Statistics: Manuscript Resource Type - item counts

See Best Practices for Decision Pages and Tags for groups

Legend: NOT STARTED IN PROGRESS STALLED DECIDED

Status	IN PROGRESS
Description	In seeking to standardize how we report common statistics (to the extent possible); and build centralized statistics reports, generated at the Network Zone How should the UC Libraries handle counts for items previously represented by “Manuscript Units” in UCOP statistics, and with "Physical Items"."Bibliographic Details"."Resource Type" value “Manuscript” in submissions for UCL/UCOP annuals stats (also used for risk management) as well as other, third-party reporting bodies like ARL, ACRL, etc.?
Decision summary	Exclude Special Collections materials from Alma Analytics based annual statistic reports. Instead, Special Collections on each campus will report their own counts of materials for risk-management and other purposes.
Owning group	AASAP Team sils-aasa-l@listserv.ucop.edu
Approver
Consulted	AASAP Team members consulted locally, including their local special collections colleagues Heads of Special Collections (HOSC)
Informed	Leadership Group
Decision-making process	Team members gathered information from campus experts individually and as a group via HOSC. Some campuses reviewed data from Alma, e.g., list of titles by location with Resource Type = Manuscript.
Priority
Target decision date	21 Apr 2023
Date decided	[type // to add Date]

Recommendation

Exclude Special Collections materials from Analytics-based annual statistic reports. Instead, Special Collections on each campus will report their own counts of materials for risk-management and other purposes.

Impact

Stakeholder group	Impact
UC Libraries	Determinations around what and how we report are for the most part managed/owned by the UC Libraries (i.e., shared ownership).
CDL	CDL analysts, who are responsible for building report queries at the Network Zone according to templates agreed upon by the UC Libraries, must exclude items based a variety of parameters – likely resource type and location (specific to campus special collections), and any another group of query parameters identified by campus partners.
Special Collections on every campus	SC on every campus will have to keep and report their own statistics to third parties.
UCOP	Likely, this specifically pertains to our Risk Management Office, who reports holdings information to our insurer, for compliance purposes.

Reasoning

Background

2021-2022 UCOP Table 3 Other Library Materials Example: Irvine

UCOP Category	Subcategory	Irvine Counts (all Locations)
Manuscript Units	Personal manuscript units	2,193
Manuscript Units	UC archival manuscripts	1,599
Manuscript Units	Other archival materials	268
	Total	4,060

UCOP statistic table showing Manuscript Unit counts.

Proposed 2022-2023 Resource Type = “Manuscript” Example: Irvine

Alma Resource Type	Location	Total Active Items
Manuscript	Special Collections (e.g., Langson Library Special Collections and Archives)	1,285
Manuscript	Other locations (e.g., Science Library)	11,472

At this time, archival or manuscript collections are not effectively represented by counts of Alma item records with bibliographic resource type “Manuscript.” There are two ways that a count of items based on bibliographic resource type with current Alma data fail to provide useful information about Special Collections materials.

Overall measurement issues. Counts of item records in Special Collections are wholly inadequate.
- Item records do not exist at all for some materials This is true at Bancroft Library and other Special Collections units in the UC Libraries.
- Online Archive of California records are not accurately represented in Alma. At UC Irvine, for example, Alma does not have item records that correspond to representations there.
- Item records do not correspond to meaningful, standard archival measurements that are in use nationally and internationally. ARL, for example, asks for Manuscript Units.
- Item records for containers are flawed measurements, because they can represent vastly different quantities and types of materials - from a single piece of paper to a large container with thousands of documents.
- Inaccurately coded records are an issue. For example, Berkeley Bancroft Technical Services notes that many Alma items for Special Collection manuscripts are currently miscoded as type “book.”
- Resource type at the bibliographic level does not provide meaningful information. Manuscripts and archival materials are sometimes coded as “collections,” and sometimes as “manuscripts.” Still images can be both “pictures” and “other,” due to coding as projected vs. non-projected graphics. On many campuses, counts of items with resource type “Manuscript” mostly show individually-catalogued theses and dissertations.
Risk management issues. Counts of items cannot provide an accurate or useful picture of the value of materials for insurance purposes.
- For UCOP stats, HOSC has provided MU measurements because the insurance unit values table describes manuscripts as "Personal Manuscripts," "UC Archival Manuscripts," and "Other Manuscripts" -- all this translates, to HOSC since at least the last decade+, as archival/manuscript collections, not individual manuscripts. https://libraries.universityofcalifornia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Unit_value_2021.pdf.
- For some materials, there is an existing distinction between UC archival collections and personal papers or other collected manuscripts that is recorded at the item level—not at the bibliographic level. Valuations have in the past been tied to this information, so any changes to tracking it should be in coordination with UCOP Risk Management.

Options Considered [remove if not needed]

	Option 1	Option 2
Description
Pros
Cons

Dependencies

Questions to consider

Action Log

Action/Point Person	Expected Completion Date	Notes	Status
Gather feedback from local campus Special Collections colleagues	Later March
Gather feedback from Heads of Special Collections as a group	April