A Comparative Analysis of - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

A Comparative Analysis of ILL Systems

Meg Atwater-Singer

Access Services Librarian, Associate Professor

University of EvansvilleSlide2

GoalsILL @ UEL

Desired features in new ILL system

What systems are out there?

How will they improve UEL’s ILL service?Slide3

UEL ILL Background Part of Access Services department

1.5 FTE + 21 student hours/week

# of filled borrowing requests

Copies = 3,462 (38% IN) / 3-yr average: 3,364

Loans = 2,521 (80% IN

) / 3-yr

average: 2,143

# of filled lending

requests

Copies = 97 (46% IN

) / 3-yr

average: 386

Loans

= 770 (74% IN)

/ 3-yr

average: 907

Generous & FREE lender – 56 days with multiple renewalsSlide4

Current ILL SystemEx

Libris

Voyager 9.2.1

ILL Module = (version 6.7.2 / 2013)

Based on CLIO Basic

ILL Request

Initial processing of requests delivered via forms in catalog and

OpenURL

Link Resolver (SFX)

Worldshare

ILL – ordering of requests

ILL Management

Updating records (received, returned, renewed, recalled, etc.)Slide5

Why change?

Migrating to ALMA/Primo this summerSlide6

Current ILL FeaturesOpenURL

Link Resolver

Automatic notification when loans are received

Uses ILS patron database / institutional data

Charge loans in ILS / bib records automatically created on the flySlide7

Desired ILL FeaturesILL process is transparent to patrons

Patrons can see their requests/history

Customizable patron notices & reports

Manage copyright compliance

Reasonably pricedSlide8

Systems Looked at

CLIO Web

Tipasa

AutoGraphics

Worldshare ILL

ILLiad

Homegrown optionsSlide9

Homegrown ILL - Rockhurst University, MO

Compared

ILLiad

,

Wufoo

(online form building website with a data management grid) and old, paper-based system

Six categories: patron usability, request forms, staff viewing and navigation, staff side request generation, staff side report generation and confidentiality

Choose

Wufoo

over

ILLiad

- $200 v. $2000

Wufoo

does not work with Open URL Link Resolvers



Kohler, E & D

Theiss

. 2012. From overloaded to opportunity: the search for a low-cost

i

nterlibrary loan management system.

Bricks and Click Libraries Symposium Proceedings

, 8-20.Slide10

ILLiadWeb-based & hosted

$11,000 – includes $2,500 training / 1-time cost

OCLC

https://

www.oclc.org/en/illiad.html

Did not consider = OCLC plans to move libraries to TipasaSlide11

WorldShare ILLWeb-based & hosted

$0 – are already paying $17,500

OCLC

https://

www.oclc.org/en/worldshare-ill.html

No

user interface

Slide12

SHAREitWeb-based & hosted

Cost - $0 – SRCS!

AutoGraphics

http://

www4.auto-graphics.com/products-shareit-inter-library-loan-ill.asp

Over 50% of ILL traffic are copy requests, which

SHAREit

doesn’t do elegantlySlide13

CLIO WebWeb-based & hosted

$2,000 + $1,000 database conversion

Clio Software

http://www.cliosoftware.com

/

Slide14

TipasaWeb-based & hosted

$6,000 + WSILL

OCLC

https://

www.oclc.org/en/tipasa.html

Slide15

Analysis CriteriaPatron Interface

Request Functions

Request Forms

Staff – Request Processing

Staff – Request

Management

Staff –

Report Generation

Confidentiality Slide16

Patron InterfacePatrons authenticated

using LDAP or similar

method

Yes to both

See new requests, request

history, status of ILL requests,

PDF links

Yes to both

Edit

his/her

information

Yes to both

Choose

to receive status changes via text

Tipasa ONLYSlide17

ADVANTAGE = TipasaSlide18

Request FunctionsSubmit

requests using Open URL link resolver from databases/discovery layer

Yes to both

Submit

requests using fill in the blank forms

Yes to both

Request multiple items from one form

Clio ONLYSlide19

ADVANTAGE = ClioSlide20

Request Forms Customizable

: add desired logo, colors & fonts

Yes to both

Add/delete

required

fields

Yes to both

Edit

field

names

Yes to bothSlide21

ADVANTAGE = NoneSlide22

Staff - Request ProcessingAble to correct

and manipulate data on requests

Yes to both

Add notes,

concerning questions or

clarifications

Yes to both

Easily

sort

requests

, identifying attention

items

Yes to both

Staff

is able to see which requests are

new

Yes to bothSlide23

ADVANTAGE = NoneSlide24

Staff - Request ManagementNotifications

sent

automatically with

status

changes / can customize

Yes to both – Clio with caveats

Automatically create/delete bib records in ILS

to

charge

loans

Clio ONLY

PDFs

can be uploaded to

database & emailed, with

a copy of

citation

Yes to both

Electronic

files

automatically

deleted after 30

days

Yes to both

Requests needing Copyright Clearance easily identified

Tipasa ONLYSlide25

ADVANTAGE = TipasaSlide26

Staff - Report GenerationAutomatically generate reports from raw form

data

Yes to both

Reports will include graphs and other visual

features

Tipasa ONLY

Export

reports

Yes to bothSlide27

ADVANTAGE = TipasaSlide28

ConfidentialityGenerate reports

that do

not violate patron

privacy

Yes to both

Can hide patron

information

when

necessary

Yes to bothSlide29

ADVANTAGE = NoneSlide30

Improving ILL ServiceTipasa+

Patron Interface

Request Management++

Report Generation

Clio+

Request Functions

Request Management+Slide31

Comparison Results

Tipasa

Clio

Open URL

Link Resolver

Y

Y

Automatic notification when loans are received

Y+

Y-

Uses ILS patron database

Y

Y

Charge loans in ILS / bib records automatically created

N

Y

ILL process is transparent to patrons

Y

Y

Patrons can see their requests/history

Y

Y

Customizable patron notices & reports

Y+

Y-

Manage copyright compliance

Y

N

Reasonably priced

Y

YSlide32

Clio Web Patron Request HistorySlide33

Tipasa Patron Request HistorySlide34

Tipasa Patron Request History 2Slide35

Clio Request InterfaceSlide36

Tipasa Request InterfaceSlide37

Now what?Meg Atwater-Singer

ma35@evansville.edu

Twitter: @

megatwater