Institutional examples on this page are conceptual workflow references only. They do not imply existing partnerships, production deployments, approvals, or endorsements.
Guide for institutions
Review book offers with enough structure to make real decisions.
Let Books is designed first around library-friendly workflows, while also supporting schools, universities, archives, and nonprofits that need practical intake, review, and retrieval coordination.
When this guide is for you
- You review books that donors want to offer.
- You need a practical selection workflow, not just a loose email thread.
- You want decisions tied to stable item identity.
- You care about provenance, condition, and retrieval feasibility.
Who counts as an institution
- Public and academic libraries
- Schools and universities
- Archives and specialized collections
- Nonprofits and community organizations
What institutions receive
The first useful deliverable is a structured export with enough context to review books seriously while keeping donor logistics manageable.
Stable item IDs
Selections should be matched by item identity, not by title text that may be incomplete or duplicated.
Bibliographic and physical detail
Titles, authors, edition clues, condition, and copy-specific notes can travel together without pretending every book is identical.
Storage-aware follow-through
Requested copies remain linked to real locations so the donor can retrieve them efficiently.
Review workflow
The MVP flow is intentionally simple because many institutions will accept a spreadsheet before they accept a new portal.
Receive export
Open a spreadsheet with stable IDs and readable metadata.
Mark decisions
Choose wanted, maybe, or not wanted. Add comments where needed.
Return the file
Use a familiar workflow instead of requiring every reviewer to create an account.
Import decisions
The donor imports your feedback without ambiguous title matching.
Create pick list
Requested copies are grouped by location for retrieval.
Coordinate handoff
Pickup and delivery arrangements happen outside the platform unless a future feature explicitly expands that scope.
Why provenance matters
Institutional users need to know whether metadata came from human entry, OCR, an external catalog, or an imported spreadsheet. Confidence and review status should travel with the suggestion, not be hidden behind it.
Interoperability direction
Let Books should remain open to COBISS and other library-facing integrations later, but the current value should not depend on them. Structured export and import come first.
Physical logistics still matter
A requested copy is only useful if somebody can find it. Pick lists grouped by room, shelf, and box reduce friction and reduce the chance that the wrong copy is handed over.
One record can represent many copies
Institutions often need to decide per copy, not just per title. Two copies of the same textbook may differ in condition, notes, or retrieval status.
Example scenario: A municipal library, a university department, and a local archive review one export from a private donor. Each institution selects different copies based on condition, subject fit, and duplication. The donor then generates separate pick lists from the same underlying batch.
Useful before deep integration
Less ad hoc review
Structured decisions are easier to track than free-form email lists.
Better donor coordination
Institutions can request what they actually want while leaving clear comments.
Clearer future migration
Once data is structured, later integrations become far more realistic.