Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Koha -- ByWater Solutions


2018 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction86 1 1 3 2 18 33 28 87.868
ILS Functionality86 1 2 1 6 22 38 16 87.598
Print Functionality86 1 1 4 9 37 34 88.128
Electronic Functionality80 2 2 3 6 6 13 22 15 11 76.477
Company Satisfaction85 2 1 2 3 9 22 46 98.139
Support Satisfaction82 1 1 1 1 4 7 27 40 98.098
Support Improvement84 1 1 8 13 3 13 21 24 97.058
Company Loyalty85 1 1 3 1 6 26 47 98.229
Open Source Interest76 2 1 3 1 69 98.539

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS86 22.33%
Considering new Interface86 44.65%
System Installed on time?86 8093.02%

Average Collection size: 143982

TypeCount
Public0
Academic0
School0
Consortium0
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,00056
[3] 100,001-250,00021
[4] 250,001-1,000,0003
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0003
[6] over 10,000,0010


Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2017 results according to the type and size of the library.

Koha -- ByWater SolutionsallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS1737.75 327.5640807.7987.880147.4367.50
ILSFunctionality1727.47 327.3440797.5887.380147.0766.67
PrintFunctionality1727.72 327.6340797.6688.000147.7167.17
ElectronicFunctionality1646.48 316.1640756.3286.630136.4665.33
SatisfactionCustomerSupport1717.93 317.7140797.8188.630147.7167.83
CompanyLoyalty1697.41 327.4440777.3187.000137.0067.83



2017 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction173 1 5 5 10 40 55 57 97.758
ILS Functionality172 1 6 9 14 43 62 37 87.478
Print Functionality172 2 1 6 3 10 32 60 58 87.728
Electronic Functionality164 4 2 7 3 6 22 24 29 46 21 86.487
Company Satisfaction171 1 1 2 6 11 27 46 77 97.948
Support Satisfaction171 1 1 3 9 11 25 35 86 97.939
Support Improvement164 1 3 11 37 14 15 38 45 96.938
Company Loyalty169 5 2 4 5 14 8 22 31 78 97.418
Open Source Interest158 11 4 1 8 5 2 10 9 108 97.539

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS175 105.71%
Considering new Interface175 179.71%
System Installed on time?175 16594.29%

Average Collection size: 90943

TypeCount
Public89
Academic38
School14
Consortium6
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00021
[2] 10,001-100,000108
[3] 100,001-250,00031
[4] 250,001-1,000,00010
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction124 1 1 1 4 8 25 47 37 87.748
ILS Functionality124 2 2 2 3 10 32 52 21 87.448
Print Functionality124 3 1 1 1 2 6 28 45 37 87.618
Electronic Functionality120 9 3 8 5 8 18 24 30 15 86.177
Company Satisfaction124 1 1 1 2 1 10 15 37 56 97.948
Support Satisfaction121 1 1 2 4 9 11 41 52 97.908
Support Improvement110 2 3 29 6 18 21 31 97.007
Company Loyalty120 1 1 1 4 8 6 14 28 57 97.788
Open Source Interest109 8 1 1 1 4 4 1 4 8 77 97.649

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS125 32.40%
Considering new Interface125 108.00%
System Installed on time?125 12196.80%

Average Collection size: 85491

TypeCount
Public75
Academic28
School4
Consortium1
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00016
[2] 10,001-100,00080
[3] 100,001-250,00022
[4] 250,001-1,000,0005
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2015 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction152 3 2 1 2 7 11 33 50 43 87.438
ILS Functionality152 1 1 2 3 4 5 17 37 59 23 87.208
Print Functionality150 2 2 2 4 1 5 4 22 56 52 87.618
Electronic Functionality140 8 2 2 4 7 14 22 27 34 20 86.357
Company Satisfaction152 3 2 1 3 2 4 12 18 44 63 97.628
Support Satisfaction149 2 1 2 4 7 11 21 36 65 97.708
Support Improvement145 2 1 9 36 9 12 21 55 97.038
Company Loyalty146 7 2 4 5 8 11 10 32 67 97.348
Open Source Interest130 10 3 2 7 4 2 3 11 88 97.469

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS155 53.23%
Considering new Interface155 1610.32%
System Installed on time?155 14996.13%

Average Collection size: 101914

TypeCount
Public91
Academic32
School6
Consortium6
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00012
[2] 10,001-100,000100
[3] 100,001-250,00023
[4] 250,001-1,000,00013
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0002
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction116 1 1 1 9 12 30 39 23 87.348
ILS Functionality116 3 1 2 6 18 31 35 20 87.177
Print Functionality115 1 1 6 9 20 47 31 87.698
Electronic Functionality112 3 4 2 4 3 11 14 31 28 12 76.437
Company Satisfaction116 1 2 3 6 8 23 30 43 97.618
Support Satisfaction115 1 1 1 2 6 12 21 25 46 97.638
Support Improvement110 1 1 3 9 24 9 16 16 31 96.737
Company Loyalty111 1 3 1 3 6 10 8 9 23 47 97.268
Open Source Interest101 6 1 2 2 1 5 1 4 12 67 97.659

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS119 75.88%
Considering new Interface119 1210.08%
System Installed on time?119 10991.60%

Average Collection size: 97617

TypeCount
Public73
Academic21
School4
Consortium5
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,00014
[2] 10,001-100,00072
[3] 100,001-250,00017
[4] 250,001-1,000,0009
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2013 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction89 1 1 2 3 8 19 27 28 97.618
ILS Functionality89 1 1 2 4 9 29 25 18 77.297
Print Functionality89 1 2 1 2 3 15 32 33 97.848
Electronic Functionality85 3 3 2 1 3 10 12 17 20 14 86.467
Company Satisfaction89 1 1 2 1 3 5 10 25 41 97.838
Support Satisfaction88 1 2 1 1 4 3 10 24 42 97.848
Support Improvement82 1 1 1 13 8 11 19 28 97.308
Company Loyalty88 4 2 2 1 7 1 9 14 48 97.489
Open Source Interest78 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 2 62 98.009

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS91 33.30%
Considering new Interface91 77.69%
System Installed on time?91 8694.51%

Average Collection size: 100698

TypeCount
Public53
Academic21
School3
Consortium2
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0005
[2] 10,001-100,00057
[3] 100,001-250,00016
[4] 250,001-1,000,0006
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2012 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction63 1 1 5 14 25 17 87.788
ILS Functionality63 1 1 2 4 18 27 10 87.488
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction63 1 1 1 2 12 11 35 98.119
Support Satisfaction63 1 1 2 14 12 33 98.059
Support Improvement59 1 2 4 5 5 6 13 23 97.278
Company Loyalty61 2 2 2 2 8 8 37 98.029
Open Source Interest57 2 1 2 2 3 2 45 98.219

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS65 00.00%
Considering new Interface65 11.54%
System Installed on time?65 5990.77%

Average Collection size: 148035

TypeCount
Public40
Academic11
School3
Consortium2
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00044
[3] 100,001-250,0009
[4] 250,001-1,000,0005
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2011 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction59 1 1 3 3 13 23 15 87.618
ILS Functionality59 1 1 3 9 17 17 11 77.257
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction59 2 1 1 8 18 29 98.078
Support Satisfaction59 1 2 3 7 11 35 98.179
Support Improvement56 1 11 6 4 9 25 97.438
Company Loyalty59 2 2 2 3 3 9 38 97.989
Open Source Interest49 2 1 1 2 2 3 38 98.069

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS62 00.00%
Considering new Interface62 58.06%
System Installed on time?62 5995.16%

Average Collection size: 104566

TypeCount
Public42
Academic7
School3
Consortium2
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0007
[2] 10,001-100,00034
[3] 100,001-250,0008
[4] 250,001-1,000,0005
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2010 Survey Results
Product: Koha -- ByWater Solutions Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction37 1 2 12 8 14 97.868
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction37 4 14 19 98.419
Support Satisfaction36 3 14 19 98.449
Support Improvement37 1 3 10 23 98.469
Company Loyalty37 2 6 29 98.739
Open Source Interest37 37 99.009

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS40 12.50%
Considering new Interface40 12.50%
System Installed on time?40 3690.00%

Average Collection size: 57706

TypeCount
Public26
Academic8
School1
Consortium1
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0004
[2] 10,001-100,00028
[3] 100,001-250,0005
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010


1 Responses for Koha -- ByWater Solutions in 2009

0 Responses for Koha -- ByWater Solutions in 2008

0 Responses for Koha -- ByWater Solutions in 2007

2018 : gen: 7.86 company 8.13 loyalty 8.22 support 8.09

2017 : gen: 7.75 company 7.94 loyalty 7.41 support 7.93

2016 : gen: 7.74 company 7.94 loyalty 7.78 support 7.90

2015 : gen: 7.43 company 7.62 loyalty 7.34 support 7.70

2014 : gen: 7.34 company 7.61 loyalty 7.26 support 7.63

2013 : gen: 7.61 company 7.83 loyalty 7.48 support 7.84

2012 : gen: 7.78 company 8.11 loyalty 8.02 support 8.05

2011 : gen: 7.61 company 8.07 loyalty 7.98 support 8.17

2010 : gen: 7.86 company 8.41 loyalty 8.73 support 8.44

Comments (survey2017)

Bywater Solutions has proven over and over again that they are willing to help the customer in anyway that they can. This year they wrote a report for me to calculate time students spent in our Tutoring Center - a part of the Library. They go above and beyond in service. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Bywater Solutions, supporting Koha, has been extremely helpful. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

ByWater solutions is an excellent support company and a pillar of the Koha development community. No other United States Koha support provider compares to their involvement. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

We have been using the KOHA ILS for over three years and are very pleased with not only the initial system, but all the subsequent upgrades that have been done annually since. Bywater Solutions hosts our ILS, and provides support within the parameters of a state library supported consortium. While this can be cumbersome at times for support, the NH State Library technical staff are very efficient, and Bywater does solve our problems. And we have had no problems with the servers. I would highly recommend this system and Bywater Solutions to anyone. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We would consider open access and self hosting of a discovery service, but we do not have access to a server of our own, nor someone to maintain it. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Koha seems more geared toward public libraries, less so for academic libraries. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

The only reason we are considering a switch to another ILS from Koha is so that we may join the statewide consortium. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our Learning Resource Center has been transitioning to a full fledged academic library over the past year. We are a small tech academy with limited funds and a small collection. Koha has provided us with wonderful guidance and customer service. As a part-time solo librarian, I know we couldn't have picked a better ILS. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Since we have not yet migrated to Koha, I left most of this blank but will be happy to fill it out next year when I have more data. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium)

We have open source now. Koha, supported through ByWater. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

ByWater Solutions is a great company to work with. Their staff are knowledgeable, helpful, innovative and positive. They are quick to respond to support tickets. They will create custom CSS, jQuery and SQL reports any time we ask. They provide webinars and tutorial videos for the upgrades that come out twice a year (which they take care of installing) We saved a substantial amount of the annual budget by going open source with Koha and being hosted by BWS. We were able to put our savings into more programs and resources for the public. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

I don't know whether bywater's customer support has gotten better over the past year because I started in July. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We love Koha and the support we get from ByWater. ByWater is responsive to our requests and follow through on promises. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

We have had an ope source ILS for 5 years. We are very happy with the ability to help direct the forward motion of the Koha, ILS. Our support vendor is ByWater Solutions and they are very proactive in the Koha community. I would never want to go back to a proprietary ILS. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

it is open source (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

In a former position, I was the person who initially chose to look at Koha for the consortial ILS. I believe in the open source principle and think we still made a good decision. That being said, NO ILS is perfect and Koha has a few areas that I would like to see improved, especially the ability to discover and link to ebook sources (including those OTHER THAN Overdrive) easily. As a cataloger at heart, I'd like to see a more robust expert cataloger interface, but the existing one is workable. Authorities needs work; pre-loading the LC authorities files (ncluding genre) would be a good step in the right direction. But, as I started, I still think Koha is a good choice for libraries and Bywater Solutions seems to do a good job (we started with LibLime in 2008, moving in 2010). If I were choosing again, Koha would still be looked at... Biblionix is one I'd look at (it was off our radar back then). (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We already use an Open Source ILS. Koha by Bywater (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

When[...] updated it was problematic for me. Another librarian connected me with ByWater. The problem was solved & solved well within 24 hours. Thank you (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We put in problem-tickets via the State Library, but Bywater Solutions has been the general educator and communicator. We're pleased with the response of both. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

After many years in a public school library with up to date library automation systems, then switching to Koha at a public library, I feel like I have gone back to the June Cleaver days. The inventory needs to be updated, there needs to be a true batch delete when weeding and such as that. They just did an update and it is better than it had been previously so I know they are trying. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 5)

The directors in our library consortium met last week and discussed Koha and working with ByWater Solutions. Our current contract ends in the Spring of 2018 and we all decided we like Koha and want to continue contracting with ByWater Solutions. ByWater Solutions staff are so easy to work with and very knowledgeable. Their system for launching tickets for help with the system works very well and we usually get a response in an hour or less. They stick with us until we find a solution to any problem. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

The product is still under development. We are incorporating new functions with every upgrade. Still not perfect. The only comment regarding our support company is that unfortunately we live on different time zones. Practically we have no instant F2F communication. All LIS issues are usually solved overnight. Sometimes it takes time, when more emails need to be send both ways. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We love having a vendor/support company that listens to us and is responsive. We love having an open source system where tweaks can be made: we are currently working with Bywater to create a report that isn't currently available. We also love being able to interface with a database like Novelist K-8 directly in our OPAC. And, although we haven't yet been part of a software development, it's great for us to know that we can pay for things to be changed. The challenges lie in the fact that Koha is used in very few elementary school libraries. Over time our goal is to make changes to our system so that our OPAC meets our young students' needs better, and so that our patron database access points meet our needs more accurately. We also found that the interface that we were hoping for between Koha and Ebsco Discovery didn't quite work as we'd hoped: it's still a little unclear to us whether that was because our setup was inadequate or the connections are flaky. Working with Ebsco tech support is a great deal more opaque than Bywater, and that project is still on our To Do list. Overall, we are very happy with both Koha and Bywater compared to the rigidity and unresponsiveness of Follett and their insistence that they knew best what we needed. P.S. The customer support question got a 5 from me because it has stayed the same over the past year. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We are very happy with our transition from OCLC WMS to Koha. We are a smaller library that didn't get the support needed from OCLC. ByWater showed us great support through our migration, and continue to impress us. Koha does require a little more knowledge for creating reports and other backend features, but on the whole is very intuitive. We hope that they are able to develop an ILL feature and that some of the small bugs get fixed, but those are minor issues. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

I am new to this position, so I cannot compare current experience to that of previous years. (Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

We're very pleased with Bywater and the support they provide. (Library type: Museum; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

The Koha community is making great strides with functionality making Koha a mature and extremely viable ILS especially when combined with a support company as customer service driven as ByWater Solutions. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

The customer service is excellent! I also enjoy the reports and the clean interface. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Low ranking on Koha's ability to manage electronic resources is only because it cannot manage them as a stand alone. Can be enhanced with discovery products, which we do not have yet. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Koha Bywater Solutions is a great company to work with, very pleasant and responsive customer service, good product, we are so pleased with them. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Bywater is always helpful and patient with our small library. Amazing help for the price. (Library type: Theology; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We have been very impressed with ByWater Solutions. I would highly recommend them to another library. Their support team is very friendly, helpful and realize the problem I am having is a real problem and are happy to help. They do not make you feel like you do not have a clue about what you are talking about. Again, I would highly recommend this ILS Product to other libraries. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

KOHA works well for us. We were promiced spell check and search suggestions. This functionality has not materialized yet. For elementary students discovery is a huge need. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Every update results in breakdowns somewhere in the overall system, particularly in the accounting part, specifically fines. Illogical and inconsistent listing of search results Fast cataloging has too many steps. Inventory reporting program is difficult , insufficient, and does not meet the information needs of the library. Arrangement of report results is often not helpful, requiring results to be tabulated by hand rather than automatically adding them up. Similar reports give different figures for the same inquiry. Cataloging has too many boxes and superfluous requirements for most cataloging needs and slows down the process unnecessarily. Fines function: arrangement of results on page is erratic and therefore confusing when determing what is paid and what is not. Totals for different kinds of fine transactions must be run separately. Four steps to pay fines! (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

the consortium and this library are satisfied with the open source ILS that we have been using since 2012. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Use Koha- Bywater (Library type: For-profit Educational; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 8)

this survey is a bit confusing in the combination of questions. (Library type: Corporate; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Bywater's KOHA has improved since our school and public library consortium began using it, but it is still a primitive system, in comparison with Horizon, our previous ILS. Check in and check out speed is now average, rather than painfully slow. Searching with the staff module is still inaccurate. The OPAC is somewhat better. Creating reports requires specialized computer skills. Bywater's customer service has improved. In the beginning Bywater mistakenly cut off access to KOHA when they detected a problem, and failed to correctly identify its source. Many of our problems are referred to the community, and other libraries may contribute funds for Bywater to resolve the issue. The resolution takes a long time. The z39.50 record searching and importing is faster this year, and works well. (Library type: School; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 2)

Koha strives hard to meet their clients needs and work on developments often. Sometimes, the developments are quite complicated and take time. Reports can be challenging for novices. But I've seen lots of improvement in the 2.5 years I've worked with them. They have been very responsive especially during emergencies over the weekend or holidays and have helped us with any catalog hiccups. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

I did not answwer the question about electronic resources because as a consortia we have engaged that resource. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Overall, we're very satisfied with our work with ByWater Solutions and the KOHA ILS. It has better flexibility than our previous ILS and the pricing is substantially better. (Library type: Law; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

The coming implementation of Elastic Search will make Koha's OPAC and search capability much better. That would raise most of my "8" responses to "9". (Library type: Museum; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

Stats are for the entire consortium. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

WorldCat Discovery is great for exposing our e-resources to the uninitiated, but the limited customization options and consistent metadata linking issues without the ability to correct them locally have left us wanting. We may consider other Discovery layers, definitely open source, but the proprietary interests will be invited to make their case. EBSCO EDS taking the lead by working with Koha on their API is welcome news, and something we'll definitely consider. As Koha continues to integrate CORAL ERMS, (the ERMS we use), what it lacks for an academic library's e-resource needs is quickly becoming a nonissue. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

Decent support from ByWater - but uneven in that a wealthy library can pay for whatever enhancements they want/need while poorer libraries need to wait to see if their needs get addressed. True to some extent for other vendors but not quite to the same extreme... (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

[...] (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

We require a more specialized product that works for a special library. The current product is more for a public library, which means that we have different needs that it doesn't quite support. (Library type: Independent Research; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 5)

Our ILS, Koha, is open source, which has enabled us to make customizations that have improved the user interface and the workflow for many staff members. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

Our ILS, Koha, is open source, which has enabled us to make customizations that have improved the user interface and the workflow for many staff members. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

The capabilities of Koha are limited only by the imagination. (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 9)

We are very satisfied with Koha and ByWater Solutions. We are able to make most of the customizations that we need. And ByWater Solutions is always very helpful and responsive in making those changes happen or in solving any problems or technical issues that we encounter. (Library type: Law; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Koha is an open source ILS. It does have some features of a discovery interface being added in different updates. Our library is part of a consortium that uses this system. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We currently have Koha, which is an open source ILS. We do not have the expertise nor the time to gain the expertise to manage a cooperative open source library system. We preferred dealing with our previous vendor, who created and implemented the solutions to all our needs. But the price was what made our director chose this product. (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 4)

We have been using koha through Bywater for less six months. Bywater staff have been engaged and responsive during the implementation, but I think the implementation has suffered from the dispersed support structure, and lack of a single contact/project manager for the implementation. I am spending a lot of time following up on issues, and there doesn't seem to be a central Bywater staff person who is responsible for the entire implementation, including UX/OPAC design and issues that came up as a result of the data migration. (Library type: Special; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

Looking forward to the mentor program! (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

ILS