Currently the library can turn borrowing history on or off, but the choice applies to all users. For privacy reasons, and in order to avoid subpoena situations, we have it off, but some users do want borrowing history on as a convenience, and are not concerned about privacy risk themsleves. Why not allow those users to opt in to borrowing history, and allow the default otherwise to being off?

By the way, this "opt in" approach is how most public libraries in Eastern Massachusetts are set up, so our users expect this level of service from us also.

It is hard to explain that we leave borrowing history off because in our system turning it on exposes all our borrowers to a privacy risk. When users can't make this personal choice and control their own privacy settings at the university the way they can in their local cities and towns, it makes our library and our online system appear very "web 1.0".

The Activity Report letter automatically tries to send when “Renew Selected” and “Renew All” are selected in Alma Patron Services. This is problematic for a few reasons:

1. The letter is triggered even when the letter is disabled in Letter Activity configuration. It generates a ‘fail’ message for staff.




2. The letter slows down processes dramatically depending on how many loans are attached to the account.




3. A workaround is to use the letter opt-out functionality, but we'd have to continually update all of our users with the opt-out in order for this to work well for us.

I would like to see this functionality updated so that disabling the letter is enough to not trigger the letter automatically. This functionality should also be fixed so that the letter does not slow down processes when there are many loans attached to an account.

Boston College would like to be able to configure Alma so that work orders are auto-created for materials in a designated location when they are placed on loan.

Here is the desired workflow:

1. Item is loaned.


2. At the same time, Alma automatically places a work order on the item.


3. When the item is returned to the managing circulation desk the work order is triggered and the item is routed to the correct work order department for processing.

The purpose of this request is to improve the management of the laptops that Boston College Libraries loan to patrons, and to facilitate the implementation of an online laptop availability tool.

We use the booking functionality in Alma for our Audio/Video-equipment. The equipment is administrated by our media production department, and is configured as a library in Alma.

The AV-library is the only place on campus patrons can check out and return AV-items. Apart from that, the AV-library also supports delivery to a library at a different campus (Kjeller).

• The transit time between the AV-library and Kjeller is set to 48 hours.
• The preview time on the equipment booking is set to one hour.

Use case:
When scanning an item due for pick-up at Kjeller within the next 48 hours, Alma insists you reshelf the item at the AV-library. Alma keeps on insisting you reshelf the item, until one hour before the booking time, alas until you are within the set preview time. Then, and only then, the item goes into transit to Kjeller, and the workflow is as expected. This of course, results in the equipment being too late for pick up at the Kjeller library.

If we change the preview time to 48 hours to accommodate the transit to Kjeller, the correct workflow kicks in at the expected time and the equipment goes into transit. Unfortunately, this affects the preview time for all the AV-items, regardless of pick up location. One apparent downside being patrons are blocked from checking out booked items, 48 hours prior to the booking time.

Our present work-around is to keep an eye on “Monitor Requests and Item Processes”, in order to sort out the equipment booked for pick up at the Kjeller library. Checking out the item as loaned for the patron before shipping it to Kjeller. The obvious downside, not being able to track the item in process, use scan in item … etc.

Suggested solution:
We would like to be able to make an exception to the preview time for bookings in the Fulfillment Unit based on pick up location: IF pick-up location=Kjeller THEN Preview period=48 hours.

When an Automated Fulfillment network allows for their patrons to pick up materials at any Institution in the AFN, it is possible for a patron to pick up their item at a third institution, that is neither the patron's home library, nor the item's home library.

With how Alma currently manages Linked Users, and with the fields available for display on the Active and Expired hold shelf screens, library staff at that third (pick-up only) institution are unable to determine which institution the patron is from.

This is because:

Since the patron is not a local patron to the pick-up institution, and the item was not from the pick-up institution, the patron's linked user record is not automatically saved to the pick-up institution's Alma instance.

This means that the Requester ID that shows when the item is scanned in for hold is not searchable (that requester ID is only searchable at the item's home library), and, without knowing the patron's home library when the AFN is set up for staff to select the patron's home affiliation (because patron identifiers are not unique across the consortium), their name is not searchable either.

We realize the patron would, in theory, receive an email letting them know the item was ready for pick-up from the shelf and would bring their ID with them when they came to pick up the item, but, if the library wanted to contact the patron for some reason, we don't know how they would do that as we don't know how to help them retrieve the patron's record in fulfillment.

Thanks!
Debbie

Currently, the display of holdings in Primo for multi-volume monographs is random.
Alma only allows to configure the order of locations by "their proximity to the patron, according to the library IP address”. However, holdings with the same location but different call numbers are not sorted in any meaningful way.

When we catalogue a multi-volume monograph we create a different holding record for each volume, so we cannot use the “item sort routines” to adjust the display in Primo, because they only apply to items within the same holding.

Currently, our patrons see things like this:
http://primo.sns.it/primolibrary/libweb/action/display.do?tabs=requestTab&ct=display&fn=search&doc=39pisalma2150514590002521

We’d like to be able to sort the holdings primarily by location and secondarily by call number, so that the holdings pertaining to different volumes of the same publication would be displayed in the proper order.

There are two other ideas about the sorting of holdings in the GetIt Tab, but I think
they don’t overlap
“Sort of holdings by location (A-Z) in Primo GetIt” is about sorting locations alphabetically by name
“Configure the order of the holdings records in the GetIt tab” is about sorting locations by loan period

When the closepaidlostloans parameter to false and lost loans are closed (either manually or through the Close Lost Loans job), refunds/credits are not automatically given to patrons if the item is subsequently found and returned. When setting the closepaidlostloans parameter to true and the lost loan is closed (automatically setting the Lost and Paid status), a refund/credit IS applied to the patron’s account if the item is subsequently found and returned, providing the Lost Loan Refund Ratio is greater than 0.

For libraries that wish to take advantage of this new Process Type, but do not wish to issue credits automatically for Lost and Paid items, this can cause some problems. Staff must monitor and waive these credits as they often negate other fines on the patron’s account. In addition, the credit can cause problems with automated financial processes (i.e. Bursar integration) as credits transmitted to the financial system can act on non-library fees owed, or create automatic refunds that may or may not be due depending on the refund policies in place.

Proposed solution: When setting the closepaidlost_loans parameter to true, we’d like an additional option to allow or block the automatic refund/credit when a lost and paid item is found and returned. In other words, we’d like the option to keep the new Lost and Paid Process type, but also the ability to actually close the loan completely as is done with regular Lost Loans.

When you don't find a requested item at your institution, it is great to be able to 'convert it to a resource sharing request' -- however that function should mark the item missing from our institution. Since pick from shelf does NOT display barcode and once we select the item to be converted to resource sharing request, it disappears from the pick from shelf list, so it is very difficult and time consuming to find the item and toggle it to missing. Also, the resource sharing request might be canceled because the item at our institution shows up as 'item in place' .