1	Automated Redistribution Request System for Floating Collections Sarajo Wentling Hennepin County Library PLA, February, 2004
2	Hennepin County Library Background One library, 26 buildings Centralized selection, technical services Annual circulation: 11.8M Delivery: 4M items annually 60% back to “owning” library to be reshelved Delivery outsourced: $250K annually Team formed to investigate, plan, implement floating More “How do we” than “Should we”
3	Analysis of delivery data predicted significant drift Migration of material over time from some libraries to others Concentrated losses in the 2 largest libraries Distributed gains in the 23 small and medium sized libraries Causes: Reserves “Patron redistribution” Commuter patterns Open hours and available services Bookdrop availability and design
4	Analysis of delivery data predicted significant drift Weekly loss rate of 4% to 8% at the two largest libraries Develop an automated redistribution request system to compensate for drift Libraries with a surplus automatically receive requests to send material to libraries with a deficit Developed in-house Experimental
5	Automated Redistribution Requests System uses “Percent of Shelf Capacity” to decide how material should be redistributed Nightly snapshot of on-shelf material location and collection information recorded Number of on-shelf items in each library is compared to allocated shelving to give % of shelf capacity
6	Automated Redistribution Requests Current % of shelf capacity is compared to predetermined norms:
7	Automated Redistribution Requests If critical surplus outweighs critical deficit, requests are generated to move material from libraries with critical surplus to those with a deficit Deficits filled in order of need Requests stop when either all the critical surplus is shed or the total deficit is filled
8	Automated Redistribution Requests If critical deficit outweighs critical surplus, requests are generated to move material to libraries with a critical deficit from those with a surplus Requests for material are sent first to the libraries with the largest surplus Requests stop when either all the critical deficit is filled or the total surplus has been requested
9	Automated Redistribution Requests
10	Automated Redistribution Requests
11	Pilot VHS collection (non-juvenile) Broadly distributed in all libraries Heavily used Reservable Started floating on December 16^th Slow start due to holidays Learning curve for library and delivery staff
12	Results Mixed bag, so far Major tweaking needed to bring all libraries closer to the 75% ideal 2 largest libraries seem to be stuck at about 55% of shelf capacity – never enough surplus to fill the need Problems when one part of the collection is more heavily used Feature films in VHS collection More effective than anticipated in reducing deliveries
13	80% reduction in reshelving deliveries
14	Automated Redistribution Request System for Floating Collections For more information, contact HCL’s Collection Handling Action Team chat@hclib.org Presentation available at http://www.hclib.org/extranet