by-branch, circulation, historical-data, polaris-reports
Custom > ~Patron Services > Item Circulation By Collection Group
Item circulation by collection group for the specified branch or branches. This report uses data from the training database and therefore the numbers will be approximately 24 hours behind the data in the production system. This report can take up to 30+ minutes to execute.
A new eContent group has been added to this report. This group includes CKO information from Overdrive circulations. Previously these circs showed up in the Other category.
These eContent circulations “in theory” represent all Overdrive transactions, regardless if they happened through the PAC or directly through the Overdrive website. However, if there is any discrepancy between the Overdrive and Polaris numbers, the Overdrive numbers should be used.
The numbers in this category do not match the numbers generated through the Content Reserve circulation activity report. Is there a chance the Polaris report is not accurate?
The Overdrive reports will be more accurate. The Polaris reports are helpful for providing “ballpark” figures on usage. The separation on this report was more to keep the Overdrive numbers out of the Other category as requested by several folks.
Good to know. Thanks. For reporting then, the Polaris numbers are pretty useless.
Just to clarify…how long was eContent lumped into the Other category? I saw a huge spike in that category for October…but in no other months. I want to make sure we weren’t counting the econtent circ twice by accident.
Thanks. Kent
Re-running the report for previous months the eContent seems to stop in August…if that sounds right.
The change was only made just recently, so reports run during all of October and most of November would have had eContent grouped with Other. However, any reports run after the change will have the updated groups, regardless of the chosen timeframe.
Sounds good. just FYI…I think there was a little Econtent showing up in September as well. I ran September again and the EContent was pulled out in its own category. Nothing in August.
Do we have any idea why these number are so different? (3117 econtent 2141 overdrive) Polaris’s number is about 30% higher than Overdrives. @wosborn , I need a new definition of ballbark. 
LOL.
It will take a long time to track down that difference. But our first step is to get Polaris and overdrive syncing properly and consistently (I’ve got another call on that this afternoon). Once they’re syncing properly, we could spend more time investigating, but until they’re syncing reliably we’d just be spinning our wheels.
