Committee Final Report

NOTE: ** = Required Field


**Type of report being submitted: Committee Final Report

**Date: July 6, 2005            

**Committee Name:  Resume Review Service (RRS) Committee


**Supervising Board Member:  Laura Kortz


**Chair, Co-Chairs, Assistant Chairs:  Donna Braquet & Susie Skarl

**Committee members: Donna Braquet (Co-Chair), Victoria Campbell, Jennifer Cella, Tiffany Allen, Karen Evans, Laurel Haycock, Nanako Kodaira, Jessica Kopecky, Penny Scott, Susie Skarl (Co-Chair), Julia von Ranson, and Joyce Wheatley.

**Goals, Objectives, Projects completed (including, but not limited to, any procedures, tip sheets, checklists, etc. created during the reporting year):

The RRS Committee had an outstanding year and completed many of our goals. In particular, at Midwinter in Boston, 200 conference attendees visited our booth and 113 had their resumes reviewed. In Boston, we were fortunate to have over 30 reviewers and over 20 volunteers staffing our booth. At Annual in Chicago, 335 conference attendees visited our booth and 162 had their resumes reviewed. At Annual, we had over 20 volunteers staffing the booth and 59 reviewers, which included four reviewers during peak hours. Between July 2004 and June 2003, our e-mail review service completed 73 reviews, nine less than last year. 


Project Descriptions/Goals

1.                  The Committee revised conference sign-up sheets to include more information about the reviewers (including areas of expertise, special skills, educational background, etc.). The conference sign-in sheets were revised for Midwinter in response to reviewees wanting to know more about a reviewer before scheduling an appointment.  We included the type(s) of institutions that the reviewer was comfortable reviewing for, the reviewers' title, and general area (instruction, reference, technical services, etc.) of specialization.


2.                  The Committee devised criteria by which reviewers will be selected upon application. When recruiting new e-mail and conference reviewers, we have asked that they answer a short questionnaire on what type(s) libraries and specializations they are comfortable reviewing for and a write a few sentences about their experience with HR, hiring or search committees.

3.                  The Committee updated and further-enhanced the Job Hunting Resource Guide (, created by last year's committee, by adding more websites and articles, in addition to deleting dead links.


4.                  The Committee identified new resources (books, articles) to have on display at the conferences. During Midwinter & Annual Conferences, Beatrice Calvin, ALA;s Placement Center Manager updated the career resources collection with new books and articles. 


5.                  The Committee recruited a total of 12 new e-mail reviewers and recommends that the new co-chairs continue to recruit for both e-mail and conference reviewers, with reviewing expertise in public libraries, special libraries, and school libraries.


6.                  The Committee created a publicity schedule that structured a timeline for announcements and lists venues for publicity. This timeline should be revised  for each conference in the future.


7.                  The Committee created a flyer that will be forwarded to the SASCO Committee (following further revisions) that will target library school students and recent alumni about the e-mail Resume Review Service.



**Action Items/Issues To Be Resolved

1.      Work with the web liaison to create a form for easier resume submission and review application via the website.

2.      Continue to update the Job Hunting Resource Guide.

3.      Revise the promotional RRS flyer to be distributed to library schools.

4.      Continue to recruit reviewers for both the e-mail review service and ALA Conferences with emphasis on public, school, and special library expertise.

Financial Report Section:

Your budget appropriation (see budget)

a. 100.00

Amount which you have spent so far this year

b. 0.00

Your estimated additional expenses this year

c. 0.00

Total of amount spent and additional “estimated” expenses for this year (b+c)

d. 0.00

Difference between budgeted amount and total expenses from above (a-d)

e. 100.00



**Action Items/Issues To Be Resolved – What plans/projects remain which will be carried over or postponed until next year? Have there been any substantial changes in plans requiring a reconsideration or cancellation of projects? Information regarding such will be helpful for future chairs and planners.



Financial Report Section:

Your budget appropriation (see budget)

a. $100

Amount which you have spent this year

b. 0

Difference between budgeted amount and amount spent (a-b)


**Report submitted by:  Donna Braquet & Susie Skarl

**Email address: