Questionnaire for Implementation
(IMP) Respondents

Informed Consent Form

(See appendix B for Informed Consent Form.)

A. Number of IRs

1. How many institutional repositories (IRs)—general IRs, special-purpose IRs, and IRs in the pilot-testing phase—are available or will be available to members of your institution’s learning community in the near future?

5 or more

B. Specific IR implementation

Please answer the remaining 42 questions with the one IR in mind that offers the widest array of services to the most people and greatest number of constituencies (e.g., faculty members, students, staff, administrators, guests) in your institution’s learning community. Please feel free to message Soo Young Rieh (rieh@umich.edu) with your questions or concerns.

C. Timelines and Funding

2. How long has your institution been involved with IRs (everything from planning, pilot testing IR systems, to system implementation)? Please enter the number of months.

3. How long has your IR been operational, that is, available to authorized users for submission and searching of digital content? Please enter the number of months.

D. Needs Assessment

4. Did your institution conduct a needs assessment prior to implementing an IR?

Yes

Don’t know

5a. How important were the results of the needs assessment for:

	VI*	SI	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
Identifying first adopters of an IR
Identifying especially active contributors to the IR
Formulating IR policies
Making the decision to implement an IR
Increasing faculty awareness of the IR
Recruiting digital content for the IR
Streamlining IR planning and implementation
Choosing an IR software package
Scheduling the rollout of various IR services
Identifying new services to build onto the IR
Identifying preservation techniques
Other (Please specify in question 5b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

5b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

E. Influences on IR Implementation Decision

6a. How important were the results of the following investigative activities in terms of influencing your institution’s decision about implementing an IR?

	VI*	SI	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
Results of your institution’s needs assessment
Learning about successful implementations at comparable institutions
Learning about successful implementations at a wide range of academic institutions
Learning about available expertise and assistance from a library consortium, network, group of libraries, etc.
An analysis of a thorough literature review of IRs
Learning from reports of other institutions’ IR planning, pilot testing IR software, and implementation activities to date
Using other institutions’ operational IRs
Demonstrating operational IRs to my institution’s decision-makers
Demonstrating IR metadata harvesters such as OAIster and Google Scholar to my institution’s decision-makers
Waiting for a critical mass of IR implementation at comparable institutions to happen
Waiting for a critical mass of IR implementation generally to happen
Identifying better digital preservation techniques
Other (Please specify in question 6b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

6b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

F. Benefits of IRs

7a. At the beginning of IR planning at your institution, how important did you think these anticipated benefits of IRs would be to your institution?

	VI*	SI	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
A boost to your institution’s prestige
Better service to contributors
Better services to your institution’s learning community
New services to learning communities beyond your institution
Maintaining control over your institution’s intellectual property
Capturing the intellectual capital of your institution
Contributing to the reform of the entire enterprise of scholarly communication and publishing
A reduction in the amount of time between discovery and dissemination of research findings to scholarly communities
An increase in citation counts to your institution’s intellectual output
Exposing your institution’s intellectual output to researchers in North America and around the world who would not otherwise have access to it through traditional channels
An increase in the accessibility to knowledge assets such as numeric, video, audio, and multimedia datasets
Providing maximal access to the results of publicly funded research
A solution to the problem of preserving your institution’s intellectual output
An increase in your library’s role as a viable partner in the research enterprise
Reducing user dependence on your library’s print collection
Longtime preservation of your institution’s digital output
Other (Please specify in question 7b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

7b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

8a. Now that you are implementing or have implemented an IR, reassess these same anticipated benefits of IRs and tell whether you think they are less important or more important than you originally thought.

	VMMI*	SMI	SU	NC	SLI	VMLI	NO	DK	NA
A boost to your institution’s prestige
Better service to contributors
Better services to your institution’s learning community
New services to learning communities beyond your institution
Maintaining control over your institution’s intellectual property
Capturing the intellectual capital of your institution
Contributing to the reform of the entire enterprise of scholarly communication and publishing
A reduction in the amount of time between discovery and dissemination of research findings to scholarly communities
An increase in citation counts to your institution’s intellectual output
Exposing your institution’s intellectual output to researchers in North America and around the world who would not otherwise have access to it through traditional channels
An increase in the accessibility to knowledge assets such as numeric, video, audio, and multimedia datasets
Providing maximal access to the results of publicly funded research
A solution to the problem of preserving your institution’s intellectual output
An increase in your library’s role as a viable partner in the research enterprise
Reducing user dependence on your library’s print collection
Longtime preservation of your institution’s digital output
Other (Please specify in question 8b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VMMI=Very much more important, SMI=Somewhat more important, NC=No change in importance; SLI=Somewhat less important, VMLI=Very much less important, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

8b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

G. People involved in the IR effort

9a. How active were people in the following positions in terms of leading the charge to get involved with IRs at your institution?

	VA*	SA	SI	VI	NO	DK	NA
Staff at a library network, consortium, or other affiliated group
Your institution’s president or chancellor
Your institution’s vice president or provost
Faculty governance, e. g., faculty senate, faculty senate assembly, etc.
Your institution’s chief information officer
Your institution’s archivist
Faculty members generally
A faculty member in particular
Library director
Assistant library director(s)
Library staff member(s)
Graduate student (s)
Undergraduate student(s)
Other (Please specify in question 9b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VA=Very active, SA=Somewhat active, SI=Somewhat inactive, VI=Very inactive, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

9b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

10. Who is the individual leading IR implementation at your institution? (Choose one only.)

A faculty member in a particular college, department, or school

Your institution’s chief information officer

Your institution’s archivist

Library director

Assistant library director

A library staff member

No committee or committee chair has been appointed

Other (please specify)

11. If a committee is involved with IR implementation, identify the positions of the other people on this committee. (Please check all that apply.)

Staff from the office of the president or chancellor

Staff from the office of the vice-president or provost

Staff from the office of the chief information officer

Staff from your institution’s legal office

Your institution’s chief information officer

Your institution’s archivist

Library director

Assistant library director

Library staff member(s)

Archives staff

A faculty member in particular

Graduate student(s)

Undergraduate student(s)

Committee members have not yet been appointed

Other (please specify)

12. How many people are involved in your institution’s IR implementation?

H. IR Responsibility

13a. What percentage of the responsibility for an operational IR has been given to various campus units? (Percentages must add up to 100%.)

	% Your institution’s central administration
	% Your institution’s library
	% Your institution’s central computing unit
	% The office of the chief information officer
	% Your institution’s archives
	% Various academic colleges, departments, and schools
	% Other (Please specify in question 13b below)

13b. If you provided a percentage for “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

I. Contributions to the IR

14. Who are authorized contributors to your institution’s IR? (Choose as many as apply.)

Faculty members

Graduate students

Undergraduate students

Research scientists

Librarians

Archivists

Your institution’s administrators

Your institution’s press

Your institution’s news service

Your institution’s central computer services staff

Academic support staff

External contributors

Other (please specify)

15. Who is the major contributor to your institution’s IR? (Choose one only.)

Faculty

Graduate students

Undergraduate students

Research scientists

Librarians

Archivists

University and college administrators

Computer services staff

Academic support staff

Other (please specify)

16a. When planning for an IR, what did you think would be the most important reasons why members of your institution’s learning community would contribute to the IR?

	VI*	SI	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
To boost the particular scholar’s prestige
To boost your institution’s prestige
To contribute to the reform of the entire enterprise of scholarly communication and publishing
To reduce the amount of time between discovery and dissemination of research findings to scholarly communities
To increase citation counts to the particular scholar’s oeuvre
To increase citation counts to your institution’s intellectual output
To encourage other scholars to provide open access to their intellectual output
To expose the particular scholar’s intellectual output to researchers in North America and around the world who would not otherwise have access to it through traditional channels
To expose your institution’s intellectual output to researchers in North America and around the world who would not otherwise have access to it through traditional channels
To place the burden of preservation on the IR instead of on individual faculty members
To increase the accessibility to knowledge assets such as numeric, video, audio, and multimedia datasets
To provide maximal access to the results of publicly funded research
To solve the problem of preserving your institution’s intellectual output
To increase the library’s role as a viable partner in the research enterprise
To reduce user dependence on your library’s print collection
Other (Please specify in question 16b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

16b. If you rated “Other’ for the question above, please specify in the box below.

17a. How would you assess your methods for recruiting digital content for the IR?

	VS*	SS	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
Volunteer contributions
Publicity about the IR in campus newspapers
Presentations by staff responsible for the IR at departmental and faculty meetings
Personal visits by staff responsible for the IR to faculty and administrators
Staff responsible for the IR working one-on-one with early adopters
Word-of-mouth from early adopters to their colleagues in the faculty and staff ranks
Publicizing the IR during reference interactions in libraries and archives
Systematic review of faculty, staff, center, and departmental web sites for potential contributors by staff responsible for the IR
Institution-wide mandates regarding mandatory contribution of certain material types, e.g., doctoral dissertations, master’s theses, faculty preprints, etc.
Other (Please specify in question 17b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VS=Very successful, SS=Somewhat successful, SU=Somewhat unsuccessful, VU=Very unsuccessful, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

17b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

J. IR Implementation

18a. What IR software package have you implemented? (Choose one only.)

	Pilot Tested	Implemented
ARNO
bePress
CDSWare
ContentDM
DigiTool (Ex Libris)
DiVA
Documentum
Dpubs
DSpace
Fedora
GNU Eprints
Greenstone
HarvestRoad Hive
Innovative Interfaces
i-TOR
Luna
myCORE
OPUS
Sunsite
Virginia Tech ETD software
None
Other (Please specify in question 18b below)

18b. If you checked “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

19. How would you characterize your IR’s host? (Choose one only.)

A regional or state-based consortium

A partnership that joins your institution with one or more comparable institutions

Your institution only

A for-profit vendor

A not-for-profit vendor

Other (please specify)

20. What interoperability standards does your IR support? (Choose all that apply.)

IR supports OAI-MPH

IR is OpenURL compliant

IR materials use persistent identifiers

Our institution’s federated searching includes the IR

Other (please specify)

21a. Based on your experience with IR implementation, how would you rate your chosen system with regard to these capabilities?

	VA*	SA	SI	VI	NO	DK	NA
Technical support
Technical documentation
Adherence to open access standards
Scalability = System growth and enhancement
Customization
Extensibility = Access to other campus systems and data
Supported file formats
User authentication
Formulating metadata for digital documents
Browsing, searching, and retrieving digital content
End-user interface generally
Controlled vocabulary searching
Authority control
Digital preservation
Other (Please specify in question 21b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VA=Very adequate, SA=Somewhat adequate, SI=Somewhat inadequate, VI=Very inadequate, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

21b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

22a. If your efforts to implement an IR involved pilot testing IR software packages, what were the most important benefits of the pilot testing?

	VI*	SI	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
Giving demonstrations to people involved in the IR implementation decision
Giving demonstrations to an institution (s) interested in partnering with us to encourage them in IR implementation
Gauging the interest of potential contributors to the IR
Gauging the interest of potential IR-system users
Identifying the strengths and shortcomings of available IR software
Estimating costs for the technical implementation of an operational IR
Developing the requisite technical expertise for IR implementation
Identifying first adopters of an IR at your institution
Control over your institution’s intellectual output
Preservation of your institution’s intellectual output
Other (Please specify in question 22b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

22b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

23. If your efforts to implement an IR involved early adopters of IR technology, from what academic colleges, departments, schools, and service units have they come? (Choose all that apply.)

Your institution’s library

Your institution’s central computing unit

Your institution’s archives

A particular academic college, department, or school

A particular service unit

Don’t know

Not applicable

Other (please specify)

K. IR Content

24. Estimate the total number of digital documents that are published or in process in your IR.

25a. Estimate the number of digital documents that make up your IR’s collections. (Write in the amount or write in DK for Don’t Know or NA for Not Applicable.)

Preprints

Working papers

Books

Journals

Journal articles

Maps

Interview transcripts

Sound recordings of interview transcripts

Software

Software documentation

Video recordings of performances

Blogs

Interim and final reports to funding agencies

Raw data files that result from faculty research projects

Raw data files that result from doctoral dissertation research

Raw data files that result from master’s thesis research

Raw data files that result from senior thesis research

Written papers or transcripts of conference presentations

Conference presentations (e.g., summaries, abstracts, notes, outlines, remarks, etc.)

Committee meeting agenda and minutes

Committee meeting documents, e.g., budgets, reports, memoranda

Your institution’s course catalogs

Your institution’s newspapers

Your institution’s alumni publications

Faculty senate agendas and minutes

College, departmental, and school alumni publications

Regent, trustee, board meeting agendas and minutes

Course syllabi, class notes, handouts, outlines, assignments prepared by faculty, lecturers, teaching assistants, and other professional teaching personnel

Other learning objects such as simulations, models, software demonstration files, images, video prepared by faculty, lecturers, teaching assistants, and other professional teaching personnel

Doctoral dissertations

Master’s theses

Senior theses

Graduate student eportfolios

Undergraduate student eportfolios

Class notes, outlines, assignments, papers, and projects prepared by graduate students

Class notes, outlines, assignments, papers, and projects prepared by undergraduate students

Other (Please specify type of digital document in question 25b below)

25b. If you entered an estimate for “Other” in the previous question, please specify in the box below.

26a. What file formats have you guaranteed contributors that you will preserve in perpetuity?

	Guaranteed	DK*	NO	NA
Plain Text UTF-8 (Unicode)
Plain Text ANSI X3.4/ECMA-6/US-ASCII (7-bit)
Plain Text ISO 8859-x (8-bit)
Plain Text (all other encodings, including, but not limited to ISO 646 national variants)
Rich text
XML
TeX
LaTeX
Postscript
PDF
PDF/A
Microsoft Word
Microsoft Excel
Microsoft PowerPoint
TIFF
GIF
JPEG
PNG
BMP
Photo CD
Photoshop
AIFF
Audio/Basic
MPEG audio
AAC_M4A
Real Audio
Windows Media Audio
Wave
AVI
MPEG-1
MPEG-2
MPEG-4
Windows Media Video
Quicktime
Other (Please specify file format in question 26b below)
* Key to abbreviations: NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

26b. If you selected “Other” in the previous question, please specify in the box below.

L. IR Policies

27. Who is responsible for managing the IR’s intellectual property rights? (Choose all that apply.)

Contributors’ academic or service units

One chosen academic unit

One chosen service unit

IR staff

Library staff

Archives staff

Staff from the office of the chief information officer

A company to which our IR is outsourcing

Other (please specify)

28a. What is the status of these IR policies?

	NP*	D	I	DK	NA
Determining what is acceptable content
Defining collections
Determining who is authorized to make contributions to the IR
Restricting access to IR content
Acceptable file formats
Identifying metadata formats and authorized metadata creators
Charging for IR services
Formulating a privacy policy for registered IR system users
Licensing IR content
Updating IR content
Withdrawing IR content
Providing access management services
Preserving IR content
Revising IR policies in the future
Authorizing external contributors
Intellectual property
Other (Please specify in question 28b below)
* Key to abbreviations: NP=No policy; D=Drafted; I=Implemented; DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

28b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

M. IR Deployment

29a. To what extent do you think the following are likely to inhibit your ability to deploy a successful IR?

	VL*	SL	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
Making members of your institution’s learning community aware of the IR
Contributors’ lack of knowledge about how they can benefit from IRs
Encouraging faculty to submit digital content to the IR
Convincing faculty that the IR will not adversely affect the current publishing model
Absence of campus-wide mandates regarding mandatory contribution of certain material types, e.g., doctoral dissertations, master’s theses, faculty preprints, etc.
Contributors’ concerns about the difficulty using the IR system to contribute digital content to the IR
Inability of contributors to formulate quality metadata
Contributors’ concerns about intellectual property rights for digital materials
Inadequacy of the IR system’s digital preservation capabilities
Difficulties in long-term preservation of digital files
Lack of on-campus technical expertise in IR systems
Supporting all ongoing costs of an operational IR
Competing for resources with other priorities, projects, and initiatives
Other (Please specify in question 29b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VL=Very likely, SL=Somewhat likely, SU=Somewhat unlikely, VU=Very unlikely, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

29b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

N. Relationships

30. To what extent will an IR affect your institution’s ability to build relationships between the IR and other on-campus repositories (e.g., archives, student services, library systems, digital asset management systems, electronic course management systems, digital libraries)?

A big positive effect

A moderate positive effect

No effect

A moderate negative effect

A big negative effect

A combination of positive and negative effects

Don’t know

No opinion

Not applicable

Other (please specify)

O. Funding

31a. How likely is it that funding for your institution’s implementation of an IR will come from these sources?

	VL*	SL	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
Special initiative supported by your institution’s central administration
Special initiative supported by your institution’s library
Special initiative supported by your institution’s central computer services
Special initiative supported by your institution’s archives
Special initiative supported by academic colleges, departments, and schools
Regular budget line item for your institution’s central administration
Regular budget line item for your institution’s library
Regular budget line item for your institution’s central computer services
Regular budget line item for your institution’s archives
Regular budget line item for academic colleges, departments, and schools
Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s central administration
Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s library
Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s central computer services
Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s archives
Costs absorbed in routine operating costs of your institution’s academic colleges, departments, and schools
Grant awarded by an external source
Grant awarded by an internal source
Other (Please specify in question 31b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VL=Very likely, SL=Somewhat likely, SU=Somewhat unlikely, VU=Very unlikely, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

31b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

32a. What percentage of your IR’s annual budget is allocated to these categories? (Percentages must add up to 100%.)

	% Staff (including benefits)
	% Hardware acquisition
	% Hardware maintenance
	% Software acquisition
	% Software maintenance and updates
	% System backup
	% Vendor fees (for IRs hosted by an external vendor)
	% Other (Please specify in question 32b below)

32b. If you provided a percentage for “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

P. Future Migration

33. How long do you think your institution will stick to this IR system before migrating to a new system? (Please enter number of years.)

34. How likely are you to modify your IR’s software?

Very likely

Somewhat likely

Somewhat unlikely

Very unlikely

Don’t know

No opinion

Not applicable

35a. What do you think will be the most important reasons for migrating to a new IR system?

	VI*	SI	SU	VU	NO	DK	NA
Greater capacity for handling preservation
Friendlier user interface
Advanced searching features
Friendlier digital content submissions procedure
Better tools for assisting contributors with metadata creation
Around-the-clock technical support
Greater versatility with the wide range of digital formats
Greater opportunities for customization
Greater versatility for linking to other campus systems and data
Other (Please specify in question 35b below)
* Key to abbreviations: VI=Very important, SI=Somewhat important, SU=Somewhat unimportant, VU=Very unimportant, NO=No opinion, DK=Don’t know, NA=Not applicable

35b. If you rated “Other” for the question above, please specify in the box below.

36. What approaches have you used to date to assess your IR’s success? (Choose all that apply.)

Tracking number of contributions

Tracking number of unique contributors

Tracking number of searches

Tracking number of users

Tracking number of unique users

Tracking number of queries

Conducting interviews with IR contributors

Conducting interviews with IR users

Surveying IR contributors

Surveying IR users

Other (please specify)

Q. Institutional Information

37. Please identify your position at your institution. (Choose one only.)

President or chancellor

Staff in the office of the president or chancellor

Vice president or provost

Staff in the office of the vice president or provost

Chief information officer

Staff in the office of the chief information officer

Archivist

Archives staff

Library director

Assistant director of library public services

Assistant director of library technical services

Assistant director of library information technology

Library staff

Other (please specify)

38. What is your connection to your institution’s IR?

39. Please identify your institution.

40. If your institution’s IR is available to the general public, please give its web address(es):

R. Follow-up information

41. How can the MIRACLE Project assist you regarding IRs?

42. If you would be willing to volunteer for follow-up questions via phone or email, please add your name and email address and we will contact you in the near future:

Name

Thank you! If you have questions, please message Soo Young Rieh (rieh@umich.edu) at the MIRACLE project. Thank you for your responses.

APPENDIX E

Questionnaire for Implementation (IMP) Respondents

Informed Consent Form

A. Number of IRs

B. Specific IR implementation

C. Timelines and Funding

D. Needs Assessment

E. Influences on IR Implementation Decision

F. Benefits of IRs

G. People involved in the IR effort

H. IR Responsibility

I. Contributions to the IR

J. IR Implementation

K. IR Content

L. IR Policies

M. IR Deployment

N. Relationships

O. Funding

P. Future Migration

Q. Institutional Information

R. Follow-up information

Questionnaire for Implementation
(IMP) Respondents