Goal: $5,000
Raised: $5,000
Supporters: 2
This development feature has been funded by
CLAMS (Cape Libraries Automated Materials Sharing Inc.)
NEKLS (Northeast Kansas Library System)
Description
With ‘Local hold groups’, libraries can restrict items to a local group 'always' and items would never leave your group to fill a hold outside of the group.
If you would like those items to leave your group to fill holds then you may be looking for something we coined ‘Local hold priority groups’. This is best described by the example below:
A Library consortium is made up of 3 districts which includes 14 libraries (or branches).
- District A with 3 libraries: Main, West, East
- District B with 6 libraries
- District C with 1 library
Development
In this example:
District A is made up of small rural libraries that share funding amongst the 5 libraries. The collections are moderate and the patron base is on the smaller side. They consider themselves 1 library with 3 branches.
District B is based in a large city. It has 6 branches and one source of funding for new materials. It’s well funded and has a large patron base.
District C is the suburban area and has 1 branch. It’s also funded well and has medium large patron base.
When an item from District A is purchased, the libraries in that District would prefer to allow the 5 District A libraries to have preference on holds before sending the item to District B or District C. What happens currently is that items in District A are being sent consistently to the larger districts with large patron bases with lots of hold requests which slows access to the libraries in District A from using the items in their libraries.
This development will allow for the creation of these hold priority groups. All patrons in the priority group would be given priority over holds from other groups. Within the priority group all libraries branches are considered equal and would be filled in the order they exist in the queue.
Expected Outcome
If a we have a biblio with 3 items system wide - 1 owned by District A MAIN, 1 owned by District B -branch 2 and 1 owned by District C. District A and District C are ‘priority groups’
And now imagine the title has 30 requests on it in this order:
01 request at District C
02 request at District B - branch 1
03 request at District B - branch 1
04 request at District C
05 request at District A - EAST
06 request at District B - branch 5
07 request at District C
08 request at District C
09 request at District B - branch 6
10 request at District C
11 request at District B - branch 5
12 request at District B - branch 4
13 request at District A - EAST
14 request at District C
15 request at District B - branch 4
16 request at District C
17 request at District B - branch 4
18 request at District B - branch 3
19 request at District B - branch 2
20 request at District B - branch 3
21 request at District C
22 request at District B - branch 2
23 request at District A - WEST
24 request at District B - branch 1
25 request at District C
26 request at District B - branch 2
27 request at District B - branch 1
28 request at District B - branch 5
29 request at District B - branch 2
30 request at District C
Requests 05, 13, 23 should be filled by the District A MAIN copy in chronological order
Requests 1,4,7,8,10,14,16,21,25,30 should be filled by the District C copy in chronological order
And then all of the other requests should be filled in chronological order once the prioritized requests have been filled. For example, once hold 23 is filled for District A, that item is free to fill a hold at District B
Koha Community Enhancement in Bugzilla
Bug 20747 - Allow LocalHoldsPriority to fill by hierarchical groups system rather than individual library
Want to be a sponsor
Submit a request to dev@bywatersolutions.com to get the process started.