Many thanks to all of you who replied to my request. We now have plenty of
material to add to our review. We are looking at ways of reducing ILL
requests and the first reply reminded us that "a good access policy means
more not less".
That said, the following replies indicate ways in which other institutions
have responded to rising numbers and costs of requests:
(1) Imposition of charges - usually £1, non-refundable. (3 replies)
coupled with a quota - (no more than 20 active at any given time) (1
reply)
(2) Devolvement to faculties (1 reply)
(3) Increase in subscriptions to electronic journal services - staff check
all incoming requests against ejournal lists (1 reply)
(4) Departments given initial allocation of ILL vouchers which can be
supplemented by purchase at £4.50 each. This resulted in a drop of
50% in requests which became the Department's
responsibility. (1 reply).
(5) Restriction of access to final year and Postgraduate students (1 reply).
(6) Creation of in-house database using ProCite. Journal issues are scanned
and
indexed on receipt and used as first port of call.(1 reply).
(7) Use of the local holdings facility on Medline, HMIC and Cinahl.(1 reply).
(8) Promotion of article supply services such as Uncover, Reveal and
Northern
Light (1 reply).
(9) The following solution followed a review because the ILL budget had
been rising by 10% pa. It resulted in a 29% drop in requests in
the first year:
(i) ILL budget set each year
(ii) allocation was made to faculties based on past usage of service
(iii) Departments were given the option to vire book and ILL budgets
(iv) underspend was carried forward
Thanks again to all who replied.
Wendy Bastable
Academic Resource Librarian (Health Sciences),Harrison Learning Centre,
University of Wolverhampton, Wolverhampton WV1 1RH
Tel:01902 322728
Fax:01902 322194
Email: [log in to unmask]
http://www.wlv.ac.uk/lib/systems/hs-1.htm
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|