From awareness to funding

From PLN

Jump to: navigation, search

From awareness to funding

Contents

Two sets of notes on the OCLC report From Awareness to Funding--one from Leslie Dillon pointing to some other commentaries, the other an extended commentary from Jeff Scott, Library Director for the City of Casa Grande Public Library (Arizona).

OCLC's study of library support in America

by Leslie Dillon from Leader's Digest July 2008

In case you haven’t already heard much about OCLC’s report From Awareness to Funding: A study of library support in America, here’s a brief summary, with some help from Barbara Quint and Norman Oder.

Funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and conducted by Leo Burnett USA, the report (PDF free; print copies $10) “provides detailed voter segmentation and analysis of groups on the basis of their likelihood to support library funding.”

Target: Public libraries serving populations of less than 200,000.

Primary goal: To understand “which voters are most likely to provide definite library funding support, which voters will provide limited or no library funding support, and which voters represent probable support for increased library funding.”

Some findings

  • Library funding support is related more to voters’ attitudes and perceptions than to their demographics.
  • Library funding support is only marginally related to library visitation.
  • Many people don’t know how public libraries are funded or the full extent of services offered.
  • “‘Passionate librarians’ help generate library funding.”
  • Voters who see the library as a "transformational" force as opposed to an "informational" source are more likely to support increased funding.

Strengths

  • Excellent data, useful insights and great graphics!
  • Useful decision-making tool.
  • May help librarians target their “messages to the right segments.”

Weaknesses

  • Limited to statistics of on-site use of physical facilities; omits website usage.
  • Ignores alternative funding sources.

Recommendations

  • Brand libraries as “transformational,” “capable of changing and enriching people’s lives.”
  • Promote the concept of equal access. “The … most compelling argument in support of funding increases for public libraries is the important truth that U.S. public libraries provide equal access to valuable information resources for all residents.”

Recommendations from elected officials

  • Stress “the library’s return on investment (ROI) to the community.”
  • “Build strategic partnerships with other public services and programs.”
  • Proactively seek library support.
  • Get “constituents to influence elected officials.”
  • “Stress the library’s broad nonpartisan appeal.”

Conclusions

While people see the library as “a provider of practical answers and information,” the study concludes that this “is a very crowded space, and to remain relevant in today’s information landscape, repositioning will be required.”

Cathy De Rosa, OCLC marketing VP and principal author of the report, believes that the study’s “findings suggest that a large-scale advocacy campaign targeted at the right segments of the voting public has the potential to drive increased funding support.”

Read more about the report from: Norman Oder, "OCLC report suggests ways to generate new library support," Library Journal, Jul. 15, 2008; Barbara Quint, "Voters and public library funding: An OCLC market research report", Information Today’s NewsBreaks, Jul. 21, 2008. Or get it here; individual chapters are available as well as the PDF of the full report. At the very least, bookmark it! I think you’ll want to come back to it. Full disclosure: I used to work for OCLC.

A public library director looks at the report

by Jeff Scott, adapted from three posts at Gather no dust, used by permission. Quotes from the report are indented and end with page references. The first part of the discussion is adapted from this July 17, 2008 post at Gather no dust

I have been waiting to review this document for a while. From Awareness to Funding is an OCLC report that surveys who supports libraries and why. It also surveys why people don't support libraries. I enjoy getting information on how the public perceives and uses the library. We went through a similar process when we developed our 20 year master plan and our bond referendum. Both identified key issues for the library and helped us pass our bond.

Some of the points in the document provide keen insight to why referendums and levy votes fail. Some of the points I don't agree with as I see them as very difficult to convey, such as explaining where the library gets its money. Some financial analysts cannot clearly decipher and explain the complexities of the local taxing system. It is difficult to do that without appearing to obfuscate. The density of the annual report is enough to scare anyone away.

A few highlights

While successful in raising demand, the majority of library campaigns have been aimed at promoting library services and driving library use,not increasing library funding." (Introduction: Funding the mission)

Yes!!! This is where my library is right now. We have a huge increase in demand, but we are very slow to catch up to it.

Our hypothesis: U.S. public libraries are facing marketing and advocacy challenges that have been faced by other "super brands." Lessons learned and successes achieved can be applied to increase library funding. Utilizing marketing and advocacy techniques targeted to the right community segments with the right messages and community programs, we can improve the state of public library funding.

The report identifies eight important findings from the quantitative research (p. 24):

  1. Most people claim they would support the library at the ballot box, but fewer are firmly committed to it.
  2. There is a lot that people don’t know about their public library.
  3. Library support is only marginally related to library usage. Advocating for library support to library users focuses effort and energy on the wrong target group.
  4. Perceptions of the librarian are highly related to support. "Passionate librarians" who are involved in the community make a difference.
  5. The library occupies a very clear position in people’s minds as a provider of practical answers and information. This is a very crowded space, and to remain relevant in today’s information landscape, repositioning will be required.
  6. Belief that the library is a transformational force in people’s lives is directly related to their level of funding support.
  7. Increasing support for libraries may not necessarily mean a trade-off of financial support for other public services.
  8. Elected officials are supportive of the library—but not fully committed to increasing funding. Engaging Probable Supporters and Super Supporters to help elevate library funding needs is required. (p. 24)
Respondents who have the strongest beliefs that the library is a source of transformation are those who are most passionate about the need to protect, support and fund the library." (p. 25)
Instead, the research indicated a need to appeal to both the heart and mind of the potential voter, positioning the library as an important part of the community’s infrastructure that plays a key role in providing equal access to resources vital for thriving in today’s digital world. (p. 25 )

Overall, I have marketed the library and advocated for the library. We are embedded in the community. People see our value. The Friends group makes $25,000 that goes right into library projects. We passed a bond by 66%. However, traffic exceeds funding right now. It always will in government. I wonder what the breaking point is.

I liked the breakdown in this pyramid for library support.

Barriers to support

Three groups are barriers to support: Financially strapped, detached and those for whom the web wins.

Financially strapped

The Financially Strapped generally believe that the public library already has sufficient funding. The Financially Strapped segment is more than twice as likely (53%) as the average for all voting respondents (23%) to believe the library should be able to operate on its current budget. This segment is not willing to increase taxes for library funding. (p. 48)

This graphic shows how Financially Strapped respondents use public libraries.

Generally, the Financially Strapped won't pay for extra funding. I can understand that without all the graphs and charts. If you can't make ends meet, you can't afford another dollar no matter what the value is. It's called being nickeled-and-dimed. (I have to say, look at the discrepancy near the bottom. That's a 22% difference between those who attend literacy programs and those who would support additional funding.)

Detached

The most defining characteristic of this segment is its members’ lack of involvement with their local public libraries and with their communities as a whole. The Detached segment is the least involved with their library of any voting segment. They use the library less than other segments and do not see its relevance to the community. (p. 50)

This graphic shows how the detached use libraries.

I see this as a problem with a new voters moving in. With the recent housing boom, many communities are seeing many new faces. Have those faces been integrated into the community? A bedroom community could have this problem. A community in which the residents go elsewhere for shopping or other amenities will have community support problems in general, not just the public library.

The Detached segment tends to have higher household incomes than average, with 29% having an annual household income of $100,000 or more, compared to 19% of the total voting respondents. (p. 50 )

This also rings true in my community. We have had a housing boom with more white collar households. It has been difficult to engage them or even to get them to shop in town. This is mostly due to them moving to the northern side of town and commuting to work and leaving to go shopping on the weekends.

They are more likely to have Internet access at home than other voting respondents and think that the information provided by the Internet is as good as that provided by the library. (p. 50)
Not only are the Detached respondents uninvolved with their local libraries, they are uninvolved with their communities. They pay less attention than average to issues around local politics and the local economy, and are less-frequent consumers of local media. The Detached segment tends to believe that everyone in their communities has Internet access. They fail to recognize the library’s role in providing equal access to technology for community residents. (p. 50)
With higher than average income, the Detached segment is better able to afford an increase in taxes to support public services than many other segments. But lack of connection to or interest in the library and their communities make them unlikely to support tax increases to fund the library. (p. 50)

I can understand this. If I don't use it, why should I pay for it? This is the segment that wants to lower taxes. Some would say, "I don't want to pay to help the poor or someone else." What if some Library Directors fell into this category?

The web wins

This section is a no-brainer. These are the people who say "Isn't everything on the web?" Librarians try to attract this segment by placing library services online. Sometimes I wonder if some librarians are going too far into this realm. (As in using the web so much that they don't use their own library.)

This graphic shows how these people use (or don't use) their public libraries.

Probable supporters

Adapted from this July 20, 2008 post at Gather no dust

Pages 61 through 112 cover Probable Supporters. The Strong Supporters section, briefly mentioned earlier (and discussed below), notes community members who strongly support the library but don't necessarily use the library extensively. They understand the value of the library and the benefit to the community.

Probable Supporters support the library because they use the library. The four categories of probable supporters are:

  1. Just for Fun
  2. Kid Driven
  3. Library as Office
  4. Look to Librarians
  5. Greater Good

Just for fun

The Just for Fun respondents are the heaviest users of the library, reporting an average of 36 visits per year. (p. 71)
While Just for Fun voters are the heaviest users of the library, they are the least likely of all Probable Supporters to vote in favor of an increase in library funding. (p. 71)

That matches the Financially Strapped as two categories of heavy library users that are least likely in their categories to fund library initiatives. This group obviously favors the library and would support it in an election, but I wonder where the line is crossed for this group to go from supporter to non-supporter (a bad economy affects this). Furthermore, Financially Strapped voters identifies the library as a need but can't afford more, whereas Just For Fun voters don't identify the library as a need, but a want.

They see the library as a place to relax, hang out and socialize with others and recognize the library’s role as a community gathering place. However, they are not as emotionally connected to the library as other segments on the Probable Supporters tier and are less likely to support it financially. (p. 71)

Does that mean they like it, but consider it frivolous? Here's a graph of just-for-fun usage.

I have to say, I find it odd when respondents say the top things they check out are nonfiction titles when my circulation data says otherwise. (You'll see this pattern throughout.)

In my library's master plan study, the results were similar. The majority of people said they checked-out nonfiction and used reference the most of any other service. But my stats say Fiction/Bestsellers and DVDs are most heavily used.

The Just for Fun segment represents almost a quarter of all library visits (23.9%). (p. 75)

This part was interesting:

The Just for Fun segment has a greater awareness of what is available at the local public library than average for all voters. In particular, its members see the library’s Internet access as a big draw and they love to read. They have the same positive associations with the library that are common across all Probable Supporters segments but have less of an emotional connection than other segments on this tier. Compared to other Probable Supporters, Just for Fun respondents are less likely to see the library as a place that helps them improve intellectually, creatively or personally. The library is a place to hang out and socialize, and Just for Fun respondents value the library’s role as a community gathering place and social hub. (p. 76)

Does this mean library initiatives for making the library a community space create high usage but don't create more support?

This seems to explain the the phenomenon I remarked on in the first part of this post: Casa Grande has high usage, but funding comes a bit more slowly.

Is the community hub a bad idea if it doesn't translate into community support?

The library is seen less by Just for Fun respondents as a place to better themselves intellectually, creatively or personally. (p. 79)

Just for Fun respondents have a tendency to be uninvolved in the community, but make a point of voting in local elections. Their voting habits tend to be liberal and these respondents are the least likely Probable Supporters to definitely vote Yes for a library referendum

Kid driven

Kid Driven respondents visit the library more than average with 19 visits reported annually. They are typically accompanied by at least one child. They regularly check out materials for children and participate in the children’s programming. Kid Driven respondents are willing to support the library financially because of the role it plays in educating and inspiring their children to be the best that they can be. (p. 80)
The Kid Driven voters are emotionally connected to the library, seeing it as offering an exciting and diverse experience that inspires them and helped shape their identity. They hope the library will do the same for their children. (p. 85)

This chart shows how Kid-driven people use public libraries.

Back to the emotional connection discussion. These people understand the power of the library to transform. They value their children's education and library's potential to help. Parents are some of the best advocates of the library. They can see the advantages demonstrated in their child's advancement.

Library as office

This segment takes advantage of the library's technology and resources. For them, the library "fulfills a practical function and is more about knowledge than a personal connection."

Library as Office respondents are more likely than other segments to operate businesses or work in the same towns where they live. They have a tendency to live in smaller, rural towns across the Midwest. (p. 89)

This group averages 18 library visits annually.

This graphic shows how Library As Office people use public libraries.

The Library as Office voters feel that they always leave the library having learned something new. Their connection to the library is practical rather than emotional and their ideal library would offer services tailored to the business user. (p. 93)

Library as Office users see the library as a resource; it has the tools they need. They are very knowledgeable and are aware of library tools with little or no assistance. They use the Internet because of limited access at home and like the library environment. They like the learning environment. It's all practical, it's about information, but there is no personal connection. There is no transformational connection.

This group wants more business support.

I liked this part of the report; it's very detailed.

This is a tricky line to cross for libraries. If you are dedicated to small business support, office resources provided to the public are critical, but are very time consuming and costly. In this case, the library duplicates some of the resources you can find at a local OfficeMax.

The Ideal library: A resource for small businesses: Provides all of the resources a small business would need, including free temporary office space, computers with Internet access, phone, copier, scanner and fax machine. It would also provide access to online databases like ABI/Inform as well as other business-related resources like books about finances, marketing, etc. Resource for tax preparation: Provides tax forms, access to tax preparation resources and step-by-step guidance during tax season Workforce training center: Provides instructor-led classes on entrepreneurship, presentation skills, computer skills, sales generation, financial planning, marketing and other business-related topics in order to improve the workplace skills and marketability of community members." (p. 95)

These users are more likely to be Friends of the Library. (That explains the Friends support for me. Lots of businesses buy tables and donate money, but may not come to dinner or the library.)

Look to librarians

Look to Librarians voters have the foundation of a strong emotional relationship with the library and they see the library as a place where they can better themselves intellectually and feel like they belong. They also see the library as a place to escape from everyday life. (p. 97)
This is the only segment to rank public libraries as the number-one priority for an increase in taxes across all seven public services surveyed, outranking the police and fire departments and public schools. (p. 97)

This graphic shows this group's use of public libraries.

Look to Librarians voters volunteer in their community and at the library and are active participants in local organizations. They have a long-standing and ongoing relationship with the library. This relationship has led to a strong emotional connection and a sense of belonging. (p. 102)

Greater good

Although this group uses the library infrequently with only 4.5 visits a year, its members believe that the library plays an important role in serving the needs of the community and can be a great source of pride. (p. 107)

This graphic shows this group's use of public libraries.

The Greater Good respondents see the library as a noble and necessary institution, a source of pride in a community and a place that brings people together. They believe that the library turns people into thinkers and achievers instead of passive participants in life. (p. 112)

Getting support

Adapted from this July 25, 2008 post at Gather no dust

In this third part, I will wrap up the analysis of the report and provide what I think libraries could do in relation to this report. This section covers p. 112 forward: An analysis of Super Supporters, Chronic Non-Voters, Elected Officials perception of libraries, and what to do about the information provided in this report.

Super supporters

Super Supporters graphic
Super Supporters are avid readers with a long-standing relationship with the library. Although they use the library only a little more than average, their relationship with the library is strong because their emotional connection to the library transcends the library’s practical functions. More than any other segment, Super Supporters see the library as a place where they can better themselves and become the people they always wanted to be. They hold the librarian in high regard and recognize the value that librarians bring to the research process. (p. 116)
Super Supporters use the library to feed their voracious reading habits and to recommend children’s books. (p. 118)

This group supporters the library, ranking it second highest (only behind the Fire Department) for priority support. However, they support everyone very highly. They are big community supporters, influential (even powerful) figures in the community.

I always think it is interesting when libraries think organizations, groups, or individuals may not fund a library initiative because the particular entity funds another service heavily. It seems to me those who fund, fund everything well. I have never seen an either/or situation. These are the "rah rah" community supporters.

Super Supporters recognize the library’s contribution to a successful community. (p. 123)
Super Supporters believe the library helps bring a community together. (p. 124)

Chronic non-voters

The Chronic Non Voters segment of the Library Supporter Segmentation Pyramid represents 26.6% of the U.S. population ages 18–69 in communities with populations of less than 200,000. Chronic Non Voters are the group least likely to improve funding support for libraries. Chronic Non Voters are not registered to vote, or they are registered to vote but report a track record of not voting in primary elections, presidential elections or local elections. Chronic Non Voters are unlikely to be motivated to vote in the future. This segment represents 0% of respondents who

said they would definitely vote yes in a library referendum. (p. 128) I can hear it now when I write this. "Boo hiss boooooo!" These people apparently don't care about anything. They are not involved in anything. Their lack of support isn't just for libraries, it's for everything. They have basically dropped out of democracy and don't support their local community. The more disconnected the population feels, the more the support wanes. I would go so far to say that if the general public has a tendency to distrust government, particularly the local government, support for everything wanes. Even if it isn't a problem with library performance, dissatisfaction for local government or for the local community translates to a problem with the library.

Elected officials

(Chapter 3 goes into Elected Officials' perspective)

Elected officials have views about the library similar to those of the Probable Supporters. They appreciate the added value librarians offer and see librarians as important figures in rallying community support. Elected officials are knowledgeable about libraries and their value, but they often do not see the library as a necessity for the community. The library is seen as a community ‘amenity’ rather than a ‘must have.’ (p.132)

This seems to be a balance of non-usage. Most City Councilmen don't need the library. They understand the value to the community, but if it hasn't touched their life (they don't use it, their family and friends don't use it) that is where the "isn't necessary" comes in. In my opinion, this really goes back to a complaint issue. People will complain if they don't have adequate service and if the library provides good enough service so people don't complain, then they are doing their job.

The Library consistently ranks below Police, Fire, Schools and Streets in that order.

Reality check: more people complain about the lack of these things. If there is a crime, and the cops show up really late or nothing is done about the crime, people get angry. If the Fire response is too slow and it is a life or death situation, that's serious. If the schools are failing, everyone takes notice and wants to know what is being done about it. If the streets are in disarray, that will also cause a trip to City Council to complain. Even though the library is used more often than two of the four services (more people visit a library in their community than need to call police for a crime or fire for a medical/fire emergency, but they do send their kids to school every day and drive them there on city streets), they aren't supported more.

Local elected officials (68%) are more likely than voters (59%) to have lived in their community for more than 10 years. Elected officials are more likely to be members of a variety of local organizations, including Friends of the Library groups. Forty percent (40%) of elected officials surveyed were members of Friends of the Library, compared to 9% of voters and 11% of Probable Supporters. (p. 137)
Elected officials are more likely than voters to recognize library financial needs, yet 73% believe the library has sufficient operating funds. (p. 140)

I think this goes back to the complaint issue. If people are not complaining about the lack of service, then it is fine.

Advice from elected officials
  1. Stress the library’s return on investment (ROI) to the community
  2. Build strategic partnerships
  3. Be proactive
  4. Engage voters in the campaign
  5. Stress the broad appeal of the library
Elected officials on library funding campaigns

Elected officials cited a number of important components required of a successful library funding campaign:

  • Messaging that focuses on the broader value of the library to the community,specifically a community gathering place, access to technology and programs for teenagers and other groups
  • A passionate, committed and active champion(s) who can rally support among the elected officials and community influences
  • Civic engagement, including a commitment to speak with every relevant group in the community to encourage grassroots support
  • A willingness to partner with other public services in a joint effort where strategically advantageous
  • The ability to ask for the right support at the right time:
    • Voter turnout is greater for general elections than local elections
    • It is often easier to campaign for a new building than for operating funds.

Voting and awareness

The next part focuses on how people vote and awareness. Many people who say they would vote for a bond issue, may not do so.

Furthermore, the report says that while the breakdown of support is 37% definitely yes, 37% probably yes, and 26% no, the probably part should concern libraries.

Familiarity with the full range of library services was not a determinant of library funding support for the library’s top funding supporters. (p. 148)

Neither was usage.

Frequency of library visitation is not a determinant of funding support. (p. 149)
A definite need: the "passionate librarian"

These five attributes can be combined to describe the ‘passionate librarian’: (p. 152)

  1. True advocate for lifelong learning
  2. Passionate about making the library relevant again
  3. Knowledgeable about every aspect of the library
  4. Well-educated
  5. Knowledgeable about the community.

There seems to be a definite correlation between passionate librarians and support. If your staff doesn't care about the library, why should anyone else? Furthermore, if you are a mover and shaker is it more important that you are one rather than what specifically you are doing?

The library is perceived as a service that provides "information with a purpose." As the framework illustrates, this perceptual territory, ‘information with a purpose,’ is a very crowded space. There are many other information and learning services located in the same quadrant including Wikipedia.com, online bookstores like Amazon.com, search engines and bookstores.

These brands and services are redefining the role and definition of information. Belief that the library is a transformational force in people’s lives is directly related to their level of funding support.(p. 156)

Rewards framework
  • Helps create who you are
  • Makes you feel good about yourself
  • Allows you to appreciate the beauty in life
  • You come away feeling like you really learned something
  • Fills you with hope and optimism
  • Empowers you
  • Helps you seek truth
  • Serves a serious purpose (p. 157)

The library needs to be transformative. A library perceived the same as "watching a documentary" is a snoozer. Libraries perceived as taking a class for fun, going to a religious service or getting a college degree are better. How can I change myself? How can I improve myself? What can I learn today? Transformational--not functional, like reading the newspaper.

Increasing support for libraries may not necessarily mean a trade-off of financial support for other public services. (p.158)
The public library receives just under 1% of the total local operating budget. (p. 158)
A side-by-side comparison of the willingness of a voter segment to increase taxes to fund local public services, including the public library, shows that a willingness to fund one service is often similar to their willingness to support other local services. (p. 158)
Elected officials are supportive of the library—but not fully committed to increasing funding. Engaging Super Supporters and Probable Supporters to help elevate library funding needs is required. (p. 160)

Ding ding ding. Don't go after the mayor and council, go after the people who have influence over the mayor and council. Who are those people? Who do the mayor and council listen to? Those are the people you need to talk to.

Best factors for motivation
  • Early memories, the library as a transformative force (your storytime kids will ensure funding in the future).
  • Current perceptions are important. The idea of what the library can do and what it represents.
“People who’ve been exposed to libraries realize that there are a lot of other cultures and things out there that a small town of 4,000 doesn’t provide access to. The library is literally a window on the world.” (Super Supporter, McPherson, Kansas) (p. 169)
During the course of discussion it surfaced that, even for the most passionate lovers of the library, the library is becoming less relevant. Access to information from other sources, often the Internet, is changing the relative importance of the library. Many assumed that usage of the public library is down as "other" people are increasingly turning to the Internet for information. (p. 171)
“If they close off the libraries, you don’t have to worry about a Brain Drain. You’ll close off the mental capabilities of the people.” (Super Supporter, McPherson, Kansas) (p. 172)

I felt the presentation to the population was a bit extreme. You either have libraries or you don't: Yes, that shows the impact, but it doesn't address an unfunded library. I think the extremes here are troubling and unhelpful. No, we don't want it to close, but will we allow the library to be underfunded? What is underfunded? What is the community member willing to accept?

Library's relevance questioned

  • Information: The library is one of many sources of information. It could potentially be replaced by a combination of bookstores, schools, coffee shops and the Internet.
  • Institution: The library is an institution sometimes associated with an out-of-date building, aged materials and limited accessibility. (The library has limited hours, the Internet is available 24/7.)
  • Nice to have: Availability of so many other options for information and learning make the library a ‘nice to have’ service rather than a necessity.
  • Past: The library is an important part of supporters’ lives, but they question whether it is still relevant for their children and grandchildren.
  • Altruism for others: The library is less important to them, but it is important for "other people" in the community.

Why people vote no

Even though the libraries in that town were closed at the time of the focus group research, the Probable Supporters were planning to vote ‘no’ at a pending library levy to raise the operational funds that would allow the library to open. This was not because they were against the library...but they saw it as a personal statement against the local city council who they felt had mishandled funds that had previously been raised for the library and then placed into the general fund. Even in that situation, the residents believed that ultimately the funding situation would be resolved and the libraries would reopen. (p. 179)

I remember the City of Mesa in Mesa, Arizona when their property tax initiative failed. It was perceived by the public that the city had mishandled funds and that this was a bailout. Some other failed initiatives have the same theme: "We feel you mishandled our funds," "We feel you are not going to use these funds as you say you will." The track record of previous projects will crop up. Does the library appear to be using its funds appropriately? If there are detractors, what are they saying, is it being addressed? If you have a bond or referendum election during an off election year, the no vote becomes that much stronger. If you have that same election during a Presidential or Congressional election cycle, you will have a better chance at success. I wonder if OCLC looked at the stats on that?

Probable Supporters and Super Supporters felt that support for libraries can be improved by increasing the public’s attention to four essential community benefits that the public library uniquely delivers:
Equal access: “No kid should have an excuse for not having a book or knowing how to do research. If you don’t have a computer at home, you can go to the public library.” (Probable Supporter, Huntsville, Alabama)
Shared community values (or teaches values) “It’s one of the few things that truly can provide a sense of community. It doesn’t belong to anyone but to all of us. It’s a good lesson in respect, being quiet, signing up for Internet time, returning books on time. It’s kind of a good building block in respect.”
A sacred place: “It’s a gathering place where lots of different people can listen to someone else’s ideas, whether spoken or written.” (Super Supporter, Medford, Oregon)
Community stature. “It represents a commitment by the community to cultural and intellectual activities.” (Probable Supporter, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) (p. 180)

Some objectives

  • Make the library relevant for the 21st century.
  • Instill a sense of urgency by putting the library in the consideration set for local funding with other public services, like police, parks and fire.
  • Start a conversation on the vital role played by the library in the community’s infrastructure and future.

This is the same research you can find on getting any bond election passed. They are the same issues for the community as for the library.

If the city wants to pass a bond, the perceptions must be the same. You must also time this during a big election with already high turnout. Any negative campaigning can be drowned out.

If there has been some scandal in finances or if this is perceived as a bail-out, expect a no vote.

If you have tried a levy or other measure and it failed, and you are going again and haven't changed the package, you will continue to fail.

Most U.S. residents are aware of the traditional ‘informational’ library services, such as books, newspapers, magazines and Internet access. Far fewer know about the many value-added and "transformational" services provided by their libraries, such as teen programs, computer training and ‘English as a second language’ (ESL) classes. (p. 195)

The transformative nature. Let's look at activity based costing. The most expensive program is tutoring. It is the most transformative, but also most costly. These people will be supporters and the people who understand that need will support us supporting them. People must see the need.

Today’s support comes from those who believe libraries transform lives.

A library that is perceived to transform lives will gain support even from people who do not use the library.

In fact, the person who sees that the library is transforming lives will support the library more than the person who is actually using library services. This is generally why libraries that are more successful are action-based (strategic plan) versus stats-based (your stats went up, so what?).

If your library is perceived to be old, run-down and mismanaged, you won't get funding even if you need it. If your library is perceived as modern with modern conveniences, even if your library doesn't need more funding, you could get it if you asked.

Is it just a perception issue that libraries can work on with a focus on how the library transforms people rather than provides access to things?

There is a great deal to ponder here.

Related articles

Your turn: Talk about it

Retrieved from "http://pln.palinet.org/wiki/index.php/From_awareness_to_funding"
Personal tools
Home