Draft 3 for consideration of the Working Group on Research Library Infrastructure.
At the first meeting of the Working Group, CAUL was asked to provide an overview of all sources of funding for the development of library and information support services for university research and teaching. This document is intended to provide the basis for considering what ongoing action is required for the development of a coordinated library infrastructure strategy within the higher education sector.
Following a meeting of representatives of the National Library of Australia, DEET, the Higher Education Council and the Australian Research Council, the Working Group on Research Library Infrastructure was established.
Its aim is to:
It was agreed that representatives of CAUL and the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee. were to be included in the Working Group. At the first meeting of the Working Group on 21 July, CAUL was asked to provide the funding overview.
Australian University libraries have access to three main sources of funding:
The nature and level of university library funding is therefore uneven, potentially erratic and dependent on a range of commercial activities and Federal Government discretionary funding for the continuation of a desirable level of service to the libraries' primary clientele, and for the development of significant innovative services.
"Most Commonwealth funds are allocated as block operating grants. Current funding arrangements....of triennial funding means that institutions know with some certainty what resources they have access to three years in advance. The provision of a block operating grant provides flexibility to allocate resources within institutions without centrally imposed constraints."
The operating grants program provides the major part of Commonwealth funding for higher education institutions. Operating grants for UNS members consist of four major components; a teaching related component, a capital component, a research related component and an Aboriginal support component.
The conditions under which operating funding is provided are set out in Section 18 of the HEFA. These include the requirement that institutions spend the financial assistance provided to it in accordance with its educational profile.
Educational profiles are established under Section 14 of the HEFA. Educational profiles involve a number of elements including statistical returns regarding actual and planned teaching activities, an equity plan, an Aboriginal Education strategy, a research management plan and a capital management plan. The information requirements of profiles are determined following consultation with the Higher Education Council, the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee and other interested groups. These include the national Tertiary Education Union, the National Union of Students and the Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations.
Library expenditure in 1994 was approximately $325 million, of which at least 90% came from institutional operating grants.
Most libraries receive a regular proportion of the university's operating grant annually. The proportion varies. From a survey done by Deakin University in 1995, responses from 15 university libraries indicated a range from 5.5% to 14.57% in 1995. A similar survey by the University of New England in 1994 indicated that the average was approximately 6.3%.
The teaching component constitutes the bulk of the operating grant and is intended to support expenditure on activities such as academic and general salaries, minor capital works, and non salary items associated with teaching such as libraries.
From 1994, higher education capital grants have been added into the institutional operating grant. Some libraries receive capital funding from their universities. The amount and regularity varies.
The allocative mechanisms for the Research Infrastructure program were restructured for 1995. There were three mechanisms, Mechanism A, B and C. Two mechanisms now exist; Research Infrastructure (Block Grants) and Research Infrastructure (Equipment and Facilities) (see p.5).
The bulk of the funds provided under the Research Infrastructure (Block Grants) program replaces Mechanisms A and B. Block Grants are allocated to institutions based on their relative performance in obtaining competitively awarded research funding. The research quantum of operating grants is allocated on an annual basis by means of a composite index developed from a range of research input and research output measures. The relative weightings of these composite index components are reviewed annually.
The amount available for distribution under the program in 1995 was $42.27 million (Dec. 1994 price levels). The amount available for 1996 has not yet been formally agreed by the Minister.
Some libraries receive a proportion of research grants received by staff of the university. One library used to get 10% of all ARC Mechanism B grants received from the University to upgrade their research collection. With the phase out of Mechanism B from 1995, the University has undertaken to provide the equivalent funds for this purpose (approx. $350,000 this year) from its own recurrent budget.
The Committee for Quality Assurance was established as a Ministerial Advisory Committee on 9 November 1992 to conduct reviews of universities' quality assurance practices and outcomes, and to advise the Minister on the allocation of the additional funds available annually under this program. The 1995 review includes the research management process as one of the major components. The management and development of research infrastructure is one aspect of this component.
Those institutions which receive funds from the Quality Assurance Program ned to declare a strategy for expending the funds and this strategy should address the maintenance and enhancement of quality at the institutional level. The committee takes these strategies into account in future recommendations on the allocations of funds. It reports annually to the Minister on the effectiveness of recipient institutions' expenditure in respect of maintaining and enhancing quality.
Some libraries are allocated a share of Quality Assurance Grants received by their university. The amount varies considerably. Twenty university libraries responded to a CAUL survey on funds received from the Quality Assurance Program. A significant number of grants were used for building infrastructure, information technology equipment, services and training and filling gaps in the collections caused by shrinkage in the real value of collection budgets over the years. Amounts received over 1993-94 ranged from $6,000 to $1,550,000
Some universities receive direct funding from the State Government for additional student places. In some cases a proportion is passed to the library.
Projects funded under this program must fall within priority areas determined by the Minister in consultation with the Department and the Higher Education Council. The guidelines are reviewed annually.
The primary objective of the program is to assist individual higher education institutions and the higher education system to improve the quality of higher education provision through more effective management and through specific education initiatives in areas of identified national priorities.
Funds are available to those higher education institutions receiving an operating grant under the Higher Education Funding Act 1988 and to other incorporated bodies for projects designed to achieve specific objectives in areas of national priority. Institutions are able to submit up to three proposals from different priority areas in any one year, for grants of up to $100,000 each. Proposals may also be submitted by a consortium of institutions.
Under the aegis of the Australian Vice-Chancellors' Committee's Standing Committee on Information Resources, funds were allocated from this program for three broad areas in the System-Wide Library Infrastructure priority area - database access, information infrastructure and electronic publishing - over the period 1994 to 1996. Implementation of these programs is now part completed and significant system-wide benefit has been achieved. Up to $5,000,000 was earmarked for the program over the three years.
Over 1992-93, NP(R)F funds were allocated to 23 university libraries for projects to improve access to the Distributed National Collection by the addition of records in the less accessible subject areas to the national database. $1.3 million was allocated under the headings of "cooperative library projects " in 1992 and "improvement of library services" in 1993.
In general, however, libraries have not been very successful in obtaining funds from this source, despite a range of applications for support.
The CAUL submission to the Higher Education Council on the subject of discretionary funding states: "CAUL recognises the logistic and financial implications of administering the discretionary funds and is aware that there has been some duplication of effort. Nevertheless, it is aware of the benefits which have been derived from the various schemes and supports the retention of centrally administered funding to permit the undertaking of projects which have system-wide benefit.
"CAUL does not support the view expressed in some quarters that the funding be included in the recurrent allocations to institutions. While this solution would improve institutional flexibility to undertake programs, it would have a deleterious effect on initiatives which are best undertaken at a national level. While it may be theoretically possible to fund such projects by institutional contributions, in practice it is difficult to respond quickly if funding is dependent on the allocation mechanisms of 37 institutions."
This program represents a continuation of the previous Mechanism C. It provides funding for collaborative proposals by two or more institutions for larger equipment and facilities. The objective of the program is to support high quality research by:
Funding for this program is available for high quality research endeavour in all areas except clinical medicine and dentistry. The following may be funded in this program:
All institutions in the unified national system are eligible to submit proposals. Peak bodies representing the higher education community may well act as catalysts in developing cooperative arrangements. In such cases the peak body may apply on behalf of, and with the full written agreement of, higher education institutions.
In 1994, $17.7 million was available for the program; $1.813 for library type projects. In 1995, $14.8 million is available, but the amount to be allocated to library type projects has not yet been released by the Minister. The minimum grant would normally be $50,000. One library reported receiving $42,000 in 1995.
The aim of this program is to improve the quality of teaching in universities by supporting teaching development projects which will lead to practical improvements in teaching, learning and assessment within the university system.
Applicants must be academic staff who are currently teaching in the Unified National System. Group members may include academics from different departments of universities and people with teaching expertise from outside the university sector. An applicant may only submit one project for consideration in any one year.
Particular attention is paid to projects seeking to advance teaching through the application of new technologies. Some $4 million is available annually, from the National Priority (Reserve) Fund. Grants now generally exceed $50,000.
In 1994, three grants were awarded for "information literacy" projects at Central Queensland University, the University of Western Sydney and at Charles Sturt University. In only the first of these was the lead applicant from the library. In 1995, a grant was awarded to the Department of Library and Information Science at Edith Cowan University for "Library cataloguing practical examples on CD-ROM."
This program funds studies and research projects to evaluate performance and investigate issues of national importance in higher education. Priorities for funding are determined annually by the Department in consultation with interested persons and organisations in the higher education system. Higher education institutions, tertiary education authorities in the States and Territories, and other educational organisations are eligible to apply for grants under the EIP. Grants are typically in the range of $30,000 to $80,000. In 1994/5, grants ranged from $19,800 up to $350,000.
Only one of these related directly to the support of research library infrastructure. In 1995, CAUL, in collaboration with The Australian National University and the National Library of Australia, was successful in obtaining $63,000 for a project entitled Access to Distributed National Collections: Models for the Future Development for Integrated Print/Electronic Delivery to Australian Higher Education Institutions.
In some libraries, this can amount to a significant income eg one library reports an income of $250,000 per year. These funds are subsumed into general operating revenue.
Some libraries earn income from consultancies, associate or community borrowers, library services to commercial companies, training courses, etc. The amount varies according to the amount of activity possible in any year. One library reported that its share of the university's recurrent budget is reduced in line with the income the library was able to generate from external sources. The rise of CD-ROM and commercial database services have greatly reduced the capacity to earn income from mediated searches.
Some libraries earn income from publications such as library skills manuals, bibliographies, directories, etc. The amount varies according to the amount of activity possible in any year.
The National Library provides the National Bibliographic Database (NBD) for the benefit of the Australian library community. In 1994, the cost to the National Library for the provision of this infrastructure was $2.8 million.
University libraries, from their recurrent and other funds, purchase materials which form the basis of their own teaching and research collections, but also contribute to Australia's distributed national collection (DNC). They "publicise" their collections by contributing records to the NBD. The costs vary according to the volume of records contributed and the number of original cataloguing records contributed. One university library paid $160,000 (net) in 1994 to contribute its records to the NBD, and hence make them available for access by other libraries and individuals.
In 1994, National Library established a DNC Office, to handle matters such as Conspectus, collection development policies, the registration of collecting agreements, and the coordinated monitoring of national DNC activities. The DNC Office was established to undertake responsibility for the coordination of operational aspects of the DNC concept at the national level. The office has a staff of two. The National Preservation Office of the National Library has a staff of three, and was formed "to assist in the development of a national preservation strategy for that portion of the country's documentary heritage held primarily in libraries."
Some universities receive income from full fee or "visiting" students. In some cases a proportion is passed to the library. One library receives up to $680,000 per year from this source. Another has reported receiving anything from zero to $250,000. Another reported $175,000 in one year from the university's investment income. The potential for this type of income is likely to be reduced following the change to the payment schedules for operating grants.
Funding relates to the Open Learning Library and Information Service which has been created to coordinate an Australia-wide Open Learning library support network. It is the library agent for the universities participating in Open Learning and is accountable to the OLA consortium and acts as a library broker bringing libraries and students together through the library network and voucher scheme. A Commonwealth Grant was made available to assist participating libraries with collection building for open learning students.
Some libraries receive funding from the Open Learning Agency, which now allocates funds on the basis of the number of students registered at the library, and on the number of Open Learning courses offered by the university. One library received $46,000 in 1995 to help defray the costs of support of Open Learning students.
Some libraries receive donations from bodies such as the Friends of the Library or the Alumni Association. The amounts are usually small, eg one library received $5,500 from its University Foundation.
The following place additional load on research libraries. The proportion of funds allocated directly to the relevant library for the support of that additional load varies considerably.
It is recommended that a library impact statement be included in all applications for federally funded grants and centres as a matter of course, and that funds be allocated accordingly.
The demand on library services created by the programs of Cooperative Research Centres has not been measured. Anecdotal evidence suggests that there is an additional load, but that it is difficult to gauge. Staff usually have borrowing rights but are not differentiated from other academic staff. Material may not be purchased specifically for the CRCs although may be acquired with faculty funds.
As addressed above under Research Grants to University staff, the allocation of any portion of the grants towards library services is made according to local university procedures. Some libraries are receiving strong support from this source, while others receive little or nothing.
(with further details about Commonwealth programs provided by DEET staff)