A&C 3 but probably underestimated (recalculate using Carmel’s 1500 working hours per year?)

Transport to requesting library: By Post: Costs would be reduced CORSALL By post Average cost in 2001 if articles sent per photocopied electronically but may article = £0.75 need additional (CORSALL) equipment BHL 2005

£2.00 Average cost of second class delivery by Royal Mail per book loan in SWRLIN 2004(BHL) 75% of cases postage not paid from library budget so in the SWRLIN study postage SWRLIN By transport scheme: did not form part of No official postage library costs; cost because post however there is a delivered between hidden cost to the NHS sites via a van within organisational service (SWRLIN) overheads for both postage and the van service Stock replacement overheads £1.00 per item in Contribution to overall BHL 2005 2004 costs incurred by BHL as a result of having to replace items that are damaged or lost in the post Maintenance of union £41,250 SWRLIN Costs cover software SWRLIN catalogues central database and hardware costs 1999/2000 maintenance and support, database staff time, cataloguing products, management support (itemised details given in article, section 4.2) Extent to which scheme is able 8% of requests for CORSALL to fulfil requests loan items and 11% for photocopies supplied by local scheme (CORSALL) Potential alternative SWRLIN 1999 suppliers (e.g. Royal Requesting library Colleges, BMA) but D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 40 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project look up hit rates in seen as supplementary 1998/9: 64% for suppliers because of the photocopies; 76% for small, specialist nature loans of their collections. Supplying library hit rate for finding item 50% may be on shelves 1998/9: conservative as not all 86% for journal libraries were full articles; 50% for participants in the loans (SWRLIN) “book” ILL system

Additional equipment required e.g. scanners CORSALL

4. Other considerations in addition to costs above  inconvenience factors  management overheads

Cheryl Twomey, eKAT, London Health Libraries [email protected], 22 April 2005

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 41 NLH/LKDN Document Delivery Project Appendix D - Interlending and Document Supply Task Group

Mandy Beaumont, Library Services Manager, Lancashire Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust Helen Bingham, Library Services Manager, Portsmouth Hospitals NHS Trust Christine Fowler, Head of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences Faculty Services & Electronic Library Services, University of Southampton Library Claire Honeybourne, Project Manager, National Core Content Project Joan Hunter, Library and Knowledge Services Co-ordinator, Norfolk, Suffolk & Cambridgeshire Strategic Health Authority David Johnson, Librarian, Luton & Dunstable Hospital NHS Trust Bertha Low, IM&T Co-ordinator, West Midlands Library Services Development Unit Richard Marriott, Learning Resources Manager, Trent Strategic Health Authority Stella Pilling, University of York Caroline Plaice, Knowledge Services Manager, North Bristol NHS Trust Christine Reid, Librarian, Chapel Allerton & Cookridge Hospitals, Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust Sharon Springham, Deputy Head of Library Services, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust Diane Thompson, Library Services Manager, West Hull PCT Jenny Toller, Electronic Information Resources Manager, NHS South West Workforce Development Confederations Ben Toth, Head of Knowledge Management, NHS Connecting for Health Cheryl Twomey, eKAT Leader, Electronic Knowledge Access Team (eKAT), London Health Libraries Pam White, Library Services Manager, West Dorset General Hospitals NHS Trust

As a typical example of volumes of items supplied, EDEN scheme members supplied each other with a total of 30,000 items during 2004.

Due to space constraints, a library in Portsmouth archives its journals older than 10 years. This archive is accessed on average 900 times per year. Obtaining the same photocopies from the British Library would cost £4500 a year.

NHS libraries typically and unsurprisingly find that the number of times journal articles are requested declines rapidly with the age of the journal. A library in Brighton found that their 1971 - 1983 journals were used on average 120 times a year, their 1961 - 1970 journals 25 times a year, their 1950 - 1960 journals 7 times a year, and their pre-1950 journals 6 times a year.

D:\Docs\2017-12-29\058c872659afa05e5ed6893125d8f0f0.doc 42

Load more

  42

Copy Link