"passionate" is definitely on the mark there!

I agree that checkin is a basic tool to ensure that you are getting what
you pay for.  We are also a state institution and I would feel a bit
uncomfortable dispensing with checkins based on the amount of claiming
that we currently do and the fact that we still bind most of our titles.

That said, I don't agree with couching this whole debate as a right or
wrong issue.  You do what you think is best given the parameters you
have (staff, fiscal resources, institutional/administrative
requirements, etc.).  And that will be different for each library.

Besides, checkin v. non-checkin is a sliding scale.  Many libraries
check in their journals but don't worry about their daily newspapers,
for example.  Or a public library may check in their journals at their
main branch but not worry about their branch titles. Or they may not
worry about checking in when they have electronic access or they are
gifts, etc. Again, it will be different for each library depending on a
variety of factors.

Buddy Pennington
Serial Acquisitions Librarian
UMKC - University Libraries
800 E. 51st Street
Kansas City, MO  64110
816-235-1548
816-333-5584 (fax)
penningtonb@umkc.edu

UMKC University Libraries: Connecting Learners to the World of Knowledge

www.umkc.edu/lib

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum
[mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of Hijleh, Renee
Sent: Tuesday, January 17, 2006 10:16 AM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Looking for other libraries that have eliminated
check-in

Actually, you are mistaken in your oversimplification of matters. As a
state institution, we have a responsibility to the public to see that
their funds are used properly. And we actually have had auditors come to
our department, check our invoices, and demand to see that ALL of the
issues PAID FOR were RECEIVED. If they have not been received, then they
require a documented explanation. This does not bother me, and
furthermore I feel that this is how things should be run. (And yes, I
could be reproved, with possible loss of my job, if it was deemed that I
was not handling my duties correctly and costing the state money by
mishandling departmental funds.)

Our journal subscriptions are costly, and getting insanely more so every
year.
We cannot afford to pay $600 or more for a quarterly, or $7,000 or more
for a weekly, and then not know whether or not we are receiving all that
we have paid for! Who responsibly spends money this way?

Furthermore our overall journal budget is not that forgiving. We cannot
afford to be cavalier with how any of our funds are spent.
You start having multiple problems with expensive journals (like
Elsevier, Blackwell, etc.) and the cost for loss starts adding up into
the thousands of dollars quickly and easily. Who can actually afford to
just let $5,000 to $10,000 of materials go missing and unaccounted for?
Would be acceptable for your book budget? Or any other budget?..
I don't think so. Money lost is money lost. Thus, to me, its the height
of irresponsibility and misuse of departmental funds to knowingly allow
nonreceipt of any materials paid for. Conversely, responsible management
is getting exactly what you paid for in a timely manner, and if there
are problems, refunds and compensation for missed issues are ALWAYS
required.
Any prolonged problems with titles or publishers are resolved by
discontinuing doing business with them and finding a better alternative.

Most arguments for ditching checkin ring hollow. When it comes right
down to it, it represents lazy management and the equivalent of playing
Russian Roulette with your budget. How can you have an accurate finger
on the pulse of your journal collection without checkin, and
corresponding use studies? You can't. Because you have no idea what you
have received, nor what is being used. You also have no idea if you have
overlapped subs (that basically equates to double billing for the same
issues), dropped subs, delayed issues, missed issues, misdelivered subs,
etc., etc., etc. You would even have a hard time catching title changes!
You'd have to wait until the next billing cycle, and that's only if your
department paid the invoice and not some other accounts payable
department at your institution! How can anyone call this good
management?
You can't, because its not. I am one voice that will never join the
noncheckin bandwagon!!

My passionate 2 cents....

Renee Hijleh
Periodicals Department
William D. McIntyre Library
PO Box 5010
University of Wisconsin- Eau Claire
Eau Claire, WI  54702-5010
715-836-3306
fax: 715-836-2949

-----Original Message-----
From: SERIALST: Serials in Libraries Discussion Forum
[mailto:SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU] On Behalf Of Dan Lester
Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2006 5:05 PM
To: SERIALST@LIST.UVM.EDU
Subject: Re: [SERIALST] Looking for other libraries that have eliminated
check-in

Every state and every institution has different rules regarding auditing
of institutional property.  However, has an auditor EVER come looking to
see if you have the December 2004 issue of Albanian Underwater
Basketweaving?  I didn't think so.

Remember that even if you have a subscription to the journal, and have
carefully recorded that you received it, that doesn't mean that it is
still in the library. Right?  As long as you have some issues for 04 (or
whatever subscription period) and the documents that show you paid for
it (rather than writing a check to yourself), I believe you've done your
duty. And even if your auditors aren't happy that they, what sanctions
are they going to take?  Certainly they can't do anything that will get
you fired.

No, I'm not, thank goodness, an auditor.  But I do know that we
librarians make FAR too many decisions based on "what if" worst case
scenarios than we need to.  All too many libraries and library
departments are managed by fear and worry, rather than common sense.

dan

Wednesday, January 11, 2006, 1:51:51 PM, you wrote:

TSE> There were a
TSE> number of participants however who quickly noted that check-in was
TSE> required for auditing purposes.

--
Dan Lester, Data Wrangler  dan@RiverOfData.com 208-283-7711
3577 East Pecan, Boise, Idaho  83716-7115 USA www.riverofdata.com  Fair
is whatever God decides to do.