Presentation on theme: "October 2010. An Automated System Enabling Libraries to Efficiently Track and Loan Materials ◦ The Catalog of library materials ◦ The database of patrons."— Presentation transcript:
An Automated System Enabling Libraries to Efficiently Track and Loan Materials ◦ The Catalog of library materials ◦ The database of patrons ◦ Check-outs ◦ Check-ins ◦ Requests for materials ◦ Overdue fines, fees, notices ◦ E-commerce ◦ Patron preferences, lists, reading history, etc. Current system purchased in 2002 through private grants.
Large and complex. Many limitations for consortium or federated system. Lack of support for modern server architecture. Vendor customer service policies are not what is needed and there is no alternative. New features and updates are lagging and require additional purchases. Significant operational cost ($240K annually) with no new features.
Proprietary software vendors are limited in number and have very different goals than public libraries. Information, Reading, Entertainment – ◦ Successful organizations that provide these types of services have direct control over their information systems. We need and want more features, better reliability, and better service. Could an Open Source System be the Answer?
MYTHS FACTS Open source is “free.” We can have everything we want! There is no support. No licensing fees or annual maintenance fees. We can better direct the outcome of our investments The community needs to agree and work together to ensure that common software works together. “The More the Merrier!” Choices are available and there is no vendor “lock.” Freely available to download and develop, and is an ongoing condition of change.
Preliminary Evaluation ◦ Functionality, Sustainability, Financial Viability, Timeframe Detailed Functional Testing ◦ 600+ requirement statements ◦ Test Environment ◦ Data Migration ◦ Document gaps IMLS Grant Partner ◦ Federal grant to pave the way for large public libraries to use open source. ◦ Six libraries across the U.S. – King County Library System lead
Taskforce participants Included requirements from Statewide project State project initially more focused on small libraries State timeline 6-7 years Large urban systems have special needs/our goal We need something sooner
Review new software version to identify gaps ◦ Gaps = “new development” Begin communication & forums for library staff ◦ December – initial introduction (Circulation & OPAC) ◦ Early 2011 – Other functional areas (Holds, Circulation policies, Reporting, Other modules) ◦ Online information portal ◦ Access to test environment ◦ Create training plan for migration Work with libraries to prioritize gaps Create development and migration plan Determine overall timeline