College and Research Libraries By SIDNEY E. MATTHEWS Simplifying Library Acquisitions With University Purchasing T HE UTOPIAN DREAM of all librarians, and especially acquisition librarians, is to have complete freedom in placing book, continuation, and periodical or- ders direct! y without having to go through any intermediate university pur- chasing department. In a state university this is often impossible due to various rigid purchasing procedures that must be followed. Several years ago the Ohio State University was no exception. All university orders had to be placed through the University Purchasing De- partment and all such orders had to be received, checked, and forwarded by Stores and Receiving to the Library. However, the goal has now been realized by the Ohio State University Libraries. The transformation from a rigidly con- trolled system by the University Purchas- ing Department was a five-year process, which was implemented by an under- standing of library acquisition problems on the part of members of the U niver- sity Purchasing Department, and a de- sire to cooperate with the Library in solving its acquisition problems. The first change occurred in 1948-49, when permission was granted to the Di- rector of Libraries to order out-of-print books and periodicals directly from the dealer offering them for sale. A confirm- ing order was sent to the University Pur- chasing Department after the material had been received by the Library. The primary reason for this permission was Mr. Matthews is acquisitions librarian) Ohio State University. JULY 1957 to prevent the loss of encumbered library funds, and the secondary reason was to enable the Library to procure many books and periodicals whose immediate availability was uncertain. '!\Then such orders were processed through the University Purchasing De- partment, funds were encumbered for the purchase; consequently, these funds were lost to the Library when it was dis- covered that the material was not avail- able too late in the quarter to permit the use of the funds for order;ing in-print items. Until the fall of 1950, out-of-print book and periodical orders by the Li- brary were placed by writing an indi- vidual business letter asking the vendor to consider it an official order. This type of procedure was adopted to comply with an apparent desire by the University Purchasing Department to prevent any request having the appearance of an offi- cial order from being placed from any other entity of the University, thereby obligating the University Purchasing De- partment for payment. However, in the fall of 1950/ 51, a "form letter order" was printed and put into operation in an effort to expedite this type of order. This direct method of ordering was due in part to the growth of the Library, which naturally tends to demand a high- er proportion of books from abroad, from antiquarian catalogs, from small and little known sour"ces. Ordering from these sources resulted in a high percent- age of cancellations for items which were not available or which had been sold be- fore the order was received. This direct 331 OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT COLUMBUS 10, OHIO Order No .... .................... . Date ......................... . .. . 1. Report any item which is in press or temporarily out of stock. 2. Report before sending any item which is part of a series, unless order notes series. 3. Bill in U. S. dollars, or state current rate of exchange. 4. Bill the OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY in quadruplicate. QUANTITY ITEM Acquisition Librarian .Form 6002 OSU's Form Letter Order method eliminated the extra delay in sending the order through the University Purchasing Department and having the material received and processed by Stores and Receiving and finally sent to the Library. As pointed out before, it also prevented the loss of encumbered library funds. The chief disadvantage of this direct method of ordering was the amount of clerical work involved after the items had been received. It was neces- sary to list each item and its price on a requisition in the Library and list them again on a confirming order in the Uni- versity Pu~chasing Department in order to encumber funds and satisfy other re- quirements of normal purchasing and bookkeeping transactions. The above system functioned until 1953, when pennission was granted to the Director of Libraries to use a "John Doe blanket order." "John Doe" is an inclusive term for firms which enables the Acquisition Department to include many firms on one requisition and one purchase order number. Requisitions were actually and not figuratively writ- ten to "John Doe" for "rare, out-of-print books and fugitive material" purchased from domestic or foreign booksellers in varying amounts at the beginning of each quarter and sent to the University Pur- chasing Department. The University Purchasing Depart- ment would then issue a purchase order number, and invoices received and ap- proved were paid for up to the amount of the purchase order without typing the titles and prices on a requisition and again on a confirming order. The advan- tage of the "John Doe blanket order" lay in the great efficiency in preventing loss of funds allocated for the purchase of books and the elimination of the unnec- 332 COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES essary typing and retyping of orders and requisitions by the University Purchas- ing Department. It should be noted that the above applied only to rare, out-of- print and fugitive material. Direct orders through the University Purchasing De- partment were still required for current material purchased in the United States. The next development came in the Fall of 1954, when the Library was re- leased from a quarterly book and peri- odical budget and placed on an annual book and periodical budget. This was a much-discussed item with the personnel of the University Purchasing Depart- ment. However, the process was not for- eign to them, as an annual budget had been in operation in the 1920's and 1930's. The Library justified an annual budget on the following points: I. The most important single advantage of an annual budget would be in pre- venting the closing, by the University Purchasing Department, of purchase orders that are not totally used each quarter. 2. The quarterly budget requires an un- due amount of time spent in checking invoices, open purchase orders, bal- ances, outstanding orders, and closed purchase orders, by the Acquisition De- partment, to encumber and spend its funds four times a year. An annual budget would reduce this amount of work, thereby releasing time to be used advantageously on other projects in the Acquisition Department. 3. An annual budget would enable the Acquisition Department, with the aid of the faculty, to spend departmental allocations more efficiently, more nearly completely, and would prevent one de- partment from over- or under-spending. It would also make it possible for the Acquisition Department to send out quarterly financial statements of the book budget to the faculty concerned. 4. An annual budget would prevent such poor business procedures as: carrying invoices over from one quarter to the next or breaking larg~r invoices into JULY 1957 smaller ones, and reserving the summer for processing and catching up on in- voices that could not be approved for payment in previous quarters. 5. An annual budget would enable the Acquisition Department to take ad- vantage of special offers, sales, and quo- tations which it is unable to do on a quarterly system. 6. Since a large proportion of Ohio State orders is for books published abroad, it is difficult to complete the transaction within a three-month period. Further, it is impossible to know whether or not the order will be supplied. Orders are often placed for out-of-print books as offered in dealers' catalogs, and such items must be placed promptly when the catalog is published; but this may mean placing the order at the end of a quarter. 7. The Acquisition Department is nor- mally faced with two peak seasons for book orders. These peaks are generally reached in the fall and the winter quarters, with a tapering off during the spring quarter. These peaks are cre- ated by several factors, such as the ac- tivity of new faculty members, estab- lishment of new courses, and new re- search undertaken at the University. Another factor is the habit of publish- ers to concentrate on publishing and releasing new titles during the fall and winter. The final step to the annual budget goal was reached January, 1956, through the willingness of the University Pur- chasing Department to work out more efficient and timesaving procedures for handling current trade publications. The Library was permitted to place orders for current publications directly with the vendor, as had been done for some time in the case of out-of-print, rare, and fugi- tive materials. This represented a very substantial im- provement in the entire acquisition pro- gram, in the amount of work required to process requisitions and invoices in the Acquisition Department, and in the University Purchasing Department. 333 The Acquisition Department now places directly with the vendor all do- mestic or foreign "John Doe" orders for current material as well as for rare, fugi- tive, and out-of-print items. Extreme care is exercised to insure that invoices exceeding $500 to any one vendor are not paid on a "John Doe" purchase order, but that separate purchase orders are written to those vendors with whom we do a substantial business. This pro- cedure is due to the fact that on orders over $500 the University Purchasing De- partment must secure a vendor's certifi- cate of "no collusion." The advantages of direct ordering b y the Acquisition Depart1nent for current materials can be summarized as follows: 1. fewer requisitions to write 2. more flexibility in placing orders 3. one less budget file to maintain 4. receipt of books from two to four weeks earlier 5. less delay and misrouting of invoices received 6. fewer purchase orders to write and close The Acquisition Department processes invoices in quadruplicate by placing on each invoice the purchase order number and the date, and by having the Acqui- sition Librarian sign each copy of the invoice. This procedure is in accordance with instructions issued by the University Pur- chasing Department. The fourth copy of the invoice is retained in the Acquisition Department for bookkeeping purposes; the other copies go to the University Pur- chasing Department, University Auditor, and State Auditor. In summary, the Acquisition Depart- ment now has complete authority in pur- chasing books, periodicals, continua- tions, and otll:_er library materials. The Purchase Division of the Acquisition De- partment types a seven-part multiple order form, and places all orders di- rectly. This authority was achieved on a step-by-step basis, and only after each step had proved satisfactory did the next step develop. It was imperative at all times to have a clear understanding of the problems of the Library Acquisition Department and of the University Pur- chasing Department and to work toward a mutually advantageous system. Remington Rand Grant Renewed A second grant of $5,000 from the Remington Rand division of Sperry Rand Corporation continues ACRL's Remington Rand Fund, estab- lished as a part of the ACRL grants program in 1956. The fund will be distributed for use in. purchase of equipment by college libraries. Sub- grants will be made from the Remington Rand Fund in the fall by the ACRL Committee on Foundation Grants. 334 The Remington Rand grant brings the total of the funds to be dis- tributed in subgrants by ACRL in the fall of 1957 to $40,000. Grants of $30,000 from the U. S. Steel Foundation and $5,000 from the New York Times Company were announced in the May issue of CRL. In- structions to be followed in submitting applications for subgrants to the ACRL Committee on Foundation Grants will be published in the September issue. COLLEGE AND RESEARCH LIBRARIES