||| Technical Services Division	||	|

TECHNICAL SERVICES DIVISION
PROGRAM REVIEW
GIFTS PROCESSING WORK GROUP

TSD Program Review Report for Handling of Gifts in Kind
Committee members: Lauren Brown, Michelle Kalech, Kay Kearney, Reny Mashoori,
Cynthia Sorrell, Ken Tanaka, and Cindy Todd
October 20, 2000

I. List of major tasks:

1. Receive Gift Materials in TSD
2. Display unselected Gift Materials for Selectors
3. Search VICTOR to determine whether selected gifts should be added to the collections
4. Return materials not added to Gifts in Kind Coordinator for Book Sale
5. Create bibliographic control over gifts destined for backlog queue
6. Catalog gift materials for collections

• Including adding OCLC holdings
• Proper authority work
• Adding 599 information when appropriate

II. Flow charts for tasks:

• Gifts coming into Acquisitions
• Materials sent to Rapid Cataloging
• Selected gifts sent to Acquisitions from all other locations
• Hebrew/Yiddish materials
• Gifts sent to Nonprint by donors
• Selected gifts sent to east asian language specialists in Cataloging
• Gifts to performing arts
• Gifts to Marylandia, Rare Books, Archives, etc.

The review committee quickly determined that there are several separate conduits for gift materials into TSD.

One significant point of entry is the Acquisitions Department. Acquisitions receives material directly from donors; it automatically sends this material to the Gifts in Kind Coordinator for proper acknowledgement and reporting. Acquisitions also receives material from the Gifts in Kind Coordinator; it presents this material for selection by library selectors. Acquisitions also receives selected material directly from some branches. Selected gift material from the later two sources is then searched to determine whether it is to be added to the collections. From Acquisitions, gifts go to the Rapid Cataloging queue on the 2nd floor or to the Gift Backlog queue in basement TSD storage. Acquisitions creates SRAQ records for each item that selectors identify as "backlog" and is therefore destined to sit in the Gift Backlog queue in the basement. It appears that the ONLY unit in TSD that accumulates and reports separate statistics relating to gifts is Acquisitions.

The other significant points of entry for gift materials into TSD are through specialist catalogers. For example, PAL sends its gifts directly to the Music/Audio cataloging Unit. Marylandia/Rare Books/Archives sends its gifts directly to the Rare Book Cataloger. All Hebrew/Yiddish materials go directly to the cataloger responsible for those languages. East Asia Collection works directly with appropriate language specialist-catalogers in TSD. In each of these cases, cataloging priorities are negotiated between the collecting unit and the appropriate catalogers. The collecting units speak very highly of the quality and flexibility of the service that this arrangement provides.

In general, gifts are fully integrated into the cataloging and end unit processes once they leave Acquisitions. There is no difference in treatment or statistics created just because an item happens to be a gift except for the addition of 599 tag information (when required) or the addition of a bookplate (usually done in End Processing).

III. Information on the level of staff that performs the tasks

In the Acquisitions Department gift materials represent a separate workflow within that department. Reny Mashoori (LTIII) has been temporarily assigned to this work with the assistance of student. Effective in October 2000, Scott Leffler (LTII) assumed some of the gift responsibilities; this change occurred after the work of the committee was done, so we do not know the full implications of workflow changes. In the rest of TSD, the copy cataloging/original cataloging/serials control work/authority work/physical processing/preservation staff would be engaged as for any other material proceeding through TSD.

IV. How much of it is there?

There are two sources for Gifts in Kind statistics. The Gifts in Kind Office Statistics for FY99 are Appendix A of this report. The Acquisitions Department statistics for the same period are Appendix B. Both units are reporting monograph titles/pieces, periodical pieces, and other format. Acquisitions makes an additional count for gift items searched & to the queue both titles/pieces.

Gift receipts are a very unpredictable workflow. Some measure of control over that flow is supplied by the processing priority negotiations between catalogers and collections, and by attempts like EPSL’s and the Gifts in Kind Coordinator’s to send Acquisitions a steady "diet" of material to be processed. However, storage of unprocessed gift materials represents both a storage and workload challenge.

There is also a Selected Gift Books Backlog queue in the TSD storage area of the McKeldin basement. The queue is bibliographically controlled by SRAQ records and the oldest material in the queue dates back to selections made in 1993. These SRAQ records are not visible from the public catalog. This queue is under the management of the Rapid Cataloging Unit. That Unit processes from the queue oldest material first as workflow permits OR as particular pieces/collections are judged so important that they must be processed. Below is a description of that queue and its size:

• Entenza Books (1 range)
• Hebrew Serials (about 200 pieces)
• Duplicate Serials from Topping Collection & Greek books and more Entenza (1 range)
• Hebrew Books (about 150 pieces)/Hebrew Priority/Hebrew Serials/Packed shelves (over 1000 pieces)
• Hebrew Brittle Books/Hebrew Books from Stanford/more Hebrew material (1 range)

V. Bottle Necks and Other Problems

• Acquisitions currently fills out Gifts Transmittal Forms for gifts material that simply arrives in Acquisitions via the mail. Acq then sends these forms and the material to Gifts in Kind Coordinator for acknowledgement etc. Is it necessary that Acquisitions fill out this form or should Gifts in Kind Coordinator be responsible for determining whether this "level" of paperwork be done?
• TSD does not seem to actually ask selectors to reevaluate their selection decisions, yet TSD staff are very frustrated when a selector is adding, say a second copy of a 3rd edition of a text that we already hold the 4th edition of. We know that many selectors are making selection decisions without the benefit of looking at VICTOR. Should Acquisitions inform selectors when they discover that we hold later editions or another format of selected material?
• There were numerous comments on the Gift Selection Form. Comments focused on staff questions about the #of copies to add portion of that slip. Staff questioned whether selectors were truly making a "# of copies to add" decision on a title-by-title basis. Generally TSD staff were suggesting that selectors were allowing too many copies of some titles into the collection. Anecdotal evidence placed that range of "# of copies" that selectors were indicating: from 3 to 13, to "add no matter how many copies".
• The cataloging priorities for gift materials are varied. When gift materials are sent to individual catalogers, as in the case with Alice Lasota or Jim Stephenson, the catalogers and collecting libraries/collections negotiate cataloging priorities. These arrangements seem to very successful from both parties points of view. When selectors select from the gift materials presented in Acquisitions or when selected gifts are sent into Acquisitions (from EPSL for example) the selector indicates whether the material should receive routine or backlog processing. (When the decision is not indicated, TSD policy is to assign the gift to the backlog queue. Is this the appropriate policy?). The routine material goes on to Rapid Cataloging, the backlog material goes to the basement and eventually up to Rapid. Apparently the Cataloging Priorities Committee has little or no role in this process.

  Yet another level of complexity is introduced when a gift is sitting in "some processing queue" and donor politics or user need demands that this gift be found immediately (or sooner) and processed. This happens infrequently, but can cause a great deal of work as "the search is on." Gifts cause very special problems when their cataloging priority changes because there is NO BIBLIOGRAPHIC CONTROL unless the material is sitting the Gifts Backlog Queue. TSD doesn’t even know if the specific piece was selected and IS IN a cataloging queue at all.

• Periodicals present special problems. Are there policies/guidelines addressing issues such as selecting and then cataloging offprints or reprints? The Head of Serials Cataloging questioned the TSD staff expense of cataloging these when they duplicate material that UM already holds within complete issues or volumes.
• The processing of Hebrew/Yiddish gifts is complex. Not only is there a high volume of material requiring the attention of a cataloging specialist, but there is also a very significant amount of interaction and negotiation between interested faculty, the TSD specialist, the Preservation Department, and the subject specialist for this area. These interactions often take place at a piece level; this has a negative impact on the efficiency of processing and necessitates "holding" pieces while decision making is in process.
• TSD staff are especially concerned about the physical condition of the gift materials that selectors are selecting for the collections. Some Staff believe that many selectors are totally unconcerned about the cost of adding such material to the collections and are probably making bad decisions to add such material. Staff is concerned about the costs of processing and reformatting this material. Yvonne has a reasoned position and is quite articulate in stating that Preservations does not want to prevent selectors from adding poor condition gifts, IF the items are needed in the collections. She states that selectors need to realize that there is expense involved so that they do not add "unnecessary" items that are brittle, etc. All parties agree that there is a preservation/selector training issue and that selectors must be aware of the COSTS of their decisions.

  Another level of complexity on this issue is the philosophical disagreement within TSD itself on when to manage to preservation issues. Some cataloging staff believe that preservation decisions should be made BEFORE spending the time cataloging problematic material. The argument seems to be that spending the time cataloging a piece and then having a decision made later to reformat results in additional steps to recatalog and remove the record as originally cataloged. Preservation, on the other hand, does NOT want TSD Acquisitions staff and Cataloging staff to interrupt their work flow to bring damaged items to Preservation. Instead, they should put damaged items through cataloging and then on to Preservation at the physical processing stage.

  VI. General Recommendations

  • A. We recommend that TSD/CMRAC work together and consider making a "project" of selecting all of the unselected gift materials in the basement. We propose that the collections be unpacked and displayed in the basement storage area and that selectors work with the material in that setting.
  • B. We recommend a Process Improvement Team that would work on the gift process and focus special attention on these areas:
    • TSD staff are frustrating each other a great deal on their philosophical differences relating to WHEN preservation decisions should be made. Second floor staff are extremely sensitive to preservation issues and genuinely care about the material that they are sending to the collections. The Preservation Department has done an excellent job in getting its message across, now the Department and the folks on the second floor need to have a dialogue about the frustrations of the front end of the TSD process on this issue.
    • Do we need a redesigned Gift Selection Form or simply to agree with selectors on what the "add up to copies" language means and find a way to document that agreement for future training?
    • Are we appropriately managing negotiations for the cataloging priorities for gift materials? PAL and Special Collections have worked out an arrangement that seems to be working for TSD and those collections, can we learn from that experience.
    • Hebrew/Yiddish materials

  VII. Miscellaneous ideas

  Could donors with special language skills assist in processing "their" gifts if such language skills are needed?

  Should Acquisitions look for DLC/DLC OCLC copy for material designated as "backlog" and if such copy exists, either add holdings or send on to Rapid for processing? This would reduce the number of SRAQ records that must be created to provide bibliographic control over the Gift Backlog Queue. SRAQ records are NOT available through the online catalog; therefore, users have no idea that we hold the material.

  Book plates are generally inserted by the End Processing Unit. Should they be inserted earlier in the process so that loose bookplates are not in danger of being lost/misplaced as books move through the work queue.

  Appendices:
  Gifts-in-kind statistics FY99
  Gifts received, FY 2000
  

  

  Program Review Working Groups |TSD Program Review|TSD Home
  SEND US YOUR COMMENTS

  

  Libraries, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-7011 (301)405-0800
  Please send comments and suggestions to the Libraries' Webmaster.
  Content questions should be directed to Lulu Barnachea, Office of the Director of Technical Services.

  
  Last edited Oct. 24, 2000

  © 2000 University of Maryland Libraries
  Last Revised: Oct. 24, 2000