Alma Analytics

[mmyers]

It appears to me when I run analyses in Alma Analytics, the results contain materials that have been previously deleted. Is there a way to turn this setting off? I went through and added filters to the weeding analysis we regularly use. During that process, I noticed a few dozen materials are still in Process Type "Technical-Migration." So I ran the "Items with Technical Migration Status" analysis and realized many of these items have already been deleted. So why do they continue to show up on the report, as if they are still in Alma and need to be handled??? 

I have attempted multiple searches through Google and the Ex Libris Knowledge Center to try and fix this on my own to no avail. Any thoughts would be appreciated.

Thanks!
Marci

[jcarrell]

Hi Marci,

Yes, there’s a lifecycle filter somewhere in Analytics.  I actually discovered this a few weeks ago when we actually want to pull the deleted items.  I learned they were still in there.  

I think these instructions will help: https://knowledge.exlibrisgroup.com/Alma...months_ago

Hope that helps!

[mmyers]

Thanks, Jacqueline. Yes, I used the lifecycle filter on the weeding report. I wish there were a way to just set it globally. I was hoping someone had found a way to do that. lol

[jdessino]

Marci:

Unlike Aleph, when you delete something, it doesn't actually get removed from Alma. To limit your Analysis so you don't see those, you have to include a field to that limit to Active. I think the field is Lifecycle, but I'm in an ELUNA session so didn't look it up.

[mmyers]

Thanks, Jacque. Yes, it's Lifecycle.

[teresa]

I am trying to do some clean-up jobs on my Book Count- All FY2019 analytics report before I run the final count on June 30 for the VCCS Questionnaire . So far I'm working on clearing Lost and Missing process types from my count, but I was wondering what the Technical-Migration count is under the "Num of items (In Repository)" column. If these Technical-Migration items really are items that are already deleted as some of you found earlier, should they be included in my total Items in Inventory on the questionnaire? Or should they be counted as Deletions on the questionnaire? Thanks!

[jdessino]

Teresa:

The End of the Year statistical counts are set up to only count things that have not been deleted. So they should be counted as items in inventory.

[teresa]

I am trying to do some clean-up jobs on my Book Count- All FY2019 analytics report before I run the final count on June 30 for the VCCS Questionnaire . So far I'm working on clearing Lost and Missing process types from my count, but I was wondering what the Technical-Migration count is under the "Num of items (In Repository)" column. If these Technical-Migration items really are items that are already deleted as some of you found earlier, should they be included in my total Items in Inventory on the questionnaire? Or should they be counted as Deletions on the questionnaire? Thanks!

Thank you, Jacque, for the information about the End of the Year statistical counts. I have been doing some further investigation, and I've found so far that the Alma Technical-Migration process type is probably our old Aleph process type/status of SR (Sent to Repair) or maybe SC (Sent to Cataloging). We still have these items in the catalog, but they were weeded and stored because they were valuable titles that were damaged/fragile binding/etc. So, long story short--it does appear that these items are still in our collection, just in a different process type than on last year's Aleph book count.

[jdessino]

Anything with an Item Process Status in Aleph were migrated with Technical-Migration as the process type. The actual IPS code was placed in Internal Note 3 (if I'm remembering correctly off the top of my head!). At TCC, for any that couldn't be converted to something existing in Alma (like Missing), or just cleared out, we had new locations created and moved them to the new location (think Display, Withdraw). Then we cleared all the Technical Migration process type since anything with that process displays in Primo as 'not in place'.