The Library's Contribution To The Community
Case study in the Merrickville Public Library
SOLS CONSULTANTS: Claire-Marie Paquette-Finlay, Terry Sarazen
DATE COMPLETED: October 21, 1999
1. PURPOSE
"The Library’s Contribution to Your Community: a resource Manual for Libraries to Document their Social and Economic Contribution to the Local
Community" was developed under the auspices of the Strategic Directions Council and the Southern Ontario Library
Service by a Steering Committee representing the Ontario public library community. The basic premise of the manual is that
libraries that are able to document and communicate the value of their contribution to the community are better placed to receive
adequate and stable municipal funding.
The Merrickville Public Library used "The Library’s Contribution to Your Community" in order to document the social and personal value of the library to the community and communicate
that value to the Merrickville-Wolford Council and community, assuring the viability and continuation of local library service.
2. BACKGROUND
The Merrickville Public Library was founded in 1856 and is presently located in a heritage building. The village of Merrickville/Wolford is located about one hour’s drive from Ottawa and is a popular tourist
destination.
The municipality is a major funder of the library’s operations. It contributes
approximately 75% of the library’s annual budget. The Ontario Public Library Statistics 1996 indicate the
library offers a fairly good return on that investment, in so far as statistical data can be indicative of performance.
Council recognizes the popularity of the library but sees it as a "soft"
service as opposed to a "core" service. The library has made many efforts to increase its profile in the community. It
produces a regular column in the local monthly newsletter The Phoenix; it has the established its own web page, it
regularly makes a presentation of the library’s annual report to the Municipal Council. In 1995, it sent out a user
survey to get feedback on its services.
Despite these efforts, the contribution
of the library is still not perceived as highly valuable by the community and the Council.
3. THE STUDY
3.1 Profile of the Library’s Services
The library has a client population of approximately 3,700. This
includes the population of the Corporation of Merrickville-Wolford that amalgamated in 1998. The
Library also has a service contract with Montague Township.
The library is open eighteen hours a week and is staffed by one
person, the Librarian/CEO. The card catalogue and circulation system are not automated.
- The primary role of the library is providing recreational reading and
encouraging the pursuit of personal interests and hobbies for both adults and children. Collections are focused on
bestsellers and popular nonfiction, how-to and self-help books and children’s materials that support the
school curriculum.
- Over the past four years, the library has increased its children’s programs, which include storytime, a summer reading program and a March Break craft program.
It also receives visits from school classes.
- The library has also promoted the interlibrary loan service since 1994 and has substantially increased the level of use.
- The library began offering public Internet access, a public CD-ROM computer and a public computer for word-processing in 1998.
- For special users, the library offers large print books, talking books and books-on-tape.
3.2 Focus for the Investigation
The Merrickville Public library initially chose to investigate the following three
benefits as those most applicable to demonstrating the library’s social and personal value to the community:
3.3 Community Resources
The following existing resources and organizations were used for this project.
- Results from a 1995 needs assessment survey carried out by the library and the 1997
community report,
- Vision 2020 Merrickville, a 1997 municipal visioning report,
Friends of the library gave assistance in contacting the random sample of community residents by telephone requesting their cooperation in filling out the survey.
Katimavik student volunteered to input the community survey data, over the summer.
3.4 The Scope of the Investigation
Existing in-house statistical data were used as performance indicators.
- The library carried out a six-week statistical sample survey, from October 19, 1998 to January 7, 1999 to gather statistics that were not currently being kept that were required to
document the three chosen benefits.
SOLS consultants prepared a spreadsheet to aid the collection of this data.
Key information interviews were held for each benefit.
Testimonial letters were solicited.
3.5 Making the Case
Key Findings: Information for personal decisions
- Comments from the survey demonstrated that information services for personal decision-making are very important to the
community.
- There is a clear demand and need among the users for how-to-manuals, self-help
books and books on hobbies and projects
| Information Services for Personal Decisions |
| Information
Collected |
Source
|
Findings
|
| circulation
of how-to manuals |
statistical
sampling |
1,179
items/yr
(38% of total adult non-fiction circulation) |
| circulation
of self-help material |
statistical
sampling |
624
items/yr
(20% of total adult non-fiction circulation) |
| circulation
of information technology material |
statistical
sampling |
133
items/yr
(4.3% of total adult non-fiction circulation) |
| questions
using Internet |
statistical
sampling |
295
questions/yr |
| user
perception of importance |
community
survey |
52.8% use the
library primarily for information on hobbies or
personal interest
In the last year,
58.3% used the library materials to make a personal
decision
65.3% think
service is "very important"
31.9% very
satisfied with materials
|
| |
key informants |
"Library has print materials not available elsewhere and out of
print materials. Can be used for free" "Do not use the library often for personal use for making decisions but use it extensively for my business"
"There would be a lack of pride, community esteem without the library"
"My satisfaction rate for the library is 9 out of 10"
|
| community’s perception of importance |
community survey |
"Although the library is small, anything anyone wants can be
obtained through the Internet or by interlibrary loan" "I
am able to access everything I wish, directly or through interlibrary loan"
|
| |
key informant |
"The main purpose of the library is for information. I use it
with the hopes that the children will become life-long readers" (teacher) |
3.5 Making the Case (cont’d)
Key Findings: Use of Leisure Time
The recreational reading
material at the library is valued and users claim that it
contributes to the literacy of the community.
Library
services were ranked the highest of all community
services.
Use of Leisure Time
|
| Information
Collected |
Source
|
Findings
|
| Proportion
of households that are library users |
library statistics
|
approx. 46.7% of Merrickville/ Wolford
households (approx. 537 of 1151 households)
|
| Circulation
of recreational materials |
statistical sampling
|
16,056
|
| Circulation
to special needs users |
library statistics
|
260
|
| Number of
library visits/yr |
statistical sampling
|
9,077
|
| Number of
library visits/day |
statistical sampling
|
43.6
|
| Number of
juvenile visits/yr |
statistical sampling
|
3,155
|
| Number of
juvenile visit/day |
statistical sampling
|
15.1
|
| user
satisfaction |
survey
survey
key informants
|
- 66.7 % of
respondents come to the library primarily for
recreational or leisure reading
- 58.3% of the
respondents used the library for recreational
reading in the last year
- 36.1% were
"very satisfied" with the recreational
reading materials
- 66.7% of
respondents felt that recreational reading
materials were "very important" even if
they did not use them
"For a small town,
we have a good library with good services. This
encourages use and literacy"
"The library is
extremely important to me for pleasure and recreational
reading"
"Totally pleased; better selection now; home school
three children so library is very important"
"An excellent library for the size of the area;
eclectic variety of books...good selection of well-known
authors"
|
| community satisfaction |
survey |
satisfaction with library services ranked highest of all community
services:
Library - 41.7%
very satisfied
Fire Protection
- 34.7% very satisfied
Snow Removal -
20.8% very satisfied
library services
have improved the most of all the community
services:
Library Service
better -31.9%
Road &
Sidewalks better - 20.8%
Fire Protection
better - 19.4%
62.5% feel current
level of library service "about right" |
| community satisfaction - nonusers |
survey |
"Even
though we have access to other libraries, we feel
it’s very important that others without the same
opportunities have access"
"I do not use the library frequently, but have
always found service excellent and material I desire
there" |
3.5 Making the Case (cont’d)
Key Findings: Reading Readiness for Pre-School Children
- There is strong community
support for children’s services.
- Respondents place a high value on these services and feel that
accessibility to these services is important for everyone.
Reading Readiness for Pre-School
Children
|
| Information
Collected |
Source
|
Findings
|
| preschool/reading
readiness materials |
library statistics |
250
|
| Storytime
sessions |
library statistics |
36
|
| Storytime
sessions attendance |
library statistics |
260
|
| Summer
reading programs |
library statistics |
15
|
| Summer
reading programs attendance |
library statistics |
243
|
| March
Break Sessions |
library statistics |
5
|
| March
Break Sessions attendance |
library statistics |
75
|
| Class
visits |
library statistics |
43
|
| Class
visits attendance |
library statistics |
1055
|
| users
perception of importance of the library |
key informant
survey
|
"Library
provides books I don’t have at home; provides some
socializing for my son; children learn how to use the
library..." 77.8%
consider children’s services very important whether
they use them or not
|
| community
satisfaction and support - users |
survey |
"I
regularly take my kids there and get books for myself. If
we had to go outside the community, it would not always
be possible in a one vehicle family" " It is very important to
get children interested in reading early, they will do
better in school and later life"
|
| community
satisfaction and support - non-users |
survey |
"Although we do not use the services, I
feel it is very important for those who need and use it.
This is important for developing our kids."
"In our current
situation the library is not important to us but in four
or five years our son will be older and it will become
quite important"
|
3.6 Report to the Library
- A full report was presented to the Library Board including all
the findings, results of statistical sampling, responses to the
community survey, write ups of key informant questionnaires and
testimonial letters and suggestions for communicating the results to
target audiences.
- A brochure was produced by SOLS detailing the contribution of the
library to the community with respect to the three chosen benefits for distribution to target audiences.
3.7 Communicating the Results
The Merrickville Public Library has targeted Municipal Council and the community of Merrickville-Wolford to receive the results of the study.
While comments from the
community survey indicate that most library users highly value
the contribution of the library to the community, it is crucial
to effectively communicate this message to the Council and the
community at large.
3.8 Preparing For Next Year
It is recommended that the collection of
local usage statistics be changed to take into account the
following important data:
- Membership
records should be kept by individual borrower and by age
group, rather than by family.
- Membership
statistics should indicate the municipality in which the
user resides.
Other suggestions include:
- Investigating the availability of grants to improve accessibility to
the library for disabled patrons and senior citizens
- Improving service to home-based business owners as a preliminary
step to providing local support for business
4. Observations
4.0 Observations by SOLS Consultants
-
Benefits selection:
- It was
fairly easy to choose the benefits that would be
relevant since a small library must, of necessity,
focus its efforts in a couple of specific areas, such
as leisure reading, information services and
children’s services and programming.
-
Human resources:
- Lack of manpower and existing resources available in a small
community was a major limitation
- Due to a library staff of only one person and a shortage of
available volunteers, delays were experienced when
collecting and inputting data for the community
survey.
-
Statistical data collection:
- The statistical sample survey worked well and was a
relatively easy method for a non-automated library
with minimal staffing to gather relevant statistics.
- The statistical sample survey yielded useful figures.
-
Information from the surveys:
- The interpretation of some of the statistics from the
survey was difficult, due to the phrasing of the
questions.
- The community survey (the sample survey from The
Library’s Contribution to the Community: a
Resource Manual...), while providing valuable
information, was judged too long and complicated by a
number of respondents.
- The ratings given by the respondents on their satisfaction with
library services and the improvement of library services were extremely valuable evidence for
documenting the library’s contribution to the community.
- The numerous comments gleaned from the questionnaires made for
surprisingly strong evidence in favour of the library. This valuable information more than made up
for the low level of response.
-
Implementation of the survey
- It was
decided that potential survey respondents would be
called by volunteers and that a survey would be
mailed out to the interested participants. This
method proved to be very labour intensive and did not
produce satisfactory results.
- The random
sampling method using the telephone book proved to be
problematic. The Librarian commented that volunteers
did not always understand the procedure of random
sampling. Volunteers found that making so many calls
was very arduous.
It may have been more
effective if SOLS staff had held a short training session for
volunteers prior to the calls being made.
- The length
of the survey could not be reduced because it had
been decided to use it as is to test it for the pilot
project. The cost of reproducing this lengthy survey,
born by the Library, was about $150.00.
- The survey
was distributed late in November. In hindsight the
timing may have been off, as that time of year is
quite busy leading up to Christmas.
- The
distribution of the questionnaire to the random
sample group yielded only 45 completed
questionnaires. A second distribution of the survey,
in-house, still only yielded a total of 72 of the
required 100 completed surveys.
- These two
batches of surveys created a number of problems for
SOLS when it came to combining the results and
rerunning the data.
- It was
decided that for the purpose of this pilot project
the data runs would be done and analysed even if the
confidence rate has not been reached.
-
Key informant questionnaires and testimonials:
- Comments
elicited at the interviews did not provide very much
detailed information.
- Selection of the
key informants was also an issue as some of the key
informants chosen were not relevant to the benefits being
discussed.
- The questions
prepared by the consultants were not successful in
drawing out useful comments from the informants. The
questions were seen to be repetitive and not open-ended
enough to invite more in-depth comments.
- More information
might have been obtained had the consultants done the
interviewing. The interviewees may have been seen them as
neutral parties and may have shared more of the type of
data needed to support the study. The questionnaires will
be revised in light of the interviewer’s input about
the process of the interviews.
- Testimonial
letters yielded better results; they gave more details
about the library services and provided more elaborate
opinions about the library.
4.3 Library’s Observations
Overall, we have found the process helpful, and we greatly appreciate all of the assistance
provided by SOLS. Reinterpreting the use of the library from the perspective of the benefits provided has been a positive exercise. We have found the "Library's Contribution to the
Community" model to be a very useful tool for analyzing the value of the library. This project has produced a greater sense of
confidence among the staff and board about the value of our services, as well as generating enthusiasm and ammunition for
library advocacy with the local councils and in the media.
The 6-week statistical sampling was not difficult to carry out and did not take much
time. We would have liked a few additional categories (or perhaps for the existing ones to be better defined). It was sometimes
tricky to decide what category to use (e.g. should a parenting book be recorded as Self-Help or How-To. Should a history book
for a school assignment be Self-Help? - would this result in misleading data for collection development?). There might be a
problem maintaining consistency if more than one person is collecting the data. Collecting statistics on the "personal
decisions" benefit was the most difficult. It was often hard to know why a person was consulting a particular book, and one
does not like to ask (particularly in a small community). This was even more difficult to determine re: Internet use, and I
finally decided not to try to gather that statistic.
However, we found the statistical information collected to be well worth the difficulties involved. The library has revised its statistic-gathering process to incorporate these new categories.
Statistics are now collected with a greater focus on how the patrons are using the materials, and on illustrating how the
library is providing benefits to the public.
The key informant interviews went well. These were done by a board member (from a
list of regular users suggested by the librarian), on the theory that this would encourage more candid responses than if the
interviews were done by the librarian. These interviews did provide useful information; some interviewees were also inspired
to provide testimonial letters. The interviewer found the questions (which were supplied by SOLS) to be generally good, but
rather repetitive, which made the interviews somewhat awkward.
The survey was the most onerous part of the project. Most of the problems involved have
been mentioned previously in the report. We were not happy with our method of distributing the survey, but it would just have
been too expensive (or labour intensive) to do a general distribution throughout the community. Although the population is
numerically fairly small, the rural segment of the population covers a lot of territory, and it would have been undiplomatic to
limit our distribution to the more centralized village population.
The random selection process and the pre-calling re: the surveys did not go as well as
we had hoped. Population lists (based on the phone book) were a problem to prepare, as residents were listed under different
communities. Also, some of the volunteers making the calls seemed to have difficulty following the random selection method (or
perhaps just did not see the importance of sticking to it).
The length/complexity of the survey was also a problem. Even when we distributed it to
users in the library, they almost always considered it too long to do in the library, and a large proportion did not return the
survey (in spite of my pleas). It was suggested (too late) by another library that offering a prize draw for returned surveys
can improve the return rate. For our next survey, we will definitely be looking into this option.
Although we realize that this was not the focus of the survey (and would be even more difficult to do in a shorter survey), we would have liked the
survey to have more room/encouragement for comments re: what the community wants from the library (needs assessment).
A small library does not have the resources to do surveys very often, so it would be nice
to have been able to get some of this information, too (for planning).
On the plus side, inputting the survey data and comments for analysis by SOLS was
quick and easy (once we had a volunteer to do it).
Generally, participating in this project was not overly time-consuming, but the librarian
really did require additional help (from board and volunteers) to complete it in a timely manner. It is not the sort of thing that
can be squeezed in with regular duties, if staff time is tight. The board feels that the results offer an accurate picture of the
community's view of the library, in spite of the small size of the survey sample.
We particularly appreciated SOLS work in converting the results of all the data
collection into materials (e.g. brochures, overheads) and ideas for a publicity campaign/ marketing plan for the library. Their
presentation to the board was valuable and effective in communicating the results and their ideas to us. Our library
(like most small libraries, I imagine) lacks the marketing expertise to do this all on its own. We expect that this
reevaluation of our services from a benefits analysis/ marketing perspective will be very useful in our future approaches to the
Municipal Council.
5. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
5.1 On the study methods, how SOLS could assist your library
in conducting a study "The Library’s Contribution to Your Community",
contact the
Director of Library Development, Southern Ontario Library Service:
| Email |
|
| Telephone |
416-961-1669 (press 0), 1-800-387-5765 |
| Fax |
|
| SOLS Route/Mailing |
|
5.2 On the Merrickville Public Library or a copy of the full report on the study:Mary Kate Laphen,
CEO,
Merrickville Public Library,
(613) 269-3326
