2023-04-25 Acquisitions Meeting notes

Implementer's Topic # 74

• Having cancellation policy coming through API and appearing in Agreement lines.
• Only integration at the moment is with EBSCONET.
  • Updates at renewal step, populating some details (cost, quantity, renewal date, etc.)
  • Does not create orders like GOBI does. Updates existing orders at time of renewal. 
• Any others interested in working with subscription agents for automated renewals? 
  • Kimberly Smith (MTSU) 12:12 PM
    I think that we are interested in updating renewal information
  • Joanna Cerro (she/her) 12:12 PM
    could the same feature be used for claiming restrictions?
  • Scott Pope (he/him/his) 12:13 PM
    Here’s a typical cancellation policy: Cancellation Policy: Cancellations not accepted after fifteen issues have been served
  • Joanna Cerro (she/her) 12:13 PM
    such as no claims allowed after 90 days
• Would you find these policies in your license agreement?
  • In EBSCONET under each title.
  • Scott Pope (he/him/his) 12:14 PM
    Typically the cancellations policies are for single titles like print titles
  • Would essentially be an order by order thing. Cancellation would be of the order itself. 
  • Joanna Cerro (she/her) 12:15 PM
    For both print and E-Resources cancellation restrictions, I think it would make sense to have the notes on the POL
• No one in attendance seems to have use cases for adding data to agreements apps.
• Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) 12:17 PM
  Who now at this meeting has implemented EBSCO integration?? Just curious? I would love to see a demo
• One library doing this already. Maybe could get a demonstration from them.
• ~:19 EBSCONET process description and relationship to GOBI process.

Dennis Bridges,

Aaron Neslin

• More specific use cases? 
• Sara - If an order has not been set up as a package and in retrospect wish it had been set up that way. Also want other things linked to PO. There's no way to do that retrospectively. In many cases now, post-migration, have deleted items to recreate them so that I am guaranteed that my link is there. Want to make sure that the item is acknowledged as beloging to a PO, but for timing and migration reasons, the item was already created. Create a new item. Copy information over and delete other item. No way to say, "I want this item to belong to this POL".
  
  • Gather all holdings and items together.
  • Can't do that because in the piece record there's no way to change the connection. You're either generating an item or not. If item already exists cannot link to a piece. Have receiving area in between order and items. Piece records are what is connected to item records.
  • In receiving app, have to create a piece. 
  • If you were able to edit the piece record, you would create the piece and then instead of using checkbox to create item record would want to select the item record. When you pick the item record, the system would also capture the holdings link. 
  • Have a POL for a speific instance. We're not talking about a use case where you might have item records that appear on a different instance (an instance that this POL is not associated with in any way)? 
    • Goes back to first case with package. If it's a package then very often you do end up with multiple titles/instances. Wouldn't be opposed to having other title associated with the POL. 
    • Could end up having an instance record over time having multiple POLs associated with it because multiple items are linked to different POLs. What needs to be clear is that if I go to an item, I need to figure out which POL this item came from.
• ~ :31 - Martina - Have an online update from union catalog to FOLIO inventory. In union catalog already create items when acquisitions process is started. Sometimes necessary to move. Would be good to connect the POL to the item directly. If item moved, POL should follow. Ideally, we could have direct connection with item when we create an order in FOLIO. 
  • Not that you wouldn't want the instance connected, but want to make sure item is connected. 
  • Wouldn't say we don't care about the instance. But in the end, would like to connect item with the order.
  • When we start to implement and migrate data, it is important to know whether this will be possible or not. 
  • Concern about making this possible is that there is a structured relationship between orders and inventory. Order line must be connected to Instance, Holdings, Item. Allowing you to connect only an item record to a PO would need to be a very separate thing from what we are already doing.
  • Would assume that all of the connections follow. 
  • Pretty sure we do not want to have a PO that is not a package and have two separate titles connected?
• Demo would be helfpul.
• ~:40 - Sara - Example with subscription where title changes. Received the new title piece by accident on old title. Can't split off the ones that are on the wrong order line. (Added as Implementer's Topic #112.)

Dennis Bridges,

Sven Thomsen

• To have a quick overview of frequently needed information and to avoid of "jumping" between multiple apps, it is desired to have additional acquisition data displayed in the "acquisition" accordion of the item record. Requested are:

  • Cost
  • Acqusition method
  • Organization code (extension by supplier name and linking to the respective data record)
  • Fund
• Two biggest are "Cost" & "Acquisition Method"
  • Especially from service desk point of view. E.g. Someone loses an item. How much does the person need to pay for it? 
  • Would be great to have the amount it cost and the purchase method (purchase, gift, mandatory copy, etc.)
• In some cases, cost information is sensitive information. Is this the unit cost? From the Purchase Order?
  • Would be great to have exact amount paid. Orders would also work. If sensitive information, maybe make optional in settings? 
• Would displaying the cost of acquisition in inventory be a problem for other organizations? 
  • Lisa Smith - Mich State 12:53 PM
    Our nda's are for electronic packages - I don't think they apply to anything physical
• Displaying this to staff members, not to the public
• Dung-Lan Chen 12:54 PM
  We assess replacement cost with current cost from the market instead of what was paid when the item was acquired.  But I agree cost info is good to have for Circ. staff in the use case mentioned.  Display cost of physical items to library staff is usually not a concern for us.
• Robert Heaton 12:54 PM
  Could a more granular permission for those users fulfill the need, keeping the data in the other app(s)?
• Scott Pope (he/him/his) 12:55 PM
  It seems like a common thing in libraries when paying for lost books to look up the price paid.
• Sara Colglazier (MHC/5C) 12:57 PM
  Basically only physical things that a user may need to replace--so never anything electronic
• Funds - Special funds come with certain restrictions. E.g. Cannot order two copies on some funds. 
• Replacement costs in items does not exist. May need manual location to input such costs for billing things like headphones, instruments, etc. 
• Lisa Smith - Mich State 1:02 PM
  We did the same, Sarah.  We had a standard bill, but a higher price could be used as needed for expense or hard to replace items.