lms comparisons apla 2010

Information solutions

Library Management Systems - an Australian case study

Anastasia Govan


What am l covering today?

Project brief for DHF

Regulatory framework for libraries

Project steps

Literature review findings

Expected costs

Recommendations for Australian/Health systems library


The work brief

Aim

To provide options for procuring a new LMS and Digital Repository software in order to improve access to, and increase the usage of, the DHF Library’s information resources for DHF Library clients

Project outcomes

1. List of criteria2. Review systems with digital repositories3. Review standalone LMS systems4. Review standalone digital repositories5. Assess costs of options

Deliverables:

Recommended product(s) meet(s) requirements


Stage hours Task

1 10 Audit existing LMS and DR software, establish service requirements for new systems, discuss requirements with staff.

2 20 Review products and current trends to determine suitability for the Library’s requirements in Australian context

3 16 Report recommendation(s) to Library Director and managers. (12 hours draft, 2 hour meeting to discuss report changes, 2 hours revisions)

Tasks

Time

40 hours over 4 weeks


How we did it

1.List of criteria 2.Complete system functional specification checklist 3.Reconcile vendor responses4.Review standalone library management systems that fulfill the requirements 5.

Review standalone digital repository software that fulfills the requirements

(scale 1 to 5)6. Assess costs of options


Governance framework

1. Australian Library and Information Association’s ‘Guidelines for Australian Health Libraries’. Section 3.5

2. DHF strategy documents

3. Library Act/Legal deposit legislation

4. Library goals and objectives

5. Library standards


DHF issues

1. Lack of Northern Territory support for the Horizon (SirsiDynix) product

2. Lack of ability to customize easily onsite3. Current product university focus4. Inherent functional issues5. Library acquiring separate modules from

separate vendors to meet their 6. requirements


Literature review findings - LMS & Digital repositories

Market Summary Number of customers

%share

Total number of HE institutions 183 100

ExLibris (incl. Endeavor) 43 23.50

Talis 42 22.95

SirsiDynix 41 23.40

Innovative Interfaces 33 18.03

Unknown 8 4.37

ISOxford 6 3.28

Infor (formerly Geac) 3 1.64

OCLC Pica (formerly FDI) 3 1.68

Payne Automation 1 0.55

Softlink 1 0.55

VTLS 1 0.55

Axiel 1 0.55


RFI respondent overview

Thirty vendors were sent the functional specification

Nine responded in full

2 responded but identified that their product would not meet DHF requirements

1 of the 9 full responses was for another sites RFI

1 half responded (indicating a demonstration had previously been given to the staff)


Summary of vendor responses

•Most vendors did not read the RFI instructions•Most vendors could not respond in the two week timeframe•A detailed sales response was specifically not requested at this stage of the project but most vendors sent it•Most vendor responses were open in regards to functionality and cost •Larger commercial vendors appearing more guarded and responding in US $•Costs varied dramatically making a straight comparison difficult. • Software costs (excluding installation etc.) ranged from $8,000 to over $120,000•Some responses were for hosted only systems, some were for local systems only


Have you considered an Open Source LMS?

Only 2% of the Integrated Library System market is held by open source solutions

In Australia Koha supported in Australia by CALYX information essentials. Koha also has many health related site installations in the UK and used mostly by small libraries.

Evergreen used by NLA- basis for the international (300 library consortia) for the Open Library Environmentproject. It was initiated by a 265 library consortia in Georgia, United States

Digital Commons is supported in Australia by BePress and is stated as being more robust than Dspace by Bepress

A direct comparison of open source solutions is difficult as they all have different functionality. Balnaves (2008) indicates a metrics-based approach can be used to asses them.

Goh et al (2006) also provides an overall checklist for a ‘good’ system.

Visiting functioning sites and benchmarking according to the DHF RFI functional specifications would be best in identifying a good business fit


Expected implementation & maintenance costs

Riewe (2008) open source savings realised when part of a consortia - 20% of implementation cost is charged as ongoing maintenance fees

SirsiDynix Unicorn ILS (Integrated Library System) server costs of $1m - annual maintenance charges of $558,000

Migrated to Evergreen costs diminished to $150,000 for the server environment and annual maintenance of $450,000.

Staff training costs of $250,000 were initially incurred

Initial cost for a proprietary ILS was $24,313, mean annual cost $2,133 for 15,000 catalogue items - open source option was $10,700 including hardware and first year and annual support cost of $2,500.

Open Source system implementations worked due to technical inhouse employment and training


Expected project costsITEM Total Project Management $35,000 Training – End user Training - staff $$5000 Hardware – SaaS upfront $60,000 Hardware – SaaS option ongoing per year $25,000 Software install/licenses $20,000-

$160,000 Change management throughout the department

???

Software license maintenance fees ongoing $5,000 - $50,000

Hardware $20,000 Data migration $10,000-

$50,000 Govt IT Implementation staff ??? $10000-

$30,000 Interfaces - programming $5,000-$15,000 Testing


Key findings

1. Very few vendors specialise in provision of services to Health Libraries2. Few vendors have dedicated Australian support3. One vendor provides local support in the Northern Territory (Inmagic) 4. Large pricing variances between vendors making comparison difficult based on

price5. Several vendors provide Software as a Service (SaaS) offerings6. Comparing open source offerings is very difficult due to their individual nature and lack of commercial support7. Stable, consistent support bases in Australia for open source systems is debatable


Recommendations

1.Allocation of at least $250,000 upfront and $30,000 ongoing2.Library invite those with current health library installations in Australia to demonstrate how their systems work in the DHF environment 3.Benchmark using the DHF FRI functional specifications document4.A dedicated and system trained Systems Administration role be employed within DHF

Based upon a mix of fit of the RFI criteria, price, digital repository incorporation and Australian support that Civica

(Spydus) and Ex Libris / Koha and Digital Commons


Why we manage information..................

Anastasia Govan

Information ArchitectPhone 0428836405Email [email protected]

lms comparisons apla 2010

Technology