skip to content
 

Cambridge RCUK Block Grant spend for 2016-2017

Much to our relief, last Friday we sent off our most recent report on our expenditure of the RCUK Block Grant fund. The report is available in our repository. Cambridge makes all of its information about spend on Open Access publicly available. This blog continues on from that describing our spend from 2009 – 2016, and from the blog on our open access spend in 2014.

Compliance

We are pleased to be able to report that we reached 80% compliance in this reporting period, up from 76% last year. The RCUK is expecting 75% compliance by the end of the transition period on 31 March 2018, so we are well over target.

According to our internal helpdesk system ZenDesk, our compliance is shared between 52% gold (publication in an Open Access journal or payment for hybrid Open Access), and 28% green (placement of the work into our institutional repository, Apollo). We do not have the breakdown of how many of the gold APC payments were for hybrid. In the past it we have had an overall 86.8% spend on hybrid.

Not only do we have an increase from 76% to 80% in our compliance rates overall, this is even more impressive when we consider that this is in the face of a 15% increase in the number of research outputs acknowledging RCUK funding. Web of Science indicated in a search for articles, reviews and proceedings papers that Cambridge published 2400 papers funded by RCUK in 2016. In 2015 Web of Science the same search counted 2080 RCUK funded research outputs.

Headline numbers
  • In total Cambridge spent £1.68 million of RCUK funds on APCs (this is up from £1.28 last year)
  • 1920 articles identified as being RCUK funded were submitted to the Open Access Service, of which 1248 required payment for RCUK*
  • The average article processing charge was £1850 – this is significantly less than the £2008 average last year, reflecting the value of the memberships we have (see below)

*Note these numbers will differ slightly from the report due to the difference in dates between the calendar and financial years (see below).

Non APC spend

In total Cambridge spent £1.94 million of RCUK funds in this reporting period, of which £1.68 million was on APCs.  Approximately 13% was spent on other costs,  primarily distributed between staffing, infrastructure and memberships.  The greatest proportion is staffing, with £95,000 spent on this cost. Memberships were the next largest category, mostly arrangements to reduce the cost of APCs, including:

  • £42,000 on the open access component of the Springer Compact
  • £22,000 on memberships to obtain discounts – there is a list of these on the OSC website
  • £18,000 on the University’s SCOAP3 subscription

The RCUK fund has also supported the infrastructure for Open Access at Cambridge, with £62,000 covering the cost of several upgrades of DSpace and general support for the repository. This has allowed us to implement new services such as the minting of DOIs and our hugely successful Request a Copy service which allows people to contact authors of embargoed material in the repository and ask them to send through the author’s accepted manuscript. This category also covers our license for our helpdesk system, ZenDesk, which helps the Open Access team manage the on-average  responses to 60 queries a day. We are also able to run most of our reporting out of ZenDesk.

There are some other smaller items in the non APC category, including £1500 on bank charges that for various reasons we have not been able to allocate to specific articles.

Are these deals good value?

Some are. The Springer Compact is shown as a single charge in the report with the articles listed individually. The RCUK Block Grant contributed £46,020 to the Springer Compact and 128 Cambridge papers were published by Springer that acknowledged RCUK funding. This gives us an average APC cost per paper to the RCUK fund* of £359.53 including VAT. This represents excellent value, given that the average APC for Springer is $3,000 (about £2,300).

*Note that in some instances the papers acknowledging RCUK may also have acknowledged COAF in which case the overall cost for the APC for those papers will be higher.

Cambridge has now completed a year having a prepayment arrangement with Wiley. Over this time we contributed £108,000 to the account and published 68 papers acknowledging RCUK. This works out that on average the Wiley APC cost was £1,588 per paper. Like Springer, the average APC is approximately £2,300 so this amount appears to be good value.

However the RCUK has contributed a higher proportion to the Wiley account than COAF because at the time the account was established we had run low on COAF funds. Because the University does not provide any of its own funds for Open Access, there was no option other than to use RCUK funds. We will need to do some calculations to ensure that the correct proportion of COAF and RCUK funds are supporting this account. It is a reflection of the challenges we are facing on a rolling basis when the dates are fluid (see below).

It appears we need to look very closely at our membership with Oxford University Press. We spent £44,000 of RCUK funds on this, and published 22 articles acknowledging RCUK funding. This works out to be an APC of £2000 per article, which is not dissimilar to an average OUP APC, and therefore does not represent any value at all. This is possibly because our allocation of the expense of the membership between COAF and RCUK might not reflect what has been published with OUP. We need to investigate further.

Caveat – the date problem

We manage Open Access funds that operate on different patterns. The COAF funds match the academic year, with the new grants starting on 1 October each year.  The RCUK works on a financial year, starting on 1 April each year. Many of our memberships and offset deals work on the calendar year.

To add to the confusion, the RCUK is behind in its payments, so for this current year which started on 1 April 2017, we will not receive our first part-payment until 1 June. That amount will not cover the commitments we had already made by the end of 2016, let alone those made between 1 April when this year started and the 1 June when the money is forthcoming. This means we will remain in the red. Cambridge is carrying half a million pounds in commitments at any given time. The situation makes it very difficult to balance the books.

Our recent RCUK report covers the period of 1 April 2016 – 31 March 2017 and refers only to invoices paid in this period. In the report the dates go beyond the 31 March 2017 because the reconciliation in the system sometimes takes longer, so items are logged as later dates even though the payment was made within the period. The publication dates for the articles these invoices relate to are wildly different, and many of these have not yet been published due to the delay between acceptance and publication which ranges from days to years.

This means working out averages is an inexact science. It is only possible to filter Web of Science by year, so we are only able to establish the number of papers published in a given calendar year. This set of papers is not the same set for which we have paid, but we can compare year on year and identify some trends that make sense.

Published XXX 2017
Written by Dr Danny Kingsley


Tuesday 23rd May – E-Book drop-in session – Clinical Students – Sherwood Room

Used an e-book before?  Want more information, hints and tips?  You have access to numerous medical e-books.  Do you know how to find and download e-books to your devices?

We are holding e-book drop-in session on

Tuesday 23rd May 12:15 – 1:00 in the Sherwood Room

There will be a range of devices so we can show you how to download books.  However if you prefer to bring your own device that’s fine.

We can also help with any other library queries.

So – come and visit us and we look forward to seeing you!

The post Tuesday 23rd May – E-Book drop-in session – Clinical Students – Sherwood Room appeared first on Medical Library.


History of Philosophy Quarterly

New on ejournals@cambridge A-Z : History of Philosophy Quarterly. 

From the University of Illinois Press website for the journal:

“History of Philosophy Quarterly (HPQ) specializes in papers that cultivate philosophical history with a strong interaction between contemporary and historical concerns. Contributors regard work in the history of philosophy and in philosophy itself as parts of a seamless whole, treating the work of past philosophers not only in terms of historical inquiry, but also as a means of dealing with issues of ongoing philosophical concern. The journal favors the approach to philosophical history, increasingly prominent in recent years, that refuses to see the boundary between philosophy and its history as an impassable barrier.

HPQ is published by the University of Illinois Press on behalf of North American Philosophical Publications.”

Now available to the University of Cambridge electronically from the University of Illinois Press platform from volume 26 (2009) to the present. Access from vol 1 (1984) to volume 25 (2008) is available from the JSTOR Arts and Sciences platform.

Access History of Philosophy Quarterly via the ejournals@cambridge A-Z or at this link.

Image credit: Denis Collette, Gone With The Wind, on Flickr –https://www.flickr.com/photos/deniscollette/5217160145/sizes/l/



Tijdschrift voor Theologie

New on ejournals@cambridge A-Z : Tijdschrift voor Theologie (on campus only)

From the Peeters Online Journals website for the journal:

Tijdschrift voor Theologie is edited by leading Dutch and Flemish theologians. This magazine not only answers current issues of faith and religion, but also discusses social issues.

Tijdschrift voor Theologie  publishes research results from all theology topics: religious sciences, exegesis, church and theology history, systematic theology and moral theology / ethics, practical theology, religious psychology, philosophy of religion and sociology.

Now available to the University of Cambridge electronically from volume 47 (2007) to present.

On campus only access to Tijdschrift voor Theologie is available via the ejournals@cambridge A-Z or at this link.

Image credit: ‘Budapest Basilica’ by Michael Grech on Flickr – https://flic.kr/p/UkGwTZ



Global Jukebox

The Global Jukebox offers access to more than 6000 recordings from around the globe that can now be streamed freely online.

“The Global Jukebox is presented as a free, non-commercial, educational place for everybody, students, educators, scholars, scientists, musicians, dancers, linguists, artists and music fans to explore expressive patterns in their cultural-geographic and diasporic settings and alongside other people’s. By inviting familiarity with many kinds of vocalizing, musicking, moving, and talking, we hope to advance cultural equity and to reconnect people and communities with their creative heritage.”

Search the database with the map or on the ‘tree’, searching by region or cultural group. Clicking on these images will take you though to the website.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Further details on Global Jukebox can be found in this New York times article from April 18th 2017:

“Alan Lomax made it his lifelong mission to archive and share traditional music from around the world. He spent decades in the field, recording heralded artists like Muddy Waters and Woody Guthrie, as well as far more obscure musicians, from the British Isles to Haiti. He also created systems to classify this music and explore the links between cultures.

“The website, organized by map and by culture, is free to use. The wide-ranging samples were digitized from hard copies at the Library of Congress and include 1978 field recordings from the Kullu culture in Himachal Pradesh, India; harvest songs from 1954 Romania; and a ballad to John Henry from Asheville, N.C., in 1941, recorded by Lomax.”



In the mood?

It’s exam season, and libraries across Cambridge are packed with students frantically revising. It’s an odd time of the year to be a librarian – some days our reading rooms are full to bursting, then they fall eerily silent before examinees … Continue reading →

Trial access to online resources for LGBT+ studies

Source: Trial access to online resources for LGBT+ studies

We know that some students and staff at the Divinity Faculty are interested in LGBT+ studies, and hope that this reblogging of a post from Ejournals and eresources blog at the UL will be deemed useful.



Archives of sexuality and gender trial extension

To allow for a fuller overview, understanding and appreciation of the Archives of sexuality and gender, access has been extended until June 15, 2017.

Please visit the Archives.  And tell us what you think, email ejournals@lib.cam.ac.uk

The earlier blog post about this trial is here.  Thank you.



Oxford University Press – delay in access to some content on the new platform

The new Oxford Academic journals platform is still missing some content, which is not expected to be made available until August. Most of the missing full text articles and PDFs will be in supplementary material, but also includes many of the archive volumes of Notes & Queries and certain articles in The Library.

Any articles that that only offers the options ‘Cite’, ‘Permission’ and ‘Share’ (please see the above image) and not ‘PDF’ (as in the image below) will be unavailable until August.

If you need articles from Notes & Queries then you can find print copies in the main University Library (classmark R904.2 in the West Room, on the shelves to the right as you enter the room). These volumes are not borrowable, but there are photocopying and scanning facilities in the West Room.

The Library is also available from the University Library (classmark P850.c.54, located on West Four). These volumes are borrowable. The English Faculty Library also has a print this title (classmark P TRA).

If you have any questions about access to an Oxford University Press journal then please contact us ejournals@lib.cam.ac.uk



Journal of American Ethnic History

New on ejournals@cambridge A-Z : Journal of American Ethnic History

From the JSTOR website for the journal:

“Journal of American Ethnic History addresses various aspects of American immigration and ethnic history, including background of emigration, ethnic and racial groups, Native Americans, immigration policies, and the processes of acculturation. Each issue contains articles, review essays and single book reviews. There are also occasional sections on “Research Comments” (short articles that furnish important information for the field, a guide to further research or other significant historical items that will stimulate discussion and inquiry) and “Teaching and Outreach” (essays which focus on innovative teaching methods or outreach efforts). The journal has also published special issues on particular responses from authors on specific topics.”

Now available to the University of Cambridge electronically from the JSTOR Complete Current Scholarship platform from volume 19 (1999) to present. Access from vol 1 (1981) to volume 18 (1998) is available from the JSTOR Arts & Sciences V platform .

Access Journal of American Ethnic History via the ejournals@cambridge A-Z or at this link.

Image credit: ‘A native American chief’ by scott1346  on Flickr – https://flic.kr/p/5KmqtG