Analytics

• Committee agenda for the year

  • Collaborating with the Resource Sharing committee for collaboration to create a Rapido Dashboard.

  • We will continue to monitor and update the ACRL IPEDS reports as needed.

  • There may be opportunities to work more directly with SRDC on collection development analytics as well.

Resource Management

• Committee agenda for the year

  • Examine periodical records in Alma/Primo to attempt remediation of mismatched and duplicative records that appear when one searches for a Periodical by title in OneSearch.

  • Recommend that we discuss the practice of putting what used to go in a 655 for electronic books into a local bib data field

    • Do we know how heavily facets are used? - do we use genre at all?

  • Examine use of new secondary resource type feature - is this useful?

  • Explore Metadoor, open access MARC record repository, minting record numbers for collocation and involvement in Data excellence initiatives

  • Pulling people together to recommend greater cohesiveness in metadata between groups (ULMS, DAMS, IR’s, etc.)

ERM

• Committee agenda for the year

  • The ERM committee will be reaching out to the Discovery committee about the continued crossover between our two areas.  Our ERM members have agreed that merged records should be our first point of conversation.

  • We have also begun identifying broken links and outdated information on the Wiki.  Quite a bit of our documentation has not been updated in the past two years.

Resource Sharing

• Committee agenda for the year

  • Improving patron communication and marketing of Rapido and other interlibrary services

  • Create more ways for resource sharing staff to report issues and possible improvements for RAPIDO

  • Cleaning up and improving the WIKI

  • RAPIDO content moved forward

  • Archiving content that is no longer relevant 

  • Reinvigorate task forces 

  • Finalize walk in policy

Fulfillment

• Committee agenda for the year

Goal 1: Finalize Walk-In User Policy

• Overview: Over the past few years, the Fulfillment Functional Committee (FFC) and Resource Sharing Functional Committee (RSFC) successfully convinced Ex Libris to make the necessary updates in Alma to make it possible for walk-in users to use CSU+. In the 2021/2022 FY, FFC’s goal was to write up a policy for approval by COLD that will ask all CSU libraries to use the new workflow and allow walk-in users at all campuses. Our goal for 2022/2023 FY is to finalize the policy language in collaboration with RSFC, submit the proposed policy to the Steering Committee for review/feedback, then hand it over to COLD for final review and approval of policy.

Goal 2: Alma/Primo Release Notes

• Overview: Keep the Access Services community aware of Alma updates by reading through Ex Libris release notes and testing new updates.

Goal 3: Satisfaction Survey

• Overview: Assist with dissemination of surveys and gathering and evaluating data from survey responses. FFC will identify areas of improvement with current functionality as it relates to Fulfillment, as well as what features are missing from the current product.

Goal 4: General Fulfillment/Access Services Survey

Overview: Gain insight from Access Services staff as we work towards navigating post-pandemic library environments: structure, services, and user experience. Survey questions may include:

• Discontinued services

• New services

• Service models

• Staffing

• Student employment

Assessment: This goal is complete if survey results have been evaluated and disseminated across the CSU libraries, and a resource is provided for all libraries to gain insight into how other libraries are structured and how fulfillment service models differ across the 23 CSU libraries.

Discovery

• Committee agenda for the year

  • Evaluate Primo VE: We should evaluate Primo VE and assess whether it offers improvements over Primo Back Office. The CSU Libraries elected to migrate to VE because of Ex Libris described it as offering greater functionality over BO and solutions to problems found in BO.

  • Establish Test Sites: Establish 2-5 campuses that can monitor release notes and test new discovery features when available. This was proposed by Christian Ward to the ULMS Steering Committee.

  • Update Wiki Content: Some pages in the Discovery area of the ULMS wiki require updates and possibly pruning.

  • Apply Findings from UI/UX Evaluation: Discuss findings from UX studies such as those conducted by Gabriel Gardner and Heather Cribbs, and provide a set of recommendations.

  • Address uResolver Matching Issues: Many consortia campuses are reporting records with uResolver matching issues. These include: 1) over matching of results, 2) under matching of results, 3) different format matching, and 4) title matching issues.

  • Address Features Not Working as Expected: Features are not working as expected or as we understand them to work. For example:

    • LC subject browse does not return expected results,

    • Date Newest facet only works when specific metadata is present in records, which is inconsistent in CDI and Alma records,

    • Search within journal feature is nice, but only works when ISSN is present and can only be disabled using CSS,

    • Ranking configuration still eludes many campuses in the consortia, and

    • Performance issues with indexing, front-end load times, and feature activation.

  • Investigate Improvements to Analytics Gathering and Analysis