Collaborative Implementation of Alma/Primo System in Orbis Cascade Alliance

Central Oregon Community College and other institutions in the Orbis Cascade Alliance worked together to select and implement the Alma/Primo system for efficient library management. The consortium, consisting of 37 universities, colleges, and community colleges in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, leveraged shared resources, streamlined technical services, and saved costs through group purchases of electronic resources. The decision-making process and timeline spanned from 2009 to 2014, showcasing the successful collaboration and benefits of consortial initiatives.

• Collaboration
• Library Management
• Consortial System
• Orbis Cascade Alliance
• Alma/Primo

cem_mcn Follow

Uploaded on Sep 20, 2024 | 0 Views

Download Presentation

Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.

The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Presentation Transcript

1. IN IT TOGETHER: SELECTION AND IN IT TOGETHER: SELECTION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ALMA/PRIMO IMPLEMENTATION OF ALMA/PRIMO AS A AS A CONSORTIAL CONSORTIAL SYSTEM SYSTEM Ann Miller University of Oregon Eugene, Oregon USA

2. Central Oregon Comm. College Portland State University Central Washington University Reed College Chemeketa Community College Saint Martin s University Seattle Pacific University Clark College Seattle University Concordia University Southern Oregon University Eastern Oregon University The Evergreen State College Eastern Washington University University of Idaho University of Oregon George Fox University University of Portland Lane Community College University of Puget Sound Lewis & Clark College University of Washington Linfield College Walla Walla College Mt. Hood Community College Warner Pacific College Oregon State University Washington State University Oregon Health & Science Univ. Oregon Institute of Technology Western Oregon University Western Washington University Oregon State University Pacific University Whitman College Portland Community College Willamette University

3. MAP OF ORBIS CASCADE ALLIANCE

4. THE ORBIS CASCADE ALLIANCE FIGURES AND VALUES 37 universities, colleges, and community colleges in Oregon, Washington, and Idaho 258,000 students 9.2 million titles representing 28.7 million items Group purchases of electronic resources at a value of over $9 million annually. Existing tradition of cooperation in resource sharing and collection building. History of working in OCLC and using Worldcat Local Looking to explore how to collaborate more fully in technical services

5. WHY A CONSORTIAL PURCHASE? Operational costs duplicated across the consortium Existing system operated on an outdated platform Interest in facilitating technical services collaboration Prediction that institutions could save money by sharing

6. TIMELINE OF REVIEW AND DECISION ON A SYSTEM Shared ILS Groups formed to review the possibility each year from 2009-2011 Shared ILS RFP in 2011-2012 (https://www.orbiscascade.org/rfp-for-shared- library-management/) Chose Ex Libris Alma/Primo in Spring 2012 4 Cohorts between Jan. 2013-Dec. 2014 First went live in June 2013 Six months each Libraries requested a cohort, record numbers were a factor, as well as confidential negotiation

7. COHORTS Cohort 1 - Linfield College, Marylhurst University. Pacific University, University of Washington, Western Washington University, Willamette University Cohort 2 - Concordia University, Eastern Washington University, Evergreen State College, Lewis & Clark College, Portland Community College, Reed College, Saint Martin's University, Seattle Pacific University, University of Idaho, Warner Pacific College, Washington State University Cohort 3 - Clark College, Mt Hood Community College, Oregon Health & Science University, Oregon Institute of Technology, Portland State University, Southern Oregon University, University of Oregon, University of Portland, University of Puget Sound, Western Oregon University Cohort 4- Central Oregon Community College, Central Washington University, Chemeketa Community College, Eastern Oregon University, George Fox University, Lane Community College, Oregon State University, Seattle University, Walla Walla University, Whitman College

8. STRUCTURE OF IMPLEMENTATION Shared ILS Program Manager Shared ILS Implementation Team chairs of: Acquisitions WG Cataloging WG Circulation & Resource Sharing WG Discovery WG Serials/ERM WG Systems WG Training WG Implementation Leads grouped into Cohorts for communication

9. IMPLEMENTATION PREPARATION (UNIVERSITY OF OREGON) Reviewed fulfillment policies Reviewed location codes Deleted order records based on university record retention policy Extracted bibliographic records for withdrawn material Reviewed and coded local bibliographic data (unfinished) Edited bibliographic, holdings and item records to ensure a smooth migration

10. IMPLEMENTATION (C3 EXAMPLE) 1. Initial configuration and migration forms due 7 months out from go live. 2. Data sample to Ex Libris 6 months out 3. Full data and test load (Alma) about 6 months out (loaded by groups within the cohort) 4. Primo configuration form 4 months out 5. 3.5 months of data testing (Alma) 6. Primo testing 2 months out (C3 had 6 weeks due to Primo changes at the Alliance level which postponed it) 7. Technical freeze Oregon s lasted 4 weeks. 8. Within a cohort we had rolling go live dates of the course of one month

11. TRAINING Functional workshops for Cohort 1 & 2 provided by Ex Libris Functional workshops for Cohort 3&4 provided by Cohort 1 & 2 In Cohort 1 Alma and Primo certification provided after go live. Now provided earlier Webinars have varied in quality, but are improving Weekly functional calls started with Cohort 2

12. SHARED SETUP AND STRUCTURE ALMA AND THE NETWORK ZONE Tab for NZ between IZ and CZ search by all titles only (no inventory (as yet)) Alma IZ local inventory, order and fulfillment data NZ formed of OCLC master records held by Alliance members. Loaded daily Anytime the master record is updated a record comes in. Management presents a challenge, don t want to give everyone access Let s take a quick look

13. SHARED SETUP AND STRUCTURES - PRIMO Central Alliance installation at which some standard configuration is set for all Other than those there can be institutional branding and other configuration The 50 field display limit in Primo has been problematic Where and how local data displays has been a question One significant loss we perceive is the integration with Worldcat Local for identifying tangible resources outside the Alliance

14. HOW IS THE SYSTEM WORKING? Summit pass through to NRE is working The move to central publishing has been problematic Across the board productivity has slowed Complexity makes diagnosis of problems difficult Monthly releases provide advantages and disadvantages Advantages -New functionality and fixes Disadvantages-New functionality and fixes Difficult to keep up with necessary policies Has strengthened ties between Alliance institutions and staff

15. CONCLUSION To early to truly assess Center for Excellence Definitely need continuing development in some areas Electronic resource management in the NZ Summit 3 consortial resource sharing Ability to perform collection assessment from the NZ Alliance needs to develop its own support and management models Concern about service exhaustion among Alliance staff