Legend:
| Status | ||
|---|---|---|
|
| Status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Status | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Page Properties | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Recommendation
The Fulfillment and ILL FG recommend creating and managing separate institutional patron databases. Alma fulfillment networks can be configured by sharing specific patron information fields, determined by the network members, and are not dependent on the creation of single unified patron databases. The FG was unanimous in its preference for a decentralized model, with local cleanup decisions.
Background
The work of the Patron Data Cleanup group, as well as others potentially, will be highly impacted by this decision. A single unified patron database will demand a higher level of harmonization decisions being made as it pertains to user fields in Alma and the data being migrated from the current integrated library systems. A decentralized model allows each campus to essentially focus more on “cleaning their own house” and make decisions about “their patron data” locally within the scope of what can and cannot be technically migrated.
Dependencies
The Should expired patron records be migrated to Alma? (PDCG) decision depends on this decision.
...
technical consideration: can the NZ (if that is where the shared patron records will be) have ten SIS integrations? (posed to ExL on May 8 )if not, how will the shared patron records be ingested into Alma?
Questions to consider
What are the operational or functional benefits of either option?
What happens to loading Stanford users from UCB?
CSUs have implemented separate databases.
(long term consideration) Who (which UC entity/office) would manage NZ patron database?
ICs: After some thinking on this, it seems like having multiple databases would be significantly LESS work for the same “bang” - we tentatively recommend this course, but defer to the experts.
Will there need to be work done to put forth recommendations related to patron identifiers? Who owns this work?
Action Log
Action/Point Person | Expected Completion Date | Notes | Status | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Send out email to review decision information Elizabeth Rodriguez (Unlicensed) |
|
| |||||||
Fulfillment and ILL FG meet to discuss and have a preliminary vote on decision |
|
|
| ||||||
Final review and decision |
| Fist of 5 vote conducted on moving forward with separate institutional patron record databases instead of creating a single UC patron record database. Unanimous support for separate institutional databases. |
| ||||||
Final decision passed back to ICs and Patron Data Group |
|
|