[Rdap] Repository cost models

[Stephanie Wright]

Hi everyone,

As promised, here are the summarized results to the survey I sent out in
the beginning of January about funding models for repositories.  Thank you
to all of you who responded, tweeted (and retweeted) so I could get these.
Much appreciated and very helpful in guiding us toward coming up with a
funding model for new repository.  For those who offered, I will be
contacting you shortly for a few more details.

Thank you!

Steph

RESULTS:

19 respondents

Three were identified from outside the U.S. but didn't ask this question
until 15 responses were in the hopper.

Demographics:

Small (<5K stu): 2 (one outside US)
Med (5-15K stu): 2 (one public, one private)
Large (15K+ stu): 15 (2 outside US, 3 private)

Responsibility for management of repository:

Library: 13 (2 of these split w/ IT services, 1 w/ IT & Office of Res)
IT services: 4 (see above note plus 1 split w/ just IT & Office of Research)
Other: 2 data archives, one faculty-based data service

Content published in repository:

Data: 15 (4 contained data only)
Documents: 14 (2 contained docs only)
Images: 12
Audio/Video: 11
Other: Two explicitly indicated they were format-agnostic

Charging for publication of materials in repository:

Three repositories charged or sometimes charged for services.
All large, all inside the US. One private, two public.
User type, service level (incl length of time material is preserved), and
file sizes were determining factors though not across all three.

Extra charges were for:
More storage space
Increased levels of support

Funding of library (and shared w/ library) repositories:

 indicated repository is funded through library bidget. When responsibility
for the repository was shared, funding is from budgets of sharing
entities.  Five mentioned central institutional funding as sole or
supplementary source.  One mentioned supplementary funding from grant
projects.

Funding of non-library repositories:

State/nat'l funding with one being fully supported by grants and one
stating "public".

Comments

A few respondents with repositories managed by the library expressed
concern that current funding either is under review or needs to be reviewed
because a) it is not sustainable, b) it is being done ad-hoc and hinders
planning or c) there is a desire to expand services.

-- 
Stephanie Wright
------------------------------------------------------------------

Data ServicesCoordinator | University of Washington Libraries |
206-685-1540 | Suzzallo Library, Room G051
ORCID: 0000-0003-3829-318X | http://guides.lib.washington.edu/dmg
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.kunverj.com/pipermail/rdap/attachments/20150204/1940901b/attachment.html>