University of Virginia Library
Summary FY 2002-03 Results
| Target1 Met | Target2 Met | Targets Not Met |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| User | I. Overall Survey: faculty I. Overall Survey: students VI: Circulation of new monographs: print VII. Turnaround time: searches VII. Turnaround time: Toolkit |
II. Customer Service Rating III. ARL Index Ranking V. Special Collections attendance VII. Turnaround time: LEO |
VII. Turnaround time: ILL VII. Turnaround time: recalls VII. Turnaround time: new books |
| Subtotal | 5 | 4 | 3 |
| Metrics Suspended: IV. Instruction Rating and VI. Circulation of new monographs: electronic (Subtotal : 2) | |||
| * Composite Score 0.17 | |||
| Internal Process | VIII. Processing time for routine acquisitions XII. Process Improvement |
X. Service to internal customers | IX. Shelving time and quality |
| Subtotal | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Metric Suspended: XI. Departmental assessment plans (Subtotal: 1) | |||
| * Composite Score 0.25 | |||
| Finance | XIII. Non-State Expenditures XIV. Library budget/University budget XVI. Unit cost of serial use: electronic XVII. Unit cost of database use XVIII. Unit cost of acquisitions XVIII. Unit cost of ILS XXIX. Unit cost of public services: circulation |
XV. Used mono/total mono | XVIII. Unit cost of cataloging XXIX. Unit cost of public services: reference |
| Subtotal | 7 | 1 | 2 |
| Metrics Suspended: XVI. Unit cost of serial use: paper and XXIX. Unit cost of public services: user ed (Subtotal: 2) | |||
| * Composite Score 0.50 | |||
| Learning/Growth | XXII. Equipment reliability XXIII. Renovations |
XXI. Retain commended staff | XXIV. Expenditures for digital material XXV. Website usability testing XXVI. Increase digital access |
| Subtotal | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| Metric Suspended: XX. Develop learning plans (Subtotal: 1) | |||
| * Composite Score -0.17 | |||
| Grand Total | 16 | 7 | 9 |
| * Composite Score 0.22 (excludes the 6 suspended metrics) | |||
* 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.