Page Comparison

...

1. Incorporate data from Books in Print, Resources for College Libraries, and Ulrich's
        Response: On the roadmap
   
   
2. Support for All COUNTER reports (including/especially Open Access)
   
   Intota assessment can include usage for Open Access journals, or on open access articles inside non-open access journals. What will ALMA provide?
        Response: Alma can get usage for data which comes from COUNTER reports. Alma can also get usage from the Alma Link resolver.
        Comment - NDM: Were we asking about JR1 GOA reports?  If so, that would be the best way to clarify this question.  Since Carol also wants to know when JR5 will be supported, I think what we really need is a list of all COUNTER reports and their planned implementation.
   
   A. Follow-up  (9/14/16): Can we get a list of ALL the reports in the COUNTER Code of Practice, both mandatory and optional, with the development status for each (i.e. implemented, expected Q_, on the roadmap).
   
   Response (9/23/16): 
   
         Already available in ALMA as of August 2, 2016: DB1, BR1, BR2, JR1, JR1a, PR1
         Planned (Stage 1 - "coming months"):    JR2, JR5, DB2, BR3, MR1, 
         Planned (Stage 2 - 2017):   JR1 GOA, BR4, BR5
   
       Details found in Acquisitions/COUNTER powerpoint (August 2, 2016), Slides 7 and 9

     

   B. Follow-up  (9/14/16): Do we know if JR1 GOA reports (open access materials) will be supported?  If so, will open access (JR1 GOA) usage be automatically filtered from the standard JR1 data, or will they overlap?
        Response (9/23/16): Support for JR1 GOA is planned for Stage 2 (2017).   See Slides 7 and 9 of the Acquisitions/COUNTER powerpoint.
        Response (9/23/16): Will Alma have any tool to de-duplicate possible overlap of JR1 GOA/JR1?   Forwarded to Ask an Expert (Webinar at 7 AM on October 10). 
   
   
3. Overlap analysis: journals, ebooks and streaming as currently on the Intota development timeline.  Including functionality to check against external collections and unowned packages
        Response: Overlap analysis can be done already. It can be done on collections owned by the library (portfolios in multiple collections) and it can be done in Alma analytics. 
        In Q4 2016 it will be possible to check overlap with portfolios / collections in institution and in Community Zone. 
        It is also possible in Alma and in Alma analytics to create reports on “duplicate titles” (titles with inventory both physical and electronic).
   
   
   
4. Ability to include/exclude platform & access fees from cost per use reports
        Response: The price is taken from the invoice lines of the POL and cannot be selectively removed.
        See https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Materials/Overview_Materials/Presentations_and_Documents
             Analytics - Overview of calculation of the cost per use in the Cost Usage subject area with DB and JR1.pptx
             Analytics - Overview of Usage Data subject area.pptx
   
   
5. Intota’s planned proportional pricing enhancements to provide more accurate title costs across a package
   
6. d
7. d2
8. d3
9. 
        Response: The Alma method of determining cost per use is very exact and precise. 
        See https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Materials/Overview_Materials/Presentations_and_Documents
            Analytics - Overview of calculation of the cost per use in the Cost Usage subject area with DB and JR1.pptx
   
   Comment- NDM: Two things are not addressed here:  Carol's question re how Alma handles journals outside the package (is their usage lumped in?  what about their subscription costs?  can they be excluded?) and this question of proportional pricing.  I'm not quite sure I understand the proportional pricing part myself, though I imagine it is to do with the way journal packages can include journals that cost $250 and journals that cost $25,000, and they get treated the same way in cost/use.  We might want to clarify exactly what the desired functionality would be here.  Regarding the exclusion of non-package titles, this can be done with a filter in Alma Analytics now, but I have no idea how their associated costs are handled (I can't test because we didn't migrate acq data).
   
   Follow-up (9/14/16): Cost per use

1. It looks like we can filter out “non-package” journal titles in standard Alma Analytics reports now.  Do these filters work with the cost-per-use reports (where could we filter out non-package titles from cost per use calculations)?

2. Does Alma have any mechanism for handling proportional pricing in package or cost per use analysis?  (E.g. – a journal package may include a title that runs $250 and another that runs $1750 – any way to weight these types of proportional costs?)

   RESPONSE (9/23/16): Submitted these Cost per use questions for the upcoming Ask the Expert Session on Managing COUNTER Usage Reports in Alma.

   See also these three document (via https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Training/Extended_Training/Presentations_and_Documents)

   1.       Acquisitions - COUNTER diagram showing before and after the move to Alma from UStat.pptx

   2.       Acquisitions - COUNTER report harvesting and uploading in Alma.pptx

   3.       Acquisitions - COUNTER report harvesting and uploading in Alma status update Aug 02 2016.ppt

   
   

10. The COUNTER BR 2 reports seem to simply lump all types of sections into one field.  Does Alma currently (or are there any plans in the future) to identify different types of sections reported in the BR2 counter reports, e.g., with filtering?  (9/14/16)
    
    
    

...