Memo from Pat LaRose, Chair, Reference Working Group
To:  OSL Steering Committee
From: OSL Reference Working Group
Date:  June 2010
Re:  Charge to review OSL EBSCO databases

Reference Working Group members agreed to offer recommendations on prioritizing OSL contracted EBSCO databases.  The criteria used for consideration was primarily usage statistics and quality of content.  Some consideration was given to overlap with other resources, potential use growth (especially in the case of databases new to OSL, where statistics were not available over a very long time period), and use across spectrum of libraries regardless of size.  

Lisa Davis of OSL and Karen Mellor of OLIS supplied links to compiled statistics to aid in our evaluation.  RWG members referred to statistics from their own libraries to add to our evaluation.  RWG members discussed this issue at several meetings, and a final consensus of the committee at the May 18, 2010 meeting was taken.  This report reflects the opinions of  the RWG members at that meeting and prior meetings, and was distributed to all committee members for approval before being submitted.

We understood we were asked to present the findings of the committee without regard to pricing, but we are well aware that EBSCO offers a package, and many of these products are bundled within the package.  OSL administration, presumably working with members of the Steering Committee, will be responsible for negotiating with EBSCO.

Overview:   
Most databases receive enough use to warrant keeping them.  There are only a few that the committee felt could be eliminated. We identified some databases that are government databases, and thus free anyway.  Some databases listed separately in statistics are redundant, in that they generate a statistic when you search another primary database.  For example, the Funk and Wagnall's Encyclopedia has high usage stat, but we believe this is due to its use within several other databases.  The image collection also generates stats every time a user looks at an image in any of the databases.  In some instances it was noted that Gale offers a similar and better product.  This is to alert the Steering Committee in the event that it becomes possible to utilize both vendors in the future.  We also recognized that children's librarians are, unfortunately, underrepresented on the RWG committee.  We suggest further input from children's librarians be sought in regard to databases in that area.  We noted that the Spanish language products do not show much use at all.  We speculate that the ESL and Spanish-speaking patrons are not finding these resources, however this should be a growing population in our communities.

For the purposes of presenting our recommendations we grouped the EBSCO databases in two tiers.  First tier indicates all members strongly recommend keeping.  Second tier indicates a lesser used, and lower need product.  Attached is a copy of the statistics we used for comparisons.  We looked at "searches" not sessions, as the more meaningful data.

OSL EBSCO databases evaluation by RWG May 2010
Alphabectical Listing
Group 1   (members recommend keeping)
Academic Search Premier
Automobile Repair Reference Center
Biography Collection Complete  (both Gale and HW Wilson offer better products)
Business Source Premier
Consumer Health Complete
Health Source - Nursing/Academic Edition
History Reference Center  (could use better interface, Gale has a better product)
Library, Information Science and Technology Abstracts (only source for most libraries in our field)
Literary Reference Center (new last year, Gale product considered better by some)
MasterFile Premier
Medline  (free government database)
Middle Search Plus (moderate usage, need input from children's librarians)
Newspaper Source (high stats, may indicate redundancy)
Novelist Plus (highly recommended across all levels of users)
Primary Search  (suggest input from children's librarians)
Teacher Reference Center
TOPIC Search  ( get more input from children's librarians)

Group 2     (members would like to keep, but less strongly recommended)
Alternative Health Watch
American Heritage Children's Dictionary (redundant database?)
Health Source - Consumer Edition
ERIC   (free government database)
GreenFile  (potential growth in use, useful for grade school users)
Points of View Reference Center  (new - only have stats for ½ year - Gale's Opposing Vwpts better)
Regional Business News (noted that this does not include Providence Business News)
Salud en Espanol  (low stats - not sure why)

Other databases in the statistics list are either redundant, or discontinued.

Highest number of searches
Academic Search Premier
MasterFile Premier
Newspaper Source
Novelist
TOPIC Search
Health Source - consumer edition   (committee recommends keeping Consumer Health Complete over this database because it includes this source, and is more comprehensive)