TexShare Electronic Information Working Group
Conference Call, October 21, 2011
2:00 – 3:30 PM
Working Group members:Karen Blankenship; Victoria Chiavetta; Marilu Chavez; Eric Elmore; Gayle Gordon; Mary Jarvis; Susan Smith; Alexia Thompson-Young; John Weed; Russlene Waukechon, Guest: Wendy Spinks; Rosemary Willrich
John Weed, Head of Collection Resources
Eric Elmore, Electronics Resources Coordinator
New members introduced:
Greg Tramel (absent)
Pat Van Zandt (absent).
I. Discuss change and expectations for this year:
Russlene began the discussion by explaining why the Texas State Library and Archives Commission (TSLAC) will not be doing a competitive bid for TexShare core databases this year. We are going to renew our current contracts and try to maintain the core databases we currently have. At the Texas Council of Academic Libraries (TCAL) meeting held September 26-27, 2011, academic libraries, while supporting TexShare program, expressed concern about decreased funding and potential loss of content. The TCAL membership decided to explore purchasing as a group databases that would supplement the TexShare database core. Academic libraries have to have their budgets ready by March of each year and are concerned that a TexShare bid would not be complete until April. At its September 27 meeting, the TexShare Advisory Board – recommended delaying a competitive purchasing process by one year &renewing as many of the TexShare core databases as possible.. The Texas State Library and Archives Commission supported this recommendation of the TexShare Advisory Board at its October 13, 2011 meeting.
Russlene will be contacting vendors within next couple of weeks to discuss renewal options.
Questions followed from EIWG members.
One member expressed the viewpoint of public librarians that whatever content is selected it needs to address the needs of public libraries. The current core menu except for Heritage Quest just doesn’t address the needs of a public library.
Russlene acknowledged this point and further discussed the bid, the bid timeline and the products that will probably be included in the bid.
Another member agreed that renewing existing contracts and delaying the bid process for one year is the best option.
II. Discuss Bid for 2012/2013:
In preparation for the upcoming bid process, the EWIG will need to identify:
a. What are our priorities?
b. What do we want?
c. Any issues surrounding the bid process.
Because the budget was reduced, the resource package will be smaller. K12 will not be included in this bid. We are only writing this bid for core databases. .In response to questions from the group, Russlene clarified that TexSelect options are not going away.
Action Item: Russlene had sent out an email to the EIWG and key individuals in February asking them to list priorities for databases necessary in a core provided by TexShare. Russlene will forward the lists that she received to EWIG for review and help others make suggestions for a priority list.
Discussion followed about database budget .
III. RFP – Working on Timeline
a. We will form a smaller “sub-group” from EWIG that will be responsible for the initial review of bid documents.
b. There will be statewide trials of products proposed.
c. As part of the process, everyone on the working group will need to come to Austin for demos from vendors.
Timeline was discussed for the bid.
Meeting was concluded by 2:45.
Minutes prepared by: Wendy Spinks