Reclaiming your Catalog: Benefits of Batch Reclamation

1. Reclaiming your Catalog: Benefits of Batch Reclamation Roman S. Panchyshyn, MLIS Kent State University ALCTS CCS Catalog Management Interest Group ALA Midwinter January 8, 2011

2. Topics to cover • What exactly is an OCLC batch reclamation project? • What advantages does this project have for your library and for OCLC? • How did Kent State University prepare and plan for a batch reclamation project? • What were the outcomes--lessons learned from the KSU project?

3. Background • KSU is part of the OhioLINK consortium • Local system is Innovative Interfaces (KentLINK) • KSU has been cataloging on OCLC since the late 1970’s, one of the original OCLC libraries • No attempts have been made to implement data-base wide clean up since bibliographic data was migrated from NOTIS to Innovative in 1990s

4. What is Batch Reclamation? • Batchload project that allows your library to synchronize your bibliographic records with OCLC WorldCat • Free for OCLC libraries, no setup fees required • Your cost is calculated in resources committed • Libraries must commit to maintaining their holdings either online or through batchload after project is completed

5. Direct Benefits • To OCLC • Provides OCLC with an accurate view of your library’s holdings • Maximizes the effectiveness of OCLC products such as WorldCat Collection Analysis, WorldCat Resource Sharing, WorldCat Local … and others • Potential to increase the use of the OCLC record number as a manifestation identifier between platforms

6. Direct Benefits • To Library • Library holdings become in synch with WorldCat • Allows library to locate and identify problem areas in their catalogs • Cataloging errors • Omissions • Poor workflows or interesting local practices • Provides your users with a cleaner and more accurate database (local and consortial)

7. KSU Case Study • Outline of the KSU Batch Reclamation Project--steps • Local preparation • OCLC preparation • Project implementation • Project deliverables and outcomes • Project clean-up and evaluation

8. Local Preparation • Technical services recruited support from various areas of the library before project could move forward • Technical services administration • Systems • Public Services (Reference and Circulation) • Government documents • Regionals • Consider what impact the project will have on all areas of the library and OhioLINK

9. Local Planning • KSU Batch Reclamation task force formed in late 2008. Comprised of: • Technical services staff members • Systems staff members • Purpose was to plan, implement and document the entire batch reclamation project

10. Project Scope • Project would include all KSU holdings for branches and for regionals • Three OCLC symbols included • KSU (main and all branches) • OCK (KSU Stark) • OWK (KSU Trumbull) • Other OCLC symbols that KSU may or may not have used in the past were identified and made inactive

11. Project Buy-in • Task force members gave presentations to regional libraries and public services to “sell” project • Systems administration needed to be convinced that project would not be a drain on systems resources

12. Local Issues • KSU had local practice where duplicate OCLC records were downloaded into KentLINK for individual branches • Departments wanted certain collections excluded from project, so as not to be visible in OCLC (Marantz Children’s Collection) • Branches and regionals had limited resources for any maintenance and record clean-up

13. Record Selection • Critical decision—which records should be selected or excluded, this has significant impact on clean-up • Records excluded were • All suppressed record (bib lvl = s) • All records that had a non-OCLC number in the 001 (prefixes and/or suffixes) • Records that lacked an 001 • Records that had a blank cat date (eliminated order records and certain special collections records)

14. Criteria for Record Selection • Example 1, from the KSU Batch Reclamation page, shows the strategy for creating record files from Innovative • This strategy was used for the creation of files for 3 symbols • KSU • OCK • OWK • Each symbol becomes a separate OCLC project

15. OCLC Paperwork • Library must complete OCLC Batchload Order form for each project and submit order online to OCLC (OCLC provides checklist for guidance) • Library must be prepared to deliver record files to OCLC when requested • ***Completing this order from correctly is critical to the success of your project***

16. Critical Areas of Order Form • Identifies symbol and contacts for project • Sets options to retain any local data in the OCLC archive record and local holdings • Identifies where the OCLC number (if any) is stored and where the local system number is stored in record • ***Special instructions—Use extended match: OCLC matches only records where both the OCLC # and title (245 $a) are exact matches*** (prevents false hits)

17. File Creation in Innovative • Once paperwork completed and submitted, files were extracted for 3 symbols. • Cutoff date was set at 03/31/2009 • Record totals: • KSU 1,725,956 • OCK 48,988 • OWK 33,024 • Records were delivered to OCLC via EDX (KSU file was split into batches of 90,000)

18. Timetable • Paperwork and files delivered to OCLC in April 2009 • OCLC averages about a 90 day turnaround time for batch reclamation projects • OCLC runs scan/delete to remove old holdings • Files were processed and deliverables returned by OCLC in July 2009

19. OCLC Deliverables • For each file we sent to OCLC, we received the following: • A report detailing • Records processed • Holdings set • Unresolved • Data merged (where OCLC adds info to master record) • A file containing the unresolved records

20. Cross-Reference Report(X-Ref) • OCLC provides a cross-reference report (spreadsheet) that lists your local system number and the number of the matched OCLC record • This report can be run against your local system and correct matching OCLC number added to the local bib record

21. 3 Column Cross-Reference Report • OCLC programming can, for no extra cost, generate a 3 column cross-reference report instead of 2 (see Example 2) • Our OCLC number in KentLINK record • Our local system number • Matching OCLC record number • If the matching OCLC number and our OCLC number do not match, it identifies merged records matched on the 019 in the OCLC master record

22. KSU Results

23. OCK Results

24. OWK Results

25. Previous Holdings on OCLC: Comparison Chart

26. Overview • Using data from OCLC FirstSearch, all symbols showed a decrease in number of holdings, the percentage was much greater for the regionals (poorer catalog maintenance) • KSU had 119,000+ duplicate records • Number of unresolved records was reasonable • KSU 2734 • OCK 198 • OWK 87

27. Matches on the 019 • KSU 68,805 • Negligible for the other 2 symbols • Workflow decisions • Do we consider overlaying the updated or merged OCLC records in our catalog? • Do we just overlay the OCLC number in the local catalog? • At this point, we have not decided to do anything with the 019 merge/overlay

28. 019 Issues • For products such as WorldCat Local, OCLC would prefer that current OCLC numbers be inserted into the local records • However, OCLC and Innovative both index the 019 • Downloading and overlaying 60,000 OCLC records would be a large undertaking • Local data may be lost

29. Records Not Sent • In order to try to account for the decrease in the number of holdings on OCLC, we also examined the records we did not send. • For KSU they included: • Blank cat date • Records with non-OCLC numbers in 001 We did not care about suppressed records

30. Problems Found • Records with prefixes or suffixes in the 001 were usually part of a vendor load, such as EBSCO; consortial purchases such as e-books • Records with blank cat dates revealed problems with our local workflows • Found 12,000 brief gov docs shipping list records from MARCIVE where full records were never overlaid • Found 8000 unfinished special collections records where holdings were set on OCLC

31. Clean-Up • KSU undertook clean-up project for the unmatched and blank cat date records that were uncovered by reclamation • Records were extracted from Innovative and broken into little puddles based on format, language, and location • All unmatched records were given a 910 field (910 ## KSU Batch Reclamation) for identification and tracking

32. Clean-Up Resources • KSU technical services takes advantage of a strong pool of quality student labor, due to our relationship with Kent State School of Library and Information Studies. • Student and staff help was used to review all the unmatched OCLC records and match as many as possible

33. Clean-Up Data • Unmatched project: 85% unmatched complete as of January 2011 • Original records used for student training and practicums; records added to OCLC as level K • Some libraries (Map library) chose not to add their unmatched records to OCLC • Non-English materials make up the bulk of unfinished records, they were hardest to match due to lack of language skills

34. Clean-Up of Blank Cat Date Records • 8000 special collections records • holdings were re-added to OCLC. Problem was caused by lack of knowledge of cataloging workflow. Removing cat date kept the records from going out for authority control • 12,000 MARCIVE gov docs shipping list records • records were never upgraded. We contracted with MARCIVE to supply as many full records as they could, and we are using student workers to finish cleaning up the balance

35. Project Impact • KSU holdings now more in synch with OCLC; catalog much cleaner for KSU users • No verifiable statistical impact on KSU for ILL. Statistics for FY 2010 are similar to FY2009. No need for additional staff resources for ILL • Poor practices/workflows uncovered and addressed in certain areas • Cleanup projects advantageous for student training

36. Future Directions • Review of unmatched records will be completed. Decisions on what holdings need to be added to OCLC will be addressed project by project • OCLC ongoing holdings project was established. We are developing a batchload process to track adds/deletes automatically to insure nothing is missed

37. Decisions • Library still needs to make decisions on: • What to do with the 019 matches • How to handle duplicate records in database • Records containing multiple formats (print vs. electronic)

38. Tips for Success • If your library is considering a batch reclamation project in the future, keep these points in mind: • Get buy-in from all areas of the library affected • Consult with other libraries that have undertaken this project • Be selective about which records are sent to OCLC and what holdings you want included in WorldCat • The more junk you send them, the more difficult the clean-up

39. More Tips …. • Fill out all OCLC documentation precisely • Insure that you use extended matching if you plan to match on OCLC control numbers • Request the 3 column spreadsheet if you want to identify matches on the 019 • Carefully examine the records you do not send out • Set up a plan for batch reclamation clean-up projects. Make sure you have the resources • Document all decisions made for future reference • Do a follow-up evaluation to find what worked and where improvement may be necessary

40. Remember … • OCLC’s goal is to synchronize your holdings with OCLC WorldCat • Your library’s goal should be cleaning up your catalog for your patrons and provide improved services • Batch reclamation can benefit both parties if planned and carried out effectively

41. Follow-Up • Be willing to share your experiences with batch reclamation with other libraries (see handout for other examples) • OCLC has, since we completed our project, opened up a new support group within their Customer Service Division, called Consultive Services. Their function is to assist libraries with pre-project and support questions. E-mail: consult-svcs@oclc.org

42. Questions?

43. Roman Panchyshyn, MLIS Catalog Librarian Kent State University rpanchys@kent.edu 330-672-1699 Thank You!