Circulation Subgroup Meeting
Tuesday, April 8, 2008 10a-1p
UMBC Tech Center

Present: Mark de Jong (Guest/RSTG Co-chair), Paula Langley, Lea Messman-Mandicott, Hongyan Sun, Tammy Taylor (Guest/RSTG member), LaTanya West (Co-chair/minutes), Evelyn Yocco

Absent: Everly Brown, Jamie Edwards

Standardized Replacement Costs: In order to have different replacement costs by call number, each call number range would have to have a collection code assigned to it. To do this globally, each campus would have to agree to prices and collection codes. Lea explained that the decision to allow campuses to charge separate fees was made long ago to give libraries a change to remain independent.

Resolution: Will not pursue as a global implementation. To help with questions about different campus' policies, a web page will be developed as quick reference with each library's return and fees policies.

Patron Privacy: The group was informed that the SSN must be removed completely and not just suppressed.

• Circ Subgroup will test to expedite troubleshooting with V.18 SSN patch by due date of April 30, 2008. Sample money reports from various campuses will be generated for testing purposes to ensure that SSN is not available.
  
  
• General discussion about patron loader and whether patron loader will honor more than one Local ID (09 field) number.

The bulk of the remaining meeting time was spent discussing unique identifiers and matching points. Based on the discussion, campuses have several different unique identifiers in place. A survey will go out to find out if all campuses have one and what format they are using.

• There was some concern about whether bursars could use identifiers that had letters in them to identify different campus patrons (i.e. UB-1234567; BC-PQ12345). Paula suggested using the last two digits of the campus specific barcode pre-fixes.
  
  
• Lea mentioned that there may already be a unique 2-digit number that identifies each campus to each other that other departments use outside of the library. She will check with their IT person to confirm this information.
  
  
• It was discussed that bursar offices do not need the SSN for local billing- we do not have information on how no SSN will be handled by CCU. Conversations must be had with individual bursar offices to decide on an identifier that will work. A survey will be sent out to determine if they need a specific number of digits and are letter and number combinations acceptable.
  
  
• Suggestions were made for match points for de-duplication without the SSN:
  1. Birth date (were told this may be a patron privacy issue as well)
  2. Place of Birth (field available in patron registration screen)
  3. Address (although this can be transient)
  4. Email address
  5. Full name, including middle name (Tammy suggested this as it may be possible to add this to patron loader parameters)

The group believes that being able to match on multiple points will be the only way to accurately de-duplicate patrons. Previous conversations indicated that scripting for multiple match points is possible, but difficult. The group would like to know the actual feasibility of this process.

• More discussion ensued about the patron load de-duplication; Paula suggested purging more frequently to help catch inactive, possibly duplicate, patrons in the database.
  
  
• Hongyan suggested that it was better for campuses to have a 9-digit local identifier. She also mentioned that it may be possible to have a main profile with multiple sub-accounts to help patrons with multiple affiliations that may be in the database more than once.
  
  

The group needs additional information and complete testing before drafting policies for identifying patrons from other campuses. This work will likely be done via email.

Action Items:

• LaTanya will send out a survey asking campuses to:
  1. State whether they have a unique identifier
  2. If so, what is the format?
  3. How is the number generated and by whom?
     Will also ask that campuses contact their bursar's offices to find out what format is necessary for billing purposes. Responses will be requested by 4/15; last chance due date- 4/18.
  
  
  
• Hongyan will check on the exact format necessary for identifiers (9-digits, etc.)
  
  
• Mark will draft an email to Celia and Carlen the multiple ADM possibility, scripting for multiple matching points, and use of multiple accounts. RSTG and Circ Subgroup will be cc'ed.
  
  
• Hongyan will ask ITD to refresh V.18 TEST database as soon as possible- by April 15th at the latest.
  
  
• Hongyan will ask ITD to furnish cash reports in TEST for testing as soon as possible- by April 15th at the latest.
  
  
• Hongyan will ask about the various suggestions for additional matching points.
  
  
• Circulation Subgroup will look at patron registration manual and submit any comments to Tammy Taylor (ttaylor@ubalt.edu) by April 28th to meet the April 30th deadline.
  
  
• Hongyan will find out if there is a way to "find and replace" the alpha 2-character campus code with a numerical 2-digit campus code should the group decide to go that route.

Minutes submitted by LaTanya West
April 9, 2008

I also wanted to supply this supplemental information from Hongyan to the RSTG:

I had discussion with Hans yesterday for De-duplicate patron, and format of U ID. After SSN removed from the system, we will not avoid duplicate patron records. What that means are:

*For multiple affiliation users:

1. Patron can have multiple records at different campuses. A student at CP and also a faculty at UB will have two records. We can combine them if the patron complains.
   
   
2. Patron can login Catalog with any of campus barcode they have, and can only review the account summary of one individual campus each time.
   
   
3. Patron combined will have a main barcode, and alternate barcode. Patron can choose which barcode to use to login, and will be able to review one account summary.
   
   
4. Patron needs to manager their account if they have multiple library cards.
   
   

*For duplicate records at individual campus:

1. We will not have duplicate records for the same campus if we receive unique patron ID
   
   
2. We will rely on patron to report to us for patron merge.
   
   

*The format for U ID:

1. It is ok among campus having different digits as long as it is unique and consistent. Hope we can find out what Bursar will say for the U ID format through the survey.
   
   

Information Technology Division College Park, MD 20742-7011
Please send comments and suggestions to ITD's Webmaster.
Content questions should be directed to USMAI Web Admin.