CONCEPTUAL DRAFT
Library Budget Review Report Format
Revised following 2/7/12 CSS meeting
Goal
 Submit to SFC a concise report focused on resources and budgets, as outlined in CSS’s
charge
Key Issues Impacting or Impacted by the Libraries’ Budget
 Funding stream in support of a non-revenue generating unit
 Escalating acquisition costs, including OhioLINK
 Staffing (mix of faculty, A&P, CCS, students)
 POM funding (space assigned vs. space needed, renovations, maintenance)
 Expanding hours of operations
 Changing role of libraries in the academic enterprise
 Standings among peers (do the metrics measured by ALA really measure what OSU
Libraries needs to do? What metrics should be used?)
 Library’s role in helping the university meet its strategic objectives (Teaching and
Learning, Research and Innovation, Outreach and Engagement, Resource Stewardship)
 Expectations for the libraries to rise with the university’s aspirational goals
Examples of Budget Issues to Include in CSS’s Report (in no particular order)
1. How should escalating costs for OhioLINK (anticipated $1M increase in OSU’s costs in FY
13) be covered?

Data from 1/6/12 report (includes Health Sciences and Law)
2. How should escalating costs for materials acquisition (anticipated 7.5% annual increase in
costs) be covered?




Data from 12/13/11 overview indicates $11.4M acquisitions budget (includes Health
Sciences and Law)
Data from 1/6/12 report indicates $14.1M acquisitions budget as equipment with
“Materials Budget (often labeled as Equipment in budget documents)” (includes Health
Sciences and Law)
If 80% of equipment budget is actual acquisitions (11.4/14.1), then projected acquisitions
only budget for FY 17 will be $17.3M ($21.6 X 0.8)
In 2012 support unit budget request process, received $800,000 in permanent allocation
to support acquisition needs
3. Should a library fee be instituted?


Data from 1/6/12 report regarding peers and OSU projection models
Suzi will calculate different scenarios given general fee caps)
4. Are there efficiencies to be realized by combining personnel, technical services, or other
elements of the University Libraries, Prior Health Science Library, and Law Library?


Staffing data from 12/13/11 overview and 1/6/12 report
“Sources and Uses” documents for the three libraries posted at: http://www.rpia.ohiostate.edu/committees/senfiscal/css/index.html
University Libraries Staffing FTE
Employee
Group
Faculty
FTE
Staff
FTE
Total
FTE
2004
53.9
154.78
208.68
2005
55.9
154.76
210.66
2006
58.45
162.13
220.58
2007
61.75
165.15
226.9
2008
61
174.65
235.65
2009
59
172.55
231.55
2010
58.5
168.05
226.55
2011
56
157.3
213.3
2005
5.95
26.41
32.36
2006
6
32.9
38.9
2007
7
25.95
32.95
2008
8
29.07
37.07
2009
5
31.05
36.05
2010
6
28.25
34.25
2011
7
35.5
42.5
2005
18.75
18.75
2006
17
17
2007
18
18
2008
16.8
16.8
2009
15.8
15.8
2010
15.84
15.84
2011
13.85
13.85
2006
64.45
212.03
276.48
2007
68.75
209.1
277.85
2008
69
220.52
289.52
2009
64
219.4
283.4
2010
64.5
212.14
276.64
2011
63
206.65
269.65
Health Sciences Library Staffing FTE
Employee
Group
Faculty
FTE
Staff
FTE
Total
FTE
2004
7.3
17.25
24.55
Law Library Staffing FTE
Employee
Group
Staff
FTE
Total
FTE
2004
18.75
18.75
Total Ohio State Libraries Staffing
FTE
Employee
Group
Faculty
FTE
Staff
FTE
Total
FTE
2004
61.2
190.78
251.98
2005
61.85
199.92
261.77
5. What is the budget impact of greater utilization and expanded operating hours and how are
these costs being covered?


Data from 1/6/12 report (FY12 $1.7M, estimate for FY 17 $2.7M)
In 2012 support unit budget request process, received $200,000 in permanent allocation
to support expanded hours
6. Is there excess space being used by the libraries that is costly and could be used in other ways
by other units, relieving the Libraries budget of unnecessary POM costs?

Space allocation summary from 1/6/12 report
7. Are there budget or administrative efficiency ramifications for having the Libraries as the TIU
for Prior Health Sciences Library (and Law????) but not having administrative control over those
libraries?


How to determine?
“Sources and Uses” documents for the three libraries posted at: http://www.rpia.ohiostate.edu/committees/senfiscal/css/index.html
8. What is the appropriate staffing level for the Libraries (compared to peers, according to ALA
student/staff ratio standards, etc.) and what would be the cost of increasing staffing to meet these
markers?





Do surveys show dissatisfaction with service?
What is the right mix of staff—faculty, A&P, CSS, students—given their roles?
What is the mix of staffing compared to OSU’s aspirational peers?
Data from 1/6/12 report (salaries FY 12 $18.3M, projected for FY 17 $24.6M)
“Sources and Uses” documents for the three libraries posted at: http://www.rpia.ohiostate.edu/committees/senfiscal/css/index.html
Faculty FTE
Staff FTE, A&P
Staff FTE, CCS
Grad Stu FTE
Stu FWS FTE
Stu wages FTE
Total FTE
#
63
35
137
10
67
104
416
2006
%
15.1%
8.4%
32.9%
2.4%
16.1%
25.0%
Library Personnel (excluding Health Sciences and Law)
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
#
%
61 15.1%
60 15.3%
62 15.9%
58 15.5%
56 16.1%
53 13.1%
57 14.5%
61 15.6%
61 16.4%
60 17.3%
131 32.3% 127 32.3% 114 29.2% 106 28.4% 102 29.4%
9
2.2%
11
2.8%
10
2.6%
9
2.4%
8
2.3%
42 10.4%
34
8.7%
53 13.6%
80 21.4%
64 18.4%
109 26.9% 104 26.5%
90 23.1%
59 15.8%
57 16.4%
405
393
390
373
347
9. Can current alternative sources of revenue be enhanced, or new ones exploited, to provide
additional revenue? Possibilities include: Trademarks and Licensing (currently receiving about
$600K of total $790K trademark allocation receipts, according to 12/13/11 overview), other
affinity relationships, room rentals (11th floor, others), income from copiers/printers/coffee shop,
etc., others?

“Sources and Uses” documents for the three libraries posted at: http://www.rpia.ohiostate.edu/committees/senfiscal/css/index.html