The SHARE Circulation & Resource Sharing Committee made significant changes to the Damaged or Incomplete Item Procedure, including:
- Clarification of owning versus requesting library responsibilities
- Separation of minor versus major damage procedures
- Examples of minor versus major damage
- Process for major damage using rubber bands to prevent AMHS check in
- Process for minor damage (sticky notes) due to discontinuation of removable tape
Below are the suggested changes.
If a library's material is returned to a different location with new damage that has not already been noted, the owning library is responsible for assessment. Libraries should not send out items for interlibrary loan that have major damage or have missing discs or other pieces.
Minor Damage and Can Circulate
Minor damage may include normal wear and tear like small stains, wavy or yellowed pages, or minimal water damage that has dried. If an item has minor damage which does not prevent that item from circulating, and the damage is not already noted either on the item or in the item record, the requesting library should include SHARE’s Interlibrary Loan Condition Report (sticky note), affixed to the inside of the item.
Owning Library Responsibilities:
Once the item returns home, the owning library should remove the condition report and do at least one of the following:
-
Mark the item’s inside cover in pencil with the date and nature of the damage.
-
In the Free Text Block field, make a note in the item record with the date and the nature of the damage, along with your name.
-
Using a check-in note, document the date and the nature of the damage in the Free Text Block field, along with your name. To use a check-in note, select the item and click the Manage Item icon (or Actions—Manage Item Record in Polaris Leap).
Major Damage and Cannot Circulate
Major damage or missing pieces affect usability, so the item should not circulate. Examples of major damage may include a broken spine, torn or missing pages, or significant liquid damage. This might also be due to either normal wear, poor production, or patron misuse. If a library's material is returned with incomplete or with major damage, or the patron does not want to accept the item due to the condition, the requesting library should return the item to the owning library.
Requesting Library Responsibilities:
-
Provide the Report of Damaged or Incomplete Item Form (full page form via the SHARE website) to the front of the item. Note the missing pieces or nature of the damage.
-
Affix the documentation with rubber bands and cover up the barcode. Do not use a transit slip.
-
Check the item in to track the location and deny any pending holds, so that the damaged item can be reviewed by the owning library. Click “Yes” to reactivate the hold, so the patron will receive the next available item.
Owning Library Responsibilities:
-
Once the item returns home, contact the last patron’s home library to get missing pieces returned (if applicable).
-
If the owning library decides to bill for a damaged or incomplete item, contact the last patron’s home library to add relevant charges to the patron account. They may also send a bill to the requesting library with a Bill for Item Form.
-
Once the item has been paid for, the owning library should either delete the item or mark the item as withdrawn (to be later deleted by the library cataloger/barcoder). If the item is the last copy available, please notify the patron’s home library.
-
Send the damaged and paid-for item to the payee. If sending via delivery, the owning library should use a transit slip, covering the barcode, and affix with rubber bands.
Items Damaged or Incomplete in Transit
-
If the item is suspected to have been damaged or pieces are missing due to transit, the owning library may contact the IHLS Delivery Department or SHARE Director for assistance.
-
If all other resolutions have failed, a bill may be sent to the requesting library as stated in the ILLINET Interlibrary Loan Code.
Thank you for taking the time to review the suggested changes. To comment, log in to the SHARE website (link at the bottom right of the page) using your Polaris username and password. The SHARE Circulation & Resource Sharing Committee appreciates your input!
Comments
Missing Discs and Pencil
"Mark the item’s inside cover in pencil with the date and nature of the damage."
I will fully admit, this is nitpicky, but does it being pencil really need to be specified? We use pen so it doesn't smudge.
We have a couple of disc sets (one DVD, one CD) that are missing one disc. We still circulate the items, we just have a block and a note on the item about the missing discs. Should we remove those from ILL circulation?
General comments
*
Comment on Major Damage and Cannot Circulate
Under the Major Damage and Cannot Circulate section, I think there are two scenarios that are trying to be addressed by one policy/procedure: The first scenario is that a patron brings back an item that they have badly damaged (Scenario 1) and the second is that an item that is damaged, has been sent and the patron has refused it and wants another copy (Scenario 2).
I find the following confusing because as the reader I don't know which scenario is being addressed:
If the item is the last copy available, please notify the patron’s home library. From the point of view of the Owning Library, I have been sent a damaged item in delivery with a note on it. I bill the Requesting Library. Either the Requesting Library or the patron has paid for this item which could take weeks or maybe even months. As I wait for payment, I have to hang on to this damaged item. As the Owning Library we change the status in the system, I am now suppose to contact that Requesting Library again to say that we are the last copy available (if that is true). The hold has been filled (Scenario 1) so therefore there would be no need to tell the Requesting Library that my library owned the last copy. In Scenario 2, the Requesting Library should probably check to see how many other copies are in the system.
"Check the item in to track the location and deny any pending holds, so that the damaged item can be reviewed by the owning library. Click “Yes” to reactivate the hold, so the patron will receive the next available item."
If the Owning Library is the last copy, then this patron's hold isn't going to be filled any way as soon as the status is changed, but there may be a different bibliographic record that a hold could be placed on. Example: DVD versus Blu Ray. I think the burden of making sure that the patron gets the item that they want is on the Requesting Library. If the Owning Library has the last copy in SHARE, then maybe the request could be placed in OCLC ILL instead but only the Requesting Library would be able to determine if this would satisfy the patron's request.
Going back to Scenario 1, why would I "Send the damaged and paid-for-item to the payee."?
When payment is made for the item, shouldn't the Requesting Library ask the patron if they want the item back first? As an example, if a patron spills coffee on the book and it was soaked through, the Requesting Library sends it back, the Owning Library sends a bill which could take weeks to get payment for, as the Owning Library I am suppose to hold on to this damaged book. If payment was made by the patron, they may want the item back. If payment is made by the Requesting Library (because the patron won't pay for it or it is put in the drop box and you never see them again?), does the Requesting Library really want that item back??????
Could the words, "Upon request, the Owning Library will send the damaged and paid for item to the payee." or perhaps on the damage report there could be a check box saying they want the item back? Again, why is the burden on the Owning Library to determine whether or not an item should be sent back after payment? The Requesting Library should make that determination by asking their patron or deciding if they want the item.
I think this policy/procedure would be stronger if the two scenarios were split apart.
Just my two cents, Donna
Minor damage but can circulate
Thank you for outlining this process. I appreciate the effort to create consistency across libraries. I do have a few considerations.
Using the Free Text Block to document damage can create congestion in the item record and slow down workflows when staff are checking in large volumes of materials. Additional notes in that field can make it more difficult to quickly locate relevant information. We have gotten a little note happy here over the last few years and we are now reconsidering our processes.
It may also be helpful to allow the owning library discretion in determining what qualifies as minor versus chargeable damage. For example, if a brand new item returns with staining or water damage beyond a few pages, the owning library may feel replacement billing is appropriate even if the damage might otherwise appear minor.
Additionally, noting damage directly inside the item may not always be necessary. Some libraries do not document minor damage for materials they would not bill for. For example, our library does not typically note damage on items older than two years because we would not pursue replacement charges for them.
Allowing the home library flexibility in documentation and billing decisions may help accommodate different local practices while still supporting communication about item condition.