ReCAP Data Circulation FY13
description
Transcript of ReCAP Data Circulation FY13
ReCAP DataCirculation FY13
Zack LaneReCAP Coordinator
July 2013
ReCAPColumbia University
109.6% increase in total charges to offsite collections from FY04 to FY13
Meanwhile 35.7% decline for on campus collections
Offsite charges have leveled off over the past five years
Faculty (OFF) account for 40.4% of charges and 58.0% of renewals in FY13
Offsite collections have more renewals than charges; it is the opposite for on campus
Findings
ReCAPColumbia University
Circulation activity is only one measure of collection usage
System-wide circulation statistics are available for both offsite and on campus
Circulation data are accessible to all staff Offsite collections can be identified by CLIO
location format off,xxx. ReCAP opened in January 2002 Voyager circulation activity data is available
from July 2003, the date of implementation Data does not include Teacher’s College
or Law Library
Circulation Data
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
Previous Studies Previous study has been done:
System-wide Circulation Data: Initial Analysis (.ppt)
Completed by ReCAP intern Steve Zweibel in Summer 2010
Summarizes and visualizes system-wide data by activity type and patron group
Presents activity of both on campus and offsite collections; it is not ReCAP-specific
Includes observations, analysis and conclusions
Charts
ReCAPColumbia University
109.6 % increase from FY04 to FY13 Increase in circulation activity totals every
year between FY04 and FY09 One, small decline between FY09 and FY10 Since FY09 the total charge volume has
plateaued
Charges to Offsite Collections
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
13,326 14,951
17,615
21,381
25,083
28,023 27,524 28,734 29,496
27,814
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
FY03/04 FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13
CHARGES: Offsite by Fiscal Year
Comparing offsite and on campus charges by volume
Offsite charge volume increased 109.6 % between FY04 and FY13
On campus charge volume declined by 35.7% between FY04 and FY13
On campus charges have declined every year since FY04
N.B. On campus collection size declines each year; offsite collections grow each year
Offsite vs. On Campus Charges
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
13,326 14,951 17,615 21,383 25,083 28,029 27,524 28,735 29,497 27,797
557,501 552,788
509,556
483,905
449,135 441,188 437,064415,987
404,690
358,538
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
FY03/04 FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13
CHARGES: Offsite vs. On Campus by Fiscal Year
Offsite On Campus
Growth of offsite collection usage can be evaluated using a ratio
Offsite/Total Circulation as percentage Ratio has increased since FY04 Since FY09 the ratio has been 6-7% Data suggests that the leveling off
correlates to increased renewals
Offsite as Percent of Total Charges
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
2.33%
2.63%
3.34%
4.23%
5.29%
5.97% 5.92%
6.46%
6.79%
7.20%
0.00%
1.00%
2.00%
3.00%
4.00%
5.00%
6.00%
7.00%
8.00%
FY03/04 FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13
CHARGES: Offsite % of Total
Monthly charges of both offsite and on campus collections are in phase with the academic calendar
Peaks in the middle of Fall and Spring terms The pattern of offsite charges is more
apparent when viewed alone Amplitude is higher for on campus
collections – see charts by calendar month◦ 1:3 for on campus◦ 1:2 for offsite
Charge Volume by Month
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,0007/
1/20
03
10/1
/200
3
1/1/
2004
4/1/
2004
7/1/
2004
10/1
/200
4
1/1/
2005
4/1/
2005
7/1/
2005
10/1
/200
5
1/1/
2006
4/1/
2006
7/1/
2006
10/1
/200
6
1/1/
2007
4/1/
2007
7/1/
2007
10/1
/200
71/
1/20
08
4/1/
2008
7/1/
2008
10/1
/200
8
1/1/
2009
4/1/
2009
7/1/
2009
10/1
/200
9
1/1/
2010
4/1/
2010
7/1/
2010
10/1
/201
0
1/1/
2011
4/1/
2011
7/1/
2011
10/1
/201
11/
1/20
12
4/1/
2012
7/1/
2012
10/1
/201
2
1/1/
2013
4/1/
2013
CHARGES: Offsite vs On Campus by Month
Offsite On Campus
ReCAPColumbia University
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,5007/
1/20
03
10/1
/200
3
1/1/
2004
4/1/
2004
7/1/
2004
10/1
/200
4
1/1/
2005
4/1/
2005
7/1/
2005
10/1
/200
5
1/1/
2006
4/1/
2006
7/1/
2006
10/1
/200
6
1/1/
2007
4/1/
2007
7/1/
2007
10/1
/200
7
1/1/
2008
4/1/
2008
7/1/
2008
10/1
/200
8
1/1/
2009
4/1/
2009
7/1/
2009
10/1
/200
9
1/1/
2010
4/1/
2010
7/1/
2010
10/1
/201
0
1/1/
2011
4/1/
2011
7/1/
2011
10/1
/201
1
1/1/
2012
4/1/
2012
7/1/
2012
10/1
/201
2
1/1/
2013
4/1/
2013
CHARGES: Offsite by Month
ReCAPColumbia University
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
January February March April May June July August September October November December
CHARGES: On Campus by Calendar Month
ReCAPColumbia University
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
January February March April May June July August September October November December
CHARGES: Offsite by Calendar Month
Chart compares total volume of charges to renewals for offsite collections
Faculty and Grad request more offsite collections than Undergrads
Faculty and Grads Faculty have higher renewal/charge ratios
Over time, these two patron groups tend to renew more than charge
CUL may expect to see steady or decreasing ReCAP retrieval rate as a result
Offsite Charges vs. Renewals
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
40,000
45,000
FY03/04 FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13
Circulation of OFFSITE Collections: Charges vs Renewals
Offsite CHARGES Offsite RENEWALS
Chart compares total volume of charges to renewals for on campus collections
Renewal behavior has changed significantly over time
Faculty and Grads Faculty have higher renewal/charge ratios
Undergrad loan periods were extended from four weeks to one term in January 2008
Loan period had a stark effect on usage pattern, reducing the need for renewal
On Campus Charges vs. Renewals
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
FY03/04 FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13
Circulation of ON CAMPUS Collections: Charges vs Renewals
On Campus CHARGES On Campus RENEWALS
Calculates how many renewals per charge Renewal behavior has changed over time Offsite collections have been tending
upward, indicating more renewals per charge
On campus collections trend downward, less renewals per charge
Charge to Renewal Ratio
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
1.49
0.72
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
FY03/04 FY04/05 FY05/06 FY06/07 FY07/08 FY08/09 FY09/10 FY10/11 FY11/12 FY12/13
CHARGE to RENEWAL Ratio
Offsite On Campus
Faculty (OFF) accounts for the majority of offsite activity in FY13: ◦ 40.4% of charges◦ 58.0% of renewals
Together Faculty and Grads (GRD) account for 76.7% of charges and 86.9% of renewals
Faculty charges have increased due to more Grads serving as adjunct faculty
This allowed Grads to have OFF set as primary patron group effective in Summer 2007
Offsite Charges and Renewals by Patron Group
ReCAPColumbia University
ReCAPColumbia University
GRD36.3%
OFF40.4%
REG19.6%
VIS3.7%
Offsite CHARGES: FY13 by Patron Group
ReCAPColumbia University
GRD28.9%
OFF58.0%
REG6.2%
VIS6.9%
Offsite RENEWALS: FY13 by Patron Group
More information and data can be found on the ReCAP Data Center
Website includes more information about system-wide data and special projects
Tailored data sets and analysis will be provided to staff via the ReCAP Coordinator
Please see the main ReCAP website for general information about CUL procedures and systems
More Data Available
ReCAPColumbia University