University of Virginia Library
Summary FY 2001-02 Results
| Target 1 Met | Target 2 Met | Targets Not Met |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| User | I. Overall Survey: faculty I. Overall Survey: students VII. Turnaround time searches VII. Turnaround time recalls |
II. Customer Service Rating III. ARL Index Ranking IV. Instruction Rating VI. Circulation of new monographs: print |
V. Special Collections attendance |
| Subtotal | 4 | 4 | 1 |
| * Composite Score 0.33 | |||
| Internal Process | XII. Process Improvement | VIII. Processing time for routine acquisitions X. Service to internal customers |
IX. Shelving time and quality XI. Departmental assessment plans |
| Subtotal | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| * Composite Score -0.20 | |||
| Finance | XIII. Non-State Expenditures XIV. Library budget/University budget XVII. Unit cost of database use XVIII. Unit cost of cataloging XVIII. Unit cost of acquisitions XVIII. Unit cost of ILS |
XV. Used mono/total mono | |
| Subtotal | 6 | 0 | 1 |
| * Composite Score 0.71 | |||
| Learning/Future | XXI. Retain commended staff XXIII. Renovations |
XX. Develop learning plans | XXIV. Expenditures for digital material XXV. Website usability testing XXVI. Increase digital access |
| Subtotal | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| * Composite Score -0.17 | |||
| Grand Total | 13 | 7 | 7 |
| * Composite Score 0.22 | |||
* The composite score is the numerical counterpart of the pie chart. A perfect chart (all green) would have a score of +1; a perfectly bad chart (all red) would have a score of -1.
The composite score is calculated by first subtracting the number of metrics meeting neither target from the number of metrics meeting target1. The difference is then divided by the total number of metrics.