2022-06-29 RS OST meeting notes

Attendees

@Patrick SHANNON (Unlicensed) , UC Berkeley
@Jason Newborn , UC Davis (vice chair)
@Linda Michelle Weinberger , UC Irvine
@Scott Hathaway , UC Santa Barbara
@Mallory DeBartolo (Unlicensed) , UC Santa Cruz, note taker
@Peter Devine , UC San Diego
@Ryan White , UC San Francisco
@Sabrina Simmons , UC Riverside
@Alison Ray (CDL) , California Digital Library (chair)
regrets: @Sandra Farfan-Gracia , UC Los Angeles,, @Demitra Borrero (Demitra Borrero), UC Merced

	Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Decisions	Actions

	Item	Desired Outcome	Time	Who	Notes	Decisions	Actions
1	record meeting	make sure Alison records meeting	1	Alison
2	My ILL Requests Covid-19 closure message	timing: UCLA won’t be able to vote until next week. wait or is ‘supermajority’ okay?	9	Alison	Threshold of super majority would be 8. Reflection of the “spirit of how we want to work”. Voted via fist of 5 at the meeting since we had 8 - All voted 5 except Alison (3).		@Alison Ray (CDL) will contact @Alison Ray (CDL) (SILS-OPS center) to inform them of the decision.
3	AFN TF Hand off: ”UC-UC fills in VDX”: Part II	proposed goal: improve trust in AFN lender matching (less dependence on UC-to-UC fills happening in VDX) Discuss strategies for physical UC-to-UC fills inside VDX; could ToUs be restricting AFN?)	20	AFN TF (Alison, Linda Michelle, Mallory, Sandra)	UC to UC fills inside of VDX: what reasons: 1. ‘improper’ ToUs/other IZ config (causing fill-able items to be marked as ‘not-fill-able’ in Alma, skipping that lender) 2. poor/missing metadata in request (would have to improve metadata from source). 3. manual entering of UCs. 4. WSILL auto-add with direct profile. issues with ‘oclc direct profile’: 1. adds back in appropriately skipped items (eg check out statuses) - may also be the case with manual entering; 2. vdx brokering sites (UCLA & UCSD) won’t broker from UC locations (don’t add these locations to direct profile) possible remediations of cause “‘improper’ lender ToU/IZ configs”: as borrower: see a lot of fills from particular UC lender, tell that UC lender to look into IZ settings (ToU/item policy/hierarchy….) → look at bib record (eg is there a standard number) if not, refer issue to lender as lender: magically notice (file out UC borrowers from VDX picklist?) that you’re filling requests in VDX & look into those ToUs/item policy/hierarchy → file case with ExL if ToU not obvious fulfillment configuration utility (to see what sorts of policies/configs affect requests) Can we get to a point where we trust the AFN locate and TOUs enough to not need to add UC partners back into the VDX rotas? Perception that “user error” is a problem - patrons pick a record with no/few/non-lendable UC holdings and it goes to VDX. Blank form submission: how well does this work? What do we expect the matching algorithm to do? What’s the margin of error that we expect from the AFN? Are we in the long tail where the cost of investigating the requests that go to VDX is more than the benefit we would get from resolving these issues.	let ‘uc-uc’ fills in VDX lie, if comes up as pain point in future then discuss at that time
4	NZ setting affecting fines/bills	Proposed goal: fix billing issue for NCIP created item records	20	Scott	Two campuses (UCLA and UCSB) have reported that NCIP created item records are not automatically recording fines/fees when they go to “Lost” status in Alma. There may be more campuses that are having this problem. UCSB submitted a Salesforce ticket (# 06219424) to Ex Libris concerning this issue. They strongly suspect that the issue is being caused by a setting in the “Borrowing Workflow” profile that works with the NCIP Resource Sharing Partners. The profile is inherited from the Network Zone and is named “Borrowing – Initial Profile”. Both UCSB and UCLA use this same profile. They suggest that the setting that is causing the problem is the “Lost Communicated” step, and that if this was unchecked then automatic fines/fees for Lost NCIP items would commence. Details of Salesforce 06219424 and supporting information.	if billing issues with NCIP requests, create IZ workflow profile for NCIP RS partner
5	Wrap up	Review actions and decisions	5
6	Parking Lot	Capture important topics for future discussion			‘pu anywhere exceptions’: review shared messages, what would be next steps metrics on how often ‘pu anywhere’ requests have to be changed to home campus (Jason) → may lead to: editing pu loc for this requests → may lead to: harmonizing bookbands Why do some digitization requests go to the “Digitization Dept for Institution” queue? It means they can’t get filled in Alma and then get kicked out to VDX - see 4/6/22 meeting notes for more info. (Scott) (item 5 of 2022-05-11 meeting notes )Page entries on the Resource Sharing form are only sent when enumeration fields are populated with information (Jason) special collections ‘special case’ uses falling into VDX: unclear how to fill this need within SILS architecture (should this use case get added to work plan?) (Alison/Jason)
7		Total	x/x