Minutes of June 28, 2002 meeting
- Michelle Best, Salvatore Cardinale, Joan Hendershot, Julie
Kaufman, Cathy Pecoraro(Recorder), Kayla Reichardt
- Suzanne Posluszny
- Evaluation of the current claiming processes
- In-house statistics
- Marc Implementation impact/procedures
- Procedures manual
Kayla noted the priority of the claims focus group has increased because of the Serials Working
Group. As a result of our involvement in the serials working group, any problems with vendors can
be effected university wide instead of strictly on a local basis.
1. Evaluation of Current Claiming Process
- Old, outstanding claims need to be resolved
- JH expressed concern about beginning a new claiming process since there
are many residual problems after the vendor transfer
- KR noted that the clean up is necessary, we could use the vendor transfer
- The Faxon-Ebsco transfer resulted in problematic claiming and should be
- A possible resolution to the claiming problem is to change the claim reason
for faxon claims and then run a report weekly
- Claimers can work from notices and prediction lists; Kayla will work from
vendor transfer lists.
- KR noted that guidelines for processing problem claims need to be established
- Guidelines will enable us to track vendor performance; statistics of problems
can be brought to the vendor to notify them of their performance both locally
and university wide
- Once guidelines are established for problem claims we can decide when to
use a replacement vendor
- Selectors can be consulted for decisions on routinely problematic titles
- Since the ‘claimed and received’ issues are no longer being deleted from
the system, this is one possible way to evaluate vendor performance
[Guidelines for evaluating problem claims were handed out by KR on 7/8/02]
2. In-House Statitstics
- number of claims
- times claimed
- vendor performance
How should vendor performance be evaluated based on claiming statistics? –to be further discussed
3. Marc Implementation impact/procedures
- predictions are being generated with incorrect dates
- MB noted that it is important for receivers to realize the importance of
paying attention to the receipt pattern/dates because of how incorrect dates
- JH noted that the received folder is used to evaluate claims.
- The issue of deleting receipts from the received folder was brought up again.
- Receipts are not deleted (except possibly for newspapers). KR noted
that some libraries that have Sirsi have never deleted predictions. JH mentioned
that there is a problem deciphering when only the month is displayed, that
is, when only chronology is used for newspapers or microfilm. KR suggested
changing ‘display options’ in the received folder to sort by ‘date received’.
- KR mentioned that there might be a remove receipts through a report and
will look into globally removing receipts for newspapers, dailies, weeklies,
- Shelf labels in LSM can be shaped after ALEX procedures that give specific
instructions for specially handled material such as current year only.
4. Procedures Manual
Jordan is working with Kayla to compile an updated procedures manual.