ENCompass LinkFinderPlus: UConns Experience

1
ENCompass / LinkFinderPlus UConns Experience

• Dave Bretthauer, Network Services Librarian
• Jill Livingston, Reference/Nursing Allied Health

2
UConn Libraries Background Culture

• UConn Storrs 5 Regional Campuses
• Flat, team-based organization
• Leadership Council meetings open to all staff
• Three formal Libraries-wide forums per year and
  other open meetings as needed
• User-driven in decision making
• UConn Health Center (UCHC) and UConn Law

3
UConn Libraries Existing Technical
Infrastructure, I

• UConn Libraries has 11 ITS staff
• Past year has been unusual in staffing
• Purchased Voyager (Homer) in 1999
• Voyager has features we have not employed
• In addition to catalog entries, we use home-grown
  ejournal and IA database locators
• SerialsSolutions customer since Spring 2002
• Squid proxy server

4
UConn Libraries Existing Technical
Infrastructure, II

• We attempt to negotiate licenses for networked
  resources for all institutions wherever possible
• Approximately 240 licensed networked resources
• Law and UCHC have separate catalogs, locators,
  and proxy servers
• UCHC purchased Voyager in 1999 and in 2002 had
  concurrent plans to purchase whatever link server
  Storrs purchased
• Law has Innovative Interfaces

5
Relevant Teams Stakeholders

• Leadership Council (LC)
• Director of Libraries
• Area Directors
• Public Interface Development Team (PIDT)
• 8-member cross-area technical and public service
  team
• Team ENCompass

6
Relevant Teams Stakeholders

• Team ENCompass
• LinkFinderPlus Implementation Task Force
• Acquisitions Librarian
• Network Services Librarian
• DD/ILL Librarian
• Systems Librarian
• Webmaster
• Reference Librarian Liaison
• ENCompass Digital Collections Implementation Task
  Force
• ENCompass Resource Access Implementation Task
  Force

7
Perceived Needs Addressed

• Resource Linking
• Already using SilverLinker, PubMed Linkout, links
  to library holdings
• Federated Searching
• Had used Z39.50 searching across available
  databases with NOTIS
• Management of Locally-Developed Digital
  Collections
• All needs were given equal weight as PIDT
  examined the available products

8
Selection Decision-Making in Choosing
Product/Vendor

• Unique process because of previously-negotiated
  Master Agreement with Endeavor
• Leadership Council made decision to acquire a
  federated search product April 3, 2002
• PIDTs question to answer
• Given the Endeavor Master Agreement, is there a
  product currently available which is so much
  better than ENCompass that UConn should go
  through the time and expense and added product
  cost of an RFP?

9
Selection Decision-Making Process

• PIDT charged April 8, 2002 to make a
  recommendation by June 7
• Examined following
• MetaLib/SFX
• SiteSearch
• ENCompass/LinkFinderPlus
• ARL Scholars Portal
• WebFeat and AGent were not on teams radar

10
Criteria and Findings

• Global Search Software, Digital Collections
  Component, Linking
• Search Features Options
• Compatibility with Licensed Databases
• Standards Syntaxes Supported
• Statistics
• Integration Compatibility with Existing Systems
• Interface Design Customization Options
• Patron Empowerment Features
• Neither product stood out as being clearly
  superior
• Both products have underdeveloped federated
  search feature sets

11
Implementation, I

• UConn Health Center and UConn bought separate
  copies of LinkFinderPlus 2.0 per Endeavors
  requirement
• Software (server and client) installed at both
  sites before training began
• OpenURL-compliant vendors have had no problem
  accommodating two or more linkservers
• Even when the two institutions shared one account
  
• Even when the product was licensed statewide via
  iCONN, the Connecticut Digital Library
• Some vendors had not heard of LFP
• Some tech support folk seemed not to have heard
  of OpenURL

12
Implementation, II

• Trained on LFP 2.0 October 8, 2002
• Decided to wait for 3.0 (due RSN)
• Decided to customize screens and take advantage
  of XML/XSL
• LFP 3.0 Installed December 4
• SerialsSolutions first XML report delivered
  December 12
• Endeavor installed script to allow incorporation
  of SerialsSolutions report December 16
• Entire team worked largely by email and
  subgroups
• KnowledgeBase group
• Extended Services group
• Currently in testing and focus group evaluation
  not available to users
• Projected for public availability Valentines
  Day

13
Implementation, III

• Planning meeting foregone in favor of subgroups
• KnowledgeBase
• Master list of products for ranking by liaisons
• Contact all OpenURL compliant vendors to
  OpenURL-enable our accounts
• Check accuracy of Knowledgebase data supplied by
  SerialsSolutions
• Configure Knowledgebase
• Enable test productMathSciNet was able to supply
  a search results page for testing
• Extended Services
• made local DD/ILL form OpenURL-compliant and
  self-populating
• Configure XSL Style Sheets for display
• Decide which commercial sites to include

14
Training/Marketing LinkFinderPlus

• Two scheduled updates to Leadership Council
  publicity plan in progress
• Focus groups planned during this and next two
  weeks
• Open staff meeting likely
• Liaisons will incorporate LFP into classes
  point of need service

15
Observations

• Pre-planning and communication are crucial, but
• Flexibility will be needed
• When in doubt, ASK!
• Respect your organizations cultural norms

16
Implications for IT and DD/ILL

• Some apparent during initial discussions
• Whoever develops and maintains website XML and
  XSL training a must, also familiarity with
  OpenURL and CrossRef
• In-house DD/ILL forms should be OpenURL compliant
  for automatic fill-in
• May increase DD/ILL demand

17
Implications for Serials, Reference Public
Services

• Reliable ejournal holdings information is
  essential
• Staff and users need warnings when products are
  activated, especially for testing
• Hope it will facilitate obtaining full text
  electronic and print holdings but many
  uncertainties

18
What's next? Enhancements, plans for future

• Emphasis will be on ENCompass
• Discussion has emphasized digital directions for
  future
• We hope early involvement will ultimately mean a
  product which meets our users needs
• UConns contract with Endeavor for ILS runs
  through 2005

19
Resource Contacts for More Information

• Dave Bretthauer, Network Services Librarian,
  UConn, dave.bretthauer_at_uconn.edu
• Jill Livingston, Reference, UConn,
  jill.livingston_at_uconn.edu
• Melissa Wisner, Systems Librarian, UConn,
  melissa.wisner_at_uconn.edu
• Deborah Sanford, Acquisitions Librarian, UConn,
  deborah.sanford_at_uconn.edu
• Lorna Wright, Head of Technical Services and
  Automation, UCHC, wright_at_nso.uchc.edu

20
Timeline for Decision Making

• 1999 UConn purchases Voyager
• Spring 2002 UConn purchases SerialsSolutions
• April 3, 2002 Leadership Council made decision to
  acquire a federated search product
• April 8, 2002 PIDT charged to make a
  recommendation by June 7
• March 28 and May 30, 2002 ENCompass product demos
  
• May 7, 2002 Metalib demo (Digitool was not in
  demo)
• Conference calls to SiteSearch users and
  individual calls as appropriate
• May 13, 2002 Site visit to Boston College
• June 4, 2002 Open meeting
• June 7, 2002 Final recommendation to LC

21
Timeline for Implementation

• July 2002 UConn purchased ENCompass
• October 8, 2002 Trained on LFP 2.0
• Decided to wait for 3.0 (due RSN)
• Decided to customize screens and take advantage
  of XML/XSL
• December 4, 2002 LFP 3.0 Installed
• December 12, 2002 SerialsSolutions first XML
  report delivered
• December 16, 2002 Endeavor installed script to
  allow incorporation of SerialsSolutions report
• Entire team worked largely by email and
  subgroups
• KnowledgeBase group
• Extended Services group
• January 2003 Testing and focus group evaluation
  not available to users
• February 14, 2003 Projected for public
  availability

22
Implementation, UCHC

• May 2002 Purchased ENCompass
• August 21, 2002 Trained on LFP 2.0 (coordinated
  by three librarians Head of Technical Services,
  Head of Network Systems, Head of Reference)
• September 6, 2002 Made available to users with
  Web of Science very well received
• September 9, 2002 First compliment reported
• Little perceived need to educate users, who
  already knew about SFX
• December 2002 Had activated only Web of Science
  and Ovid
• No SerialsSolutions, TDNet, etc., support for
  ejournals control