Shared Print Retention Notes

Draft Metadata Recommendation

All Alma item records must be marked with a Statistics Note 2 with designation of "committed to retain - ReCAP". Additional commitments for same items will be added in same field separated by a comma ("committed to retain - ReCAP, Hathi)".
All Alma holding records where at least one item is committed must have an 583 field designating the term of the commitment.
- Required coding:
  - First Indicator - 1 - Not Private
  - Second Indicator - # - Undefined
  - $a - Action (NR) - constant text: committed to retain
  - $c - Time/date of action (R) - date of the commitment
  - $d - Action interval (R) - constant text: in perpetuity
  - $f - Authorization (R) - name of the collaborative agreement
  - $5 - Institution to which field applies (NR) - constant text: HUL
- Example 583 for ReCAP Shared Collection

583 1# $a committed to retain $c 20181001 $d indefinite $f ReCAP Shared Collection $5 HUL

Note, if Ex Libris provides an enhancement to add Alma item record fields specific to retention commitments, item records will be updated accordingly.

LTS will:

Create itemized sets of items in Alma using spreadsheet data provided by Jim Hodgson as input.
Update items identified for retention with a note in Statistics Note 2.
Apply a norm rule to add the 583 holdings linked to items in the set. Norm rule will first check that an 583 $f ReCAP Shared Collection is not present already.

Is the retention byte (008/12) going to be updated also?
Are the ReCAP commitment for specific items owned at that time, or are new acquisitions (such as subsequently received issues of the same journal) also going to be committed?
Whose responsibility is it to develop/document/communicate policies and workflows on manual creation, maintenance, etc to make sure conflicts in coding don’t develop in future?
Is there contention between previously entered 583 fields and current fields? This needs analysis once records have been updated.
Are there other retention commitment scenarios, shared or local, that we need to accommodate in our use of these item and holdings fields?
What is the intended workflow for items that are marked lost or missing? Do these need to be sent to collection development staff?
Is work on this a higher priority than Google scanning processing or the creation of the metadata file for Ivies Plus?
What is the workflow to use is a committed item is replaced with a new copy (for lost or damaged items)?

Staff will need training to look for the commitment statement before withdrawing items.
Workflow documentation would need to be developed for cases when withdrawing a previously committed item occurs.
Workflows will need to be developed to add or update item data and holdings 583 notes (including, potentially, $3) when new commitments are made.

Approve Recommendation
Creation of itemized sets for 4 million items (1 week)
Update items identified for 4 million items (Allison to get projection of 10,000 items throughput)
Identify linked holdings and update with 583 field (Allison to get projection of ~10,000 holdings throughput)