PCA Recommendations

Our new web pages can be found at – http://www.jisc-collections.ac.uk/KnowledgeBasePlus/Related-Services-and-Projects/jisc-co-design-programme/Post-cancellation-access-co-design-project/

R1: Add historical package information to KB+

Work has already been undertaken to gather historical package information for over 300 packages dating back to 2005. However, the process of loading this data in KB+ is likely to create further queries and require some further work. This recommendation does not encompass further work to collect historical package information, but working with that already created.

It is recommended that some investment is made in providing sufficient time for Jisc staff (or others) to load this historical data and resolve any issues arising from the data load. It is also recommended that minor additions are made to the KB+ data fields to allow such historical data to be clearly flagged as such.

Related Use cases:

  • U6: Following the loss of detailed historical records an institution wishes to review the contents of national deals/packages from previous years

Related Challenges:

  • C1: Lack of easy access to relevant data
  • C2: The amount of time required to verify and reconcile multiple sources of data relevant to PCA

R2: Design and implement a mechanism for comparing lists of entitlements within KB+

Establishing details of current and post-cancellation access can often require the reconciliation of differing lists of entitlements. Currently KB+ supports a comparison mechanism which allows an institution to compare a current list of Issue Entitlements to Packages within KB+. However there is no way of comparing lists of entitlements from different sources – for example the library subscription details with publisher lists.

Software development to build a more general mechanism to compare lists of entitlements from a variety of sources would make the reconciliation of lists from different sources easier, and would support not only work on PCA but other KB+ workflows.

Related Use cases:

  • U7: An institution wishes to reach agreement with a publisher as to their post-cancellation rights, bringing together local records with publisher information

Related Challenges:

  • C2: The amount of time required to verify and reconcile multiple sources of data relevant to PCA
  • C3: The time and resource required to reach agreement between publishers and institutions as to the current, and previous, entitlements the institution has
  • C4: Lack of standardised workflows for both publishers and institutions in relation to recording and managing PCA entitlements

R3: Add support to KB+ for recording specific PCA licence terms

There are specific aspects of licence terms in relation to PCA which should be added to KB+. It is recommended that software development is undertaken to support at least the following values, in a similar way to the current ‘key properties’ supported by KB+:

  • Level of access offered by PCA (None, Subscribed Titles only, All titles in collection + note)
  • Whether a PCA fee applies (Yes/No/Other + note)
  • Supported routes for PCA (either free text note, or limited value list + a free text note)

These properties and values should be reviewed and agreed with Jisc licence managers. Work should also be done within KB+ to ensure that relevant licence properties can be displayed alongside entitlement data as appropriate.

Related Use cases:

  • U1: When considering the renewal and/or cancellation of a subscription, an institution wishes to understand what access would be lost, and what access retained, based on post-cancellation rights
  • U2: When considering disposing of printed materials that are part of a current electronic subscription, an institution wishes to know their post-cancellation access rights to the electronic materials.
  • U3: As part of an audit process, or to demonstrate fiscal responsibility, an institution needs to provide evidence as to what access to materials has been purchased through past and current expenditure
  • U4: Following a cancellation an institution wishes to check that they have appropriate post-cancellation access as defined by the relevant licences.
  • U5: An institution wishes to provide evidence to support their right to continued access to materials after the cancellation of a subscription

Related Challenges:

  • C1: Lack of easy access to relevant data

R4: Add support for appropriate PCA ‘entitlement’ data to KB+

While KB+ supports the recording of current and past subscriptions and associated packages, the true picture of an institutions Post-cancellation access may be informed by a mixture of existing and past subscriptions which may or may not be recorded on KB+.

It is therefore recommended that additional data and functionality is added to KB+ to allow institutions to use existing data from a variety of sources to record PCA entitlements. Detailed design work for this is not part of this report, but it is clear that such a mechanism should be able to support not just a record of the PCA, but also provenance of any claims to PCA data (which could include links to other KB+ data, documents, or data from other sources such as JUSP usage data). It is likely that this would take significant data modelling and software development activity to achieve.

This work should be done in tandem with the way ‘core title’ information is recorded in KB+, and the need to provide synchronisation of core title information between KB+ and JUSP.

Related Use cases:

  • U1: When considering the renewal and/or cancellation of a subscription, an institution wishes to understand what access would be lost, and what access retained, based on post-cancellation rights
  • U2: When considering disposing of printed materials that are part of a current electronic subscription, an institution wishes to know their post-cancellation access rights to the electronic materials.
  • U3: As part of an audit process, or to demonstrate fiscal responsibility, an institution needs to provide evidence as to what access to materials has been purchased through past and current expenditure
  • U4: Following a cancellation an institution wishes to check that they have appropriate post-cancellation access as defined by the relevant licences.
  • U5: An institution wishes to provide evidence to support their right to continued access to materials after the cancellation of a subscription

Related Challenges:

  • C1: Lack of easy access to relevant data

R5: Mechanism for digitally signing IE/PCA lists

Recommendations R1-R4 are aimed at making it easier for libraries to record (with evidence) PCA rights. However, a key part of establishing PCA rights is sign-off by all parties to an agreement (typically a library and a publisher/content provider) to a list of entitlements.

It is recommended that a mechanism for signing off such lists is supported. This may be a process supported from within KB+, or could be a process outside KB+, but with the option to publish lists from KB+ (given R4 above) to such a service. The Sconul Shared and Collaborative Services Strategy Group expressed a preference for such lists to be stored in KB+.

Such a sign-off mechanism should be considered as part of a workflow for libraries and publishers to agree entitlements.

Related Use cases:

  • U7: An institution wishes to reach agreement with a publisher as to their post-cancellation rights, bringing together local records with publisher information

Related Challenges:

  • C2: The amount of time required to verify and reconcile multiple sources of data relevant to PCA
  • C3: The time and resource required to reach agreement between publishers and institutions as to the current, and previous, entitlements the institution has

R6: Tracking title and publisher changes

GOKb can record more detailed information regarding publisher-title relationships and relationships between journal titles. Such information, especially a change of publisher for a title, may lead to an institution reviewing the impact on their PCA entitlements.

It is therefore recommended that the existing work to establish data flow between GOKb and KB+ include relevant information relating to such changes and that KB+ should support the ability to flag such changes to institutions where they have relevant entitlements.

The potential for exploiting information available from Project Transfer into GOKb and KB+ should also be investigated at the same time.

Related Use cases:

  • U7: An institution wishes to reach agreement with a publisher as to their post-cancellation rights, bringing together local records with publisher information

Related Challenges:

  • C2: The amount of time required to verify and reconcile multiple sources of data relevant to PCA
  • C3: The time and resource required to reach agreement between publishers and institutions as to the current, and previous, entitlements the institution has

R7: Formal working relationship between KB+ and SafeNet

There are potential overlaps between any PCA work in KB+ (reflected in recommendations R1-R4) and the current SafeNet work. It is recommended that there is further and detailed discussion as to how KB+ and SafeNet can complement each other as services.

R8: Potential integrations / collaborations

There are a number of opportunities for services/systems in the area of PCA and also archival access to work with KB+. These include:

  1. Build on the current integration between KB+ and JUSP ensure data from JUSP can be used as evidence of access to specific materials at specific times
  2. Enable sharing of data between KB+ and The Keepers Registry following a similar methodology to that already in place between KB+ and JUSP, identifying areas where data can be shared for mutual benefit
  3. Work with the UK LOCKSS Alliance and individual institutions within the Alliance to understand and implement integration between KB+ and the LOCKSS Subscription Administration functions, either via data export/import or APIs as appropriate.

It is recommended that some or all of these proposed interactions between KB+ and other systems should be used to provide use cases to inform and test the current development of the KB+ API.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s