Update: Library Partnership (LP) Rating · Commonplace

"If the description of Library Partnership (LP) Certification in our 2021 article intrigued you, you’ll be happy to know we’ve kept busy the past two years. Thanks to dedicated and thoughtful volunteers, LP Certification has grown and changed. This update tells you what we’re currently working on and provides a summary of the work done since fall of 2021.

First and foremost, LP Certification is now called Library Partnership (LP) Rating.undefined The goals and purposes remain the same.

As a quick reminder, LP Rating has three goals.

1. Provide information about journal publishers’ alignment with select library values to improve librarians’ funding decisions.

2. Improve clarity in librarians’ discussions about openness and publisher practices.

3. Give librarians and publishers a way to communicate and collaborate around these values....

LP Rating uses the LP Rubric to evaluate a journal publisher’s practices. The rubric underwent extensive work with members of the 2022-2023 LP Advisory Council (LPAC).undefined During June and July of 2023, a new group of librarians and publishers took another deep dive into the rubric and our associated files, seeing it all with fresh eyes. The feedback from this group of reviewersundefined has been incorporated into the LP Rubric and related documentation. We are indebted to both LPAC members and the reviewers for their hard work. Because of their input, the LP Rubric Beta version is now available....

LP Rating Values

• Community. We want to work with:

  • Organizations that are transparent, cooperative, and collaborative in their business practices

  • Organizations that are strong partners; or, organizations that, over time, adopt practices better aligned with library values

• Access. We seek:

  • Immediate open access to articles

  • Equitable access for readers and authors through reduced barriers and burdens

  • Affordability for libraries, authors, funders, and others

• Rights. We favor:

  • Author retention of rights/permissions to their own work

  • Explicit permissions to readers to reuse and build on the work

  • Authors being given a choice of standard open licenses, or a publisher applying these by default

  • Recognizing diverse needs across disciplines

• Discoverability and Accessibility. We prefer:

  • Open and indexable full-text and metadata

  • Diligent compliance with relevant accessibility standards

  • Participation in initiatives focused on interoperability

• Preservation. We want partners to:

  • Deposit content into established and open federal, disciplinary, or institutional repositories

  • Participate in standard industry preservation efforts..."