Previous Table of Contents Next

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


When Virginia is taken as a whole and library input measures are compared to those of other states, the Old Dominion State looks average. Fiscal year (FY) 2003 statistics (the most recent comprehensive statistics available) show Virginia ranking 25th among the states in operating income per capita, 27th on materials expenditures per capita and 29th on total staff per 25,000 population. On the "output" side the Commonwealth ranks 30th in visits per capita, but, in what should be considered a tribute to hard working library staff members across the State, 15th in circulation per capita.

However, a closer examination reveals that characterizing Virginia’s performance on common measures of library service as "average" is somewhat misleading. Although the statewide operating income per capita is $ 28.41, the annual statistics reported by Virginia libraries for FY 2004 shows that income per capita for library operations ranged from $ 8.25 to $ 136.72. While the statewide average is 8.48 circulations per capita, this measure varied among Virginia libraries from 1.26 items per person to 28.72 items per person.

The wide variation in both input and output measures raises questions regarding both the quality of library services offered in some libraries and the equity of library and information services offered across the Commonwealth.

The following report organizes the findings and recommendations growing out of this study into four major categories. They are quality of public library services, equity of access to quality public library services, funding, and advocacy/public awareness.

The recommendations are designed to provide an outline for actions that would result in improved public library services for all Virginians. If implemented, the consultants believe that they would ensure that the "Commonwealth’s public libraries are prepared to meet the challenges of the 21st century as valued community resources responsive to the rapid change in technology and society." If the recommendations are ignored, it is our opinion that the gap between the high performing and the marginal libraries in the State will grow and that an increasing number of Virginians will be deprived of a valuable resource that can help them succeed in school, on the job, and in their daily lives.

Recommendations: Quality of Public Library Services


Recommendation # 1: Review, revise, and strengthen public library standards.

Recommendation # 2: Review and seek the strengthening of Code of Virginia and administrative rules regarding the certification of public library directors.

Recommendation # 3: Develop a comprehensive curriculum for all library workers based on recognized skills and competencies and implement a coordinated program of continuing education.

Recommendation # 4: Encourage the Virginia Library Association to develop an annual awards program to recognize libraries that meet or exceed standards.

Recommendations: Equity of Access to Quality Public Library Services


Recommendation # 5: Support and pursue legislative action on a slightly modified version of the recommendations of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission’s (JLARC) recommendations.

Recommendation # 6: Support JLARC’s suggestion that "add on" (additional funding) to the State Aid formula be instituted to address the ability, or lack of ability, of certain areas to support public library services adequately.

Recommendation # 7: Shift the funding for Find It Virginia from Federal Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) monies to State revenues.

Recommendations: Funding


Recommendation # 8: Retain the three factors – population, square miles, and local expenditures – as the basis for calculating State Aid.

Recommendation # 9: Remove the population cap that is applicable under the current formula.

Recommendation # 10: Adjust, and then index the revenue cap and revisit the cap every five years for possible readjustment.

Recommendation # 11: Seek restoration of funding for the Infopowering the Commonwealth program including Find It Virginia as well as grants for computers and network equipment.

Recommendation # 12: Seek a separate construction bonding program to promote new public library building and expansion of current facilities.

Recommendation # 13: A significant portion of Federal LSTA funds liberated through a shifting of the Find It Virginia program should be used to support pilot projects and innovative approaches to offering service.

Recommendations: Advocacy/Public Awareness


Recommendation # 14: Develop an "Ohio Library Council" model for advocacy.

Recommendation # 15: Organize and prepare library trustees and members of library Friends organizations to be advocates for libraries.

Recommendation # 16: The Library of Virginia and the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association should work together to develop a more synergistic relationship.

Recommendation # 17: The Library of Virginia should work with the public library community to seek support from foundations to develop and implement a major public awareness campaign on behalf of public libraries.

Priorities

While the consultants believe that action is needed on all 17 of the recommendations presented above, a variety of factors suggest that immediate attention can be given to some while acting on others will require considerably more extensive groundwork and preparation.  The consultants have identified four of the recommendations that, in our opinion, should be addressed without delay.

Recommendations identified for immediate attention include:

#6 - Additional State Aid program to address equity issues,

#2 - Revisiting and strengthening the certification requirements for library directors

#14 - Development of library advocacy efforts modeled on the Ohio Library Council (OLC)

#16 - Development of a more symbiotic/synergistic relationship between the Library of Virginia and the public libraries of the Commonwealth

Priorities

While the consultants believe that action is needed on all 17 of the recommendations presented above, a variety of factors suggest that immediate attention can be given to some while acting on others will require considerably more extensive groundwork and preparation.  The consultants have identified four of the recommendations that, in our opinion, should be addressed without delay.

Recommendations identified for immediate attention include:

#6 - Additional State Aid program to address equity issues,

#2 - Revisiting and strengthening the certification requirements for library directors

#14 - Development of library advocacy efforts modeled on the Ohio Library Council (OLC)

#16 - Development of a more symbiotic/synergistic relationship between the Library of Virginia and the public libraries of the Commonwealth

INTRODUCTION

It’s 8:55 on a sunny September morning in the Commonwealth of Virginia. Every few moments another car pulls up to the library’s drive-through book-drop and deposits books, CDs and DVDs. A small group of people is gathering in the library’s front lobby awaiting opening time. A woman in a business suit glances at her watch as two older gentlemen share their observations on the weather, Washington, and the world. A man in his mid-thirties carrying a bundle of overstuffed file folders walks around a kiosk, which is filled with notices of community events. An electronic signboard at the top announces the library programs scheduled for the next week.

A mother and her eight-year old daughter sit on a bench pouring over what appears to be a text book. A woman in a hotel housekeeper’s uniform joins the group and a middle-aged man drives up in a pick-up truck and parks near the library’s entrance just as a staff member approaches the inner door with keys in hand. Another day is about to begin at the public library.

As the door opens, the gathered group streams into the building, each with a specific purpose in mind. The senior men head for the comfortable chairs in the periodicals section where the staff has just put out today’s morning newspapers. They’ll soon be joined by three or four other "regulars" who will sip coffee, scan the newspapers and discuss the issues of the day. Occasionally they glance up at four flat screen TVs mounted on a nearby wall that are set to closed captioning and are tuned to CNN Headline News, the Weather Channel, CNBC, and Fox News.

The woman in the business suit heads to a study table, opens her briefcase, takes out her laptop computer and spreads some papers out next to it. It only takes her a moment to log on to the library’s wireless network so she can check her e-mail and updated information from her home office in Atlanta. This library serves as her office away from home whenever she’s servicing clients in Virginia. The man with the file folders heads to an area under a sign that reads "Foundation Collection." He opens his files and sits down at a computer terminal to continue researching potential sources for the grant application that he’s preparing for a local non-profit organization.

The hotel housekeeper and the man in the pick-up truck both head to the computer reservation terminals and are quickly assigned a computer to use. Before she leaves, the woman will update her resume, will scour several job sites, and will submit her qualifications to three prospective employers. She’s pleased that she’s able to include the fact that she recently completed an online course in hospitality management using library computers as her classroom.

The man in the pick-up truck man also checks his e-mail. He does so every morning at opening time. He’s exceptionally pleased today when he finds a response to a message he sent yesterday to his daughter, a Second Lieutenant in the Army, who has been stationed in Iraq for the last seven months. Assured that his daughter is safe and sound for another day, he sends off his daily message and then moves on to several websites. He checks the Washington Post and New York Times headlines and proceeds to another site to see how the Nationals fared in last night’s game against the Phillies.

By now, the mom and her home-schooled child have already picked out several books on early settlements in the Americas. They had checked the library’s catalog online from home and were able to go directly to specific materials on Christopher Newport, John Smith, and the Jamestown Colony. The Youth Services Librarian asks if they’re familiar with the "Virtual Jamestown" website and directs them to a link on the library’s web page that takes them to images of original maps and copies of correspondence written by the early settlers. The mother and daughter will be joined in a few minutes by two other home schoolers and their parents for a weekly study session held in the library’s group study room.

Meanwhile, the first of several class visits for the day is arriving. A class of 24 fifth graders gather in the all-purpose room for a brief orientation session. A reference librarian is about to present a PowerPoint™ that covers how to use both online and print reference resources. After the presentation, half of the class will go to the library’s "Tech Center" to gain some hands-on experience using quality electronic resources while the balance of the class gets a similar opportunity to learn more about some of the library’s print reference tools. After an hour, the groups will switch places. By the end of the visit, the students will understand that research involves much more than doing a Google™ or Yahoo™ keyword search.

Across town, the library’s bookmobile has just arrived at a senior housing complex. About 10 seniors climb aboard to browse the newly restocked shelves. Two people pick up reserve books they had requested during the previous weekly visit of the bookmobile. One of the bookmobile staff unloads a small cart of books and takes them into the community center building where she exchanges the materials in a small deposit collection. The staff member also drops off a Bi-Folkal™ kit at the office of the Activities Director and picks up a kit that was used for a program during the preceding week. After 45 minutes, the bookmobile folds up shop and heads to the next stop at a pre-school several miles down the road.

Back at the library, a group of emergency medical technicians is gathering in the all-purpose meeting room that was recently vacated by the fifth graders. They’re about to participate in a video teleconference program on emergency preparedness. The session is part of a series of distance education classes offered by the Tidewater Community College. Meanwhile, the library’s public access computers have filled to capacity. A library technology assistant is helping a woman format a newsletter for the local historical society using Adobe Pagemaker™. The woman took a class on using the software package two weeks ago and just needs a quick refresher in how to nest a photo within a block of text.

s Another computer user is logged on to a session of an online Human Resources Management course he’s are taking through the University of Virginia’s School of Continuing and Professional Studies. The woman at the next workstation is researching used car ratings and prices.

Eight or nine people are scattered among the tables at the library café. A woman sitting at a table by herself is lost in a new treasure she found in the new book section as she sips her cappuccino. At another table, a man pages through a book that he just bought at the Friends of the Library bookshop that adjoins the café area. A lawyer and her client sit at a third table and sip coffee as they review contract language before heading to a real estate closing.

Throughout the day, a constant stream of people combine their visit to the library to select books, books-on-CD and DVDs with a viewing of the new exhibit of a local artist’s work in the gallery area. Reference librarians are busy answering questions that arrive in person, by telephone, and through the library’s website.

Several people are in the local history room. One is methodically working her way through microfilm reels for a long discontinued newspaper. She’s doing research for a local history column she writes for the current weekly paper. Meanwhile, another person sits at a computer workstation and transfers records from 3x5 cards into an online cemetery index that is being produced for the library by the genealogical society.

Mid-afternoon, a pre-school class arrives at the library. They’re headed to the children’s program area to listen to a master storyteller share an African folktale called The King and the Tortoise. At the end of the tale, each child will go to the craft area where they’ll make a tortoise to take home with them.

After school, the teens arrive and quickly head to the Teen Area. Three begin to work on a PowerPoint™ presentation at an oversized computer workstation. The presentation will be their report for a group project they’re doing for their social studies class. A pair of sixteen year olds don headphones to listen to a DVD that they’re watching in the video den. The video will be the subject of a discussion program scheduled for later that afternoon. They’re going to compare Steven Spielberg’s 2005 film version of War of the Worlds with H.G. Wells’ original novel written in 1898. The program was planned by the library’s teen advisory council, which is composed of a dozen kids ranging in age from 14 to 18.

The after school hours also signals the arrival of a host of younger schoolchildren, some of whom arrive with a parent or grandparent. Other children arrive by themselves and quickly choose their spots in the children’s room. Several spread out and start working on their homework while others head directly for the "series" books to see if they can find the next episode in the lives of their favorite characters. A retired teacher who volunteers four afternoons each week during the school year makes the rounds providing homework help. A children’s room assistant is showing a man and his six-year old son where to find the books on dinosaurs. A children’s librarian is beginning an after-school program for fifth and sixth graders. Many of these children are regulars who show up nearly everyday. Several kids are sitting at colorful computer stations playing educational games.

The middle of the afternoon also brings a tour that includes local elected officials, the director of the chamber of commerce and the advance team of a high-tech firm that is considering relocating to the area. The library is one of the premiere sites on the community’s "economic development" tour that is given to commercial prospects.

The meeting rooms at the library are busy throughout the evening. A group of 15 would-be entrepreneurs are meeting in a large conference room with representatives of the Small Business Administration and the Senior Corps of Retired Executives (SCORE). Among other things, they learn that they can attend a class later in the week in the library’s Tech Center on how to develop a business plan. In another conference room, a group of 12 mystery fans are gathered to discuss "Trace," Patricia Cornwell’s latest "whodunit." Several of the study rooms are in use. In one, a literacy volunteer tutors a young man in his twenties who is working toward a Graduate Equivalency Diploma (G.E.D.). In another study room, a second volunteer who is fluent in Spanish works with woman who has recently arrived in the United States and who is beginning to learn English.

A public hearing about a proposed highway expansion is taking place in the al-purpose meeting room. A family story hour is being held in the children’s program room. The interactive session helps new parents learn how to engage their infants in important pre-literacy activities that help develop speech and motor skills.

A steady stream of adults and young adults pass through the library doors all evening long. Some are looking for a good murder mystery; others search for a book to help them deal with a health issue or to give them decorating ideas. College students occupy several study carrels scattered throughout the building. The Tech Center is offering a training session in how to use Microsoft Excel™. Every workstation is filled.

At 10 PM, the library finally closes its doors for the day, but library service doesn’t end. Well into the night, people are accessing the library’s web site to reserve and renew books and to access the "Find It Virginia" databases. Reference service also continues after hours because a group of Virginia libraries have banded together to offer virtual reference service on a "24X7" basis. Citizens can call an "800" info line number anytime between 9 in the evening and 9 in the morning for reference assistance. Each night of the week, a different library in a different part of the state provides the staffing and resources for the service. The phone calls are seamlessly routed to the appropriate library. The virtual reference service also answers reference questions online in "real time."

Far-fetched? Not really. The scenario portrayed above isn’t a dream. At least in some areas of the State, the description of a day in the life of a Virginia public library is closer to fact than fiction. Unfortunately, in other areas of the Commonwealth, the reality is significantly different.

Virginia’s connection to books and reading is particularly strong. After all, the core of the grandest public library of them all, the Library of Congress, was first housed on a mountaintop near Charlottesville and the main buildings at the Library of Congress are named for Jefferson and Madison. Jefferson’s personal declaration that "I cannot live without books..." is enough to warm any librarian’s heart.

However, some other words of Jefferson and Madison are even more important in considering the public library as an important institution in society. Both Jefferson and Madison frequently linked an informed citizenry with liberty. Jefferson intoned,

Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day.

Madison added,

Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: and a people who mean to be their own governours, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.

We cannot help believing that if Jefferson and Madison were alive today, that they would be powerful advocates for public libraries. In 1787, Jefferson wrote the following words to Madison:

Above all things I hope the education of the common people will be attended to, convinced that on their good sense we may rely with the most security for the preservation of a due degree of liberty.

The American public library stands as one of the nation’s most important institutions. It has been called "the people’s university" because it is the place where anyone seeking knowledge can access information without a means test or reference to the social register. It is a thoroughly democratic institution that crosses all socio-economic lines and offers relevant services to all.

In the early 1990s, many pundits were predicting the demise of the public library. They reasoned that the Internet would make the public library extraneous. Instead, what we have witnessed over the past fifteen years is the re-emergence of the public library as an even more robust institution. The number of people passing through the doors of public libraries is at an all-time high. Cities and counties across America have been building twenty-first century libraries that combine books with non-print media and electronic resources. In 2005, more people will pass through the doors of public libraries than through the doors of any other type of public building. Turnstile counts at the nation’s sports arenas pale in comparison to door counts at public libraries.

How are public libraries in the land of Jefferson and Madison faring? How well is the education of the common people being "attended to?" How are Virginia’s public libraries contributing to the vitality of the Commonwealth and to the quality of life enjoyed by Virginians? The report that follows examines these important questions and offers concrete recommendations outlining how public library services can be strengthened.

BACKGROUND

In November 2004, the Library of Virginia issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) for assistance in conducting a comprehensive study of public library services in the Commonwealth. The charge to prospective consultants was extensive. The RFP stated that, "The results of this study will assist the Library of Virginia in assuring that the Commonwealth’s public libraries are prepared to meet the challenges of the 21st century as valued community resources responsive to the rapid change in technology and society."

In carrying out the charge, the Himmel & Wilson team made a concerted effort to learn as much as possible about Virginia’s public libraries. Between March and July 2005, the consultants visited more than sixty libraries in every region of the State. Included in the site visits were large urban libraries and small rural facilities, branch libraries and main libraries, brand new suburban facilities and facilities that have served as libraries for many decades in well established communities. In most instances, the consultants were able to interview the director or branch manager. Library staff members were also interviewed or, in some cases, participated in group sessions.

In addition, twelve focus groups were held with library directors and thirteen sessions were held with library trustees and representatives of "Friends" organizations. These sessions were held in thirteen different locations throughout the State ranging from Arlington to Lebanon and from Roanoke and Chatham to Hampton and Chesapeake. A total of 159 people participated in these sessions.

The consultants met with library directors at the meeting of the Virginia Public Library Director’s Association in Graves Mountain in April 2005. Several web-based surveys were used to solicit ideas and opinions from the Virginia library community. One survey that targeted directors and project Steering Committee members explored the current and future roles of the Library of Virginia in library development activities. There were 124 responses to this survey. Another series of surveys sought opinions from reference librarians, children’s service librarians, technology staff, and general library staff in addition to directors. These surveys garnered a total of 536 responses.

Personal interviews were conducted with a total of 26 individuals (in addition to interviews with directors and branch managers during site visits). Among those interviewed were members of the Virginia House of Delegates; representatives of the Library of Virginia, including the Librarian of Virginia; representatives of the Virginia Library Association (VLA), including the President, Past President, Executive Director, and the legislative advocate; representatives of organizations representing cities and counties in the Commonwealth; and staff of the Virginia Department of Education and the Virginia Community College System.

The consultants also reviewed a significant amount of background information and analyzed statistical information related to the public library services offered to the people Virginia. Comparisons were made both between the performance of Virginia’s public libraries and those in other states, and among Virginia’s public libraries.

Finally, the consultants were privileged to work with a Steering Committee composed of talented individuals committed to quality public library services and with the staff of the Library of Virginia’s Library Development and Networking Division. The consultants met with the Steering Committee and with staff on several occasions during the project to gain insight into the challenges facing Virginia’s public libraries and to gauge reactions to emerging findings and recommendations. The consultants also held sessions in Arlington, Charlottesville, Newport News, Henrico County, Halifax and Pulaski to share preliminary findings with the library community. A total of 45 people attended these sessions.

s

Findings - Prologue

When Virginia is taken as a whole and library input measures are compared to other states, the Old Dominion State ends up looking, at best, average. For example, using the fiscal year (FY) 2003 statistics (the most recent comprehensive statistics available) collected through the Federal-State Cooperative System (FSCS) and compiled by the National Center for Education Statistics, Virginia ranks 25th among the states in Operating Income per Capita ($28.41). The state ranks 27th on Materials Expenditures per Capita ($ 3.95) and 29th on Total Staff per 25,000 Population (11.73).



The picture is somewhat similar on the "output" side. The Commonwealth ranks 30th in Visits per Capita (4.38), and, in what should be considered a tribute to hard working library staff members across the State, 15th in Circulation per Capita (8.48).



However, a closer examination reveals that characterizing Virginia’s performance on common measures of library service as "average" is somewhat misleading. While the statewide Operating Income per Capita may be $ 28.41, the annual statistics reported by Virginia libraries for FY 2004 shows that income per capita for library operations ranged from $ 8.25 to $ 136.72. While the statewide average may be 8.48 circulations per capita, this measure varied among libraries from 1.26 items per person to 28.72 items per person.

The wide variation in both input and output measures raises questions regarding both the quality of library services offered in some libraries and the equity of library and information services offered across the Commonwealth.

It is also instructive to note that the library reporting the highest income per capita for FY 2004 was also the library with the highest circulation per capita. The library reporting the lowest operating income per capita, while not the lowest in the state in circulation per capita, was nevertheless solidly in the bottom quartile for this measure. It is obvious from a review of statistical data that, while operating income doesn’t necessarily translate directly into quality library service, nevertheless, money matters.

How much money is available for providing public library services and how that money is distributed are obviously important. Although state aid accounts for only about 10% of library budgets statewide, it is, nevertheless, critical to the success of most public libraries in Virginia. This fact is underscored when it is recognized that many libraries are almost entirely dependent on state aid for the purchase of new materials.

Another important question confronting Virginia’s public libraries is "Who speaks for libraries?" The twin topics of advocacy and public awareness were frequently raised as issues by members of the public library community. There are many evidences that the recent (and understandable) focus on public safety and security and on K-12 education have resulted in a marginalization of public libraries in the eyes of the public officials, and perhaps, even in the eyes of the general public.

The consultants believe that the findings and recommendations growing out of this study can be organized into four major categories. They are:

• QUALITY OF PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICES
• EQUITY OF ACCESS TO QUALITY PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICES
• FUNDING
• ADVOCACY/PUBLIC AWARENESS


There are many specific issues that need to be addressed if Virginia is to be successful in "…assuring that the Commonwealth’s public libraries are prepared to meet the challenges of the 21st century as valued community resources responsive to the rapid change in technology and society." However, we believe that the four categories listed above provide a framework for organizing and understanding these issues.

Findings - Quality of Public Library Services

If one sought a single word to capture the state of public library services in Virginia, it would have to be "uneven." Himmel & Wilson has worked on statewide studies of library services in more than twenty states. The spectrum of public library services in Virginia is among the widest we have witnessed.

However, the breadth of this spectrum isn’t entirely bad news. The libraries at the "high end" offer some of the finest public library services we have seen in the nation. For example, Arlington’s Central Library’s hours of service (76 hours per week - open four nights a week until 10 PM and open 8 hours on Sundays) are the best we have encountered. The highly developed web presence of the Central Rappahannock Regional Library provides a model worthy of emulation by much larger libraries throughout the United States. The adult programming offered by the Fairfax County Public Library for people of all ages is truly exceptional. Several libraries in the Hampton Roads area have highly developed partnerships that support various aspects of early childhood development. The Hampton Public Library’s exemplary Healthy Families Partnership with the Hampton Health Department and a variety of other community-based agencies seeks to ensure that every child in Hampton is born healthy and enters school ready to learn.

At the same time, the consultants also found that Virginia has a significant number of libraries at the bottom end of the spectrum. For example, the consultants visited a public library in Virginia that offers no public Internet access. We discovered a regional library with no web presence. Three libraries in Virginia expended less than $ 1.00 per capita on new materials in 2004. Our site visits revealed that numerous library buildings are not in full compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act Guidelines. Several libraries offer little or nothing in the way of non-print formats.

"Quality" can be a somewhat subjective term when it is applied to library service. Because public libraries fulfill many different community needs, there can be differences of opinion in terms of what constitutes quality. For example, if an individual values public libraries solely for their print materials, she or he may not be troubled that some of Virginia’s libraries offer little or nothing in the way of audio or video materials. On the other hand, the expenditure of less than $ 1.00 per capita on new materials might be seen as a significant deficiency. An individual with a disabling condition may not care too much about the collection of materials housed in a facility that is inaccessible to them.

No single measure can be used to determine whether a library offers quality services. It is necessarily a combination of factors. In the end, quality is a matter of the degree to which libraries are relevant to the people in their communities and are meeting individual needs. However, there is considerable agreement about many of the components that contribute to quality.

Virginia has a valuable document in place that attempts to identify these components. Planning for Library Excellence, while a bit dated at this point, is a fundamentally sound tool. There is no question that if all libraries in Virginia met all of the standards and guidelines presented in the document that the people of Virginia would be receiving improved services.

The eight categories used to organize the standards and guidelines document are also sound. They are:

• Governance, Administration, and Planning
• Access
• Library Services
• Collections
• Facilities
• Technology
• Personnel
• Community and Public Relations


Unfortunately, most of the standards and guidelines presented in Planning for Library Excellence have little in the way of teeth. There is, in fact, a relatively small set of "requirements" that must be met in order to qualify for state aid. The consultants have reviewed the requirements and believe that they are fundamentally sound. We believe that enforcement of this basic set of standards is critically important as a first step.

One particular concern in terms of the quality of library service is in the area of staffing and continuing education. As was illustrated in the introduction to this report, the 21st Century public library is more than just a passive warehouse of books. Professional leadership and an ongoing honing and refining of staff skills and competencies are critical to the success of Virginia’s public libraries.

Unlike some states, Virginia has been largely successful in addressing one major challenge. Through incentives for the formation of regional libraries, Virginia has been able to create larger, more efficient units of service. However, larger and often more complex governance units also deserve a high level of professional expertise in planning and implementing quality library services.

The past year has actually seen a deterioration of Virginia’s certification program for librarians and library directors at a time when what is truly needed is an even stronger program. Greater coordination of continuing education for library staff at all levels is also lacking. Other states on the eastern seaboard, including Maryland, New Jersey and Delaware, are working to develop comprehensive programs that will ensure that library staff at all levels will have the appropriate skills to offer quality library services.

While a updating of the State’s standards is needed (especially in the staffing and technology areas), an analysis of how State policies and funding programs encourage libraries to make progress toward the standards and guidelines is also needed. If Virginia’s public libraries are going to serve the public well, "library development" needs to be more than part of the name of a division within the Library of Virginia. Developmental policies and funding incentives that encourage excellence also need to be in place.

Developmental incentives such as requiring all library directors to hold a master’s degree in library science from a program accredited by the American Library Association in order to qualify for State aid is not just desirable. It is essential if Virginia’s libraries are going to flourish.

Findings – QUALITY


Virginia has a fundamental framework in place that describes and, in some cases, quantifies "quality" public library services (Planning for Library Excellence).

Virginia has a significant number of exemplary libraries that offer quality library service.

Virginia has a significant number of libraries that do not have the resources necessary to offer quality library service.

Virginia has some developmental policies and funding incentives in place that encourage quality library services.

Continuing education opportunities for librarians and for other library staff are somewhat limited and offerings by various providers (e.g., the Library of Virginia, Virginia Library Association, individual libraries, etc.) are largely uncoordinated.

Certification of library directors is an essential tool in efforts to ensure quality public library service.

The quality of library collections in most Virginia public libraries is heavily dependent on funding from the Commonwealth of Virginia.

Much of the technology in place in Virginia’s public libraries is the result of grants and gifts; many libraries are unlikely to sustain their technology in the absence of supplemental funding.

Many, if not most, of Virginia’s public library facilities are inadequate in terms of amount of space, handicapped accessibility, and technological infrastructure.

Findings - Equity of Access to Quality Public Library Services

In the "Quality" section above, the consultants highlighted the fact that some Virginia libraries offer exemplary service while others are struggling to meet basic standards. The listings of libraries offered in the section above are merely a sampling of what the consultants observed and documented at the extremes. Many other libraries could be cited for exemplary services or for significant deficiencies. The point is that there is a wide gulf between a moderate number of high performance libraries and a significant number of struggling libraries. Depending on what criteria are applied, a case can be made for considering 15 – 20 of Virginia’s libraries as being exemplary. By the same token, at least 25, and perhaps as many as 40, of Virginia’s libraries could be considered sub-standard at least in some significant category. Approximately 40 libraries perform moderately well and deliver what might be considered an acceptable level of service.

The salaries and benefits offered to library workers in some areas of the state are poor. In some cases, libraries are overly dependent on part-time staff because of efforts to minimize the amount of the library’s budget that must be devoted to paying for basic benefits such as health insurance and retirement. These realities often make it difficult for these libraries to recruit and retain qualified workers. The situation is likely to get worse as the "graying" of the library profession continues. A few states, most notably Georgia, have instituted "personnel grants" that ensure that every county library has at least one staff member with a master’s degree in library science. While these people are not state employees, the amount of the grant is sufficient to pay an MLS at a level comparable to public educators with similar educational credentials. A program such as this might be considered as part of a supplemental "equity" funding package.

One bright spot in the equity of access issue is "Find It Virginia." The statewide licensing of a package of quality electronic information services offers residents of all parts of the Commonwealth extremely valuable, comparable resources. The importance of this program cannot be overstated.

Some other states have a larger number of libraries that can be considered inadequate; however, in very few states is the gap between the high end and the low end as striking as it is in the Old Dominion State. In large measure, the quality and quantity of public library service that is available to Virginians is dependent on where one lives. Although there are some notable exceptions, residents of northern and eastern Virginia have access to much better public library service than residents of the southern and western portions of the Commonwealth.

It would also appear that the quality and quantity of public library service are somewhat dependent on the relative wealth of the library’s service area. Of the 20 counties and cities with the lowest circulation of library materials per capita, 19 of the jurisdictions had median household incomes below the state median. Only New Kent County had a higher than average income while falling in the bottom group in circulation per capita. In contrast, of the 20 counties and cities with the highest circulation per capita, 13 also exceeded the state median household income. Furthermore, three of the seven jurisdictions with median household incomes below the state average that nevertheless performed well in circulation per capita are part of regional systems that include other jurisdictions with above average household incomes. Ironically, it appears that public library service is often poorest in the areas that would benefit from quality library and information services the most. The maps on the next page illustrate the correlation between household income and library use.

In short, it is clear that high quality library service is available in some areas of the Commonwealth and that a lack of access to high quality public library service is an issue in other areas of the State.




Findings – EQUITY



There is a great disparity between the public library services offered in some areas of Virginia compared to other sections of the State.

Disparities in the quantity and quality of public library services appear to be, at least in part, economically based.

Many of Virginia’s residents who could benefit the most from quality library resources and services do not have access to those services.

Find It Virginia is an important resource in addressing the equity of access issue.

Poor salaries and inadequate benefits make it difficult for some libraries to recruit and retain quality staff.

A few areas of the State have the wherewithal to offer higher quality library services but have not seen fit to do so.

Findings - Funding

In July 2001, Virginia’s Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) released a legislatively mandated review of State aid to public libraries. The review looked at intended purposes of State aid to libraries and at the mechanisms used to determine the distribution of those funds. In general, the library community concurred with JLARC’s findings and was supportive of the Commission’s recommendations.

The Library of Virginia, the Virginia Library Association, the Virginia Public Library Director’s Association and local libraries looked forward to working with the legislature on implementing JLARC’s recommendations. However, the tragic events of September 11, 2001 changed the nation’s focus and put work on the JLARC recommendations on hold. The consultants were directed to review the JLARC recommendations as part of the current study.

The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission indicated that State aid to libraries was "…largely effective in achieving its objectives." Although the consultants generally agree with this conclusion, we offer the following observations. In structuring our response, we have used the categories used by JLARC in their Report Summary.

State Aid encourages the Maintenance of Standards and Local Support
We agree that State Aid has been invaluable in encouraging the maintenance of standards and in encouraging local support. Local libraries have been able to use State aid to leverage local investment in libraries. Furthermore, the potential loss or reduction of State aid has acted as a brake on the reduction of services below the required levels. However, we have already indicated that we believe that standards need to be strengthened. Expectations regarding the level and nature of services have changed over time and standards need to be revised to reflect this fact. We do not disagree with JLARC; rather, we believe that Virginia needs to increase its standards rather than just maintaining them. A strengthening of standards would likely require an increase in State funding as an incentive as well.

We also believe that the current level of State aid doesn’t do enough to encourage local investment. While the increase in local support documented by JLARC is impressive, much of the growth has been in burgeoning suburban areas rather than being distributed throughout the State. A higher level of incentive from the State would enable some of the roughly 40 libraries identified earlier as being "sub-standard" to gain much needed local support. Poor local support is the single factor most responsible for poor performance.

The Main Components of the Formula Should Be Kept and Updated
The three components of the State aid formula – population, square miles, and local expenditures – provide a sound foundation for the distribution of funds. This trio of factors has proven itself successful not just in Virginia but in several other states as well. JLARC’s assertion that these factors address both State goals and local needs is absolutely correct. We also concur with JLARC’s suggestion that the population and the expenditure caps should be lifted. However, the consultants would also caution that these steps must be taken in ways that do not exacerbate the equity situation.

Rapidly growing areas typically find their funding lagging population growth and the demand for services that this entails. The population cap potentially penalizes libraries in this situation. At the present time, only Fairfax County is faced with the dilemma of rapid growth and a population in excess of 600,000. However, this penalty could apply to other areas of the State in the future. It is sensible to remove this restriction while the cost of doing so is relatively low.

The removal of the expenditure cap is considerably more complex as well as being considerably more costly to address. A complete removal of the expenditure cap is probably impractical because of the nearly tripling of State aid that it would involve. However, the fact that the local expenditures cap has not been adjusted for fifteen years means that more and more libraries have been affected by the cap. JLARC proposed several alternatives for addressing the situation and seemed to favor the idea of applying a 3% inflationary rate per year starting with 1990. While this is a practical compromise, it fails to recognize that much of the growth in local expenditures is not due to inflation alone. Rather, significant growth is due to the fact that population growth has required additional expenditures simply in order to maintain service levels. The consultants believe that adjustments at regular intervals (perhaps every five years and starting with an initial adjustment) should be factored into State aid calculations. Consumer Price Index adjustments could be made in the intervening years to ensure that the cost of the five year adjustment is more feasible. Furthermore, we believe that the removal of the caps should be "triggered" by authorization and appropriation of funding to address the equity of access issue.

The JLARC Report also discussed the "regional bonus" available to libraries serving multiple jurisdictions. While some areas of the State that are not served by regional libraries take exception to the supplemental funding for regional systems, the consultants believe that this provision of the State aid formula is necessary to ensure the continuation of these larger units of service. Any reversion to smaller independent libraries would represent a setback in the development of quality library services. In fact, in the consultants’ opinion, there are still a number of libraries in Virginia that would benefit from participation in a larger unit of service.

Larger units of service do not guarantee higher quality service; however they do provide opportunities for economies of scale and greater coordination of services that make it far more likely that enhanced services will be available. Additional efforts should be made to encourage regionalization in the areas that could still derive a benefit from consolidated governance. Other efforts to achieve economies of scale should also be encouraged through grants and incentives. This would include efforts to build shared automation systems that serve multiple jurisdictions, regional coordination of continuing education opportunities, and the sharing of specialty staff (e.g., technology support staff, young adult librarians, etc.).

Local Ability to Fund Library Services Could Be Addressed
As was noted earlier in this document, people who live in some of the areas that could benefit most from quality public library resources and services do not have access to high level services. It was also noted that many of the libraries offering sub-standard services are in areas with low median household incomes. The consultants agree with JLARC’s conclusion that a separate stream of funding would be necessary to address this important equity issue. The two factors recommended for inclusion in a formula to distribute this supplemental aid, size of operation and low revenue capacity, are also seen as appropriate.

The consultants believe that the implementation of this JLARC recommendation with relatively robust funding has great potential for elevating the overall level of library and information services in the Commonwealth. It could significantly close the gap between the "haves" and the "have-nots" and could go a long way toward ensuring that every Virginian has access to good basic public library service.

Infopowering the Commonwealth Funding Should Be Restored
It has already been noted that Virginia’s public libraries are highly dependent on grants, gifts, and other "soft" money to meet their technology needs. Many Virginia libraries are struggling to sustain the technology they already have and are finding it next to impossible to upgrade their technology on a regular basis. Computers, network devices, and peripheral equipment purchased with Infopowering funds and received through Gates grants are nearing the end of their life cycle.

The JLARC report recognized that the nature of library services has changed and is continuing to change. JLARC also noted that the Infopowering the Commonwealth program provides a mechanism for bridging the digital divide. It is one of the few programs that offers a partial solution to the problem of equity of access to quality public library services. The State of Virginia should see the Infopowering program as more than simply an expenditure. It should be recognized as an excellent investment in the future of the people of the Commonwealth. The consultants thoroughly agree with JLARC’s assessment that Infopowering funding should be restored.

The Virginia library community also agrees strongly with this recommendation. The web survey of library directors that was conducted by the consultants asked participants to rate the JLARC recommendations on a five-point scale with 1 representing "very low priority" and 5 representing "very high priority." The restoration of funding for Infopowering outranked all other JLARC recommendations with a mean score of 4.63.

Public Libraries in Virginia Benefit from Collaborative Efforts
The consultants found many examples of highly developed partnerships between libraries and other community organizations ranging from schools and health departments to literacy programs and local history organizations. JLARC’s encouragement of ongoing collaborative efforts is fundamentally sound.

A Construction Component Should Not Be Included in the Formula AND Restoration of the Construction Grant Program is Needed
JLARC indicated that nearly half of the libraries that responded to the survey JLARC conducted as part of their study reported significant deficiencies in their buildings. The survey conducted by the consultants garnered similar results. Over seventy-five percent (75.39%) characterized their library’s need for additional space as either critical or moderate with over forty-three percent (43.08%) saying that their need was critical.

The consultants observed many libraries that were extremely crowded and visited many buildings that were not originally designed to function as libraries. Many ADA compliance issues were observed. The question regarding funding for library facilities is not whether funds are needed for library construction and renovation. Rather, the question is the source of this type of capital funding.

The consultants believe that JLARC got it right in suggesting that mixing capital funds with operational funds within the basic State aid formula was ill-advised. The JLARC report characterized its recommendation for a separate program for library construction as a "restoration" in reference to the legislative intent in Item 255C of the 2000 Appropriation Act. In fact, this program never became a reality. Nevertheless, the consultants agree with JLARC that a separate construction grant program is a much sounder approach to meeting Virginia’s need for updated library facilities than is co-mingling capital funding with the operational funds provided through basic State aid.

A number of states, including Delaware, Massachusetts, and California, have extensive library construction grant or bond programs in place. State investment in public library buildings can serve multiple purposes. In addition to supporting improved library services, new or improved buildings can act as an economic development tool, can help improve blighted areas, and can stimulate local economies. As was stated in the introduction, public libraries are usually the most heavily used public building in a given community. The location of a major library structure can have a powerful impact on other development activities and can be used as a tool to combat urban sprawl.

The need for this program is great as is the pent-up demand. Detailed criteria and a mechanism for establishing priority projects will need to be developed if the construction program is reinstated and funded at a significant level.

Other Funding Issues
The consultants believe that there is at least one important funding issue that falls outside of the realm of the JLARC study. The consultants found little evidence that Virginia’s libraries had any dependable source of funding for innovative projects. In many states, Federal Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) funds are used for this purpose. At the current time, the lion’s share of Virginia’s LSTA allocation is tied up funding Find It Virginia. Nearly everyone agrees that this is a vitally important ongoing program.

However, the consultants wish to point out that many other states have been successful in convincing their state legislatures to fund similar online database licensing with state revenues. Securing state funding for Find It Virginia along with the other components of Infopowering the Commonwealth would have the double benefit of freeing up over $ 2 million for other efforts including innovative projects.

Findings – FUNDING


The Joint Legislative Audit Review Commission’s Review of State Aid to Public Libraries provides a credible, well-reasoned roadmap for legislative action in regard to State funding for public libraries.

The current State aid formula is fundamentally sound. Efforts should be directed toward refining the formula rather than replacing it.

The current State aid formula does not adequately address the issue of the local ability to fund library service.

Virginia’s public libraries are highly dependent on "soft-money" to fund technology.

Many of Virginia’s public library facilities are inadequate and/or do not meet ADA accessibility guidelines.

State funding for the Infopowering the Commonwealth program (including funds for Find It Virginia and for sustaining the technological infrastructure) is essential to the future quality of public library services.

Virginia libraries lack an adequate source of funding for innovation.

Findings - Advocacy/Public Awareness

A disturbing issue was revealed in the personal interviews conducted by the consultants. Although no one who was interviewed questioned the desirability of public library services, few non-librarians saw public library services as essential or as being a high priority service. One interviewee captured the general tenor of the interviews by referring to public library service as a "nicety."

It was clear that many decision makers do not recognize the important roles that public libraries can play in introducing young children to the world of books and reading, in supporting primary and secondary education, in stimulating economic growth, in developing an informed citizenry, in supporting workforce development, or in enhancing the quality of community life.

Virginia’s public library community seems to understand the importance of raising the public’s awareness of libraries as essential community institutions. The conversations in the focus groups repeatedly returned to the twin issues of advocacy and public awareness.

Public libraries have been positioned as highly relevant to their communities in some areas of the State; however, in many other communities, libraries have been marginalized. It appears that many decision makers at the State and County level recognize education as a high priority issue but fail to make the connection between libraries and education. The question is not whether additional advocacy and public awareness efforts are needed; the question is how to carry out these campaigns.

Some of the public library directors who participated in focus groups expressed the opinion that public libraries and public library development were not the top priority of the Library of Virginia Board or of the Librarian of Virginia. The roles survey conducted by the consultants underscored this point of view. Over seventy percent (70.97%) of the directors responding to the survey identified the Virginia Library Association (VLA) rather than the Library of Virginia as currently being the leading entity in advocating for public libraries. However, the directors saw a growing role for the Library of Virginia in this regard. While VLA was still ranked as the lead library advocate in the future, the Library of Virginia increased from just over three percent at the current time to over sixteen percent (16.13%) in the future.

Some directors participating in the focus groups came to the defense of the Library of Virginia and its limited advocacy for libraries. There was a strong sense that the services of the Library Development and Networking Division (LDND) are highly valued and an expression of a real sense of loss associated with staffing reductions within LDND.

However, several directors pointed out that public libraries are just one among a broad array of priorities for the Library of Virginia. The Library of Virginia is indeed a multi-faceted organization with many responsibilities that extend beyond public libraries. Nevertheless, there was a general consensus that the state library agency could be more visible in supporting public libraries.

The web survey revealed that it is library directors who feel most strongly about gaining greater support from the Library of Virginia. Survey participants were asked to indicate the degree to which they agreed or disagreed with a series of statements on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 representing "strongly disagree" and 5 representing "strongly agree." Just over fifteen percent (15.38%) of public library directors said they strongly agreed with the statement, "The Library of Virginia Board believes public libraries are essential to quality of life." In contrast, over fifty percent of general library staff and youth services librarians indicated strong agreement with the statement (52.97% and 56.92% respectively).

Directors did not portray the Library of Virginia as hostile. In fact over seventy percent of the directors rated their agreement with the statement at the mid-point or above on a five point scale. A score of 3.0 would indicate that a respondent was neutral, that they neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement. The directors’ mean response to this statement was 3.41 and only 2 of the 65 indicated strong disagreement. However, the less than enthusiastic endorsement also makes it clear that Virginia’s public library directors wish that their institutions were a higher priority for the Library of Virginia.

Follow-up conversations on this topic centered on the delineation of the differences between advocacy and lobbying, discussions regarding the range of the Library of Virginia’s responsibilities, and where advocacy for public libraries might appropriately fit within the Library of Virginia’s priorities. Most people agreed that public libraries have placed too much emphasis on the "full funding" issue and not enough effort on conveying the importance of the positive outcomes associated with increased support for public libraries. It was clear that greater advocacy by the Librarian of Virginia and the Library Virginia Board, while desirable, is not a "silver bullet."

The Virginia Library Association was seen as the leader in advocacy for public libraries both at the current time and in the future. This is not a surprising finding. State library associations rather than state library agencies do take the lead in advocacy for public libraries in numerous other states. However, most of the library associations that do so are either 501(c)(6) organizations under Internal Revenue Service codes or have separate political action committees. The Virginia Library Association’s 501 (c)(3) status limits what it is able to do in the way of "lobbying" or organizing lobbying efforts. A 501 (c)(3) organization is a religious, educational, or charitable organization. A 501 (c)(6) organization is a business or trade organization. One of the significant differences between the two is the degree to which political action is allowed. It is clear that Virginia libraries need a stronger voice. Whether that voice is a redesigned Virginia Library Association, a new entity, or an extension of the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association is an open question.

In many states, library trustees and Friends are important players in advocacy for public libraries. The library trustees and library "Friends" who participated in the focus group sessions were relatively knowledgeable about their own libraries; however, they seemed less aware of the larger challenges facing public libraries at the State and/or national level. Trustees largely perceived their role as managerial or fiduciary while Friends saw their primary role as fund-raisers. During their interviews, representatives of VLA indicated that trustees and Friends have played a limited role in advocacy for libraries in regard to statewide issues such as state aid. Better communication of the key issues with Friends and Trustees and an active effort to recruit these individuals as advocates could pay handsome dividends in terms of legislative support.

Findings – ADVOCACY/PUBLIC AWARENESS


Many decision makers view public libraries as a "nicety" rather than as an essential community institution.

The Virginia Library Association (through its members) is the primary source of advocacy for public libraries in the Commonwealth.

The Virginia Library Association is limited by its tax status in terms of its ability to lobby for public libraries.

Many library directors believe that the Library of Virginia needs to be more active and visible in its support for public libraries.

Library trustees and members of library "Friends" organizations have traditionally played a limited role in advocacy for public libraries in Virginia.

RECOMMENDATIONS

What follows are recommendations that are designed to provide an outline for actions that would result in improved public library services for all Virginians. If implemented, the consultants believe that they would ensure that the "Commonwealth’s public libraries are prepared to meet the challenges of the 21st century as valued community resources responsive to the rapid change in technology and society." If the recommendations are ignored, it is our opinion that the gap between the high performing and the marginal libraries in the State will grow and that an increasing number of Virginians will be deprived of a valuable resource that can help them succeed in school, on the job, and in their daily lives.


The recommendations, like the findings, are organized into four major topics. They are:

• QUALITY OF PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICES
• EQUITY OF ACCESS TO QUALITY PUBLIC LIBRARY SERVICES
• FUNDING
• ADVOCACY/PUBLIC AWARENESS


While the recommendations are not presented in a priority order, we believe that it is important to point out that the four categories are highly interrelated. It is unlikely that libraries will receive additional funding unless there is greater and more effective advocacy for public libraries. Libraries are unlikely to be able to address the issue of equitable access to quality library services without increased funding. Finally, universal access to quality public library services will not be a reality in Virginia until the equity issue is confronted.

Quality of Public Library Services

Recommendation # 1

Review, revise, and strengthen public library standards.

The publication entitled Planning for Library Excellence, last revised in the year 2000, serves as Virginia’s standards for public libraries. The document, which reflects a great deal of work over a considerable number of years by the Library of Virginia’s Library Development and Networking Division, by members of the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association (VPLDA), by the Virginia Library Association, and by individuals in the State’s public library community, is comprehensive and well organized.

However, much has changed in public libraries in the last five years and the consultants believe that the time has come to review. revise, and strengthen the document. While every section should be revisited, the technology chapter is particularly out of date. It is also recommended that the revised standards should include new content related to collaboration and partnerships.

Whatever group is asked to spearhead the effort (the consultants believe that VPLDA may be the best choice if they are willing to assume the task), part of the charge should be to attempt to enhance the "user friendliness" of the standards. Consideration should be given to organizing the basic standards in a checklist format that can be used by library directors with their library boards to foster a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of the library.

In carrying out the revision, those working on the task should recognize that they are, in effect, defining quality library service. An effort should be made to identify how meeting the standards will improve services to the end user and to offer examples of how achieving the standards will benefit the communities being served by the library.


Recommendation # 2

Review and seek the strengthening of Code of Virginia and administrative rules regarding the certification of public library directors.

It is truly unfortunate that Virginia has been losing rather than gaining ground in terms of public library certification requirements. The increase in the service population that triggers the certification requirement followed by the reinterpretation of Code language leaves Virginia with a certification requirement that has little or no teeth. The fact that these changes have taken place at a time when public libraries are becoming more complex and more technical makes the erosion of the certification requirements even more regrettable.

It is the consultants’ opinion that a master’s degree in library science (MLS) from a program accredited by the American Library Association should be the minimum requirement for ALL public libraries in Virginia that receive State aid. A population base below which certification is not required does nothing more than underscore the idea that small communities don’t need library services on a par with larger communities. It also provides a convenient mechanism for avoiding participation in regional systems that have proven to be cost effective and responsive to their regions. While the consultants do not wish to disparage library workers who do not hold the MLS, and while there are undoubtedly capable individuals with considerable experience who do not hold the degree, a weakening of the certification requirements, taken to their logical end, will result in a larger number of inadequate libraries.


Recommendation # 3

Develop a comprehensive curriculum for all library workers based on recognized skills and competencies and implement a coordinated program of continuing education.

As Virginia has been weakening its certification requirements, some other states are expanding their efforts to ensure that all library workers possess the skills and competencies needed to offer quality services in 21st Century public libraries. Significant work is being done by state library agencies, state library associations, and library schools to identify and develop extensive programs aimed at equipping library staff with the skills they need to provide modern library and information services. An excellent web site that provides an overview of such efforts as well as links to providers of continuing education can be found at:

http://www.librarysupportstaff.com/4competency.html

Virginia lacks a significant continuing education provider that is available in many states in that there is no American Library Association master’s program in the State. This places a greater burden on the Library of Virginia, the Virginia Library Association, and on individual libraries to develop and implement the types of educational experiences that will ensure library workers have the tools they need to do their jobs well.

The consultants believe that the Library of Virginia is best suited to coordinate continuing education for library workers in the commonwealth. However, to do so, the agency will require at least one additional professional position and clerical support. The role of this staff member would be to work with all libraries and all providers of continuing education to develop a curriculum for library workers. Virginia can build on the work of others. A number of eastern seaboard states have been working together on leadership initiatives and several states have well developed library assistant programs. The Western Council of State Libraries has done an impressive amount of work identifying basic skills and competencies. If Virginia’s libraries are going to be exceptional, then Virginia’s library workers need exceptional skills.


Recommendation # 4

Encourage the Virginia Library Association to develop an annual awards program to recognize libraries that meet or exceed standards.

Standards are often seen as rules to be enforced rather than as being the right thing to do. Virginia needs to encourage public libraries to meet standards by offering incentives as well as by enforcing penalties. The consultants believe that the Virginia Library Association can play an important role in offering such incentives.

Retail establishments often display certificates that proclaim that they were voted "the best delicatessen" or "the best florist" in an online or newspaper readers’ poll. The consultants occasionally encounter libraries that fly banners proclaiming that they are among the top ten libraries in Hennen’s American Public Library Ratings (the HAPLR index). This type of recognition is often used as a source of pride AND as a mechanism to motivate staff and to increase public support.

An annual awards program organized and carried out by the Virginia Library Association would provide positive reinforcement to libraries that are striving to meet or exceed a full range of standards. The consultants envision Board members coming to their directors asking why a nearby community was recognized and why their library was not. This would offer an opportunity to point out the areas which need to be improved to qualify for the award in subsequent years.

The Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association already has an awards program. VPLDA and VLA could possibly work together to develop award criteria and to review library performance on selected standards each year.

Equity of Access to Quality Public Library Services

Recommendation # 5

Support and pursue legislative action on a slightly modified version of the recommendations of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission’s (JLARC) recommendations.

The JLARC Review of State Aid to Public Libraries that was conducted in the year 2000 provides an excellent road map for library improvement. The consultants concur with nearly every recommendation of the Commission. The modifications that we are recommending are refinements rather than a rejection of JLARC’s findings.

Recommendation # 6

Support JLARC’s suggestion that "add on" (an additional funding program) to the State Aid formula be instituted to address the ability, or lack of ability, of certain areas to support public library services adequately.

The consultants believe that addressing the equity issue is one of the most important recommendations, if not the most important recommendation, we are offering. Virginia will not be able to claim that it has high quality public library service until it addresses the significant disparities in service that exist. As we illustrated earlier, most of these disparities are, at least in part, economically based.

The consultants agree with JLARC’s suggestion that the legislature consider an "add on" (an additional funding program) category of State Aid. Furthermore, we strongly recommend that this add-on program be elevated to the highest priority for funding. In other words, the "equity package" of funding should be fully funded before other components of state aid are calculated. Full funding for the equity package might be used as a trigger mechanism to lift or extend the population cap and/or expenditure caps.

The consultants envision this new program to be separate from the current State Aid formula. That is, this new program would not change or adjust the current State Aid distribution method. Rather, it would be a standalone program that reflects the inability of some areas of the State to adequately fund public library service.

The consultants also agree with JLARC that the use of updated data similar to that provided in the State’s Report on the Revenue Capacity, Revenue Effort, and Fiscal Stress of Virginia’s Counties and Cities is a fair way of determining need. These data reflect actual conditions that make it difficult for some jurisdictions to fund libraries adequately. However, in order to make the additional program effective, it would need to be funded at a level that is sufficient to really make a difference. As many as twenty-five or thirty library jurisdictions might be included in an equity add-on program. It is anticipated that at least $ 4 million would need to be dedicated to this type of program if it is expected to have a noticeable impact on library services in economically stressed areas.

Recommendation # 7

Shift the funding for Find It Virginia from Federal Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) monies to State revenues.

Find It Virginia is one of the most significant tools available to the State to address equal access to information and consequently, equal educational opportunity. Many other states that began funding their statewide database licensing programs with LSTA funds have been able to shift their programs to state revenue streams. This accomplishment recognizes the importance and the success of statewide database access programs.

Find It Virginia should also be expanded to include licenses for services such as tutor.com, which is an online homework help service. Governor Bob Riley of Alabama recently announced that his state would begin offering free access to the service to any child in Alabama with a library card. This resource is an invaluable tool that is directly related to student achievement. The service is currently available through at least one of Virginia’s regional libraries. Making the service accessible statewide would be an important step in offering quality services to all who wish to learn.

Shifting Find It Virginia from Federal to State funding would also have a significant secondary affect. At the present time, libraries in Virginia lack a source of funding for innovation and experimentation. In many states, LSTA funds are used to fund pilot projects, to offer competitive grants to libraries who are willing to try alternative delivery mechanisms and to encourage the adoption of new technologies. We have addressed this issue under a separate recommendation on innovation.

Funding

Recommendation # 8

Retain the three factors – population, square miles, and local expenditures – as the basis for calculating State Aid.

The three factors applied in determining State Aid reflect conditions that have an impact on quality library service. Population reflects the fact that serving more people takes additional resources. Square miles reflects the reality that effectively serving a large geographic area often entails branch locations, bookmobiles, and other outreach efforts that have costs associated with them. The local expenditure factor recognizes the partnership that exists between the State and local units of government in providing library services. Local governments that are willing to support services should be encouraged to do so through financial incentives.

Recommendation # 9

Remove the population cap that is applicable under the current formula.

While the population cap currently penalizes only one jurisdiction, the day may come when it affects others as well. As stated above, the population factor is in place to reflect the fact that larger populations require money to serve adequately. Areas that experience rapid population growth typically also face substantial infrastructure costs that have an impact on other funding priorities. Removing the caps ensures that jurisdictions faced with this situation will receive an increase in State Aid that will help them maintain quality services. Furthermore, removal of the cap at this time has a relatively small financial impact. Waiting until Fairfax County grows even larger and until multiple jurisdictions fall under the cap will place the legislature in a situation similar to what they are facing with the revenue cap. The cost of removing the cap will eventually become prohibitive.

However, the removal of the population cap, and even more importantly, any adjustment of the expenditure cap, must be done in a manner that holds other jurisdictions harmless. Growing areas should not be compensated at the expense of other areas, many of which lack adequate capacity to support library services at a high level. Even if a hold harmless provision is built into the formula at the "full funding" level, the impact of the removal of the population and expenditure caps must be considered under partial funding scenarios to prevent a shifting of funds away from the struggling areas of the state and toward growth areas.

Recommendation # 10

Adjust, and then index the revenue cap and revisit the cap every five years for possible readjustment.

The revenue cap is the source of a considerable degree of unfairness in the State Aid formula. Over one third of the libraries in the State are now affected by the cap which serves to negate one of the purposes of the original State Aid formula – encouraging local expenditure for libraries. The problem that exists is that the revenue cap has not been adjusted for fifteen years. During that time, local funding for many libraries has soared and an increasing number of libraries have been affected by the cap.

Almost everyone, including the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, agrees that the expenditure cap is problematic. An ever increasing number of localities are not being recognized for their contribution to library services. However, nearly everyone is afraid to tinker with the cap for one or more of several reasons. A complete removal of the cap would either be very expensive (JLARC estimated that a tripling of State Aid would be necessary to hold harmless the two thirds of the libraries not under the cap) or would severely penalize two thirds of the libraries in the State including most of those that are in economically distressed areas.

Because this situation will only grow worse over time, the consultants believe that a three step process should be followed. A one time adjustment larger than the 3% per year adjustment suggested by JLARC should be made. The adjustment should be accompanied by the amount of money necessary to hold harmless all libraries not affected by the cap. This adjustment is likely to cost the State nearly $ 8 million. The new cap should then be adjusted annually as suggested by JLARC using the Consumer Price Index as a guide. JLARC further recommended revisiting the expenditure cap every ten years. The consultants believe that it should be readjusted at five year intervals to prevent the current dire situation from reoccurring at regular intervals.

In short, to achieve a fair application of the State Aid formula, the expenditure cap should be removed; however, providing enough additional funding to protect two thirds of the libraries is unlikely. The consultants therefore recommend a significant adjustment that falls between JLARC’s recommendation and a complete lifting of the cap.

Recommendation # 11

Seek restoration of funding for the Infopowering the Commonwealth program including Find It Virginia as well as grants for computers and network equipment.

Virginia’s libraries must be technologically advanced if they are going to continue to be relevant to the people of the Commonwealth. Although the consultants believe that books will continue to dominate library collections for many years to come, nevertheless, computers and computer based devices will continue to expand their domination in reference and information services.

We have already discussed the merits of Find It Virginia and have stressed the importance of that resource as a tool that extends equitable access to quality information resources to all Virginians. We have also alluded to the benefits associated with moving the Find It Virginia licenses to State funding. However, the consultants believe that the Infopowering program must also include funding for computers and network devices as well.

In order to remain current, libraries must develop rolling replacement schedules that allow for a complete turnover of equipment every four to five years. For most libraries, this kind of replacement schedule is just a dream. Gates computers are nearing the end of their useful lives. Every day, thousands of Virginias turn to public libraries as their primary source of computers. They depend on the equipment for communication, for education, and for consumer and health information. Classes held in computer labs in libraries help residents of the Commonwealth develop marketable job skills and help students hone their information literacy skills. A robust Infopowering program is an excellent investment.

Recommendation # 12

Seek a separate construction bonding program to promote new public library building and expansion of current facilities.

We have already seen the importance of public library buildings in the lives of their communities. They are more than just brick and mortar. They are, in many cases, the heart and soul of their communities. The JLARC study of five years ago recognized the need for a source of capital funding to renovate and expand existing buildings and to construct new facilities.

A funding program for construction such as the one envisioned by the legislature in the year 2000 makes sense on several fronts. If nothing else, such a program could help to address significant handicapped accessibility problems that exist across the State. Inaccessible restrooms, non-compliant or non-existent ramps, shelving spacing that fails to meet the ADA Guidelines and the lack of handicapped parking abound. Addressing these issues should be a high priority.

Secondly, new and expanded facilities can have a significant impact on a local economy. As the most significant public building in the community, a library can be used as a catalyst to encourage private investment in aging city centers. It can be used as a mechanism to encourage higher density development and to fight urban sprawl in the "New Urbanism" mode.

Many other states, including Delaware, Massachusetts and California, have well developed programs that provide a significant percentage of the cost of new library construction. For example, the Delaware program provides 50% of construction costs. The consultants believe that this kind of program is merited and that it would have a significant positive impact both on library services and on the communities in which new or expanded facilities are built. However, it should also be recognized that the administration of such a program would require additional staff within the Library Development and Networking Division. At least one professional with significant library facilities experience and full-time clerical support would be required to implement this type of program.

Recommendation # 13

A significant portion of Federal LSTA funds liberated through a shifting of the Find It Virginia program should be used to support pilot projects and innovative approaches to offering service.

At the present time, Virginia’s public libraries lack a source of funding for innovation. Libraries find themselves in the uncomfortable position of being a highly technical knowledge industry with little ability to carry out any research and development activities. If the Virginia Library community is successful in getting State support for Find It Virginia, LSTA could be used for a variety of important purposes including fostering innovation.

For example, LSTA could provide the initial funding for a 24X7 virtual reference network that would enable all Virginians to get real-time answers to reference queries anytime day or night via telephone or through the Internet. LSTA funds could also be used to encourage the development of shared automation consortia serving multiple library jurisdictions.

Several states (Indiana is one example) have used or are using LSTA funds to begin the development of statewide virtual libraries patterned after the Library of Congress’ American Memory project.

Advocacy/Public Awareness

Recommendation # 14

Develop an "Ohio Library Council" model for advocacy.

Ohio is widely heralded as a model for public library funding. The activity of the Ohio Library Council (OLC) over many years is at least in part responsible for the unparalleled funding received by Ohio’s public libraries. OLC serves as Ohio’s public library association, as a coordinator of continuing education and, most importantly, as the center of legislative advocacy and lobbying activity on behalf of the State’s public libraries.

While OLC has individual members, institutional memberships are stressed. A large number of Ohio libraries are "Honor Roll" libraries and pay dues on behalf of all of their staff. In addition, many other libraries pay healthy dues on a sliding scale that enables full-time professional lobbying activity on behalf of libraries. OLC also encourages memberships from automation vendors, book jobbers, and other commercial entities that benefit from healthy public libraries. More information on the Ohio Library Council can be found at:

http://www.olc.org/

We are not recommending an OLC model for advocacy because we believe that Virginia needs another library association. The model we are suggesting might well find its home in the Virginia Library Association or, alternatively, it might be an extension of the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association. The point is that if Virginia hopes to provide high quality public library services to all of its citizens, the library community must ratchet up the level of its legislative, advocacy, and lobbying activity.

While the expectation that the Library of Virginia will serve as an advocate (not a lobbyist) for public libraries is reasonable, it is NOT reasonable to expect that the Library of Virginia will be able to deliver the full measure of initiatives and funding outlined throughout this report. The OLC model recognizes that advocacy is more than a part time activity. Virginia has benefited from the hard work of many dedicated individuals who have worked tirelessly for many years on behalf of Virginia’s libraries. The Virginia Library Association’s legislative advocate has been a tremendous asset to libraries as well. However, as public dollars have become increasingly hard to come by, libraries in many states have come to recognize that the time has come to take advocacy and lobbying to the next level.

Recommendation # 15

Organize and prepare library trustees and members of library Friends organizations to be advocates for libraries.

The consultants believe that library trustees and Friends are underutilized as advocates for libraries in Virginia. We are aware that there have been efforts to establish a statewide Friends organization and that there is a Trustees and Friends Forum within the Virginia Library Association. However, neither of these efforts represents an effective mechanism for mobilizing the skills and political influence of citizens who love and care about libraries.

We believe that the OLC model described above could be used as a means to develop a dedicated and organized corps of well-informed citizens who could speak, both locally and at the State level, on behalf of libraries. The paid staff at the OLC-style organization could contact every director in the State and could identify and recruit a few as one trustee and one Friend from each library to serve as part of a Friends and Trustees Legislative Network.

Training and legislative issues sessions could be held in each region across the State on a regular basis. A listserv could be utilized to inform network members of pending legislation, issues of importance and to mobilize the troops when phone calls and letters to legislators are needed.

Recommendation # 16

The Library of Virginia and the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association should work together to develop a more symbiotic, synergistic relationship.

Unlike state library agencies in some states that exist primarily for the purpose of fostering public library development, the Library of Virginia is a multi-faceted organization with a wide variety of responsibilities. Many public library directors have perceived the emphasis that the Library of Virginia has placed on some of its other priorities as a lack of interest in public libraries. Whether or not the perception matches reality, there is room for improvement in the relationship between and among the public library community, the Librarian of Virginia, and the Library of Virginia Board.

The consultants believe that there is much to be gained through a more symbiotic, synergistic relationship between the Library of Virginia and the public libraries of the State. The dispersion of public libraries throughout the State provides the Library of Virginia with a widespread network of institutions that share many of the same goals as the Library of Virginia and that could act as a distribution point for information and services as well as a widespread advocacy network. On the other hand, the Library Virginia is a well-respected and highly visible institution in the State Capital that is obviously associated with libraries. Greater visibility of the Library of Virginia in regard to public library issues could assist efforts to improve the overall quality of public library services in the Commonwealth.

The consultants recommend that the Library of Virginia Board meet with representatives of the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association to explore ways in which the Library of Virginia and public libraries can coordinate efforts to support each other.

Recommendation # 17

The Library of Virginia should work with the public library community to seek support from foundations to develop and implement a major public awareness campaign on behalf of public libraries.

Although many Virginians use their public libraries regularly, many others are largely unaware of the depth and breadth of services that libraries offer and of the relevance of those services to their own lives. A major media campaign is needed to address this situation.

Because some might question the propriety of using tax dollars to support a public relations campaign, the consultants believe that foundation support should be solicited for this purpose. As a highly respected statewide institution, the Library of Virginia is in an excellent position to seek such funding and to supervise the development and implementation of the public awareness effort.

Virginia might adopt a model used by the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners (MBLC) to carry out such an effort. MBLC was able to convince historian and author David McCullough to act as a spokesperson for public libraries in a professionally produced campaign. Given that Virginia is home to a large number of significant authors and historians, many of whom are familiar with the Library of Virginia, the consultants believe that one or more high profile authors could be located who would be willing to lend their name(s) and their time to the effort.

PRIORITIES

While the consultants believe that action is needed on all 17 of the recommendations presented above, a variety of factors suggest that immediate attention can be given to some while acting on others will require considerably more extensive groundwork and preparation. The consultants have identified four of the recommendations that, in our opinion, should be addressed without delay.

Two of the priorities that we have identified (Recommendation # 14 and Recommendation # 16) do not require any legislative action nor do they require any appropriation of tax dollars. Furthermore, making progress on these two fronts will enhance the capability of the library community to move forward on other recommended actions.

Recommendation # 14 calls for the development of an "Ohio Library Council" model for advocacy. While implementing this suggestion will require financial support, exploration of the concept and the initial planning required to apply this model to Virginia’s unique situation will not. The consultants believe that the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association is the most likely candidate to convene a gathering of interested parties.

Recommendation # 16, which calls for the development of a more symbiotic/synergistic relationship between the Library of Virginia and the Commonwealth’s public libraries, can also be accomplished without the appropriation of additional public funds. The Library of Virginia Board could appoint a special committee or could designate an existing committee to convene a meeting that would include the Library of Virginia Board, Library of Virginia senior staff (not just staff from the Library Development and Networking Division), members of the Virginia Public Library Directors’ Association, and a facilitator. The consultants recommend using a modified version of a specific process referred to as a "Future Search." More information about the Future Search process can be found at:

http://www.futuresearch.net/method/whatis/index.cfm

The consultants believe that a concerted effort should be made to begin work on two of the other recommendations as soon as possible. Recommendation # 2 calls for a review of the certification issue and an effort to strengthen Code of Virginia and administrative rules regarding the certification of public library directors. We recommend rapid action on this issue for two reasons. First, we believe that professional leadership is a core component necessary for achieving high quality public library and information services in Virginia. Secondly, we believe that quick action in response to the recent gutting of the effectiveness of Virginia’s certification program is necessary to make it clear that Virginia intends to strengthen, not weaken, standards of quality in regard to public library services.

The last of the four recommendations that the consultants believe should receive rapid attention is # 6. While accomplishing the goal of having a discrete category of State Aid that would address equity will certainly take an extended period of time, we believe that this recommendation is at the heart of the challenge facing public library services in Virginia. Exploration of the best method for instituting such a program should begin immediately simply because it is so important. As was illustrated in the introduction to this report, libraries can fulfill many vital roles that have a positive impact on individuals and on the communities in which they live. Addressing the equity issue is important not just for libraries. It is a matter of statewide importance.
 
Return to Top Printable Copy