[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Billing Fixes and Enhancements Sponsored by MassLNC

[McCanna, Terran]

Thank you for the additional explanation, Kathy, it sounds like they will all be good additions to the product - even if the PINES libraries choose not to use them!


Terran McCanna 
PINES Program Manager 
Georgia Public Library Service 
1800 Century Place, Suite 150 
Atlanta, GA 30345 
404-235-7138 
tmccanna at georgialibraries.org 


----- Original Message -----
From: "Kathy Lussier" <klussier at masslnc.org>
To: open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 4:25:25 PM
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Billing Fixes and Enhancements Sponsored by MassLNC

Hi Terra,

Thanks for the feedback! I think I can answer your questions, but, 
Jason, please jump if I get anything wrong.
> Hi Jason,
>
> I've asked for input from the PINES Subcommittees on the billing changes you've been asked to make. In general their overall response was a request for you to make each of the items optional (system-wide) so that if they are included in the core Evergreen product eventually, that PINES will be able to opt out of the changes if they conflict with current or desired work processes.
>
>
> 1. Support for conditional negative balances
>
> Responses: Not a strong for or against sentiment, but overall request to make it optional.
Yes, these will be library settings and therefore will be optional.

>
>
> 2. Support for lost and paid status
>
> Responses: The responses indicated that they are unclear about where these status’ would be listed and for what reason they would be used for. Would the status be listed under the Item Status window or in the patron’s account? Regardless, if it were made optional, PINES could opt in or out of it.
This will be implemented as a stop fines reason that is applied after 
full payment has been made and will also change the copy status to "Lost 
& Paid." Library settings will be available to make this status optional.

As far as the reason for the Lost & Paid status, our libraries see that 
the payment or non-payment of an item can make a difference in whether 
they can expect to see the item again. In other words, an unpaid lost 
item is more likely to eventually reach the shelves again than an item 
for which a patron has already paid the replacement cost.

In that regards, the holdability and OPAC visibility settings for a lost 
item may differ from the same settings for a lost and paid item. From 
our perspective, a copy status made sense since it enables control over 
holdability and OPAC visibility.

Visibility in the staff client is also of considerable importance. We 
see this visibility as a usability issue. As an example, let's say a 
reference person has a patron they are helping who wants to know if the 
library has a particular title. If the reference person looks it up and 
sees that it is lost, but has not yet had a payment, they might just 
decide to place a hold on another library's copy since there is a 
possibility that the item will be returned.  If they see that the item 
is lost and paid, they probably would still place a hold, but would also 
take the steps necessary to replace the item. Although it is currently 
possible to determine the payment status of that lost item, it takes 
several steps for staff to find the patron who lost the item, retrieve 
their record, and determine if a payment was made.


>
>
> 3. Void lost fees for claims returned items
>
> Responses: Tentative support, but overall request to make it optional.

Yes, there will be library settings that will enable/disable this 
functionality.
>
>
> 4. Allow renewal on lost, long overdue and claims returned items
>
> Responses: All responses were firmly against this change. If you make it optional, PINES will be able to opt out of it.

There will be a permission tied to this ability, so you can disable it 
by not providing the permission to any of your users. In our case, I 
think our libraries were most interested in giving permission to staff, 
but not allowing public patrons to renew these items. I can see that 
other libraries might not want to provide this permission to anyone.

Kathy
>
>
>
> Thank you for announcing the work you are doing to the community and giving us the opportunity to give you our feedback!
>
>
> Terran McCanna
> PINES Program Manager
> Georgia Public Library Service
> 1800 Century Place, Suite 150
> Atlanta, GA 30345
> 404-235-7138
> tmccanna at georgialibraries.org
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jason Stephenson" <jstephenson at mvlc.org>
> To: "Open-ILS General" <open-ils-general at list.georgialibraries.org>
> Sent: Saturday, July 6, 2013 11:07:00 AM
> Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Billing Fixes and Enhancements Sponsored by	MassLNC
>
> I thought I'd write the general list in order to get the broadest
> coverage of the community. The developers likely either read this list
> or get bug emails from Launchpad that will inform them of the following.
>
> MassLNC has hired me to work on four enhancements for billing in Evegreen:
>
> 1. Support for Conditional Negative Balances
> 2. Support for Lost & Paid Status
> 3. Void Lost Fees for Claims Returned Items
> 4. Allow Renewal on Lost, Long Overdue and Claims Returned Items
>
> Details of the work can be found at
>
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/evergreen/+spec/billing-enhancements
>
> and
>
> http://www.sigio.com/evergreen/billing2013.html
>
> I am sharing this in order to solicit community feedback.
>
> The above is being done under contract to MassLNC. It is not at all
> related to my work at MVLC. My use of my MVLC email address to send this
> email is not to be construed as indicating it is.
>
> Cheers,
> Jason Stephenson
> jason at sigio.com