Here is the full definition of CC 15, Doctoral/Research Universities—Extensive, from NCES documentation:

These institutions typically offer a wide range of baccalaureate programs, and they are committed to graduate education through the doctorate. They award 50 or more doctoral degrees per year across at least 15 disciplines.²

Of the 148 libraries in this group responding to the 2012 survey, 144 (97%) appear here, representing 98% of spending in the group. In all, these 144 libraries served 3,337,012 FTE students. Examples not already mentioned include Ohio State University, Main Campus; University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; Teachers College at Columbia University, and CUNY Graduate School and University Center (ALS 2012).

Unusually for nonspecialized universities and colleges, this group spent $3,546,450 more on books and other acquisitions in 2012 than in 2002—but it also spent $197,445,924 more on serials, about 55 times as large an increase (see table 4.1). As you’d expect from sector and large-institution changes, increases in books spending are highly concentrated: 18 libraries, each spending at least $1 million more, total $57.3 million in additional spending.

Consider the Serials % line and the Serials Changes line in table 4.1 for indications of what Big Deals mean for these high-profile, large-budget libraries: most libraries spend more than a third of their entire budgets (including salaries and everything else) on current serials, and a quarter spend at least four out of every ten dollars. Note also Books Change and Remainder Change: most of these libraries have had to cut back on non-serials acquisitions—and also on everything else they do. It would take $67,885,052 to bring all libraries up to at least 2002 books spending levels (plus inflation).

Figure 4.1 shows an interesting pattern for books: after holding fairly steady for several years, spending dropped significantly between 2008 and 2010—but it’s come back a little in 2012, although the median is still 13% lower than in 2002. That gain in books spending may be at the expense of other budget areas, given that remainder spending fell noticeably for the first time in 2012. Meanwhile, of course, serials just kept rising faster than inflation, although at a lower rate than for many other groups of libraries (a lower rate, but nearly $200 million).

Although CC 15 libraries are relatively few in number, they represent nearly half of all spending by the 2,594 libraries in this report (ALS 2012), so they may deserve extra attention.

Here is the definition of CC 16, Doctoral/Research Universities—Intensive:

These institutions typically offer a wide range of baccalaureate programs, and they are committed to graduate education through the doctorate. They award at least ten doctoral degrees per year across three or more disciplines, or at least 20 doctoral degrees per year overall. (CC)

Of 103 libraries responding in 2012, 98 (95%) appear here, representing 96% of spending in the group. The 103 libraries served 1,155,467 FTE students in 2012. Examples not already mentioned include George Mason University; University of Nevada, Las Vegas; Wilmington University; and Union Institute and University (ALS 2012).

As table 4.4 indicates, these are generally smaller libraries than those in CC 15, although still larger than most academic libraries. The patterns in table 4.4 are fairly typical. Most libraries (55%) spent at least 25% less on books (etc.), including 35% that cut by half or more, while 30% spent at least half again as much on serials. It would take $24,807,585 to have all these libraries spend at least as much on books in 2012 as in 2002.

As shown in figure 4.4, median serials spending continued upward at a slower rate after the sharp rise in serials spending from 2000 to 2002 not shown here. Books spending was only slightly down until 2006 but has fallen considerably since then.

Here is the definition of CC 21, Master’s Colleges and Universities I:

These institutions typically offer a wide range of baccalaureate programs, and they are committed to graduate education through the master’s degree. They award 40 or more master’s degrees per year across three or more disciplines. (CC)

This is the largest group of four-year (and above) institutions, including 460 that responded in 2012, of which 438 (95%) appear here, representing 98% of the 2012 spending. The 438 libraries supported 2,947,797 FTE students in 2012. Libraries include Texas State University, San Marcos; University of North Carolina at Charlotte; University of Saint Mary; and Silver Lake College of the Holy Family (ALS 2012).

Just under one-third of these libraries (31%) spent at least 50% more on serials in 2012 than in 2002, even after inflation—and 58% cut books (all other acquisitions) by at least 25%, with 32% cutting that spending by half or more (see table 4.5). It would require $47,977,671 to bring books spending up to the 2002 level.

Figure 4.5 is almost a classic case: serials go up, books go down slowly at first, faster later on . . . and in this case, remaining spending, reasonably well protected until 2010, starts to fall slightly in 2012. Slightly in this case is almost $26 million, but that’s not a huge percentage.

Here is the definition of CC 22, Master’s (Comprehensive) Colleges and Universities II:

These institutions typically offer a wide range of baccalaureate programs, and they are committed to graduate education through the master’s degree. They award 20 or more master’s degrees per year. (CC)

The basic difference of this group from CC 21 is that these institutions offer fewer master’s degrees and there is no requirement of having at least three master’s programs.

This much smaller group of master’s-granting institutions includes 99 responding in 2012, of which 87 (88%) appear here, representing 92% of spending. These 87 libraries served 253,763 FTE students in 2012. Examples include Weber State University, Ferris State University, University of the Southwest, and Salem International University (ALS 2012).

Note in table 4.8 that at least three-quarters of these generally smaller libraries spent significantly less on books in 2012 than in 2002. In fact, 67% (two-thirds) spent at least 25% less on books and other acquisitions (after inflation), including 38% where this spending dropped by at least half. It would require $5,476,292 for all libraries to spend at least as much on books (etc.) in 2012 as in 2002, accounting for inflation.

It may not be surprising that figure 4.8 looks a lot like figure 4.5: the patterns for all master’s institutions are fairly similar.

Here is the definition of CC 31, Baccalaureate Colleges—Liberal Arts:

These institutions are primarily undergraduate colleges with major emphasis on baccalaureate programs. They award at least half of their baccalaureate degrees in liberal arts fields. (CC)

Given the continued importance of books for the liberal arts, and given that the rate of price increases for serials in the humanities and social sciences has been somewhat lower than for science, technology, and medicine, this is a group where one might hope to see healthy changes in books spending and some moderation of serials increases. Unfortunately, while the second is partly true, the first isn’t.

Of 199 libraries responding in 2012, 184 (92%) appear here, representing 97% of the spending. These 184 libraries served 347,026 FTE students in 2012. Libraries include University of Richmond, Smith College, St. Andrews University, and Trinity Baptist College (ALS 2012).

Table 4.9 shows that most of these libraries saw cuts overall—but most of them nonetheless spent more on serials, while three-quarters lost at least 10% of books spending. In fact, two-thirds (67%) lost at least 25% of books (etc.) spending, including 36% where that spending dropped by half or more. It would require $19,463,972 to bring all these libraries back to 2002 levels of books spending, plus inflation—or more than half of their remaining books spending. For libraries serving institutions where liberal arts are primary fields, this seems deeply unfortunate.

Figure 4.9 shows relatively lower median gains in serials spending than some other library groups—but sharp and continuing drops in other acquisitions, along with some loss in remainder budgets in the last few years.

A slight majority of these libraries lost ground to inflation between 2002 and 2012. The minority that kept up did slightly better in terms of books budgets, but only 34 (18%) managed to increase books spending.

Here is the definition of CC 32, Baccalaureate Colleges—General:

These institutions are primarily undergraduate colleges with major emphasis on baccalaureate programs. They award less than half of their baccalaureate degrees in liberal arts fields. (CC)

This is the largest group of baccalaureate colleges. Of 273 responding in 2012, 240 (88%) appear here; those 240 represent 90% of the spending. These libraries served 450,684 FTE students in 2012. Examples include Ohio Northern University; University of Houston-Downtown; Potomac College, Washington; and Barclay College (ALS 2012).

As shown in table 4.10, the pattern is very close to that for CC 31, except that serials spending is even higher for the top quartile. Not quite two-thirds of these libraries (64%) cut books (etc.) budgets by at least 25% from 2002 to 2012, including 39% where that spending dropped by half or more, while 32% of the libraries increased serials spending by at least half. It would take $9,025,156 in additional spending to bring all of these libraries at least even for non-serials acquisitions with 2002, adjusting for inflation.

At the median, spending change patterns are so similar to those for CC 31 that the median spending graph is nearly identical to figure 4.9, so the graph doesn’t appear here.

Here is the definition of CC 33, Baccalaureate/Associate’s Colleges:

These institutions are undergraduate colleges where the majority of conferrals are at the subbaccalaureate level (associate’s degrees and certificates), but bachelor’s degrees account for at least ten percent of undergraduate awards. (CC)

This is a small group of diverse institutions. Of 39 that responded in 2012, 29 (74%) appear here, accounting for 73% of the spending. Those 39 libraries supported 98,317 FTE students in 2012. The group includes four libraries spending more than $2 million each—one over $4 million—and another three spending more than $1 million each. Those seven libraries account for just under two-thirds of the total for the 29 libraries. Libraries include Fashion Institute of Technology, Pennsylvania College of Technology, Central Christian College of Kansas, and National American University–Rapid City (ALS 2012).

Table 4.13 shows an odd group of libraries—but one where, on the whole, serials spending nearly doubled while books spending decreased 34%. In fact, 69% of these libraries dropped at least 25% of spending for books and other non-serials acquisitions, including 45% where that expense dropped by at least half. Meanwhile, 48% of the libraries increased serials spending by half or more, including 41% at least doubling it. In both cases, the rarities are libraries that didn’t change much in either direction: 24% of the libraries increased books spending by 25% or more (21% by 50% or more) while 31% cut serials spending by 25% or more (24% by half or more). In fact, only six libraries had relatively small serials spending changes—and only two had relatively small books changes. It would take $1,325,803 for all libraries to spend at least as much on books in 2012 as in 2002 (accounting for inflation)—in other words, you’d need 75% more money to do the job.

The curious drop in median serials spending from 2008 to 2010 that appears in figure 4.12 would be more interesting in a larger group of libraries; as it is, it may not mean much of anything.

Although Doctoral/Research Universities—Extensive, generally the largest university libraries, managed to increase books spending (slightly) overall along with an enormous serials increase, that came at the expense of other expenditures—while other doctoral institutions cut books spending (overall) but retained other spending. Overall, everything except serials was cut in Master’s I institutions, while Master’s II libraries mostly cut books. Among baccalaureate colleges, liberal arts colleges took the biggest hit to books budget on both a percentage and an absolute basis.