Program Update andCode of Practice

(Release 1)Peter

ShepherdProject

DirectorCOUNTER

Arnold HirshonExecutive

DirectorNELINET

& Member, COUNTER Executive

Committee

Background

Goal: credible, compatible, consistent publisher/vendor-related statistics for the global information community

Libraries and consortia need online usage statistics

To assess the value of different online products/services To support collection development To plan infrastructure

Publishers need online usage statistics To experiment with new pricing models To assess the relative importance of the different

channels by which information reaches the market To provide editorial support To plan infrastructure

Code of Practice, Release 1:Main Features

Definitions of terms used Specifications for Usage Reports Data processing guidelines Auditing Compliance Maintenance and development of the Code of

Practice Governance of COUNTER

Definitions of Terms

Data elements to be collected

Page views Bibliographic data Page type Source of page Authentication of user Access rights

Session data Market elements

Every effort was made to incorporate or reconcile the definitions with existing ones from other groups, such as NISO and ICOLC.

#  Term  Examples / formats

 Definition

3.1.2  Page type    

 3.1.2.1  Item Full text article, TOC, Abstract, Database record

A uniquely identifiable piece of published work that may be original or a digest or a review of other published work. PDF, Postscript and HTML formats of the same full text article (for example), will be counted as separate items.

 3.1.2.2  Article   An item of original written work published in a journal or other serial publication. An article is complete in itself, but usually cites other relevant published works in its list of references

 3.1.2.3 TOC (Table of  Contents)

  A list of all articles published in a journal issue

Specifications for Usage Reports Content Reports: Level 1

Journal Report 1: # of successful full-text article requests by month and journal

Journal Report 2: Turnaways by month and journal Database Report 1: Total searches & sessions by month &

database Database Report 2: turnaways by month & database Database Report 3: Total searches & sessions by month &

service Content Reports: Level 2

Journal Report 3: # of successful item requests and turnaways by month, journal & page type

Journal Report 4: total searches run, by month & service Report format: CSV file, as a Microsoft Excel file

Journal Report 1: Successful Full-Text Article Requests by Month and Journal

  Print ISSN  Online

ISSN Jan -

01 Feb -

01 Mar -

01 Calendar

YTD

Total for all journals

     6637  8732  7550  45897

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123  456  521  665  4532

Journal of BB  9821-3361  2312-8751  203  251  275  3465

Journal of CC  2464-2121  0154-1521  0  0  0  0

Journal of DD  5355-5444  0165-5542  203  251  275  2978

Example

Journal Report 2: Turnaways by Month and Journal

   Print ISSN

 Online ISSN

 Page Type  Jan - 01

 Feb - 01

 Mar - 01

 Calendar YTD

Total: full-text turn-aways for all journals

       453  233  318  4765

Journal of AA

 1212-3131  3225-3123  Full text Turnaways

 23  40  12  342

Journal of BB

 9821-3361  2312-8751  Full text Turnaways

 18  20  16  287

Example

Database Report 1: Total Searches and Sessions by Month & Database

     Jan - 01

 Feb - 01

 Mar - 01

 Calendar YTD

Database AA  Searches Run  2322  2520  2742  29878

Database AA  Sessions  1821  1929  2211  27654

Database BB  Searches Run  3466  3210  4459  36543

Database BB  Sessions  1987  2200  2544  24209

Example

Journal Report 3: Number of Successful Item Requests and Turnaways, by Month, Journal and Page-Type

 Journal Name  Print ISSN  Online ISSN

 Page Type  Jan-01  Feb-01  Mar-01  Calendar YTD

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Table of Contents  732  806  676  3543

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Abstracts  1032  1140  1020  6896

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 References  543  322  567  4002

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Full-text Postscript Requests  444  365  432  3987

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Full-text PDF Requests  621  670  598  4657

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Full-text HTML Requests  322  420  543  4433

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Full-text Total Requests  943  1090  888  5021

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Full-text PDF Turnaways  23  40  32  186

Journal of AA  1212-3131  3225-3123 Full-text HTML Turnaways  10  21  18  102

 ……………… …………….   …………….. ……………………………………….         

Total: all Journals     Table of Contents  66322  70312  81554  400980

Total: all Journals     Abstracts  54126  46005  55265  267980

Total: all Journals     References  4532  3987  5473  34876

Total: all Journals     Full-text Postscript Requests  11345  10947  12534  66007

Total: all Journals     Full-text PDF Requests  32112  34554  38221  224623

Total: all Journals     Full-text HTML Requests  22500  24000  19500  107841

Total: all Journals     Full-text Total Requests  54612  58554  57721  394532

Total: all Journals     Full-text PDF Turnaways  3221  4112  2113  8765

Total: all Journals     Full-text HTML Turnaways  1123  1321  1511  6453

Example

Enhancements Under Consideration

Break down usage reports by year of publication type of purchase (subscribed, pay per view) Note: a survey of librarians may be conducted to

learn which reports are preferred Define additional terms, e.g., “article

download” Clarify how to count “full-text requests” (e.g.,

individiual articles vs. subsets of articles)

Data processing guidelines

Code of Practice specifies the criteria to be met by the data used in building the Usage Reports Only successful requests will be counted Records generated by the server,

together with the requested pages, should be ignored

All users’ double clicks within 10 seconds on an http-link should be counted as only one request (30 seconds for PDF)

Compliance More than one compliance level

Level 1: basic set of journal and database reports Level 2: more detailed reports

Licence Agreements Standard clause covering COUNTER compliance

Declaration of COUNTER compliance For 2003 Vendors sign declaration and demonstrate to

COUNTER that they can provide at least Level 1 Usage Reports

Register of COUNTER-compliant vendors Maintained on the COUNTER website

Publishers Who Intend to Comply

American Chemical Society

American Institute of Physics

Blackwell CABI EBSCO Elsevier Extenza HighWire Ingenta Institute of Physics NPG Oxford University Press Wiley

Initial List

Auditing A publisher or content provider will be able

to state that it is “Counter Compliant” only if this can be certified through an independent audit

Audit scope: reports, processes & application of definitions

Auditing will be required beginning in 2004 RFP will be issued to qualify auditors Auditing processes are under development A list of COUNTER-approved auditors will

be made available

Maintenance and Development of the Code of Practice

Full text of the Code of Practice is freely available on the COUNTER website

html and PDF formats

Code of Practice will be systematically extended

Feedback on Release 1 is actively sought Via test sites involving publishers and libraries Via feedback to COUNTER via the website, International

Advisory Board, etc.

Governance: Executive Committee

Consortia Arnold Hirshon NELINET USA Hazel Woodward Cranfield University UK

Libraries Christine Fyfe University of Leicester UK David Goodman Princeton University USA

Publishers, Aggregators, etc. Richard Gedye Oxford University Press UK

(Chair) Marthyn Borghuis Elsevier Science Netherlands Roger Brown GlaxoSmithKline UK Timo Hannay Nature Publishing Group UK Terry Hulbert Institute of Physics UK Tony Kidd  University of Glasgow UK Jack Ochs American Chemical Society USA Oliver Pesch  EBSCO USA Peter Shepherd  (Project Director) UK

Governance: International Advisory Board

Consortia Diane Costello CAUL,

Australia Lorraine Estelle, JISC, UK Alicia Wise, JISC/DNER, UK

Libraries Frances Boyle, Oxford U., UK Denise Davis, Oregon State U.,

USA Ross MacIntyre, U. of

Manchester, UK Alison McNab, U. of Nottingham,

UK Sherrie Schmidt, ARL, USA Jill Taylor-Roe, U. of Newcastle,

UK

Publishers, Aggregators, et al

Christine Baldwin, Information Design & Management, UK

Andrew Braid, British Library, UK Michael Butterfield, BMJ Group, UK Jill Cousins, Blackwell Publishing, UK Mary Fugle, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, USA Kristen Garlock, JSTOR, USA Brian Green, BIC/EDItEUR, UK Tony Hammond, Harcourt Publishers, UK Pat Harris, NISO, USA Mike Hoover, ProQuest, USA Heather Joseph, BioOne, USA Kornelia Junge, Wiley, USA Barbara Lange, AAP/PSP, USA Judy Luther, Informed Strategies, USA Lex Lefebvre, STM, The Netherlands Liz McNaughton, Divine/ICEDIS, UK Tim Martin, OCLC, USA Kirsty Meddings, Ingenta, UK Robert Molyneux, NCLIS, USA Sally Morris, ALPSP, UK James Mouw, University of Chicago, USA Henning Nielsen, Novo Nordisk, Denmark Lynn Norris, EduServ, UK Jill O'Neill, NFAIS, USA Chris Parker, CABI, UK Norman Paskin, DOI, UK John Sack, HighWire Press, USA Graham Taylor, Publishers' Association, UK Rollo Turner, ASA, UK Syun Tutyia, Chiba University, Japan

COUNTER Memberships: Proposed Fees

Full Members: Categories and Fees Publishers and intermediaries

(aggregators): $750 Libraries: $375 Consortia: $750 Library affiliate: $150 (non-voting

member)

Benefits of full membership Owner of COUNTER with voting rights

at annual general meeting, etc. Regular bulletins on progress Opportunity to receive advice on

implementation

Question:How many consortia would be

interested in being a

member? Why or why

not?

Future Developments:2003 and beyond

Objectives for 2003 Promote and gain acceptance for the Code of Practice Obtain feedback on Release 1 Complete list of approved auditors Define and set up a permanent administrative structure Promote membership of COUNTER Full implementation by vendors for 2004 subscription

year

Beyond 2003 Build membership of COUNTER Extend and deepen Code of Practice

Cover e-books, etc Journal reporting at article level

Questions

Would your consortium consider joining?

Would you be interested in an “ICOLC Group Membership” at a lower per-consortium cost?

Do you perceive any conflicts between the ICOLC and Counter program objectives?

Should ICOLC issue a statement endorsing Counter?

For more information……….

www.projectCounter.org

Peter Shepherd (Project Director)pt_shepherd@hotmail.com