ASCC: Answers to ReCAP-related Questions

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Advertisements

Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 19, 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Business Library and ReCAP: Update and Statistics
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator August 30, 2011 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Barcode Tracking At ReCAP ReCAP LAS CUL “Big File” + - Pending Directory SubmitTracking Database Request Directory + Columbia University 2/6/09 Zack Lane.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator September 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Impact Theories: Trends in Off-site Shelving Facility Use Zack Lane, ReCAP Coordinator, Columbia University Libraries | Colleen Major, Networked E-Resources.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
ReCAP Summary: East Asian Library Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator 7/12/2010.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator August 10, 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Outline of ReCAP Accession Zack Lane Recap Coordinator 9/12/08 rev. 12/6/2010.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator February 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator August 5, 2011 ReCAP Columbia University.
System-wide Circulation Data: Initial Analysis Stephen Zweibel CCMSCC 7/14/2010.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator September, 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 31, 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator November 21, 2011 ReCAP Columbia University.
ReCAP Topics: Access and Request Columbia University Libraries 10/27/2009 Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator.
Impact Theories: Trends in Off-site Shelving Facility Use Zack Lane and Colleen Major Columbia University 12/5/2008.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator August 13, 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
ReCAP Shelving Facility Research Collections and Preservation Consortium.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator August 5, 2011 ReCAP Columbia University.
ReCAP Update: Tech Services Librarians Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator Columbia University 4/29/2010.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2012 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator April 5, 2011 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator July 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator February 16, 2011 ReCAP Columbia University.
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator September 16, 2013 ReCAP Columbia University.
Business Library and ReCAP: Update and Statistics
ReCAP Collections Analysis: Geology and Geoscience
11/5/2008 Updated 1/12/2009 Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator
7/18/2008 Updated 1/16/09 Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator
Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator February 2012
Circulation Data: East Asian Library
Current ReCAP Projects: A Review
Columbia University 1/8/09 Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator
ReCAP Data Part 4: EDD (Electronic Document Delivery)
ReCAP Collections Analysis: Music Library
Circulation Data: Health Sciences Library FY13
Circulation Data: Barnard Library FY13
Social Work Library and ReCAP: FY13 Update and Statistics
Circulation Data: Business Library FY13
Circulation Data: The Burke Library
ReCAP Data Part 2: Requests
Document Delivery of Chinese Language Materials
Butler Media Center: ReCAP Statistics
Circulation Data: Geology Library FY13
ReCAP Data Part 5: Request Rate
ReCAP Shelving Facility
ReCAP Collections Analysis: East Asian Library
ReCAP Data Part 2: Requests
Geology Library and ReCAP: FY13 Update and Statistics
ReCAP Data Part 6: High-Use Titles
11/5/2008 Updated 1/12/2009 Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator
Presentation transcript:

ASCC: Answers to ReCAP-related Questions Columbia University 2/24/09 Zack Lane ReCAP Coordinator

Q: Do we have data on request failures? A: Yes. A six month study of both physical delivery and EDD request failures was recently conducted. Data was gathered and analyzed from July to Dec. 2008. Please contact Zack Lane for full report: x15621, zl2114@columbia.edu Results…

Failure Data Gross number of failures (patrons and staff): EDD: 9.3 per week (243 total) Physical Delivery: 7.3 per week (191 total) Patron failures (EDD data does not distinguish between patrons and staff): Physical Delivery: 1.5 per week (38 total)

Analysis Total number of Physical Delivery requests July-Dec 2008: 33,674 (est.) Rate of patron failure: 0.11% Total number of EDD requests July-Dec 2008: 1,359 (est.) Rate of patron failure: 17.88% Ratio of failure rates = 163:1 (EDD:PHYS) EDD requests are more than 150 times more likely to fail than physical delivery

Breakdown of Patron failures Physical requests: Duplicate holdings (45%) Parking Lot (8%) Business Library encoding asymmetry (5%) Google (3% - larger in 2009) ?Mystery? (39%) Cause unknown; in most cases request was filled. EDD requests: Condition problems (52%) Citation errors (41%) Copyright (7%)

Breakdown of Staff Failures Staff account for 80% of physical delivery request failures Testing (42%) Item already OUT (29%) Not on File (14%) Delivery Method blank (10%) Invalid location (3%) Item WITHDRAWN (2%)

Notes on Failures EDD requests are much more likely to fail than Physical Delivery. Higher rate is due to object condition issues, patron-provided information and copyright restrictions. Physical delivery failures are attributed to CUL staff responsibility.

Q: What is the total number of EDD requests?

Decline Trend for EDD Requests From Science Collections

Q: What is the average delivery time? A: There have been no reports that delivery takes longer than the stated 1-2 business days under normal conditions. If requests are submitted before 3:30 pm, ReCAP will fill the order and it will be delivered by the courier to CUL the following morning. Delay may occur during the delivery by CUL Shipping & Receiving to department circulation desks - though there has been no reports that this is a common occurrence.

Delivery Time Note Delivery from the patrons standpoint does not take place until they receive the item in hand. After delivery to department circulation desks, ReCAP material must be unpacked, processed and staged for use. Delay may occur in the CUL notification of patrons - though there have been no reports that this is a common occurrence.

Q: What proportion of requests are never picked up by patrons? A: It is not clear. Non-empirical data from Butler Circulation suggests the following breakdown: 60% circulates 30% is examined and returned 10% never touched before return Circulation data suggests this is accurate. Further study is feasible but not planned.

Circulation Data

Q: Is there data on missing books? A: Yes, and the ReCAP intern is collecting more. Spring 09 Palmer School intern Mike Bender will work on identifying categories of “missing” books, providing metrics and creating an action plan for resolution. Broadly defined “missing” means: Item is not where it is expected to be Item is unobtainable by patron Item has incomplete encoding.

Missing Books A formal report on “missing” books will be forthcoming It is tricky to define the scope of “missing” under the ReCAP umbrella Books are missing within the retrieval/return systems at CUL Books go missing as a result of CUL processing Onsite bibliographic control declines proportionally to offsite transfer (blurry line between inventory and bibliographic control)

Q: Is the owning library the preferred delivery location? A: For some departments, yes. Data suggests that there are “magnet” delivery locations for owned collections: Avery, Butler, East Asian and Music. Avery receives a disproportionate volume. Owned Coll./Del. Total Owned Coll. To Home/Total Owned Del. Avery 75.38% 93.83% Biology 63.68% 16.42% Burke 72.34% 34.45% Business 71.99% 23.08% Butler 72.20% 66.91% Chemistry 56.61% 28.79% East Asian 92.50% 80.45% Engineering 56.79% 21.78% HSL 8.35% 32.65% Lehman 28.88% 27.05% Music 89.58% 79.93% Physics 66.89% 25.16% Psychology 22.09% 11.27% Social Work 52.43% 17.55%

Q: How has physical delivery volume changed over time to Butler Circ?

Butler Deliveries by FY

Butler Deliveries as Percentage of Total Deliveries

All Delivery Locations (Volume)