Home » Meeting of the Governing Board 2000-05-03

Meeting of the Governing Board 2000-05-03

    • Meeting of the Governing Board – Washington, D.C. – May 3, 2000 Minutes
    • Attending:
    • Bill Gosling (Chair)
    • Dan Arbour
    • Betty Bengtson
    • David Ferriero
    • Deanna Marcum
    • Sarah Michalak
    • Carole Moore
    • David Stam
    • John Tuck (for Reg Carr)
    • Bill Walker
    • Guests:
    • Jeff Moyer, ProQuest Information and Learning
    • Mark Sandler, University of Michigan
    • Introductions and review of agenda Roles and responsibilities of the Board:
    • Proposed two meetings per year
    • Five-year terms for Board members
    • Both partners and non-partners represented to broaden perspective
    • Issues to be addressed:
    • Establish terms and conditions for access to text-file
    • Authorize special conditions for use beyond license terms
    • Review organizational structure and agreements
    • Review business plan & budget
    • Review production and operational issues
    • Monitor performance
    • Consider additional production sites
    • Review and approve task force recommendations
    • Advise on marketing strategies
    • Advise on outreach to scholarly community
    • Consider relationships to other organizations and projects
    • Background:

Jeff Moyer and Mark Sandler briefed the Board on the history EEBO image product and the genesis of the Text Creation Partnership

    • Marketing:

Dan Arbour reported that the project has exceeded ProQuest Information and Learning’s expectations of market acceptance and that the text encoding initiative is credited for accelerating that acceptance. Internationally, the project has not exceeded expectations but there tends to be a lag of 12-18 months between U.S. and international acquisitions so this may just be conforming to that pattern. It is believed that the acquisition of Chadwyck-Healey will help on the international front. In any case, ProQuest Information and Learning is committed to the project over the long haul and won’t back away from its commitment to the Text Partnership.

Dan noted that ProQuest Information and Learning has developed subject subsets (religious studies, travel, women’s studies) of the EEBO corpus that the company believes will stimulate interest in EEBO among smaller institutions by lowering the entry point for adoption of the images. An agreement needs to be developed with ProQuest Information and Learning for the circumstances under which libraries choosing this option can access the corresponding text for particular subsets of the collection. John Tuck indicated that there is enthusiasm for the project at Oxford and more generally in the U.K. There is expectation of a national deal through the Contents Working Party. Reg Carr could bring the project forward to the CWP. John hopes to become more active in promoting the effort in the U.K. and would be granted funds for assistance if needed. Bill G. indicated that he could take the effort forward to the Universitas 21 project involving institutions in the U.S., U.K. and Australia.

The Board next discussed strategies for adding partners through direct institutional sales and consortium efforts. The concept of tiered or differential pricing was discussed in some detail and favored in principle. Pricing for the image product is based on three tiers of institutions but it was suggested that a two-tier (less complex) model might be more appropriate for a partnership type organization. It was agreed that a two and three tier approach would be modeled for the Board to consider.

    • Fiscal and organizational issues:

The Board reviewed revenue projections and a draft project budget. It was suggested that a sub-group of the Board be designated to oversee the financial aspects of the project. The Board also reviewed a proposed organizational model for the project that describes the roles of Michigan, Oxford, CLIR, ProQuest Information and Learning, and the Board. Draft letters of agreement between the EEBO-TCP project and Proquest Information and Learning, as well as a letter of agreement for partner institutions, were discussed. The Board offered some suggestions but more thorough comments were requested by July 1. A number of significant issues were touched on in this section of the meeting including archiving, copyright, local load, and unlimited distribution of EEBO-TCP text-files.

    • Task force reports:

The Board was asked to review recommendations from the EEBO-TCP Task Force on Selection and the EEBO-TCP DTD Task Force. After lively discussion, the recommendations of the selection group were endorsed as a reasonable starting strategy to be reviewed if significant problems arise once implementation begins. The Board also approved the recommendations of the DTD Task Force but was interested in clarification on the point about multiple works bound in a single volume.

    • Production:

A very rough outline of the production process was briefly discussed. It was noted that Oxford was beginning discussions on establishing production capability. Mark noted that an RFP would be prepared in the next month and vendors would be encouraged to submit proposals. The Board indicated that this RFP process for selecting keyboarding firms should move ahead without their direct involvement. Selection of firms will focus on cost and quality issues.

    • Public Relations:

The Board encouraged issuing press releases to a variety of library and scholarly associations in the U.S. and internationally. It was suggested that brochures be developed describing key elements of the EEBO-TCP project. There was explicit encouragement to pursue relations with ESTC as well as to explore joint initiatives with DLF. The Board encouraged the creation of an independent faculty group to advise on the project and Dan offered that ProQuest Information and Learning would help with that effort. Bill reminded the Board that they have an important responsibility to promote the initiative and help with the recruitment of partners.

  • Next Steps:Bill Gosling restated the action steps that emerged from the day’s discussion:
  • Near term:
  • Recruitment and outreach efforts-John to take back to Reg Carr for U.K. outreach
  • Brochures should be developed for Marketing Press kit should be developed
  • Intellectual property and copyright issues to be addressed-Bill, Dan, Mark, and Deanna
  • Pursue relations with ESTC
  • Develop two-tier membership model
  • Model production at different levels of participation
  • Appoint a subcommittee to monitor finances
  • Board to review preliminary drafts of the ProQuest Information and Learning and partner agreements (focus on disclaimers) and comment by July 1 to EEBO group name-David Stam will send out a reminder.
  • Agreements will be finalized and cleared through legal counsel and sent out for further review and acceptance.
  • Move ahead with RFP to select keyboarding firms
  • Develop plan for outreach to scholars
  • Longer term
  • Give greater thought to the K-12 market
  • ProQuest Information and Learning subsets should be kept in mind but won’t throw off overall effort
  • Consider grant funding opportunities
  • Develop collaborative initiative with DLF