Editorial Note

Abstract

First, we want to welcome several librarians to the Collection Management Editorial Board: Jennifer A. Maddox Abbott (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Mark England (University of Utah), Adam H. Lisbon (University of Colorado Boulder), Seth Porter (Princeton University) and Simona Tabacaru (Texas A&M University). They bring a wealth of experiences in various aspects of collection development and management that will complement and expand on the expertise of the current board. Welcome. Members of the editorial board provide important service to the journal, from reviewing several manuscripts annually to providing feedback on the journal direction. Board members have also developed or recommended subject areas that have been turned into special issues of the journal. We are fortunate to have a great editorial board, and as coeditors we appreciate and thank you for the service you provide to the journal and to librarianship. As editors we like to group similar articles together. However, this issue of Collection Management has no unifying theme but represents interesting and novel ways to deal with collection issues using a broad variety of research and case studies from many different libraries and countries. While the first three articles in this issue were written by U.S. authors, the three final papers are by international authors. This is one of Collection Management’s goals: to publish articles on the concerns of collection librarians from all over the world. In our first article, “Expanding Demand Driven Acquisition: Complete Just-In-Time Approval Plan,” Nackil Sung and Jan S. Sung introduces a novel way used at the University of Hawaii to expand the traditional DDA model. They developed a Purchase by Request (PBR) model that allows non-DDA books to be discoverable and requested by users. By working closely with their approval plan vendor and uploading the DDA and PBR titles into their ILS, titles are exposed to users for just-in-time purchases. This model and process could be very useful for other libraries as they deal with shrinking budgets. It has long been a problem for libraries that two of the main content providers, EBSCO and ProQuest, do not share metadata. In our second article, “Hacking the Collection: Changing the Collection in Response to a Migration,” Sara Hills at American University (Washington, DC) analyzed their electronic collection use after an ILS/discovery migration from EBSCO’s EDS to ProQuest’s Alma-Primo. Finding that usage of the library’s EBSCO content had dropped significantly, the library started a process to determine where usage had dropped, and even more importantly, what alternatives there were for replacing content (from considering adding journal packages to swapping out aggregated databases). They ended up replacing some of the EBSCO content with ProQuest databases. As we have done in our last several issues, we continue soliciting and publishing articles on diversity in our library collection. Our third article in this issue, “Representation in the Collection: Assessing Coverage of LGBTQ Content in an