Appendix T



PSU Libraries Collection Budget Report, 2016



This is the second annual PSU Libraries Collections Budget report for the Senate Committee on Libraries, Information Systems, and Technology. While some things have changed, much has remained the same, so the report overall will not vary a great deal from the 2015 report. Information from the Law Libraries is much expanded and appears at the end of the report. Multiple factors affect the PSU libraries’ spending capabilities; we continue to be challenged by both rising inflation and publisher costs and scholarly publishing changes, especially because publishers increase costs when introducing digital information formats. Penn State is complex, and the Libraries reflect that complexity.  As before we include a description of the challenges to the collections budget and discuss the opportunities coming from changes in scholarly communications.

The library strives to build, organize, and make accessible its collection to support the teaching, learning, and scholarship of the students, faculty, and researchers of the institution. Librarians provide subject expertise not only aligned with individual departments but also monitor publishing trends and collaborate with colleagues external to Penn State to build our collections.

This report begins with a description of who (Part 1) is responsible for managing the overall budget; who manages the individual subject allocations and who manages the interactions with publishers and vendors, and pays the bills. This section also describes the process of selection and provides a sample collection policy used to guide purchasing decisions by discipline.

Next we move to what (Part 2). This section describes types of funding available for library collections, materials and services.

The section on where (Part 3) describes the Penn State libraries supported by the collections budget.

When (Part 4) describes the timing of our budgeting and purchasing cycles.

Next there is a section describing the challenges we face, some longstanding and some we see facing us in the future.

We end with a description of opportunities the library is pursuing that embrace new directions in scholarly publishing and communications which may eventually relieve some of our greatest challenges.

The Information section features charts, tables and other numbers, a flowchart showing how the process works as we add items to the library collection, and ends with budget information for the medical and law libraries. This year we have included additional information about the databases we subscribe to as requested by the LIST committee.

Part 1. Who – Roles and responsibilities

This section describes who in the library is responsible for managing the collections budget, spending the money and paying the bills, and ends with a description of how we choose what to purchase or subscribe to, with a sample collection development policy.


The Senior Director of Administrative and Financial Services oversees the entire budget for the libraries, including endowments and the collections budget.

The Associate Dean for Research, Collections and Scholarly Communication has overarching responsibility for the library collections budget (endowments, state appropriations, etc.), with the exception of the medical and law schools. All of the librarians who are charged with selecting and budgeting for library collections (again with the exception of the medical and laws schools) are either based in the Research, Collections, and Scholarly Communications division of the library, or are Campus librarians. The Acquisitions department reports to this associate dean.


This department is responsible for all aspects of procuring books, journals, maps, media, sound recordings, scores, serials, sets, databases, back-files etc. They manage electronic resources and respond to access issues. They work closely with selectors, vendors, and publishers. This year we have an interim Acquisitions librarian, as we plan for a national search to fill the position of Head, Acquisitions department.


Fall 2016 the Libraries are interviewing for a Collections Strategies and Services Librarian. This librarian will be responsible for overseeing many of the aspects of the work of library Selectors. This position will manage the Joint Collections Group and will oversee the creation of allocation methods, collections assessment activities, vendor interactions and collaborative collection development opportunities.


Selectors are librarians with subject area expertise who are charged with selecting library materials in specific subject areas and managing the budgets for those areas. There are 94 librarians who do material selection throughout the libraries. There are 128 different subjects ranging from Accounting to Women’s Studies. The law and medical libraries manage their own selection and budgets.

Decisions by selectors about what to purchase or subscribe to are guided by the Libraries overarching policy for collection development, which is to collect and make accessible materials that meet the teaching and research needs of the university. Selectors also purchase in response to specific requests from faculty and graduate students, within the confines of the budget. Requests for books are nearly always purchased as well as new print and electronic content subscriptions. Packages, extensive backfiles, large sets and expensive databases that exceed the subject’s funding availability require a vetting process through a committee, and funds must be found or freed up through cancellations or through cost-sharing across disciplines Undergraduates rarely request items, though their requests are taken into consideration if they fit the needs of the discipline. Otherwise they are directed towards interlibrary loan. Further, selectors are guided in their decisions by their own subject expertise and through a concerted effort to assess the needs of faculty, research programs, departments, colleges, and others. Selectors are organized into subject-based Collection Development Groups. Many selectors write collection policies to describe the parameters they use when selecting materials for broad subject areas. These are updated periodically, especially when there are substantive changes.

Sample Collection Policy

Anthropology Collection Development Statement
Subject Specialist:
Nonny Schlotzhauer
Social Sciences Librarian
208D Paterno Library 814-863-4644

Department Liaison:
Nina Joblonski, Head
Department of Anthropology
409 Carpenter Building
University Park, PA 16802 814-2509


Purpose and Programmatic Information:

Anthropology documents, describes and explains the physical and cultural differences of societies, both past and present. Anthropology sees the individual as part of a larger social order that both impinges upon and is molded by those who belong to it. Anthropology investigates how cultures interact and relate within specific economic, political and ecological framework over time.

The collection supports current and anticipated teaching and research needs of the Anthropology Department in the College of the Liberal Arts. The department offers the Ph.D, M.A., B.A., and B.S. degrees in anthropology. Undergraduates may major or minor in anthropology, or major in biological anthropology or archaeological sciences. Graduates programs are offered in archaeology, biological anthropology and cultural anthropology, and in anthropology and demography. The department has a strong geographic emphasis on the Americas.

The department has an empirical, scientific focus that is scientific in nature and is organized into three sub-disciplines or research concentrations:

  1. Archaeology: Focuses upon past societies, both ancient and historic, in order to understand and explain the processes causing cultures to change over large spans of time. The archaeology program has a research agenda focusing on ancient, complex societies, especially those of the Americas.
  2. Biological Anthropology: Seeks to describe and explain human biological variation today and in the past. Research and graduate training in biological anthropology at Penn State focus on human population, developmental, and evolutionary biology.
  3. Cultural Anthropology: Strives to understand and explain differences and similarities among the world’s many cultures as ongoing systems.

The Department is the academic home to 22 fulltime faculty members, and a number of adjunct faculty and research associates. The Department has about fifty active graduate students, seventy-five undergraduate majors and twenty-five undergraduate minors.

Scope of the Collection:

Anthropology is by its nature strongly interdisciplinary. Collections in anthropology may overlap with those in the following areas:

African Studies
Latin American Studies
Political Science
Women’s Studies

Library Locations for Anthropology Related Materials:

SubjectCall Number RangeLibrary/Location
ArchaeologyCC 1-960Pattee Library, BA
Pre-Columbian period. Native AmericansE 51-143Pattee Library, 1
United States local historyF 1-975Pattee Library, 1
Latin America. Spanish AmericaF 1201-3799Pattee Library, 1
Human geography.
GF 1-900Paterno Library, 3
Anthropology (General)GN 1-890Paterno Library, 3
Physical anthropologyGN 49-298Paterno Library, 3
Ethnology. Social and cultural
GN 301-674Paterno Library, 3
Prehistoric archaeologyGN 700-890Paterno Library, 3
FolkloreGRPattee Library, 1A
Manners and customsGTPattee Library, 1A
SociologyHMPaterno Library, 2
Sexual life. Women.HQPaterno Library, 2
Natural history. Biology. GeneticsQHPaterno Library, 4
Human anatomyQMPaterno Library, 4
PhysiologyQPPaterno Library, 4
Medical anthropology. EpidemiologyRAPaterno Library, 4

Materials Collected:

  1. Languages Collected. Emphasis is placed on English language materials, with a small proportion of titles purchased in Spanish, German and French.
  2. Geographical Limits. The department has a focus on the Americas, and the collection reflects this emphasis. No region or country is excluded, though some are emphasized more than others.
  3. Chronological Limits. The collection is developed across all time periods. An emphasis is placed on current research.
  4. Major Publishers
    • University Presses (e.g., Harvard University and Oxford University Presses)
    • Association publications (e.g., American Anthropological Association and Archaeological Institute of America)
    • Oxbow Books
    • Sage Publications
  5. Reference Works. Collect encyclopedias, handbooks and biographical works. Current policy is to acquire reference sources, including indexes, in electronic format when applicable.
  6. Periodicals. Includes scholarly journals from university presses, commercial presses, and professional associations at the state, regional, national, and international level. A majority of the journals are now accessible online.
  7. Video/DVD collections. Videos are important to anthropology and archaeology researchers. Anthropological films and videos offer researchers an opportunity to “experience” another culture. Fieldworkers have used visual methods for years to record how other cultures operate. Documentaries and films are frequently used/shown in the classroom.
  8. Generally Excluded
    • Textbooks
    • Reprints of articles or other materials, especially if contained in journals owned
    • Popular works (autobiographies of journalists, for example)
    • Dissertations
    • Juvenile materials
  9. Areas of Focus/Strength
    • Archaeology
    • Biological Anthropology
    • Cultural Anthropology related to Indians of the Americas
    • Demography
    • GIS
  10. Electronic Resources
    Core Resources

    • Anthropology PLUS
    • AnthroSource
    • HRAF (Human Relations Area Files)
    • Biological Abstracts
    • Sociological Abstracts
    • JSTOR

Coordinating and Cooperative Efforts:

  1. Related Funds
    • Area
    • Biology
    • Geography
    • Global
    • History
    • Latin American Studies
    • Sociology
    • Political Science
    • Women’s Studies
  2. Data/Statistical Collections.
    Collection and analysis of data are important skills for researchers in anthropology. Researchers use ethnographic and other social science data in archives such as ICPSR.
  3. OTHER CONSIDERATIONSThe Anthropology subject specialist and selector collaborates and communicates with other appropriate Libraries faculty and Anthropology faculty to assure that the most current, appropriate, and necessary materials are purchased.Sources that are consulted for collection development include: Library Journal, Booklist and Anthropology News. Online bookstores, such as, and important anthropology library catalogs, such as Tozzer Library, are searched periodically for new acquisitions. Faculty members provide frequent input for new titles. Continuous assessment of the print and electronic collections is important to assure that the collections are meeting the needs of all researchers, faculty, and students. This is done regularly, as time permits.Campus Locations. The Abington campus offers a minor in Anthropology. Many campuses offer courses in Anthropology. Some duplication of key resources will be necessary to serve these classes.

Part 2. What – Money sources and types of materials purchased

This section describes both the types and sources of money in the library’s collections budget and the types from the most recent budget year of materials we buy, subscribe, or procure licensed access to. This section includes a brief description of fundraising and library collections

Money Sources

  1. Allocated General Appropriation
  2. Student Technology Fee
  3. Grants
  4. Endowments
  5. Gifts


  1. State appropriation: Allocated fiscally, July to June. Distribution is determined by the Associate Dean for Research, Collections, and Scholarly Communications. Allocations are typically completed by the end of August for each fiscal cycle. These funds must be fully committed by March 15th. Uncommitted balances are pooled after that date for desiderata purchases as these funds must be fully expended by June 30th. Carryover is not permitted. Outstanding order encumbrances are reflected against the new fiscal year allocations.
  1. Student Technology Fee funds: Fiscal management guidelines are the same as those for the state appropriation. This source of funding will not be continued after this fiscal year.
  1. Grants: Some grants have designated funds for library collections.
  1. Endowments: Income received on an annual basis, usually early fall. Distribution of these funds is based on the donor guidelines.
  1. Gifts: These funds represent monetary gifts received through the Office of University Development and are added to the collections budget as received throughout the year. Distribution of these funds is based on donor instructions. These funds have no encumbrance or expenditure deadlines.

Fundraising and Collections

There are currently 144 collection endowments for the University Libraries for a wide range of disciplines and Special Collections.

Other development funds such as the For the Future Fund, discretionary funds, and portions of accompanying named librarianships and chairs are also used for collections.

Collection gifts and endowments hold a central piece of the library’s priorities in the university’s campaign, which began in July 2016. While the Libraries welcome unrestricted endowments, many of the campaign priorities for collections focus on underfunded or new areas of research and strategic directions of the university.

Material types

The Libraries purchase materials in a variety of formats, primarily physical, electronic, digital, and microform. Below is a brief list of material types we acquire, which is by no means exhaustive.

  • Books – Fiction/Non-Fiction/Textbooks
  • Journals
  • Newspapers
  • Databases
  • Cartographic maps
  • Sound recordings
  • Music scores
  • Media
  • Streaming video
  • Art Museum exhibitions/ catalogs
  • Conferences/Proceedings
  • Juvenile fiction / picture books
  • Atlases (Geographical, Nautical and Astronomical)
  • Computer files, includes data sets
  • Educational Kits
  • Special Collections
  • Encyclopedias, Dictionaries and other general reference books

Other expenditures

Equipment – the item must be part of the circulating/reference collection. (i.e: calculators, globes, models, educational kits)

Commercial Binding – a long-term preventative preservation strategy which extends the life of books and periodicals (supports and protects), deters theft of single periodicals and keeps books in one physical piece.

ILL – interlibrary loan charges including document delivery fees for items that must be ordered quickly for special request.

Part 3. Where – Libraries at Penn State

This section lists the libraries who have separate budgets for collections and the campus libraries supported by the University Park collections budget, and describes what the libraries pay for jointly.

  1. These four libraries have separate budgets, but share costs for some materials such as databases and journals:
    University Libraries
    Hershey Medical
    Penn State Law
    Dickinson Law
    There are cooperative agreements to share database costs. Currently the Libraries maintain cooperative funding for eight databases. Penn State Hershey collaboratively supports partial renewal costs of over 558 electronic journals and databases at ~$1.61M annually. The Dickinson Law and Penn State Law libraries support university-wide access to more than 2,000 law and law-related journals and 120 databases in excess of $400,000 annually. Ten university departments reimburse costs to the Libraries at ~$80,000 annually. These are:
    Alumni Association
    Behrend’s Black School of Business
    Dept. of Energy and Mineral Engineering
    Dept. of Geography
    Dept. of Political Science
    EMS/Office of the Associate Dean for Graduate Education and Research
    Office of the President
    Penn State Institutes of Energy and Environment
    Pennsylvania College of Technology
    Smeal College of Business
  2. The centralized collections budget for University Libraries at University Park is used to purchase materials for the following:
    Architecture & Landscape Architecture Library
    Arts and Humanities Library
    Donald W. Hamer Maps Library
    Earth and Mineral Sciences Library
    Education and Behavioral Sciences Library
    Engineering Library
    Life Sciences Library
    News and Microforms Library
    Physical and Mathematical Science Library
    Schreyer Business Library
    Social Sciences Library
    Special Collections LibraryPenn State Abington
    Penn State Altoona
    Penn State Beaver
    Penn State Berks
    Penn State Brandywine
    Penn State DuBois
    Penn State Erie
    Penn State Fayette
    Penn State Great Valley
    Penn State Greater Allegheny
    Penn State Harrisburg Library
    Penn State Hazleton Library
    Penn State Lehigh Valley
    Penn State Mont Alto Library
    Penn State New Kensington Blissell Library
    Penn State Schuylkill
    Penn State Shenango Lartz Memorial Library
    Penn State Wilkes-Barre
    Penn State Worthington Scranton
    Penn State York

    World Campus

Part 4. When – the annual calendar of budgetary events

This section describes the fiscal year events for the collections budget.

Fiscal Calendar

Fiscal Year closeout

  • Open orders rolled-over for new Fiscal Year (FY)
  • Budget lines closed

New Year startup

  • Information from university on state funds for collections available
  • Information on new endowment and carryover gift and endowment funds
  • Preliminary allocations entered into system
  • Ordering can begin
  • 15th Deadline for journal cancellations must be completed


  • Final allocations completed (if state has a budget)


  • Documentation for selectors on previous FY budgeting completed


  • Quarterly review of large item wants list by Joint Collections Group (JCG), formerly the Collection Services Advisory Group (CSAG)
  • Journal renewals authorized


  • Endowed funds must be 50% committed


  • Quarterly review of large item wants list by JCG
  • Endowed funds must be 70% committed
  • 31st Deadline for Asian and non-European orders
  • Rolling review for journal subscriptions begins


  • Deadline for new print journal subscription
  • 15th Deadline for non-domestic and European orders


  • Quarterly review and prioritization of large item wants list by JCG
  • Deadline for electronic resource orders (databases, journals, packages)
  • 15th Endowed funds must be 110% committed
  • 15th Average Inflation rates available from Library Journal


  • Deadline for state funds for books 105% committed
  • 12th uncommitted state funds pooled for reserve


  • Inflation planning for rolling review of journal subscriptions finalized
  • 30th Deadline all book and endowed funds fully expended

Part 5. Challenges

This section briefly describes challenges that affect the collection budget in adverse ways.

  1. Inflation – has been averaging 4-6% for the last few years.

In the past, we have considered inflation increases on books as “loss of purchasing power” and have not taken them into account in calculating predicted inflation of the collection budget. If we include the monograph and approval lines as an inflation factor instead of “loss of purchasing power,” an additional inflation factor of 4% would add another $105,536 to the predicted inflation total for this fiscal year found in the Information section.

In recent years the library has been able to cover most of the increased costs primarily through annual journal cancellations, primarily in STEM fields. (Academic journal prices in STEM fields have risen more than 400% in the past 20 years. These huge increases in costs have occurred at the same time as the proliferation of new titles across all academic fields. Thus the portion of the library collections budget available for monographs has decreased because of the increased spending on journals. The number of subscriptions we are able to support has also decreased, so we are spending more money for fewer titles, including both journals and monographs.)

  1. Publisher and vendor price increases – these are at the discretion of the publisher/vendor. See price increases in the WRDS example under #8 below.
  2. Size of institution – subscription prices for databases, journals, and e-books are based on number of FTE students and faculty, and sometimes on number of campuses.
  3. Flat or stagnant budgets – in years where the budget does not include an increase for inflation, or does not increase over multiple years affects the amount of things we can buy or subscribe to when their price is increasing.
  4. Ever increasing numbers of students and faculty – affects licensing costs and agreements.
  5. Pricing increases as materials move from print to electronic formats.
  6. Streaming media – more and more films are available only via streaming services with pricing and licenses similar to subscriptions to journals, databases and e-books – based on FTE of students and faculty, not on the limited number of students who need to use for course work.
  7. Licenses and license limitations, including bundling – Publishers no longer sell libraries journals, databases, or e-books; they license access to these items. Licenses often limit access to specific IP addresses and for restricted numbers of users. If we want to buy access to these things, we are limited to the access the publishers allow. Publishers also ‘bundle’ groups of journals or databases together and require multi-year license agreements. These lock up significant portions of a library’s budget and when the budget is flat, it is difficult to purchase other materials. Publishers may also modify license agreements in ways that make certain products excessively expensive. For example, Wharton Research Data Services (WRDS) and Standard & Poors (S&P) notified University Libraries that they were terminating our license agreement for WRDS and Compustat as of 12/31/16. The new agreement, based on business school accreditation, would require that University Libraries agree to four separate licenses for University Park, Behrend, Harrisburg, and Great Valley rather than the one license for which we had been paying. Over four years, the new agreement would have resulted in price increases of over $400,000.
  8. STEM and Open Access – In the past 20 years, primarily STEM journal publishers (but not entirely STEM), have been increasing prices for subscriptions by more than 400%. Because of this and some of the other challenges mentioned here, the Open Access movement has rallied for changes in scholarly publishing processes.
  9. Preservation – these are the costs for maintaining the health and welfare of not only our print collections, but ensuring access to digitized materials into the future.
  10. New fields and increasing interdisciplinary fields – academia is increasingly more interdisciplinary and new fields of knowledge are appearing regularly. This means new journals, databases and books to add to the fields for which we are already purchasing materials.
  11. Strategic initiatives – new initiatives often require that the library acquire materials in fields where we have small or non-existent collections.
  12. World Campus – providing access to library materials across the globe means adding licensing costs for more students and more IP addresses.

Part 6.  Opportunities

This section briefly describes opportunities that may affect the collection budget in positive ways.

  1. Open Access Journals – there are now, and we will continue to see the rise of more high quality open access journals. As faculty take back control of the dissemination of their output the cost of journals will eventually be more reasonable.
  2. Open Access Repositories – institutional and other repositories such as ScholarSphere and arXiV offer alternative forms of access to scholarly output.
  3. University Press and Library Collaborations – as with our own Penn State Press these types of collaborations between libraries and presses and with faculty authors will explore new and more open avenues for scholarly output.
  4. Streaming Media – In November 2015, the Libraries’ acting head of social sciences initiated a patron driven acquisitions model for on-demand streaming videos for educational institutions via Kanopy. The pilot began with two subject packages: Indigenous Studies (658 films) and LGBT (330 films). In June, the success of the program saw the addition of access to Global Studies / Languages and Social Science packages activated for Penn State.  In total, patrons have access to 16,900 on-demand educational films streamed via Kanopy PDA but the University Libraries only purchases films used by patrons when the film is viewed four or more times.


This section provides tables, graphs, charts and other representations used to describe the money we have to spend, the resources we spend it on, the vendors we purchase the most from and the subject area cost and projected pricing break downs. The budget numbers are for the collections budget for University Park and Campus libraries and excludes the medical and law school libraries. The medical and law schools library budget information ends this section.


We begin the section with a focus on the more than 800 databases to which the Libraries subscribe. In the past 25 years indexing and abstracting of information of standard reference works, such as handbooks and encyclopedias, and new forms of meta-information resources such as chemical structure searching resources are all available in digital format collectively called ‘databases’ in library jargon. The migration began even earlier with dial up services such as STN and Dialog, and transfer of information to searchable CD-Roms. We are now in a position where a large portion of the collections budget is spent on databases ($4.77M / 27% this FY). They range in subscription cost from hundreds of dollars per year, to a hundred thousand plus per year. Many are difficult to sort into neat subject areas because they cross multiple areas of research, and others are hard to describe by format because they may offer indexing, abstracting, full-text, and full image.

Many of our databases have been chosen over the years through a multi-subject representative group of selectors with an eye on supporting research, teaching, and general education needs. Selectors support new database subscriptions from their assigned pots of funding.  New resources are optimally supported with permanent funds, however, we do pay for on-going commitments with temporary funds and seek renewal support annually.  If a desired resource exceeds an individual group’s funding capabilities, Selectors will seek collaborative support from other Collection Development Groups, Commonwealth Campus Libraries and/or cooperative agreements with other University departments. Currently 19 resources are supported collaboratively within our group structure; Hershey collaboratively provides annual support for 11 resources; the law libraries collaborate partial funding for one resource. If collaborative support does not materialize, the Selector will submit the needed resource to the Wants List for committee consideration.

Funding support for existing databases has come from a variety of sources. Since the late 1990’s through 2012/13, the Libraries’ collections budgets were fortunate to receive annual increases to our permanent Base/IT1001. Balances not required to offset inflation from these annual increases were allocated to the Collection Development Groups to support database resources. As databases became more prevalent, Selectors were often able to cancel print continuations that duplicated electronic content. Internal redistribution of funds remains a common practice.

We have a project underway to add data elements to our renewal records for databases to enhance reporting granularity. Once this is complete we will be able to report on various factors such as numbers and costs of databases supporting different areas of research.

2015/16 Databases by General Subject Grouping

SubjectSubscription CostPercentage of Total
Social Sciences$623,40413%
Arts & Humanities$367,6758%
Life Sciences$334, 4797%
News Group$237,7925%

As described below: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 1This pie chart portrays data from the preceding table, titled:
2015/16 Databases by General Subject Grouping

Collection Budget – By sources of funding for the most recent five years

Tech Fee
Reallocation from
PSUL Operations
From Univ.
2013/14$9,490,106$4,516,608$960,5000$970,660 $16,035,426


Five years of our projected inflation based on Library Journal percentage estimations for inflation on books and journals. Represents increase over the previous FY.

FYDollar Amount

PSUL Management of Inflation Factors (actions)

FYInflationBase IncreaseResource CancellationsCollections' RedistributionSoft Funding
2014/15$533,593$124,462$111,586$113,114 $308,893
2015/16$582,884$0 $126,015 $52,009$404,860
2016/17$697,817$0 $55,908 $179,909 $462,000

Top five expenditure sources for 2015/16

Expenditure SourceDollar Amount
Ebsco Information Services – vendor for the majority of our journals$3,074,685
Elsevier – journals, ebooks$3,329,852
Big Ten Academic Alliance – membership gives us discounted prices on a variety of materials.
This amount is for the resources we purchase through the BTAA agreements.
YBP Library Services – vendor for print books and ebooks$1,543,972
Otto Harrassowitz – journals, books (Springer/Taylor & Francis)$1,057,733

Numbers of materials in the University Libraries

  • Total titles added to catalog prior to 7/1/2016 is 5,993,071
  • Total items in the libraries collections as of 7/1/2016 is 9,090,786 (this includes all volumes in a set, all bound volumes for journals, and so forth)

Some breakdowns of a few material types in the catalog as of 7/1/2016:

  • Total books, 3,289,834
  • Total serials and periodicals, 1,277,148
  • Total online items, 2,568,240
  • Total microforms, 912,783
  • Total archives materials cataloged, 228,454
  • Total dissertations, 43,329
  • Total master’s theses, 52,533
  • Total musical scores, 72,265

Expenditures for fiscal year 2015/2016 by material types (not all materials are included)

Material TypeExpenditures
Books: print $1,614,060
Books: electronic $733,064
Journals: print $795,824
Journals: electronic$7,782,001
Newspapers: print (electronic are part of Databases) $34,805
Databases $5,564,056
Cartographic maps $1,591
Sound recordings $11,630
Music scores $47,651
Video streaming$143,417
DVDs $80,187
Juvenile fiction / picture books $23,158
Educational Kits $2,167
Special Collections $590,904
Encyclopedias, Dictionaries and other general reference books $49,348

2015/16 University Park Campus Expenditures by general subject areas

Subject AreaExpenditurePercentage
Life Sciences$2,049,08513%
Arts & Humanities$1,511,1919%
Social Sciences$1,147,2477%
Special Collections$590,9044%
News Group$285,2542%

As described above: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 2This pie chart portrays data from the preceding table, titled 2015/16 University Park Campus Expenditures by general subject areas.

As described below: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 3The above bar chart shows Fiscal Year Expenditures by funding source. Funding sources include the base funding which is our allocation from the university and the libraries portion of the students IT fee, endowed funding, gifts and State Library Services (SLS) funds.

2015/16 Expenditures By Funding Source

Document Delivery
Base/IT: $133,892

Base/IT: $90,056

Open Access
Base/IT: $27,162

Base/IT: $126,891

Electronic Backfiles/Packages
Base/IT: $1,503,305
Grants: $103,343
Endow: $62,670

Print Subscriptions
Base/IT: $826,481
Endow: $35,119

EJournal Subscriptions
Base/IT: $5,861,320
Endow: $65,909

Database Subscriptions
Base/IT: $5,377,819
Endow: $303,355

Base/IT: $210,197

Firm Orders (Books, Media, Maps, Etc.)
Base/IT: $2,057,553
Gifts: $40,886
Endow: $918,536

Other sources for materials available to Penn State through memberships and other arrangements


  • Association for Information Science and Technology membership
  • International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. Membership
  • European consortium for political research membership
  • American Library Association. Membership
  • Special Libraries Association. Membership/li>
  • Association of Research Libraries. Membership
  • Center for Research Libraries membership
  • Pennsylvania Library Association. Membership
  • LOCKSS alliance membership
  • Counter membership
  • CLOCKSS membership

HathiTrust currently provides us with 2,511,128 full-view titles. The number of full-view volumes is 5,347,429. The number of volumes in HathiTrust contributed by Penn State is 390,193. Of these, 226,804 are full-view. Penn State, as a member of the Big Ten Alliance, annually renews our participation (paid for operationally, 2015/16 cost $38,013).

Penn State, as a member of the CIC, participated in the Google Book Scanning Project from 2006 – 2014. Nearly ½ million books were shipped, digitized and returned to University Libraries over the course of the project. Selection for digitization was based on lists produced by Google that identified titles in Penn State’s collection not already included in the Google corpus. The digital files are now included in HathiTrust. The Libraries’ catalog displays both Google and HathiTrust emblems indicating snippet or full view digital access for those books.

Materials stored off-site

Approximately 17% of University Libraries’ tangible collections, including the collections of Law, Medicine and Commonwealth Campus Libraries, are held at three off-site shelving facilities collectively known as The Annex. Materials in every format are selected for inclusion at the shelving facilities based on low demand. Requests for books and articles are delivered daily Monday-Friday either digitally or via campus mail to University Park faculty offices, or a library pick up location at any campus. Expect a turnaround time for delivery between 24-48 hours.


DisciplineAverage Price
Per Title
Food Science$2,729
Math & Computer Science$1,895
Health Sciences$1,801
General Science$1,717


This table is from the magazine Library Journal. It lists the average journal subscription price for 2016, for Science, Technology, Engineering and Math journals. The prices range from the highest, Chemistry at $5,105 to Agriculture at $1,687.

Library Journal 2016 Average journal subscription prices for online journals in ISI indexes

Health Sciences$1,735
Math & Computer Science$1,618
Food Science$1,569
General Science$1,550
Military & Naval Science$1,002
Business & Economics$944
Social Sciences$929
Political Science$776
General Works$551
Library Science$542
Arts & Architecture$510
Philosophy & Religion$484
Language & Literature$398

*Prices represent print-plus-free-online, online-only, and the first tier of tiered pricing

This table is from the magazine Library Journal. It lists the average journal subscription price for 2016, for online journals from ISI indexes. The prices range from the highest, Chemistry journals subscription price is at $4,712 to Music at $334, average annual subscription cost. It lists the total average cost at $1,486.

Flowchart from budget allocation to materials available for use

As described below: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 4The flow chart above moves through the following steps: State and endowment money added to the budget, flows to Collections budget allocated to Subject Liaisons, flows to Liaisons choose materials to purchase OR respond to requests from faculty and students, flows to Acquisitions purchases or subscribes to materials, flows to Materials arrive physically in the library or digital access is turned on, flows to Information about the materials are added to the catalog by catalogers, and ends at Materials are placed on the library shelves – paperbacks are sent to the bindery.

Medical Library Budget Report

Penn State College of Medicine

Harrell Health Sciences Library: Research and Learning Commons


The Harrell Health Sciences Library (Harrell HSL), located within the Penn State College of Medicine and the Penn State Health Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, is the health sciences library for Penn State University.   As such, the primary focus of collection development is the health and biomedical sciences.  The library reports administratively to the Dean of University Libraries while also reporting to the Vice Dean for Educational Affairs, Penn State College of Medicine, resulting in a dual reporting structure.  The Harrell HSL has a Memorandum of Understanding in place that describes the partnership between the Penn State College of Medicine and the Penn State University Libraries.  The library retains a separate cost center with the budget originating through the COM.  All direct costs associated with managing the Harrell HSL, including the collections budget, are a component of the budget determined by the Dean of the College of Medicine.

Revenue Sources:

As a cost center within the College of Medicine (COM), the library’s funding is derived from a variety of revenue streams.  Academic support for the COM includes revenues from the Milton S. Hershey Medical Center (HMC) for services, the HMC Fixed Support Payment, the Dean’s percentage of professional clinical revenue, tuition and fees, a University contribution, lease income, investment income, and endowment returns. The Harrell HSL also has a small gift fund used to support symposia, sponsored speakers, professional development and other types of unfunded opportunities as well as occasional grants.

Development & Fundraising:

The Harrell HSL is currently working with Development & Alumni Relations staff in Hershey, PA, to develop a campaign in support of the Harrell HSL Renovation.  Long-term the Harrell HSL has plans to build an endowment to support collections.

Roles and Responsibilities:

Administration & Finance

Administration of the library’s budget falls under the Director of the Harrell HSL, the Vice Dean for Educational Affairs, and the Dean of the College of Medicine.  The Director oversees the budget and delegates responsibility for the collections budget to the Collection Development & Digital Resources Management Librarian.

Collection Management

The Collection Development & Digital Resources Management Librarian, in partnership with the Collection Access & Support Services Librarian, is responsible for selecting library materials, managing electronic resources, responding to access issues, working with vendors and publishers, and working closely with the University Libraries Acquisition Services to procure and pay for resources. The collection management librarians also maintain the scoped database list and the eJournal list on the Harrell HSL website. The Harrell HSL maintains an active liaison program. Primary functions of the liaison program include: intelligence gathering, engagement and outreach; marketing, promotion and advocacy; and collection building.  In their role as liaisons, faculty librarians serve as selectors in their assigned areas of responsibility, providing recommendations and input to the Collection Development & Digital Resources Management Librarian.

The Harrell HSL relies on the University Libraries Acquisition Services, Cataloging and Metadata Services, while also performing some acquisitions and cataloging functions onsite, and utilizes the Libraries automated systems supported through Libraries Technology (I-Tech) i.e. Serials Solutions, the SIRSI ILS, and the Illiad Interlibrary Loan system, etc.  The centralization of these types of support services is both cost effective and efficient.

The Collection Development & Digital Resources Management Librarian is a member of the Collections Services Advisory Group (CSAG) representing the interest of the Harrell HSL.  She also serves on ad hoc collections teams as needed in order to facilitate joint collection development efforts. For example, University Libraries provides primary support for the nursing collections across all campuses. The Harrell HSL collaborates in the acquisition of appropriate materials.

Materials Purchased:

The Harrell HSL has a Collection Development Policy ( that describes in detail the types of material collected (primarily in electronic formats), core subject categories, and efforts to coordinate library purchases in partnership with University Libraries to build collections in the life, health and biomedical sciences.  This relationship has allowed the libraries to leverage collection dollars and has proven to be both cost effective and beneficial for Penn State as a whole. By minimizing duplication between the libraries, students, faculty, and staff have access to the broadest range of materials.

The Harrell HSL provides an ILL service on a cost-recovery basis.  Lending library charges are passed on to the individual/department requesting documents. ILL staff makes every effort to obtain loans free of charge; reciprocal agreements are in place with partnering Big Ten (CIC) Libraries. The library is a designated Resource Library within the National Networks of Libraries of Medicine and as such is a fully participating member in the NLM DOCLINE system.

The Harrell HSL no longer binds material since the vast majority of the in-scope collection purchased is in electronic format.

Shared Purchasing

The Harrell HSL shares costs for relevant in-scope materials with University Libraries.  The library also acquires a subset of resources for Harrell HSL users only.  The total collection expenditures in FY 2015/2016 were $1,917,786.43.

Of these expenditures, 86% was expended in support of resources accessible by all Penn State user groups. The remaining14% of expenditures provided access for Harrell HSL users only to resources specific to the needs of the local campus, its vision and its mission.

In FY 2015/2016, the Harrell HSL contributed 12% of the funds for purchases from the University Libraries top 5 vendors as shown below:

VendorPSULHarrell HSL Percentage
Harrell HSL
Sum$12,168,564.96 $1,456,441.5112%

As described below: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 5A small portion of the overall library materials budget at the Harrell Health Sciences Library is used for book purchases. The remainder of the materials purchased are various types of electronic materials.

Books: 0%
Other: 1%
Ebooks: 9%
Databases: 12%
Journals: 78%

As described above: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 6The Harrell Health Sciences Library chooses to support databases that are critical to the four parts of the Penn State College of Medicine and Penn State Health mission:

  1. Academic (education)
  2. Clinical
  3. Research
  4. Community Service

A breakdown of the Harrell HSL database expenditures for FY 2015/2016 is shown below, along with the distribution of contributions from University Libraries and the Harrell HSL.

As described below: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 7Cochrane Library
Harrell HSL: 50%
PSUL: 50%

UpToDate site license
Harrell HSL: 100%

Acland Anatomy
Harrell HSL: 100%

Harrell HSL: 10%
PSUL: 90%

Harrell HSL: 81%
PSUL: 19%

Web of Science Databases
Harrell HSL: 15%
PSUL: 85%

Journal Citation Reports
Harrell HSL: 29%
PSUL: 71%

Plumb’s Veterinary Drug
Harrell HSL: 100%

Natural Medicines
Harrell HSL: 68%
PSUL: 32%


FY 2015-2016

Each of Pennsylvania State University’s two law schools has its own dedicated law library, both bearing the same library name, The H. Laddie Montague, Jr. Law Library.  Each law library is co-located within its respective law school:

  • Dickinson Law – Located in Katz Hall, 150 S. College St., Carlisle, PA
  • Penn State Law – Located in 214 Katz Building, University Park, PA

The primary focus of collection development for both law libraries is in the fields of United States and international legal and government resources. Each law library reports administratively to the Dean of its respective law school while also reporting to the Dean of University Libraries, resulting in dual reporting structures.  A Memorandum of Understanding governs the relationship between the University Libraries and the two law libraries, describing the partnership and collaborative initiatives between the libraries.


The budgets for the Law Libraries at Dickinson Law and Penn State Law are cost centers within their respective Law Schools.  As such, all direct costs of the Law Libraries are a part of the budgets determined by the Deans of their individual schools.  Annual Law Library budgets are determined by those deans who serve as the Law School budget executives and are managed by Directors of the respective Law Libraries.


Administration of the Law Library budgets falls within the purview of the Director of each law library, under the oversight of the law school financial officer and dean. Each Law Library director oversees the library budget and delegates responsibility for collection acquisitions and expenditure monitoring to law library faculty or staff as appropriate.


The mission of both H. Laddie Montague, Jr. Law libraries is to support the instructional and research efforts of the Dickinson Law and Penn State Law faculty and students, specifically, and those of the greater Penn State University community, generally, by supplying access to, and support in the use of, all information resources, regardless of format or physical location, needed to support the Schools’ high expectations for teaching excellence and significant scholarly productivity.

Each Law Library director has final responsibility for all law library activities including guidance and oversight of all collection development policies and practices. Both law libraries have designated Acquisitions staff who are responsible for day-to-day selection and acquisition activities including supervision of all standing and blanket orders; service as the law library’s primary liaison with most publishers and information suppliers; and identification, recommendation, and ultimately ordering of new materials deemed to be of interest to school of law researchers.  The law libraries liaise closely with each other to identify essential print and digital legal resources for collaborative purchasing, to forge expansive reciprocal resource sharing agreements, and to consult on matters of collection development and policy. Both law libraries coordinate with Penn State University Libraries’ Acquisitions Department to regularly assess the appropriate level of collection development cooperation and to evaluate opportunities for resource sharing when it serves the mutual interests of the Schools of Law and the greater University.


The Dickinson Law and Penn State Law libraries support University-wide access to more than 2,000 law and law-related journals, over 172,000 e-books, and 120 databases in excess of $650,000 annually. All of the law libraries’ e-resources are purchased collaboratively with each Law Library contributing a pre-determined share for each acquisition.  Generally, the law libraries share costs roughly proportional to enrollment size, currently on a 60% (Penn State Law Library) to 40% (Dickinson Law Library) basis.  The University Libraries contributes to the cost of some digital resources with the ratio determined on an ad hoc basis for each title.

The charts below illustrate the total FY 2015-16 expenditures for law and law-related digital resources along with the respective percentage share contributed by each unit.

Total Law Library
e-Resource Expenditures by Unit

TOTAL $ 699,458
Dickinson Law $ 230,390
Penn State Law $ 395,927
University Libraries $ 73,141

As described in table above: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 8Our main Law Library digital vendors aggregate many types of legal resources, each of which allows us to provide the most comprehensive coverage for our law students, faculty, staff and the University as a whole.

Law Library E-Resource Expenditures
By Vendor

VendorTotal CostDickinson Law CostPenn State Law CostUniversity Libraries Cost
Bloomberg BNA$63,600$12,720$19,080$31,800
CCH/Wolters Kluwer Law & Business$178,634$59,317$88,976$30,341
Gale Cengage$46,554$18,622$27,932-
Oxford University Press$37,846$15,138$22,708-
Westlaw/Thomson Reuters$57,416$20,966$31,450$5,000
William S. Hein & Co., Inc.$53,261$21,304$31,956-

As described in table above: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 9Some of the content provided by each of our main vendors includes:

  • Bloomberg BNA – Law school access to Bloomberg Law, which includes primary and secondary sources of law, a unique federal and state docket system, company reports, and judge and litigation analytics. University-wide access to the Bloomberg BNA Law Resource Libraries, which includes a collection of more than 200 law related news, analysis, and reference products, providing intensive coverage of legal and regulatory developments and case law covering a wide range of topics.
  • CCH/Wolters Kluwer Law & Business – University-wide access to the CCH Tax Research, Business & Finance, and Health & Human Resources networks. These networks include access to primary sources of law, as well as research materials on federal, state and international tax materials, mergers and acquisitions, product liability and safety, corporate governance, banking, international business, securities, intellectual property, antitrust and trade regulation, labor and employment, pensions, benefits, and health care compliance and reimbursement.
  • Gale Cengage – University-wide access to 18th and 19th Century News and other Collections, LegalTrac (an index of most major law reviews, newspapers, journals and law-related articles from general interest publications), and the majority of the Making of Modern Law (MOML) collections. The MOML collections include historical primary sources of law, historical trial resource, historical U.S. Supreme Court records and briefs, and foreign, comparative and international law resources.
  • LexisNexis – Law school only access to Lexis Advance, which includes primary and secondary sources of law, Lexis legal publications, Lexis Practice Advisor, court documents, dockets, legal news, expert witness materials and public records.
  • NELLCO – The NELLCO Consortium is an international consortium of law libraries that provides discounts on several legal resources offered by various vendors. Through NELLCO, we have access to Fastcase and the Loislaw Treatise Library, Ravel Law and Judicial Analytics, the Index to Legal Periodicals and Books, the Current Index to Legal Periodicals, and Investor-State Law Guide.
  • Oxford University Press (OUP) – University-wide access to several collections offered by OUP, including the Parry Historical Treaties collection, International Commercial Law, International Commercial Arbitration, Constitutions of the Countries of the World, International Criminal Law, International Human Rights Law, and International Investment Claims.
  • ProQuest – University-wide access to ProQuest Congressional, which includes indices and abstracts of congressional publications back to 1789, including full text of congressional hearings, full text Committee Prints, full text Congressional Research Service (CRS) Reports, and legislative histories, and ProQuest Legislative Insight, which includes full-text PDF versions of publications generated by the United States Congress during the legislative process from 1836 to the present.
  • Westlaw/Thomson Reuters – Law school access to Westlaw, which includes primary and secondary sources of law, Practical Law, Thomson Reuter legal publications, court documents, dockets, legal news and expert witness resources. University-wide access to Westlaw China and Checkpoint access to Tax and Estate planning materials.
  • William S. Hein & Co., Inc. – University-wide access to Hein Online, which provides the full text of over 200 legal journals from their inception; includes databases for U.S. agency, Congressional, Presidential, Supreme Court and foreign relations documents, reports and texts.
  • Other Vendors – University-wide access to many other legal resource databases and publications, such as the International Chamber of Commerce Dispute Resolution Library, ALM Legal Publications, various U.S. and International Legal Journals, and LLMC Digital, which provides full-text access to a vast collection of legal literature and government documents, including U.S. federal executive, legislative, and judicial materials.

While some content overlaps, the main benefit of providing content from so many different vendors is that each provides its own editorial enhancements, such as commentary, annotations, and analysis so that our users are given a wide variety of options for researching the law, its origins, and its interpretations.


During FY 2015-16, in combination the Dickinson Law Library and the Penn State Law Library expended $1,447,945 to acquire print and digital collections that further the teaching and research missions of both law schools and Penn State University.

The following pie chart depicts how total expenditures are allocated among various types of materials: electronic resources (43%), print serials and journals (52%), print books (4%), microforms (1%), and nonprint media (0%). The final two charts provide dollar amounts of expenditures in each separate law library, broken down by material type.

As described above: March 14, 2017 Agenda, Appendix T, Chart 10Dickinson Law
Library Collection Expenditures

Material TypeExpenditures
Books (Print)$32,813
Serials, including journals (Print)$373,372
NonPrint Media$45
Electronic Resources$230,390

Penn State Law
Library Collections Expenditures

Material TypeExpenditures
Books (Print)$28,320
Serials, including journals (Print)$374,042
NonPrint Media$31
Electronic Resources$395,927


Assuming the overall composition of the law collections and the law libraries’ acquisitions strategies remain constant, this table highlights an areas of serious concern. Inflation in our primary collection areas remained relatively static from 2011 through 2014, with a substantial spike in 2015. While the overall rate of increase from 2011 through 2015 averages out to 8.48%, it is clear that if 2015 marks the beginning of a new trend in inflation rates, the law libraries will face significant challenges to remain within budgetary constraints in future years.

Inflation – Legal Publishing


Average Inflation in Categories Shown

I. Law Periodicals Per Title Price Increase
II. Legal Serials Services Price Increase11.00%6.00%11.00%11.30%13.90%10.64%

III. Online Serials (Law) Price Increase

*Data extracted from the Library Materials Price Index (LMPI) compiled by the Association for Library Collections & Technical Services, a division of the American Library Association.


Data offered throughout this report illustrates that Law and Medicine combined, contribute approximately 20% of the overall expenditures for collections across Penn State University. Unquestionably, the collections of these two specialized libraries in the fields of law, health and biomedical sciences contribute significant value to all of Penn State University.

Discussion and Conclusion

State the implications for the faculty.


  • William E. Butler, Chair
  • Anna L. Mazzucato, Vice Chair
  • Fred J. Aebli
  • Robert Bridges
  • Mary Beth Clark
  • Marina Cotarelo
  • Anne C. Clements
  • Joseph L. Enama
  • Ken Forstmeier
  • Fynn Mott
  • Terry O’Heron
  • Ira J. Ropson
  • Lydia Scheel
  • Bradley Sottile
  • Jennifer Sparrow
  • Eric A. Walker