Many thanks to the large number of you who responded in detail to this query earlier in the month – seems I hit a nerve! I have combined the results below, unless respondents specifically asked me not to include their comments in a round up. Hope that is OK; several people said they were keen to see what I got back.

Thanks again,

Emma.

Multi-Site Services:.

Here is what I asked:

“Hi all,

I am wanting to build up a picture of how organisations with a multi-site LKS organise staff/ services/ resources. We are a two hospital trust which used to be fairly equitable in size and had LKSs to reflect that (same size stock, opening hours, staffing etc).

I think things are changing quite rapidly, and want to scope out potential re-orgs. I am wondering if any multi-site services have made decisions to centralise resources on one site (journals, particularly) to make room for other activities (training, multi-media, private study rooms) at the other site (s).

I’d also be interested to know if anyone has reduced staffed opening hours in favour of increased clinical librarian/ outreach/ satellite presences”.

Here is what I got back:

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

We are a two site hospital.  When I started here in 2008 both libraries were very different, each had their own procedures and most staff worked at one site only, this was mainly due to originally being two separate Trusts.  Over time things have changed, now nearly all staff work on both sites which makes for a much more cohesive team and helps with cover, our procedures are the same  and we took the best working practices from both libraries.  These changes were tricky, but due to staff retirement and a the need for a smaller team it made the change process more manageable. 

With regards to resources, the aim is to have an all e-journals collection which can be accessed from either site, particularly useful for specialities which are based at both sites such as orthopaedics, we have still a way to go with this but if we do have print journals then they reside at the most appropriate site depending on where the service is located, this is the same for the book collection although inevitably some books are available at both sites.  We try and make these resources as easily available as possible, so if a user wants an article from a print journal at another site we scan this and email it to them (promptly), again with books we use the internal postal system which usually is quite quick.

We have not decreased any opening times, (one site 8.30 – 5 the other 8-6), however we are increasing our outreach work which can lead to pressures, I don’t feel at the moment decreasing opening times will help with this.

All services are conducted at both sites, training, literature searching etc. and both libraries have computers, scanners, printers, quiet study etc.  we have two email addresses and two phone numbers.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

We are a mental health trust (so most of our staff are community based) and we are just reducing from three sites to two.  We have got all our print journal current subscriptions on one site, for ease of management, but the back copies are wherever we find space for them.  We have also ‘centralised’ many of the back office procedures, so that almost all article requests get done on one site, book cataloguing and processing on the other etc.

Initially we reduced staffed opening hours at two of the three sites so that opening hours could be covered most of the time by library assistants (we had been unable to replace a couple of part time LA posts when people left/retired).  This allowed the librarians to carry out more outreach/clinical librarian work.  By reducing down to two sites, we’re hoping to have both open office hours without having to depend on librarian staffing on either site in normal circumstances.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

As you know I have only a small single-site library. However, I have some comments with regards to staffed opening hours. Here, registered members have 24-hour access, so can use the library without library staff being present.

We tell people we will guarantee to staff the library (barring illness or emergencies) from 9.30 – 12.30 Monday to Friday. However, this does not mean we are never staffed in the afternoons, or earlier in the mornings.

On four days a week, X is here until 4.30 pm. I am often here until 7 or 8 pm. XX usually arrives by 8.30 am. Having these guaranteed hours gives us flexibility whilst providing our users with a core time for seeking help. Since the majority of enquiries now come by email, this does not seem to inconvenience our users too much.

My suggestion is that you could reduce your guaranteed staffed hours (core hours) whilst retaining the flexibility to staff both or either of the libraries outside these times according to need.

This also means that Team meetings can be scheduled for outside core hours when users are not necessarily expecting us to be around to help them. It also means that staff working alone in the Library are not chained to their desk all day and that I can do Training sessions in the afternoons, away from my desk, even when staffing the library on my own.

I don’t know if that helps.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

I am not sure if this is any help, but we started off as 2 hospitals but merged into 1 Trust in 1995. From then until 2010 we had 2 sites and a library on each but always one Athens org. Each library had their own staff and slightly different resources as they supported the particular specialities on each site. In 2010 we moved to a new PFI hospital with 1 library.

I started in post in 2005 and a large part of my job in the early days was planning for the 2010 move. All library staff were aware that from 2010 onwards there would be 1 library. The first thing I did was ensure procedures, opening hours etc were standardised across both sites and then I introduced a system where the staff started to work at both sites rather than just one. I also introduced monthly staff meetings which would alternate between both sites and got staff to close libs to attend. I explained that this was so they could get used to each other, the users and resources at the other site … there was a lot of resistance initially esp cross site working!

As far as staffing was concerned the Trust had always said ‘nobody would lose their job’ with the move. What actually happened was that each time a staff member left for another job etc I had a huge fight to get financial approval to recruit and the posts either were lost, got downgraded or made 2 yr fixed term. My future service plans were totally discounted and really I have had to develop a service and org structure from the staff I had left. When I started in 2005 there was me, 5 x band 5s, 1 x band 4 and 2 x band 3s to cover both sites. We were top heavy but ran a successful outreach service then … now we have me, 2 x band 5s, 2 x band 4s and 2 x band 3s.  We still have an outreach service but with me and the 2 band 5s across a Trust with 8,500 staff it is tricky to keep on top of it. We have always had out of hours access via a swipe card (Trust ID badge). Early on we reduced our counter opening hrs to 9-5 Mon-Fri (we used to do late-ish nights) and received no complaints, and later I managed to secure funding to install RFID self service via losing a staff post that I couldn’t get financial approval for. As for some reason we have also maintained the non-pay budget we are quite well off as a service, so another of my solutions is ‘can I buy something that will provide the answer’. I appreciate that not everyone can do this …!

During the 5 years prior to the move I spent a lot of time with the counter based staff working out what they do – like using those timings of processes for the costings? In a nutshell we found that counter staff spent all of their time doing ILL requests and that issuing/returning was a very small part of the job. We then spent time re-designing our counter and ILL process to gain some staff time back. We did have one awful summer with 4 staff keeping 2 libraries open … I think that was the worst time!

We process mapped our ILLs – and found that staff were searching everywhere to get the article for the cheapest cost – we looked at streamlining the process and which locations were unsuccessful and decided to ditch those that we didn’t get many articles from e.g BMA library. Now we search HDAS, a W Mids network and then go to BL so now it’s about getting the article quickly rather than economically. I have reasoned that we have the budget so let’s just go to the BL … Again with the ILLs we wanted to automate the process, use e signatures etc to speed things up. Our IT dept wouldn’t play ball with an automated form so we paid another librarian from a local Trust who is an IT whiz-kid to develop a web based system. The result is http://www.basedoc.co.uk/cgi-bin/index.cgi … which allows users to send in requests, users can track the progress and we are currently working out a way where it can search HDAS for us which again will reduce staff time. All of the ILL process mapping work was facilitated by a library manager within the area who understood the ILL process and knew the staff – he came in and asked us why we did certain things and got us to think of alternative ways. That helped having someone else facilitate …!

We did also use the time to dispose of multiple copies of items – especially quick reference and we moved journals stage by stage to electronic and disposed of the print, bought e archives, e books etc. It took a very long time but by the time we moved we had no duplicate stock.

The work looking at what the counter staff did also meant we decided to close the counter as it were – we have a ‘bell system’ where people ring the bell and we go out to help them on demand rather than having someone sitting there during opening hours. I found that staff were doing other jobs at the counter to fill in the time in between counter enquiries – however the ‘filling in jobs’ weren’t done so well or took longer than they should have done, as users would come over and chat or ask them the kind of questions they could work out themselves e.g. where are the (signposted) loos? … we did get some bona-fide enquiries but I thought we could manage them a lot better. Again there was a certain amount of resistance to this, as staff felt they should be there to help but I felt as we were losing staff posts we needed to be much smarter with our time …

As we were moving we also planned out an ergonomic design for where everything would go at the new counter. We mocked up where we wanted it and timed how quickly we could speed up processes by moving stationery and the copier closer to the counter. I know it sounds bizarre but it really did work! The other change was that we actually became quite rigid/organised in the counter jobs that needed doing – we listed everything that needed doing and we use the Outlook tasks lists to remind us to do them according to frequency like ‘clear reservations shelf’  … we also found that if we reduced the frequency of certain jobs at busier times (junior docs induction) we could save a lot of staff time …

 I suppose the difference here is that I had 5 odd years to plan for the change … hope it all goes smoothly for you …and happy to talk further if you want to …

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

I am based in an organisation that is fairly similiar in size to yours, and has gone through a restructure in the last 3 years. When I joined the Trust as a senior library assistant in April 2010, we had LKSs on both our 2 hospital sites, each with similar staffing (2FTE each), stock etc.
Since then, we have gone from 4 FTE, to 2FTE (both on the same site) and lost over 70% of our physical space.  This is in the context of a wider departmental restructure in which we also have lost a number of teaching rooms and IT suites.
We moved all of our journal content online only in January 2012 due to the loss of shelving and archive space but this has also enabled us to centralise our ILL services after the reduction in staffing.   We currently manage ILL requests through our intranet site using Sharepoint 2010.
Until November last year, we operated a satellite service in the second hospital, which I staffed 2 days per week.  Following facilities changes to this hospital, we were asked to move out of that building, and they were not able to find us any space in the main hospital building on that site, so the site had to close and all stock was centralised to the larger hospital site.
I visit the smaller site on average once or twice per month to deliver training in the customer's workplace, but often times this is not possible and they'll have to travel to the larger site.   We send books to customers on that site via the internal mail, but there are at least 3 incidents now where we have put them on the shuttle bus, but the post room has claimed not to receive them at the other end so this is a costly solution which I would avoid if at all possible!
In part to try and free up staff time, we installed self-service and security machines, and now operate 24 hour swipe card access.  We encourage customers to request items (books, articles, training, induction, literature searching) via the internet site and to issue/return/renew items via the self-service machine.  This has freed up my library assistant's time to deal with ILL enquiries and such like, and my time to deal with literature searching and training requests.

If you have any additional questions, please ask.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ooh, this is very pertinent.

As you may know, our neighbouring South London Healthcare Trust was dissolved recently and we joined up with one of the affected hospitals to form a new trust.

South London was three hospitals and it was several years before the three libraries  joined up under one manager, although they joined up lots of services and ways of working before then. One of the hospitals lost many of its services (and the library closed), but the other two largely carried on as they were - a big part of why the trust failed!

 Currently, our two libraries are still separate. Our two trainers have devised a joint programme for the year and we are synchronising some procedures etc.

The two hospitals largely provide the same services, but over the next few years that is likely to change, with one site concentrating on elective surgery. Is that the same for you? That would seem to be a good basis for changes to library services.

 My concern with having a different focus in each library is how to accommodate the clinical staff on each site who need the 'other's' service. I am less concerned about journals, much more about bookstock if it were to be concentrated on one site. We do have a shuttle bus service between sites, but a lot of our users come in during tea breaks etc so couldn't travel.

 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

We are a library service that serves a Trust across 7 hospital sites but has a library on one physical site. There used to be 2 further physical library sites but they were closed before I arrived in 2013; one of them closed in the summer of 2012 and the other one a number of years ago.

We have 3 clinical outreach librarian posts who are very successful in delivering services across the main sites – they are mapped to the 3 clinical services divisions. Our increase in training, literature searches done, people seen via induction has increased but we need to look at how we engage our staff on the other sites more fully and offer them a better service.

We do see changing patterns of use – now 38% of our book issues are electronic or self-issue not by a person at a desk in the library. It has taken 2 years for our book issues to recover the levels at which they were previously i.e. the staff at the site library that closed did not rush to the other site to borrow books and our issue figures dropped dramatically in 2013.

The site that shut in 2012 did provide extra study rooms, and an IT room in the old library as well as offices. However the local University library based over the road has gained a number of hospital staff as external members for a charge of £50!

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

In terms of your specific questions, we have never considered centralising resources on one site.  I think this would go down like a lead balloon!  In fact we have some strange anomalies related to print journal use in that the smaller PRH library actually seems to have a higher level of journal browsing than occurs at our bigger, busier RSCH site.  I guess this is a reflection of the different user groups (more students at RSCH who tend to use electronic rather than print) and the PRH library is right next to the canteen so consultants pop in on their lunch break.

We do specialise our collections at each site so that they reflect the predominant focus of each hospital.

Your second question about reducing staff opening hours is interesting. At our smallest library at Mill View Hospital we have a situation that isn’t ideal and perhaps needs a re-think.  Although we advertise that the library is staffed throughout the week, the truth is that given the low level of use I tend to be a bit blasé about leaving it unattended if necessary.  There are a couple of days a week where only one person is scheduled to be there and if they are required in a meeting we don’t always provide cover.  We do have signage up directing people to contact the other libraries (although I’m not sure this happens).  

In theory perhaps we should advertise reduced opening hours, but it can be so ad-hoc when someone is needed elsewhere that I suspect this will be difficult.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

Generally, at least from a journals slant, KCH has the big rolling stack and more space than the other two, so we have the archive and KMA and KWH each just have the last 5 or 10 years of journals relevant to their sites, whereas we have the long runs, weird titles (10 years of Space Medicine, a run of a veterinary title etc) as well as BMJ, BJSurg, JAMA, Lancet going back 100 years each…

That is all just a function of space in the libraries though.

We are still waiting to hear about a long-threatened reconfiguration that might move surgery from one site (or two), or further reduce out of hours services at another. No idea yet if that impacts trainee numbers - and therefore local justification/funding for library service provision.

CL & outreach activities are creeping up - Jonathan does more than before at QEQM, but that simply means more reliance on assistants in library whilst he is out at meetings.

Generally we are getting aware as you are of pressure for change approaching over the horizon, but nothing really firm yet, until the Trust does/says something we actually use for planning changes. All very vague. Interested to see if you get anything more concrete from anyone…

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 

---

This message was sent from an email address external to NHSmail but gives the appearance of being from an NHSmail (@nhs.net) address. The recipient should verify the sender and content before acting upon information contained within. 

The identified sender is [log in to unmask]

---

Hi all,

I am wanting to build up a picture of how organisations with a multi-site LKS organise staff/ services/ resources. We are a two hospital trust which used to be fairly equitable in size and had LKSs to reflect that (same size stock, opening hours, staffing etc).

I think things are changing quite rapidly, and want to scope out potential re-orgs. I am wondering if any multi-site services have made decisions to centralise resources on one site (journals, particularly) to make room for other activities (training, multi-media, private study rooms) at the other site (s).

I’d also be interested to know if anyone has reduced staffed opening hours in favour of increased clinical librarian/ outreach/ satellite presences.

Many thanks,

Emma.

Emma Aldrich

Head of Library & Knowledge Services

Maidstone & Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust

phone: 01622 224874/ 01892 635871

web: www.mtwlibrary.nhs.uk

blog: www.mtwlibrary.blogspot.com

netvibes: www.netvibes.com/mtwlibrary

********************************************************************************************************************

This message may contain confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient please inform the
sender that you have received the message in error before deleting it.
Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or take any action in reliance on its contents:
to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

Thank you for your co-operation.

NHSmail is the secure email and directory service available for all NHS staff in England and Scotland
NHSmail is approved for exchanging patient data and other sensitive information with NHSmail and GSi recipients
NHSmail provides an email address for your career in the NHS and can be accessed anywhere

********************************************************************************************************************