Unmediated Borrowing and the State University Libraries of Florida
Executive Summary
For submission to CSUL: May 2008
The Circulation and Interlibrary Loan Subcommittees of the Public Services Planning Committee
created a Task Force to investigate Unmediated Borrowing (UB) for the State University Libraries
(SULs). The following recommendations were developed through Task Force and group discussions
among Circulation and ILL Librarians, in consultation with FCLA. A more detailed analysis of the
issues, recommendations, and challenges outlined to date is included in the attached report.
The SULs of Florida comprise a variety of institutions: main campus libraries; multi-branch library
systems; legal, medical and specialized libraries; joint-use facilities; and in future, shared remote
storage. Though the libraries are diverse, they share common environments. Budgets for materials and
staffing decline, while user expectations for rapid delivery of products and services increase. These
realities necessitate finding new ways to provide access to materials, while leveraging the investment
each library has made in acquiring unique resources.
The new Florida MANGO Web application ties all eleven SULs together via a shared interface and
provides new opportunities to improve services. Users can easily view all SUL holdings, and also
expect easy access to those holdings. Implementing unmediated borrowing via the MANGO catalog
would greatly enhance access in a cost effective manner.
Unmediated borrowing has been successful for hundreds of other libraries. Multiple successful models
exist, among them Ohiolink (Ohio), Prospector (Colorado), GIL-Express (Georgia) and the Orbis
Cascade Alliance (Oregon and Washington). In these systems, users request an item via the catalog
without staff intervention (hence, “unmediated”). The request is routed to a potential lender in a matter
of minutes, not days. UB facilitates resource sharing while lowering per request cost of fulfillment by
simplifying and expediting workflow, enabling lower-cost workers to accomplish the associated
processing.
Recommendations:
1. Approve development and implementation of an UB service for the SULs.
2. Appoint a Technical Task Force to investigate existing UB models and technological solutions,
and review their feasibility / appropriateness in our environment. Members should include
FCLA programmers and librarians, as well as library staff representatives with some systemslevel knowledge of Aleph, Endeca, Circulation, and / or ILL. The Task Force will recommend a
solution to be implemented and initial specs for the project.
3. Following the recommendation of the Technical Task Force, appoint a Policy and Procedure
Task Force to develop policies and procedures for the UB service. Include representatives from
Circulation, ILL, and the Shared Storage Task Force.
4. Approve purchase / licensing of appropriate system(s) to support UB, with the coordination and
support of FCLA. This may include expansion or enhancement of existing solutions (e.g.
ILLiad, ALEPH). If the solution is to be developed by FCLA, allocate appropriate resources.
Unmediated Borrowing and the SULs of Florida
3/6/2016
1
Unmediated Borrowing and the State University Libraries of Florida
What is Unmediated Borrowing (UB)?
Unmediated Borrowing is the request and delivery of an item for a patron directly from the lending
library, with no intervention on the part of the patron’s home library. The user experience is something
like this:
A patron sees a desired returnable item (books, physical media, etc.) in the Union catalog and places a
request. The request is delivered directly to a lending institution, where it is filled and delivered to the
patron’s home library for pickup. This differs from current practice in that the patron’s home library
does no processing or other intervention in the request process.
Why Unmediated Borrowing?
Several states have implemented unmediated borrowing models to better serve their users. Among those
who have done so are Georgia (GIL, for GALILEO Interconnected Libraries), Missouri (MOBIUS),
Ohio (OhioLink), and Colorado (Prospector). Although these states use different technologies to
facilitate unmediated borrowing, all describe general goals of providing access to available library
materials to students, staff and faculty of affiliated institutions, in a cost-effective and efficient manner.
The recent development of the MANGO Web catalog interface for the State University Libraries of
Florida provides the opportunity to enhance user service by implementing unmediated borrowing. Our
environment and user expectations indicate the benefits to be gained by such a service.
Environment
The diversity of the State Universities of Florida presents several possible scenarios where unmediated
borrowing functionality would facilitate patron access:

Universities with multiple branch campuses, who may find the UB mechanism more appropriate
for requesting materials than standard Aleph or ILL functionality

Between the SULs

Ultimately, joint-use facilities (with community colleges and public libraries)
In addition, the State University Libraries of Florida are faced with new challenges:

Continuing budget decreases, for both materials and staffing

Addition of new academic and professional programs throughout the state, without sufficient
funding to build supporting library collections at each site

The proposed Shared Storage Facility
Unmediated Borrowing and the SULs of Florida
3/6/2016
2
User Expectations

The development of a shared catalog interface reveals the holdings of all SULs to all users,
raising expectations of access. Patrons want and expect to be able to obtain materials they can
see in the Union catalog.

Patrons expect rapid fulfillment of requests, a la Amazon.

Any state university student, staff or faculty member is eligible to borrow from any SUL.
What would Unmediated Borrowing look like?
This report focuses its recommendations on accomplishing unmediated borrowing between the SULs via
the union catalog only. However, it is important to be mindful of future possibilities so as to not build a
self-limiting system in our initial implementation. To that end, some examples of possible future
services are listed.
Unmediated borrowing between SULs from within the Union catalog
The Patron sees an item their library doesn’t hold in the Union catalog. They click a “Get It” button and
the request is forwarded an SUL who holds the item. The patron’s Home library staff does not have to
intervene (mediate) the request at all.
The Lending library receives the request. If the item is held, pull slips are generated and the item is sent
to the patron’s Home library.
If the initial Lending library receiving request does NOT have the item available, route through the rest
of SUL string of potential lenders. If all SULs are exhausted, the request is routed back to the patron’s
Home library for mediated processing via standard means.
Throughout this process, the patron is notified via email / account alerts of their request status.
Possible Futures

Direct delivery to the patron, at least of SUL materials

Unmediated article requests. This requires good citations, meaning the request source (such as
article databases) be used to accurately populate the request form.

Requests of items on loan at the home library could be forwarded to other SULs with the item
available, to fulfill the request more rapidly. If not found at another SUL, a recall would be
placed as usual at the home library.

Unmediated borrowing requests are routed through the SULs. If no SULs can fulfill the request,
it is forwarded automatically, without mediation, to verified lenders for fulfillment.
Unmediated Borrowing and the SULs of Florida
3/6/2016
3
Recommendations:
1. Approve development and implementation of an UB service for the SULs.
2. Appoint a Technical Task Force to investigate existing UB models and technological solutions,
and review their feasibility / appropriateness in our environment. Members should include
FCLA programmers and librarians, as well as library staff representatives with some systemslevel knowledge of Aleph, Endeca, Circulation, and / or ILL. The Task Force will recommend a
solution to be implemented and initial specs for the project.
3. Following the recommendation of the Technical Task Force, appoint a Policy and Procedure
Task Force to develop policies and procedures for the UB service. Include representatives from
Circulation, ILL, and the Shared Storage Task Force.
4. Approve purchase / licensing of appropriate system(s) to support UB, with the coordination and
support of FCLA. This may include expansion or enhancement of existing solutions (e.g.
ILLiad, ALEPH). If the solution is to be developed by FCLA, allocate appropriate resources..
Assumptions:

Initially, unmediated borrowing applies only to returnables (books, physical media, etc.).

Some items may not available for unmediated borrowing, depending on local policy. Examples
include: items which are owned and available at the "home" library, Reference, Reserves,
Periodical volumes, and other "specialty" categories of items. That said, participating SULs
should make every attempt to provide the broadest access to their collection for other SUL
borrowers as is possible.

If possible, bypass OCLC to avoid costs of conducting transactions through those systems.

Workflow should be made as straightforward and automated as possible so that "lower cost"
workers can conduct most aspects of the processing.

Workflow should fit within the existing workflows where possible, although it is understood this
may not be possible.

A new service does NOT presume reduced costs. Some reallocation of resources may be
expected.

Additional costs may be incurred if the unmediated borrowing solution(s) chosen requires
purchase or licensing.
Prerequisites:

Standardized policies: SULs need to agree on standard policies for lending of materials
available via unmediated borrowing and / or patron direct request. Policies to be decided upon
include a standard loan period, renewals, fines and replacement costs (if any) to be applied and
who is responsible – will the library be billed, or the patron; what system will handle the billing.
Unmediated Borrowing and the SULs of Florida
3/6/2016
4

Participation: Each institution can define which items in their collection are available for
unmediated borrowing. It is hoped that this would be as inclusive as possible within the SULs.

Load balancing: Any unmediated borrowing system must allow for randomization / load
balancing so that no one institution is overly utilized.

Web request form: A form which is automatically populated with data necessary to fulfill the
request (title, author, etc.) will need to be created. This form will need to pass this data to the
unmediated borrowing system.
Some questions for consideration:

Title-level or item-level requests?

Use existing technologies present in-house exclusively (ILLiad, Endeca, Aleph); or purchase /
license / participate in other?

If a patron submits a request and wants it delivered to their closest location and it’s not their
university, is that acceptable?

How will items be checked out?
- On the patron’s home library card?
- On a temporary card?
- On the home library’s patron account?
 Where will information about patrons and items with active UB transactions “live”?
Some Challenges:

Authentication and authorization: How do we verify patrons are who they say they are?
Against what? How do we determine if and to what they are authorized? How and where do we
track patron requests and obligations?

Delivery of materials: Is the current courier service sufficient? Recent reports of inadequate
service raise concern. What other delivery methods might be needed (USPS, UPS, etc.)? Will
delivery requirements vary for different types of materials?

Adaptation of workflows: Regardless of the technological solution used to implement UB,
library staff will be impacted. Whether a library places fulfillment of requests in Circulation,
ILL, or some combination of both, a new service will require adaptation of workflows.
Respectfully submitted by the Unmediated Borrowing Task Force:
Jennifer Kuntz, FCLA; Robb Waltner, UNF; Kristine Shrauger, UCF; Merilyn Burke, USF; Douglas
Hasty, FIU; Bridgett Turnipseed, FSU; Velma Smith, FSU
Unmediated Borrowing and the SULs of Florida
3/6/2016
5