News
The HEFCE Review of special funding for research libraries:
briefing document
Summary
- The recent HEFCE review has decided that the special funding stream for SHL will be cut from £1103K p.a. to £397K p.a. – this represents 16% of SHL’s current operational expenditure.
- A further review for the Colleges will now take place to determine the future mission and funding of SHL.
What is this HEFCE Review?
- a review of special funding for research libraries, carried out by Sir Ivor Crewe (V-C, University of Essex), approved by the HEFCE Board in November 2007.
- Concerned only with “special funding”, a total pot of £10.5M which had been annually distributed to a small group of libraries with extensive external use (Cambridge, London, LSE, Manchester, Oxford, SOAS).
- Full report will be found at http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/rdreports/2008/rd04_08/.
What is the Review’s overall conclusion?
- To continue providing special funding to libraries which meet four criteria based on collections, facilities, contributions to the national research base, and costs associated with meeting the needs of external researchers.
What specific conclusions has the Review reached about Senate House Library?
- The national, as opposed to local, London use is insufficient to justify ongoing special funding.
- Most of the SHL special funding should be phased out during 2008-10.
- There should be a further review of SHL to determine its ongoing mission and funding.
Is this fair?
- We can argue over particular judgments, but we should recognise that non-London HE use of SHL has declined during the last decade or so, an inevitable consequence of electronic and other developments in academic libraries.
How does this link with the HEFCE Review of SAS?
- Ivor Crewe simultaneously carried out a review of SAS for HEFCE, supporting the ongoing funding of the School and its libraries.
- The SAS review recognises the dependence of several Institutes on SHL for library services, and endorses the library convergence to create ULRLS.
- A proportion of the SHL special funding - that proportion which relates to English Studies, Music, Philosophy, Romance Studies, US Studies “and immediately cognate studies” (ie in subject areas relating to Institutes without separate libraries) should be retained in London and added to the special funding allocated to SAS.
What’s the bottom line?
- SHL special funding of £1,103,000 p.a. will be reduced to £397,000 p.a., a cut of 64%.
- Funding to be phased out in two equal stages (half in 08/09, half in 09/10).
What is the impact on SHL of this cut in funding?
- The total operating budget of SHL in 07/08 is ca. £4.4M, so the lost special funding is about 16% of that.
- The withdrawal of special funding increases, rather than creates, a budget shortfall for SHL.
- Even if the special funding had all been retained, the Library would still have a deficit of over £1M in 07/08. This is because the University has increasingly had to recognise, and charge out, the real costs of running and maintaining Senate House.
- The Colleges, who are the main users of SHL, pay annual subscriptions but these do not cover the necessary costs.
What does the HEFCE Review say should happen next?
- The future mission and funding of SHL should be determined by the Colleges of the University.
- This should be based upon a specific review of the role of SHL.
- This review should be carried out on behalf of the University by a third party and be partly funded by HEFCE.
When will this further review happen?
- Terms of reference for the further review of SHL were agreed by the Heads of Colleges Committee in January 2008. It will be undertaken by, and for, the University and the Colleges (i.e. not HEFCE).
- A consultancy (CHEMS) has been selected, following a tendering process.
- The review will be undertaken between April and December 2008 and will involve extensive consultation across the Colleges.
- The review will be presented to the Heads of Colleges to make a decision.
- It will be overseen by a small steering group including College Heads and Librarians, chaired by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor.
What will this review be concentrating on?
- What it is that the Colleges and their members most value about SHL, what the services are which they cannot easily get elsewhere, and what they are willing to pay for.
What are the possible outcomes/implications of this SHL Review?
- SHL is not sustainable with its current balance of income and expenditure. Either the income must increase, or expenditure must shrink.
- Cutting costs could mean reducing space (freeing up areas to let out), or reducing the services/collections provided. The Crewe review encourages the exploration of more collaboration, and the possibility of selling services to non-UofL HEIs.
- Although everyone will wish to minimise changes which are disadvantageous to the Library’s users, it is inevitable that they would be affected by reductions in services or subject coverage.
What does this mean now?
- For the immediate future, business as usual. There are no precipitate cuts or knee-jerk changes being made. Any changes which follow the next review are likely to be phased over time.
- The refurbishment and rewiring programme of Senate House is proceeding as planned as it would be both costly and risky to make changes which could only be based on guesswork. The next phase of moves (to return to the South Block, to temporarily rehouse part of SHL in the North Block, and to move the incoming Institute Libraries in) will take place in late 2008/early 2009 as scheduled.
How can library users make their views known?
- Most usefully, by using communication channels in Colleges to feed into the assessments made there about the value and importance of SHL and its services, as it is the Heads of Colleges who will decide on future funding levels.
- We understand that CHEMS will be making arrangements with the Colleges regarding consultation processes.
- If you are an independent user, not attached to a college, and wish to comment email to shl.enquiries@london.ac.uk. We will forward your message to the appropriate recipient.
Is there any good news in all this?
- The loss of funding, and the forthcoming review, are unsettling. However, we must recognise that SHL has been operating on an uncertain and questioned base for many years. This process will redefine SHL’s purpose, with the support of the Colleges, and see it established on a sustainable basis.
Media Enquiries
