Updated July 2022 by Sam Fraleigh
Checking CatQC Reports
This procedure is intended as a general guideline for reviewing CatQC records. It does not cover all cataloging procedures that may be needed in the course of your work. It does present an explanation of what to look for based on the results of running CatQC as well as some of the procedures that should be followed. Always check with your supervisor if you are unsure what to do.
One reminder: Never overlay an Alma record with another record from OCLC with a different OCLC number if other state institutions’ holdings are on the Alma record. We can, however, enhance the record we have in OCLC and then overlay the existing Alma record. If only UF has holdings on the record in question, we can overlay that record with different OCLC copy. Just remember to delete our OCLC holdings for that record and set our OCLC holdings for the new record being used.
NOTE: The following is a list of the record characteristics flagged by the CatQC program in order from most likely to encounter to least likely. As the program is several years old and difficult to update, some of these record characteristics have significantly faded from relevance and/or abundance in the reports over the years – these procedures are listed towards the bottom.
We only check the 246 to be sure that the alternate title has not been mistakenly added to the $i instead of the $a. You can see this in the report, so it should not be necessary to look at the record in Alma or OCLC for only this consideration and can usually be dismissed at a glance.
Encoding level of M, K, (common) 7, (uncommon) J, 2, 3, 5, 8 etc. (rare)
Please double-check the Alma record for each record flagged for this category to see if it is of good quality. Also check the record in OCLC to see if any recent updates have been made that need to be shared to Alma. Cataloger’s judgement if often necessary to determine the best course of action to address an Alma record flagged this way.
490 0 _ Untraced series
The CatQC program flags all shelf-ready records with a 0 in the first indicator, signifying an untraced series. The UF Libraries decided a while back that we would follow PCC policy (vs. LC policy) to trace series when we encounter them. Change the first indicator to a 1 and add the corresponding 8XX field (most commonly an 830). Check to see if there is an authority record for the series in question and validate, if so. If not, we generally will create an authority record for the series, especially if it is numbered.
Checking numerals (common) and 245 $n, 245 $p (uncommon)
These are supposed to signal the possibility that we received an individual record for a serial or a monographic volume set which is undesirable for items in UF collections.
These are also used to catch serials. Some of the primary keywords that the program looks for are “annual”, “report”, “magazine”, “journal”, etc. Just check over the title in the report. Many of these words are often used as parts of legitimate monograph titles so if you don’t find anything that indicates a problem, go on to the next record.
*** Situations covered after this point are very rare, if still encountered at all ***
This catches non-print records, especially e-books. The program detects any 338 field that does not have "volume" in the $a. Because we should only receive records for print material, a 338 that does not have "volume" in the $a indicates a format other than print. However, if an item has a term other than “volume” in the $a, it can be disregarded as a concern as long as it also contains “$a volume”.
This is used to check for non-English OCLC records or parallel records. If encountered, look into the record in question and see if there is an English-language record alternative for it.
Checking and editing 856 links (check with supervisor if encountered & unsure how to handle)