What is the
Point of the Regional Consortiums?
By Michele Matucheski, MLS, AHIP
At the Fall
Board Meeting in December, there was some discussion about removing the
notation on the WHSLA Membership forms about a member’s respective regional
consortium : Fox Valley (FV), North West (NW), South Central (SC) , or South
East (SE), since 2 of these regional consortiums have since disbanded. Because I’ve been around long enough to
know the histories (I keep the FRVALC Archives and their website), I offered to
share an explanation.
In short,
the regional consortiums formed in the early 1970s to facilitate resource sharing among health science
libraries (Tech Schools, UWs, nursing schools, and special libraries including
hospital libraries and some corporate libraries). They developed regional networks for ILL so
that there would be a more local response for resource sharing, rather than
going directly and immediately to the medical schools in Madison and
Milwaukee. Since the consortia members
met regularly and knew each other, they would also develop their journal
collections regionally. They developed a
union list, or group journal holdings list, in which at least 1 member
committed to holding / keeping at least 10 years’ worth of any given title (ie
JAMA, NEJM, AJN, etc.) in the region. I
remember making decisions on what to keep or toss in my libraries according to
our commitments to the FRVALC union list.
Nowadays,
online collections, library closures, consolidations, space reductions, and Docline
Free-Share have made this original resource sharing purpose much less
important.
The second
main goal of the regional consortiums was/is continuing education. This
continues to be important for some regions, and the main reason for getting
together. At FRVALC, we often showed the
MLA Webcasts with grants from the GMR or WHSLA.
Though MLA’s new licensing model allowing WHSLA to apply for access and
CEUs for all our members, may lessen the need to gather in the same physical
space for these webcasts, as has been required by previous licensing. That said, I would argue that getting
together fosters conversation and a deeper grasp of the material presented when
you can discuss it with people in the same room with you.
Times have
changed. I rely on my local FRVALC
Consortium much less for resource sharing and ILL, and much more for continuing
education opportunities, networking, and problem-solving. I look forward to the spring and fall
meetings when I can get together with the other members and discuss the issues
I’m struggling with, and the successes.
Someone in the group can usually suggest a solution, or share what they
did at their institution. It’s a support
network. Like WHSLA, FRVALC has also
worked through our own existential crises, and the members who remain continue
to see the value in the FRVALC Consortia.
The
Consortiums work with WHSLA, but they have their own set of bylaws and live
independently of WHSLA. Some
consortiums have fallen away, it’s true, but 2 remain strong and vibrant. They will continue whether or not WHSLA lists
them on the membership form, or recognizes them going forward. The regional consortiums are PARTNERS with
WHSLA; they are not products of WHSLA.
WHSLA didn’t create them. WHSLA
doesn’t have oversight over them either.
In the past, we tried to set the annual WHSLA meeting in a different
part of the state each year, and it was helpful to know who was in each region,
and who you could draw on to work on the annual WHSLA Mtg. Not all regional consortium members are WHSLA
members; and not all WHSLA Members are part of a regional consortium, though
there is some overlap.
One of the
big differences between the regional consortiums and WHSLA is that membership
goes by institution vs. personal membership as with WHSLA. And since the regional consortiums also
invited academic librarians, and other staff to participate, they may have many
other specialties and responsibilities besides health science
librarianship. Often it’s the ILL people
at the UWs who joined us. At smaller
institutions, it may have been the clerical staff who were also in charge of
CME programming – not necessarily people with MLIS degrees, or a commitment to
the profession. That’s one reason it
was difficult to keep some groups going.
Another reason was the physical distances between members in the
Northwest region. It was difficult and
time-consuming for them to get together.
Again, the library closures and consolidations also had an impact.
For those of
you who are interested, the remaining active Consortiums do have websites where
you can learn more :
