...
Physical Items
Lifecycle
Item Creation Date v. Creation Date
Item Receiving Date v. Receiving Date v. Receiving Date (Calendar)
Item Modification Date v. Modification Date
Electronics
Lifecycle
Portfolio Modification Date v. Modification Date
Portfolio Creation Date
Portfolio Activation Date
Other variables were also reviewed and considered but they played minor roles for the build. They included locations, item policies, call numbers, etc.
...
For counts of items added or withdrawn by fiscal year, options include:
For Added :
Physical Items
Use “Physical Items“.”Physical Item Details”.”Lifecycle” = Active AND
Use “Physical Items”.”Item Creation Date” OR
Use “Physical Items”.”Item Receiving Date” and research significant impacts at San Diego, Davis, Irvine, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Francisco, and Santa Barbara when dates are added into the data extract in Alma Analytics.
Electronics
Use “E-Inventory”.”Portfolio”.”Lifecycle” = Active AND
Use “E-Inventory“.”Portfolio Activation Date”.”Portfolio Activation Date”
For Withdrawn:
Physical items
HarmonizeUse “Physical Items”.”Item Modification Date”.”Item Modification Date” AND
Use “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Lifecycle” = Deleted and/or None or NULL AND/OR
Find out reasons behind the usage of the Deleted value
and harmonize on a field and values for deletion notes
...
Electronics
Use “E-Inventory”.”Portfolio”.”Lifecycle” = Deleted and/or None or NULL AND
Use “E-Inventory“.”Portfolio Modification Date”.”Portfolio Modification Date”
Note: ExLibris is reviewing the differences in counts when dates are used in Analytics reports as of May, 2023.
...
Lifecycle
Three values are available for “Physical Items“.”Physical Item Details”.”Lifecycle”:
Active items are active and discoverable in Primo.
Deleted items are not discoverable in Primo.
None items are not discoverable in Primo. These records are also associated with records without creation dates and possibly other pertinent metadata; consultation with Ex Libris is ongoing.
For withdrawn counts, filtering based on lifecycle = “Deleted” and/or “None” causes:
Exclusion of items that were deleted from the repository after the reporting deadline but before the report run date. For example, if a weeding project happens in August 2023 and hundreds of print items and their associated records are removed, a report looking for the items from before July 2023 that runs in October 2023 will exclude those items, even though they were still in the collection before July 2023.
Inclusion of items deleted because they were added by mistake, but that do not actually represent items that were removed from the collection. To account for this type of deleted item would require a change to harmonized approaches, revised local procedures, or both.
Modification Date
There are two modification date options:
“Physical Items”.”Item Modification Date”, which cleans up and harmonizes the value available in “Physical Items”.”Physical Items Details”.”Modification Date”. ExLibris documentation says: “The Item Modification date is the date of the last change to the item. Therefore, if on January 19, 2016 the item was in process type Acquisition, on January 20, 2016 the item was in process type Request, and on January 21, 2016 the item was in process type Loan (and no additional change to the item was made after January 21), the Item Modification Date is January 21, 2016.“
“Physical Items”.”Physical Items Details”.”Modification Date”, which allows us to know when the item record is modified. ExLibris documentation says it “Holds the date the physical item was modified“.
Alma Analytics data-based findings:
When crossed with Lifecycle = Delete, modification dates can be useful to determine and account for items withdrawn from the collection (see Prototype Version 1 at https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IBV9tKyvO3xq-UZeuLoeEViSmBwgp2YO/edit#gid=552748451 ). However, due to the problems noted in the Lifecycle section of this decision page, certain institutions are requesting to opt out of reporting annual add and withdrawal counts in statistical reporting.
Based on the reported knowledge and practices, “Physical Items”.”Item Modification Date” would be the best variable to use to determine when the items' records were last modified, especially when the record of the item was deleted.
Creation Date
Automatic date and time stamps for when records are created are a norm in relational databases. In Alma physical items, there are two creation dates:
“Physical Items”.”Item Creation Date”, which cleans up and harmonizes the value available in “Physical Items”.”Physical Items Details”.”Creation Date.” ExLibris documentation says this “Stores the item creation date in a date format such as 2/29/2014” and that “All date dimensions include dates up to and including 30 years back and 20 years forward. So, for example, if today is March 17, 2021: The earliest loan date that would appear is March 17, 1991. The latest due date that would appear is March 17, 2041.“).
“Physical Items”.”Physical Items Details”.”Creation Date”, which allows us to know when the record on the item was created. ExLibris documentation says that this “Holds the date the physical item was created” and that “This date is assigned by Alma when the physical item is created.“
Note: ExLibris documentation is questionable based on Alma Analytics data-based findings.
Alma Analytics data-based findings:
Initial findings in usage of creation date is documented at https://docs.google.com/document/d/125dx-__jZOHNRH0ysuRLtEr1j33HjV7e/; summarizing that there are ongoing additional records with no or blank creation dates provided over time. Therefore, setting Creation Date = NULL as a data-extract-, report-development cleanup and the like or filter will not provide accurate counts of how many records were created in each specific, non-NULL fiscal year and/or date ranges. This impacts at least 14% (4.9 million records of this finding out of the 34+ million total amount of records made available in Alma Analytics) of the records. This finding continues to be an ongoing issue (see https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12B7ICBG4DLiViDerm4EwN1Y5BtKByngn/).
Recent findings from comparing inclusion and exclusion of creation date in report design criteria show that significant records are dropped when dates such as Creation Date is included. Compare https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IBV9tKyvO3xq-UZeuLoeEViSmBwgp2YO/edit#gid=552748451 where Creation Date is included against https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1eoN1qFGTYA4JQG_SY89UvhznCvgGZj6w/ where Creation Date is excluded. See Table 3.
Based on the following and our knowledge of the campuses' current practices, “Physical Items”.”Item Creation Date” would be the best variable to use, if reporting counts of items added into the catalog by fiscal year and/or a particular date range is needed:
“Physical Items”.”Physical Items Details”.”Creation Date” is the raw data transferred from Alma to Alma Analytics.
“Physical Items”.”Item Creation Date” is the harmonization/data cleanup processed variable based on the Physical Items.Physical Items Details.Creation Date.
...
Option 1 | Option 2 | Option 3 | Option 4 | Option 5 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Option | "Physical Items". "Item Creation Date" | "Physical Items". "Item Receiving Date" | "Physical Items". "Physical Item Details". "Receiving Date (Calendar)" | "Physical Items". "Physical Item Details". "Receiving Date" | "Physical Items". “Physical Item Details”. “Creation Date” |
Pros | Cleans up/converts/harmonizes each of the value in “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Creation Date”, which includes all the Pros and Cons of that variable. Available at the item level which specifically describes when each of the physical item counted were “supposedly” created. Although counts are not significantly higher, this variable does provide a higher count than when receiving date options are used. | Cleans up/converts/harmonizes each of the value in “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Receiving Date” and “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Receiving Date (Calendar)”, which includes all the Pros and Cons of those variables. Available at the item level which specifically describes when each of the physical item counted were “supposedly” received. | Cleans up/converts/harmonizes each of the value in “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Receiving Date”, which includes all the Pros and Cons of that variable. Available at the item level which specifically describes when each of the physical item counted were “supposedly” received. | This variable suggests the actual date of availability of the item at the library and would be the best option if it was used properly*. Available at the item level which specifically describes when each of the physical item counted were “supposedly” received. | Available at the item level which specifically describes when each of the physical item counted were “supposedly” created. |
Cons | Item records can exist for items that we do not have, e.g. on-order items. Actual location of how and where creation date is generated and/or entered into Alma have been educated guesses and not confirmed by ExLibris, hence the term “supposedly” used in the Pros section for this variable. Even though this variable was created to clean up and harmonize “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Creation Date”, it does not read the values from such a variable correctly such that dates in m/d/yy formats are not converted to mm/dd/yyyy formats and dates more recent than certain date values are interpreted as dates older than that same certain dates. | Not all campuses update this field via Alma upon item arrival to campus. Even though this variable was created to clean up and harmonize “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Receiving Date” and “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Receiving Date (Calendar)”, it does not read the values from such a variable correctly such that dates in m/d/yy formats are not converted to mm/dd/yyyy formats and dates more recent than certain date values are interpreted as dates older than that same certain dates. When used, due to above finding, items may fall into the NULL counts or the wrong date ranges. Since some dates were of dates in the future, items with such future dates will need significant amount of investigation and attention. Although counts are not significantly less, this variable does provide a smaller count than when creation date options are used. Further, if receiving date options are used, filtering by receiving dates may drop records which are not updated where receiving dates are not available. | Even though this variable was created to clean up and harmonize “Physical Items”.”Physical Item Details”.”Receiving Date”, it does not read the values from such a variable correctly such that dates in m/d/yy formats are not converted to mm/dd/yyyy formats and dates more recent than certain date values are interpreted as dates older than that same certain dates. When used, due to above finding, items may fall into the NULL counts or the wrong date ranges. Since some dates were of dates in the future, items with such future dates will need significant amount of investigation and attention. | While some campus reps report that this field is used, some report that this field is not used. *This variable is found to be “Received Date” in Alma but named “Receiving Date” in Alma Analytics. Dates found within these fields go beyond today’s date--dates in the future. *This variable is found to be populated as the “Received Date”, date when item was received, in Alma, where the field is a free-text textbox. | Alma Analytics are not able to fully filter this variable. Some of the dates in this variable are in m/d/yy formats. Alma Analytics seems to be confused. For instance, if the “yy” portion is “22”, should it be 1922 or 2022? According to ExLibris users, 1922 and dates prior to availability of computers may make sense to their build because some ExLibris customers do have historic items created and/or received from way before time. Although the users and customers may consider using “Receive Date”, ExLibris has not yet responded to these other clients of theirs. |
Electronic Items
Lifecycle
Three values are available for “E-Inventory“.”Portfolio”.”Lifecycle”:
Active items are active and discoverable in Primo.
Deleted items are not discoverable in Primo.
None items are not discoverable in Primo.
Records where Lifecycle = Deleted and/or None may not be reliable for the following reasons:
Portfolios that were deleted from the repository after the reporting deadline but before the report run date may not be accounted for.
Campuses noted that deletions due to deactivations may not be relevant as campuses delete, deactivate and reactivate portfolios for unknown reasons and circumstances, whether they be mistakes or not, as they wish all the time.
Items available via “E-Inventory” Subject Area are not available for manual backup counting processes.
No thorough historical record modification data available for review.
Modification Date
Two options available:
“E-Inventory”.”Portfolio”.”Modification Date”, which is the raw and automatically generated date of when the record on the portfolio was last modified. ExLibris notes “The date information was updated in the portfolio“.
“E-Inventory”.”Portfolio Modification Date”.”Portfolio Modification Date”, which cleans up and harmonizes “E-Inventory”.”Portfolio”.”Modification Date”. Per ExLibris: “The Portfolio Modification Date table is a dimension table that stores details about the Portfolio modification date. The modification date of the portfolio (either in the Alma UI or by running a job)“ denotes that the raw “E-Inventory”.”Portfolio”.”Modification Date” date value is automatically generated.
When crossed with Lifecycle = Delete, modification dates can be useful to determine and account for portfolios withdrawn from the collection. However, due to the problems noted in the Lifecycle section of this decision page, institutions are requesting to opt out of reporting at least withdrawal counts in statistical reporting.
Creation Date
Only one option is available:
“E-Inventory”.”Portfolio Creation Date”.”Portfolio Creation Date”, which is the date when the record on the portfolio was created. Per ExLibris documentation: “The Portfolio Creation Date table is a dimension table that stores details about the date on which the portfolio was activated from the Community Zone and became part of the Institution Zone. Key fields are used whenever calculations are required. Description fields may be used for formatting the display of the report. Alma stores the following types of fields: Calendar Fields – These are date fields as they display in the calendar. Fiscal Date Fields – These are date fields that match the institution's fiscal period. Using this dimension, the user may drill down from year to month to the specific date on which the portfolio was created in the Institution Zone. The number of portfolios is accumulated to the relevant level in the hierarchy.” Further, ExLibris notes that it “Stores the portfolio creation date in the date format 2/29/2012“, meaning that this variable was created to clean up and harmonize a certain raw date of record creation, which we were not provided with.
This is a risky option. It is not consistent with the design of the important date variables that have been made into a separate dimension, where the raw Alma Analytics variable the Portfolio Creation Date originated can be determined. However, it does hide up any similar flaw which we currently experience with the Physical Items Subject Area.
Based on the design of the Subject Area, “E-Inventory”.”Portfolio Activation Date”.”Portfolio Creation Date” would be the most reasonable variable to use for accounting the counts of portfolios available to the us to consider for activation within a certain date, date range and fiscal year.
Activation Date
Only one option is available:
“E-Inventory”.”Portfolio Activation Date”.”Portfolio Activation Date”, which suggests the date when the Portfolio was activated. Per ExLibris documentation: “The Portfolio Activation Date table is a dimension table that stores details about the Portfolio activation date. Key fields are used whenever calculations are required. Description fields may be used for formatting the display of the report. Alma stores the following types of fields: Calendar Fields – These are date fields as they display in the calendar. Fiscal Date Fields – These are date fields that match the institution's fiscal period. Using this dimension, the user may drill down from year to month to the specific date on which the Portfolio was created. The number of portfolios is accumulated to the relevant level in the hierarchy.“ Further, ExLibris notes that it “Stores the portfolio activation date in the date format 2/29/2012“, meaning that this variable was created to clean up and harmonize a certain raw date of activation, which we were not provided with.
This is a risky option. It is not consistent with the design of the important date variables that have been made into a separate dimension, where the raw Alma Analytics variable the Portfolio Activation Date originated. However, it does hide up any similar flaw which we currently experience with the Physical Items Subject Area.
Based on the design of the Subject Area, “E-Inventory”.”Portfolio Activation Date”.”Portfolio Activation Date” would be the most reasonable variable to use for accounting the counts of portfolios added to the collection within a certain date, date range and fiscal year.
Available At | A Version i | B Version 1 | C Version 2 | D Impact (numeric) | E Impact (percentage) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UC San Diego | 1,634,888 | 1,635,014 | 1,635,015 | 1 | 0.0001% |
University of California Berkeley | 1,491,172 | 1,491,488 | 1,491,488 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California Davis | 823,846 | 824,165 | 824,205 | 40 | 0.0049% |
University of California Irvine | 1,058,186 | 1,058,411 | 1,058,415 | 4 | 0.0004% |
University of California Los Angeles | 1,256,203 | 1,256,298 | 1,256,300 | 2 | 0.0002% |
University of California Riverside | 572,888 | 573,009 | 573,007 | -2 | -0.0003% |
University of California San Francisco | 43,016 | 43,077 | 43,077 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California, Merced | 995,413 | 995,492 | 995,492 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California, Santa Barbara | 1,284,799 | 1,284,845 | 1,284,913 | 68 | 0.0053% |
University of California, Santa Cruz | 838,207 | 838,268 | 838,237 | -31 | -0.0037% |
Grand Total | 9,998,618 | 10,000,067 | 10,000,149 | 82 | 0.0008% |
Table 6. Comparison of counts and impacts when the dates considered are used in build for Electronic items available at each listed institution. The above table compares the counts and shows the calculated impacts based on the counts with and without the dates listed. These counts are of items activated at each listed institution.
Versions i and 1 uses “E-Inventory“.”Portfolio Activation Date”, which is the harmonized/data-cleanup-processed variable provided by ExLibris in Alma Analytics and which would be useful for filtering for adding accountabilities by certain dates and date ranges, including fiscal years.
Version 2 was built without any dates.
Impact (numeric) (D) is calculated by C-B, while Impact (percent) (F) is calculated by (C-B)/C. Minimal difference experienced. (Cause of the difference is not known, and priority to seek investigation in this finding is low due to insignificance.)
Available For | Version i | Version 1 | Version 2 | Impact (numeric) | Impact (percentage) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
UC San Diego | 2,191,683 | 2,194,822 | 2,194,822 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California Berkeley | 2,126,373 | 2,128,459 | 2,128,459 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California Davis | 2,012,834 | 2,038,163 | 2,038,163 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California Irvine | 2,189,430 | 2,192,576 | 2,192,576 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California Los Angeles | 2,191,378 | 2,194,524 | 2,194,524 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California Riverside | 2,054,623 | 2,080,588 | 2,080,578 | -10 | -0.0005% |
University of California San Francisco | 1,872,185 | 1,896,661 | 1,896,651 | -10 | -0.0005% |
University of California, Merced | 2,068,342 | 2,093,684 | 2,093,684 | 0 | 0.0000% |
University of California, Santa Barbara | 2,058,484 | 2,083,962 | 2,083,952 | -10 | -0.0005% |
University of California, Santa Cruz | 2,097,271 | 2,100,563 | 2,100,553 | -10 | -0.0005% |
Total (calculated by max available) | 2,191,683 | 2,194,822 | 2,194,822 | 0 | 0.0000% |
Table 7. Comparison of counts and impacts when the dates considered are used in build for Electronic items available for each listed institution. The above table compares the counts and shows the calculated impacts based on the counts with and without the dates listed. These items are made available via the Network Zone.
Versions i and 1 uses “E-Inventory“.”Portfolio Activation Date”, which is the harmonized/data-cleanup-processed variable provided by ExLibris in Alma Analytics and which would be useful for filtering for adding accountabilities by certain dates and date ranges, including fiscal years.
Version 2 was built without any dates.
Impact (numeric) (D) is calculated by C-B, while Impact (percent) (F) is calculated by (C-B)/C. No difference experienced.
...
Image 1. Sample comparison of Schedule A - Electronic Holdings Totals v. Total Deduplicated Titles using “E-Inventory“.”Portfolio Activation Date”.”Portfolio Activation Date” (Left) versus “E-Inventory“.”Portfolio Creation Date”.”Portfolio Creation Date” (right) for University of California Los Angeles. Holdings uses COUNT(Portfolio Id); Titles uses COUNT(DISTINCT MMS Id); withdrawals not included in build; and, although causes in differences not yet determined, minimal differences experienced.
References
ExLibris. (2023). “Physical Items”. Retrieved from https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma/Product_Documentation/010Alma_Online_Help_(English)/080Analytics/Alma_Analytics_Subject_Areas/Physical_Items last accessed May 26, 2023.
...