This report examinies strategic planning, administrative support, performance metrics, user-satisfaction assessment, annual reporting, collaboration with library units, advocacy, campus-wide planning, and funding for academic library special collections.
The report finds that special collections departments are often important to institutional mission but weakly integrated into formal planning. Only 34.62% of respondents maintain a written special collections strategic plan, while 11.54% have one in development and 46.15% do not. Among institutions with more than 40,000 students, only 16.67% have such a plan, while 66.67% do not.
Administrative support receives mixed ratings. 7.69% are very satisfied and 30.77% satisfied, for a combined positive rating of 38.46%. However, 23.08% are dissatisfied and 7.69% very dissatisfied, while another 23.08% are neutral. This suggests that many departments receive some support but still face gaps in understanding, advocacy, or resources.
Assessment and reporting practices are uneven. 46.15% track key performance metrics for special collections, while the same share, 46.15%, do not. User-satisfaction assessment is weaker: only 7.69% assess satisfaction annually, while 23.08% do so rarely and 42.31% never do.
Collaboration with other library units is one of the strongest findings. 23.08% are very satisfied and 38.46% satisfied with such collaboration, for a combined positive rating of 61.54%. By contrast, annual reporting is less common: only 30.77% produce an annual special collections report, while 53.85% do not.
Special collections departments also appear to have limited influence in broader institutional planning. No respondents report a high level of involvement in campus-wide strategic planning; 50.00% report limited involvement and 30.77% report none. Funding is the most negative measure: only 19.23% are satisfied or very satisfied with current funding, while 50.00% are dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.