NExpress Shared Catalog

Hello NExpressers!

The Calendar (under Tools in Koha) will affect your circulation (and overdues) based on how it is set.  The Director account has permission to update the Calendar. There are basically three ways you can set your Koha Calendar, which is done individually for each library:

1. No holidays

• Koha counts every calendar day when determining a checkout period.
• An item with a 7 Day checkout that is checked out on Monday Nov 23 will be due seven days later, on Monday Nov 30.
• It doesn’t matter if the library is open or closed on any of these days.
• Overdues are determined in the same way — an item that is 7 Days Overdue will get a First Notice.
• So, to use the example above, the unreturned item checked out on Nov 23 will trigger a First Overdue Notice on Dec 7.

2. Holidays only (Yearly and Unique)

• Koha counts every calendar day when determining a checkout period EXCEPT for specific holidays “blocked out” on the calendar, like Thanksgiving, Christmas, Independence Day, etc.
• Koha just skips the holiday in determining checkout periods.
• Using the example above, a Koha Calendar with just yearly Holidays set would skip Thanksgiving Day on November 26.
  • The item checked out on Nov 23 would be due on Tuesday Dec 1.
  • The First Overdue Notice would be sent on Dec 8.
• The benefit of setting your Calendar to skip holidays is that items won’t ever be due on days like Thanksgiving or Christmas.

3. Recurring weekly holidays (days library is closed)

• Koha will skip every day the library is not open for business when counting checkout periods.
• For a library that is closed on Saturday and Sunday each week, an item checked out on Monday, Nov 23 would be due Wednesday, Dec 2.
• HOWEVER, if the Thanksgiving holiday is also “blocked out” in addition to the regular days the library is closed, then the item would be due on Thursday, Dec 3.
• So a 7 Day checkout period could, in this scenario, encompass 10 actual calendar days, since the Calendar settings tell Koha to skip counting Thursday, Saturday and Sunday as checkout days.

Right now, libraries are using all combinations of 1, 2, and 3.  You do not HAVE to use any holiday settings whatsoever.

Mickey

NExpress Users Group Meeting
Thur., May 6 at NEKLS
Attendees listed at end
Note taker: Heather Braum, with editing by Sharon Moreland
- please leave comments, corrections, and feedback

Minutes (OK, more like notes…with links to additional information, blog posts and Web sites)

1. PTFS/LibLime update with Jim Minges

• LibLime is now a division of PTFS, a company relatively new to supporting Open Source Software.
• Additional support person has been added to the Koha support team there.
• Seeing faster response times to support requests
• We expect an upgrade to our system in the next few months — no other details available at this time.
• We will start submitting enhancement requests to PTFS.
• Conflict has been occurring between PTFS and the international Koha community over who controls Koha’s intellectual property, such as trademarks, domains (koha.org), the code repository and the bug repository.
  • As a result of the conflict, www.koha-community.org was started by the international Koha community.
  • NEKLS is hosting this site on the KLOW server.
• PTFS is not pushing us to LLEK and the previous management at LibLime is gone.
• Kim Beets asked about programming that we have already paid for — will it be implemented between now and the update?
  • Jim noted that a regular update to our Installation would correct many of the current issues in the system. Patches, bug fixes and feature enhancements are available, but none have been applied to our system since last June.  For example, the patch to fix the renewal bug 3378 was created in late June 2009, but was never applied to our system.
• Amy Begg DeGroff — last year’s Tech Day speaker — is the transition manager for the LibLime division.  Mickey is in contact with her about our needs.
• We have no target date for updates at this time.  Sharon hopes that when we are ready to get regular updates again, we will follow the model set with our previous vendor where a test installation will be upgraded, we will do testing, and then the updates will be applied to the production server after we’ve signed off on everything.

2. Policy committee recommendations with Robin Flory and Eric Gustafson

• Policy recommendation 1:
  Collection of fines can occur at any NExpress library. Money doesn’t have to be sent back to the library the fines initiated from.
• Policy recommendation 2:
  Damaged/lost/replacement fees can be collected at any library, but will then be sent on to the library that originally owned the material.
• Policy recommendation 3:
  With materials that are on lost or long overdue at another library, it is the owning library’s responsibility to contact the borrower’s library for replacement.
  • Discussion:  There is a report for identifying items long overdue at another library.  Please do not contact the patron; contact the library where the transaction occurred.
  • Options: Libraries should send invoices, that can then be paid out of the library’s own funds or through the State Library’s material replacement fund.
• Overall discussion:
  • System-wide, patrons are debarred at $10. Debarrment based on overdue notices is set library by library.  Dollar amount of fines is system-wide. The debarment is library-by-library.
  • The default setting for debarment is after the 3rd notice.
  • The issue of fines being waived by a non-fining library was discussed and the committee recommends that libraries respect the fine and collect them.   In return, fining libraries agree to waive having the fines reimbursed if the fines are at least collected.
  • The committee was not recommending that non-fining libraries make any additional effort to collect fines, but to clear a patron’s fine if requested to do so as a customer service.
• Confidentiality will be discussed after this meeting by the committee.
• Robin and the Committee brought up the “Fan Club” issue, where a library, on behalf of patron’s who have signed up for this service, places a large block of holds on new best-selling titles at a single time. In principle, the fan club is a wonderful customer service used by one active and one incoming library. But, at times it may not be ‘playing nice’ to the rest of the consortia.
  • Possible solutions suggested: buy more copies of these particular titles or libraries with fan clubs could place holds only on the local copies (which may mess up the system). Maybe have a local hold copy (or two) at the library for these fan clubs?
  • Proposal: If you will be placing holds for your patrons, you have a local hold copy that you do that for and then you buy a copy for the consortia. If you can’t afford to buy an additional copies, have your one copy on local hold for two months, and then release it from local hold. If it stops being circulated at your local library before those two months are up, go ahead and release it. –Diana Weaver & Rita Higley developed this statement.
  • Further discussion: What’s the difference between a book being checked out by your local patron or by the consortia?
  • Some libraries display a list of new titles or photocopy the book cover and put them on the new books shelf (Marketing new materials post). If the book is checked out, the patron can take that place-saver copy to the front desk and ask for the book to be put on hold.  The item is either available or not available, why the item is not available is not shared with the local patron.  Patrons will get books faster through the consortia.  Is there proof, though?

3. Local Holds testing with Sharon (skipped ahead in the Agenda due to the nature of the discussion)

• From Sharon: Notes about this are here for further scrutiny.
• The testing of 5 titles for 6 weeks showed that when the majority of items are cataloged with an unrestricted item type, patrons with title-level holds (next available) moved up the Holds Priority list a place a day, on average.

• Patron A went from 33rd to 19th to 10th to checked out in 4 weeks on a ‘Next Available’ title-level hold while
• Patron B went from 21st to 12th to 7th to waiting in 4 weeks on an “Only item” item-level hold.
• Patron C went from 27th to 19th to 12th to waiting in 4 weeks on a title-level hold
• For Worst Case, which had the most available copies, the average went up to 14 places in 7 days.

• As a ‘control’ – Sharon looked at House Rules and in 6 weeks, Patron A with a title-level hold went from 52nd to 5th place – 47 places in 6 weeks or an advancement of about 7.8 places per week. For the Patron B who had an item-level hold, they went from 9th to 3rd in 9 weeks!
• Not everyone in the consortia chose to participate in the test.
• The tests resulted in identifying other issues with the catalog: 3 bugs, including a major flaw in the system related to simultaneous transactions.
• Processing On Order Items using the On Order Item Type: On Order is an unrestricted item type. If you’re cataloging an on order item that will eventually be a restricted item, catalog it as the restricted item type from the beginning.  Continue to use the Status of “Not for Loan (Ordered)” to keep on order books from showing on your Pick List.
• Managing the Holds Shelf: holds are expiring and lingering for 2-3 weeks before being moved on to the next hold — please check your holds shelf list more often. New best sellers are the biggest culprits.

Back to 2. Policy Committee Discussion resumes, with several suggestions and additional facilitation by Royce Kitts…

• Proposal on the floor:  Smaller libraries can make their single copy of a best seller Local Hold for two months, then return it to the consortia after two months. The libraries with fan clubs, 1 copy for consortia, as many copies as needed for fan clubs local hold only.
• Continued discussion about opening up entire collection vs. using restricted item types, such as walk in and local hold only.
• Many are open to this. But many libraries only buy one copy. Many that are able to afford only one copy are willing to share them. Paula uses Local Hold on high-demand items just to be able to everything processed before having to send stuff out.  Other libraries feel that local hold is used on select items for a limited time to satisfy their taxpayers who come to their library and expect to find the new books advertised in the newspaper or on the Web site.
• Others felt ‘We’re in a consortia and in it together.’
• Kim Beets wanted to know if there is software-based way to have a Consortia-wide fan club? For example, a list that consortia patrons can subscribe to, to be added as holds on a popular author or title, where the holds list is randomized.  Sharon: Give the NEKLS staff time to investigate.  Kim Baker noted that SIRSI has this feature.
  UPDATE – Yes, this may be in Koha:  Bestseller’s Club and email notification enhancement bug by PTFS (thanks, Liz)
• Royce posed the question, “How are we all going to be local entities, when we’re in a consortia together?”  While we keep discussing local hold issues, but the crux of the issue hasn’t been decided.
• Is the system working OK, with not everything in collections being opened up all the way? No consistency at the moment. Is this okay?
• Jim reiterated that there is no written statement anywhere what the practice should be on holds. In our values statement, it talks about 95% of the collection being open to the to the public.

Proposals for Consideration:

1.  All materials are open and available to the consortia. There are no holds restrictions. Local holds are eliminated. –Jim
2. A library could catalog some items  as Walk-in only. Even the local library’s patrons couldn’t place the item on hold. Firm limit on how long a title could be placed on walk-in only. –Jim
3.  Every library agrees to give at least one copy of an item to the consortia.  If a library wishes to have a restricted copy, they will need to purchase a second copy for that purpose. -Diana

#1 — This one will never be a consensus. Libraries are saying it won’t ever work.  What about testing it for several months, on materials being cataloged from this point forward?  Others say, start with the least onerous policy of “Every library agrees to give at least one copy of an item to the consortia.”

Results: Voting on the Proposals for Consideration:

• Proposal 1: 9 votes
• Proposal 3: 8 votes
• None of the above: 2 votes

Jim stated that the ‘Consensus recommendation is that the entire collection is open to the consortia until August as a test. There isn’t going to be a unanimous adoption of this recommendation.’  The recommendation will be reevaluated at the August 26 NExpress Users Group meeting.

Back to 3. Koha/NExpress Catalog News with Sharon

• Hold ratios Circulation report: This report is showing that the top holds are 50 percent books and 50 percent DVDs.  If you really want to make your patrons happy, buy more DVDs.  This report is useful for collection development.
  
• Leased Books Collection update. Send Heather recommendations for titles for the leased collection. We use the Hold Ratios report to build the list, as well as reviews and print run information. Many titles will be added in June, because of summer releases.  Release dates are added to the title, following Kathleen Schram’s example at Bonner Springs.  The leased books are to alleviate holds.

4. Communication Survey with Sharon

• Currently, these are the ways NEKLS communicates with NExpress members:
  • Email distribution list, www.nexpresslibrary.org blog, News feature on the staff client, and Users Group meetings.
• The group decided that Email is the best way to communicate, with with the News feature coming in second.  Both can include links to longer blog posts at nexpresslibrary.org.
• Libraries need to send NEKLS the contact information for all staff members who need to  be added to the nexpress email distribution list.

5. Open Discussion

• Cataloging: duplicate record amounts increasing. Report to NEKLS when you run across them.  Could be another instance of simultaneous transaction issues.
• Label Maker: problems currently going on. We are aware of that. Newer version of the label maker (when it gets added to our system) takes care of the problems.
• Claudia asks all users of the label making to DELETE old label batches.
• Withdrawn status v. deleting an item: Do you use this status? If you’re not going to be reusing the record, delete the item. Don’t use the Withdrawn status.  It does not actually ‘do’ anything and withdrawn items appear on pick lists.
• When Reporting problems: It’s important to also call at the time that the problem occurs, so we can see the problem and attempt to replicate it better.  Screencasts, screenshots and as many specific details as you can provide are much appreciated.

Those present:

• NEKLS: Mickey Coalwell, Heather Braum, Jim Minges, Sharon Moreland, Liz Rea and Brenda Hough
• Atchison: Diana Weaver, Claudia Bosshammer-Bilimek and Mary Domann
• Royce Kitts, Tonganoxie
• Nancy Stover, Williamsburg
• Jenne Laytham, Basehor
• Amy Parton, Effingham
• Sue Peavey, Linwood
• Hiawatha: Anne Arnesen and Eric Gustafson
• Ottawa: Robin Flory, Lori Clayton, Linda Knight
• Karen Holthaus, Seneca
• Jerie Tichenor, Meriden
• Paula Ware, Oskaloosa
• Katherin Jones, McLouth
• Kim Beets, Bonner Springs
• Baldwin City: Claudia Gillentine and Becky Hayes
• Amy Lassiter, Winchester
• Jaclyn White, Rossville
• Leavenworth: Kim Baker and Kelly Fann
• Jeanette Stromgren, Osage City
• Sarah Walker-Hitt, Lyndon
• Rita Higley, Horton
• Peggy Waldman, Overbrook
• Dan Knupp, Silver Lake
• Eudora: Marlene Evinger and Alisha Whitis

Guidelines:

1. Always look up a patron who asks for a library card. He or she may already have an account at another NExpress library. Explain to the patron that one library card works at all NExpress libraries.

2. If you find an existing account for the patron, look to see if there are fines, overdue materials or notes on the account.

3. Fines or overdues for items from a library other than yours should be noted. Inform the patron about the fines or overdues that you see.

a. If the account is not debarred, you are free to check out to the account after you verify the information in the account is correct.

b. If the account is debarred or has long overdue/lost materials, ask the patron to contact the loaning library to clear the account.

c. Fines under $10 can be retained or forwarded to the loaning library, at the discretion of the director; fines over $10 should be forwarded to the loaning library.

4. You are encouraged to contact other NExpress libraries directly to facilitate resolving issues with a a patron’s account.

5. If there are no fines or outstanding materials on an existing account, then you are free to modify and/or delete the account as you see fit.

6. As a general rule, we would like patrons to have a single borrower account in the shared catalog. However, there may be times when you feel it is necessary to create a duplicate account.

7. You can change the patron’s Home Library, address, phone and all other account information without issuing a new card.

8. To issue a new or replacement library card, just overwrite the old card number in the patron’s account. You can place a note in the account showing the date the new/replacement card was issued.

Seven NEKLS libraries will be migrating to NExpress at the end of the month. Although I’m still a newbie in the KOHA world, I’m working to learn more and to help coordinate the training.

Realizing that training isn’t just about where to click and what to type, we held a session yesterday, which focused on policies and frequently asked questions. We covered six topics:

• Fines/system preferences
• Holidays
• Overdues
• Email notifications
• Renewals
• Holds

The participants asked excellent questions and our resident experts, Mickey and Sharon, gave clear explanations. I know I learned a lot.   A recorded version of the session is available (it includes the sound and the text chat) and you’ll need NExpress FAQ PowerPoint Presentation, too.

More tales of training to come!
-Brenda