Member Relations 

During the 2010-2012 governance planning meetings, several ideas emerged as potential free services for members, for instance, submission-based data when arXiv's metadata structure is ready; institutional repository bulk download. Member institutions are also very keen on informing their scientists and researchers about arXiv's business model (e.g.,arXiv LibGuide to share with their faculty and students in related disciplines). Implementing these features may require significant staff time. Therefore these services need to be considered in the context of arXiv's current maintenance and development priorities. For 2013, within the context of Member Relations, we'd like to focus on the following issues:

• Often, we are advised to make it easier to find business info on the arXiv webpage (one idea proposed is to put links from abstracts or submission forms to 'sustainability' page).  What are your thoughts and suggestions?
• How can we involve the members in documenting and sharing with us information about how arXiv is being used? What is working well for scientists that needs to be maintained? What are their unmet needs? What kinds of changes they want to see implemented? 
• How can we promote the libraries' and research laboratories' role in arXiv's sustainability to scientists?
• Scientists know very little about how arXiv is run and how much the operation costs. How can we improve communication so that scientists will understand the role of libraries in maintaining and supporting arXiv?  What is the role of the arXiv member institutions in this communication process?* We are very encouraged with the five-year pledges received so far. We want to increase the number of arXiv member institutions to create a large and international network of supporters. What are your suggestions?
  Members: Jim, Eva, Molly, Zhixiong

Financial Planning

• The current annual institutional fees are in the $1,500-$3,000 range, which may be high for some developing countries or institutions that are lower in the use ranking (below 200).  Shall we add a lower fee to encourage these institutions to support arXiv?
• Raising additional funds will allow us to expand arXiv's staffing (especially the current minimal IT staffing configuration), consided lowering the current tier structure, and support R&D projects. What are your suggestions?  One of the ideas we would like to discuss is adding a Give button on arXiv home page to invite donations from users. What are the pros and cons of this idea?  Creating a lower-priced tier for members from developing countries
• The purpose of the arXiv reserve fund is to support unexpected expenses to ensure a sound business model. Currently, arXiv has a reserve fund of approximately $100,000 that accumulated during 2010-2011 due to unexpected staff vacancies and other savings (2012 expenses have not been factored in yet). The 2013-2017 budget projections assume that we will be able to add $50,000-$100,000 per year to the reserve funds. We need to develop policies about how contingency funds will be used and how the account will be structured (e.g., funds needed for closing the business versus development funds - also a part of the reserve funds to create an endowment & the interest can be use the interest for reducing membership fees).  Also, we need to determine at what point of reserve fund accumulation (total reserve balance) we will consider to lower the annual membership fees.
• Assessment of the current financial model, adding new arXiv members 
  Members: Uwe (Esther), Yuri, Philip

Develop reserve fund policies -

Collaboration with Publishers and Societies

In celebration of the arXiv's 20^th anniversary, on September 23, 2011 Cornell University Library (CUL) hosted a meeting at Cornell with the representatives from several publishers and societies that are interested in Cornell's sustainability planning efforts. The meeting report provides a synopsis of the discussion and recommends next steps for continuing this dialogue. We will resume this investigation and discuss the feasibility and desirability of establishing a research and innovation collaboration in support of arXiv.  This effort is envisioned to entail a separate funding stream (created by participating publishers and societies) from the operational budget, which includes resources for the routine and core services currently provided by the arXiv team (including essential updates).

• Please see the September 2011 planning meeting summary about the outcomes of a collaboration discussion with a group of publisher and society representatives.  We would like to review, prioritize, and move our initial meeting recommendations into action.  What are your recommendations?
  Members: Catriona, Carol, Tim, Diane, Tommy

Research and Development Agenda

So far, CUL's sustainability planning efforts focused on arXiv's operational budget to support the core services and arXiv's strengths in order to stay mission-centric. One of the key goals ahead of us is to define a research agenda for arXiv.  We'll seek input from the advisory boards, users/scientists at large, and information scientists.  We will develop a methodology for making decisions about arXiv's R&D projects and partners.  One of the challenges will be maintaining/developing arXiv as a distinct system vs. envisioning it as a part of a joint scholarly communication infrastructure (interoperability, research data, tracking funding sources, etc.).  This is likely to be a potential tension area between the library community and scientists. 

• Moving beyond the current sustainability model that focuses on operations to a strategic plan for arXiv's further development and innovation
• Setting R&D priorities & assessing collaboration opportunities
• Setting a 3-5 year strategic plan for arXiv (encompassing all aspects of arXiv, not limited to technologies) - moving beyond the 2013 Roadmap
  Members: Tommy, Mackenzie
  

Develop guidelines for engagaing in new partnership - arXiv is approached on a regular basis by outside groups asking for advice or special services. Sometimes the assistance requested is minor, but often it would require devoting some amount of staff effort. We need guidelines for determining under what circumstances we will allocate resources in order to collaborate with an outside organization.Working with the arXiv Boards, develop policies that guide consideration of potential working collaborations with outside groups.