PART II: SURVEY REPORT

In-Depth Evaluations

C. ANALYSIS BY SYSTEM

Member library data were also analyzed by the Library System with which they were associated to identify specific association patterns or systematic differences among the ten groups of libraries. Overall, the analyses did not yield such patterns.

The analyses showed that the ten Library Systems varied in the type of areas their libraries primarily serve. For example, eighty-five percent or more of the libraries in five of the Systems serve primarily rural areas. The libraries associated with NTRLS had the smallest percent of rural service areas (51 percent) and the largest percent of suburban areas (39 percent).

Table II.C.1

Library Services Primarily

BCLS


(N=35)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=79)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=61)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Urban areas

11.4%

--

5.3%

16.1%

10.1%

14.3%

8.2%

13.2%

7.4%

5.1%

Suburban areas

--

4.0%

26.3%

6.5%

24.1%

--

39.3%

20.8%

3.7%

7.7%

Rural areas

88.6%

92.0%

64.9%

71.0%

63.3%

85.7%

50.8%

64.2%

85.2%

87.2%

Other

--

4.0%

3.5%

6.4%

2.6%

--

1.6%

1.9%

3.7%

--

The Library Systems represented libraries with varied levels of automation, although most libraries in all Systems were connected to the Internet. Overall, library members in BCLS had the lowest levels of automation. For example, only 51 percent of the BCLS libraries had automated catalog and circulation systems; only 11 percent of the libraries associated with BCLS had automated catalogues available through the Internet, and only six percent had automated circulation systems available through the Internet. TPLS had the highest percent of members with automated catalog and circulation systems available through the Internet.

Table II.C.2

Library Has

BCLS


(N=35)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=79)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=61)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Automated catalog and circulation system

51.4%

76.0%

80.7%

77.4%

70.9%

78.6%

86.9%

88.9%

63.0%

61.5%

Automated catalog available through the Internet

11.4%

80.0%

50.9%

48.4%

35.4%

21.4%

47.5%

38.9%

11.1%

33.3%

Automated circulation system that is available through the Internet

5.7%

40.0%

21.1%

25.8%

20.3%

14.3%

19.7%

16.7%

7.4%

12.8%

Internet connection

97.1%

100.0%

94.7%

100.0%

98.7%

100.0%

93.4%

98.1%

96.3%

97.4%

Library provides access to online databases to end users

71.4%

92.0%

75.4%

80.6%

81.0%

50.0%

80.3%

75.9%

81.5%

84.6%

Long-range plan

34.3%

32.0%

52.6%

41.9%

36.7%

28.6%

37.7%

33.3%

37.0%

30.8%

Long-range plan addresses future trends

91.7%

75.0%

76.7%

92.3%

69.0%

75.0%

87.0%

88.9%

80.0%

83.3%

Member participation in consortia ranged among the Systems from none to (WTLS) to 92 percent (TPLS).

Table II.C.3

Library Participation in Consortia

BCLS


(N=35)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=79)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=61)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Library is member of consortium

14.3%

92.0%

5.3%

45.2%

15.2%

28.6%

21.3%

38.9%

--

20.9%

Type of consortia*

                   

Public libraries only

25.0%

8.7%

66.7%

71.4%

25.0%

66.7%

61.5%

38.9%

--

62.5%

Multi-type libraries

25.0%

91.3%

33.3%

28.6%

75.0%

33.3%

38.5%

61.1%

--

37.5%

Other

50.0%

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

* Small number of libraries per System.

Library collaboration with other libraries varied across the Systems. About 80 percent (TPLS) to 93 percent (NTRLS) of member libraries collaborated regularly with public libraries. Between 58 percent (CTLS) and 69 percent (BCLS) members collaborated regularly with school libraries. Between 12 percent (NTRLS) and 46 percent (TTPLS) collaborated with academic libraries.

Table II.C.4

Libraries Collaborated Regularly with:

BCLS


(N=29)

TPLS


(N=24)

CTLS


(N=52)

STLS


(N=30)

NETLS


(N=64)

TTPLS


(N=13)

NTRLS


(N=56)

HALS


(N=48)

WTLS


(N=24)

AALS


(N=38)

Public libraries

86.2%

79.2%

84.6%

90.0%

84.4%

92.3%

92.9%

89.6%

83.3%

81.6%

School libraries

69.0%

66.7%

57.7%

63.3%

59.4%

76.9%

58.9%

50.0%

62.5%

63.2%

Academic libraries

20.7%

29.2%

19.2%

33.3%

28.1%

46.2%

12.5%

20.8%

25.0%

21.1%

Special libraries (law, medicine, engineering)

--

8.3%

1.9%

3.3%

7.8%

15.4%

1.8%

8.3%

4.2%

13.2%

Other types of libraries

--

16.7%

5.7%

9.9%

4.8%

15.4%

1.8%

6.3%

--

2.6%

Methods of collaboration also varied among member libraries. For example, reciprocal borrowing was most typical for libraries associated with TPLS (79 percent) and least common for members of AALS (37 percent). The sharing of electronic resources or materials was least typical of NETLS libraries (eight percent) and most typical of libraries associated with TPLS (50 percent). Between 21 percent (BCLS) and 43 percent (AALS) of libraries coordinated or offered joint programs and activities.

Table II.C.5

Methods of Collaboration

BCLS


(N=35)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=79)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=53)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Reciprocal borrowing

37.9%

79.2%

41.2%

56.7%

41.3%

38.5%

52.8%

40.4%

45.5%

36.8%

Borrow materials from libraries

75.9%

91.7%

64.7%

76.7%

65.1%

76.9%

64.2%

70.2%

77.3%

84.2%

Lend materials to libraries

34.5%

79.2%

49.0%

53.3%

46.0%

69.2%

43.6%

42.6%

68.2%

44.7%

Share electronic resources or other materials

20.7%

50.0%

19.6%

16.7%

7.9%

15.4%

13.2%

17.0%

27.3%

28.9%

Union Catalog

3.4%

37.5%

7.8%

20.0%

1.6%

--

5.7%

6.4%

--

7.9%

Courier services

10.3%

12.5%

11.8%

13.3%

9.5%

7.7%

17.0%

29.8%

--

13.2%

Coordinate or offer joint programs, classes, or activities

20.7%

33.3%

39.2%

40.0%

39.7%

23.1%

34.0%

44.7%

31.8%

42.1%

Library Systems offered multiple services to their member libraries. Funds for collection development was the most commonly offered service across all systems. The provision of other services varied considerably across the Systems, as shown in the table below.

Table II.C.6

Services Library Received from Library System

BCLS


(N=35)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=79)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=61)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Funds for collection development: books and other materials

97.1%

96.0%

98.2%

100.0%

100.0%

100.0%

95.1%

100.0%

100.0%

97.4%

Funds for library video collection operation

31.4%

--

17.5%

17.5%

45.2%

51.3%

57.4%

61.1%

37.0%

35.9%

Funds for computers

37.1%

60.0%

12.3%

12.3%

58.1%

29.5%

21.3%

63.0%

22.2%

25.6%

Funds for installing an Internet connection

20.0%

32.0%

8.8%

19.4%

11.5%

--

6.6%

22.2%

--

7.7%

Funds for upgrading the library's Internet connection

14.3%

40.0%

--

16.1%

5.1%

--

--

3.7%

--

5.1%

Training library staff in the management and use of electronic resources

91.4%

100.0%

87.7%

83.9%

92.3%

57.1%

78.7%

79.6%

100.0%

84.6%

Training and helping library staff to write grants, assistance with grant writing

54.3%

72.0%

77.2%

54.8%

60.3%

71.4%

57.4%

53.7%

92.6%

74.4%

Training library staff in the development of long-range plans

37.1%

96.0%

47.4%

38.7%

32.1%

28.6%

31.1%

22.2%

33.3%

30.8%

Purchasing for the library (or assisting with the purchasing of) video and teleconferencing/distance learning equipment

5.7%

--

5.3%

12.9%

11.5%

35.7%

1.6%

3.7%

11.1%

10.3%

Purchasing and upgrading library's hardware and software

34.3%

52.0%

10.5%

41.9%

17.9%

14.3%

14.8%

57.4%

18.5%

10.3%

Purchasing equipment for accessing electronic resources

17.1%

32.0%

3.5%

22.6%

7.7%

14.3%

3.3%

22.2%

7.4%

7.7%

Purchasing office and other equipment for library

20.0%

44.0%

3.5%

29.0%

38.5%

42.9%

41.0%

61.1%

11.1%

23.1%

Funding bilingual/ESL and literacy projects

11.4%

24.0%

5.3%

71.0%

24.4%

35.7%

1.6%

14.8%

55.6%

25.6%

Funding projects serving youth

8.6%

20.0%

15.8%

12.9%

10.3%

35.7%

37.7%

11.1%

7.4%

17.9%

Funding projects serving older adults

17.1%

64.0%

26.3%

16.1%

29.5%

50.0%

19.7%

27.8%

25.9%

10.3%

Funding projects to serve people with disabilities

14.3%

44.0%

10.5%

6.5%

15.4%

28.6%

9.8%

3.7%

14.8%

12.8%

Providing funds for planning projects

5.7%

16.0%

1.8%

6.5%

5.1%

21.4%

14.8%

14.8%

--

--

Providing funds for library automation projects

11.4%

28.0%

3.5%

9.7%

7.7%

35.7%

8.2%

20.4%

--

12.8%

Assistance with reference questions

85.7%

92.0%

54.4%

53.5%

46.2%

57.1%

54.1%

83.3%

96.3%

71.8%

Continuing education services for staff

94.3%

100.0%

98.2%

83.9%

93.6%

100.0%

96.7%

96.3%

100.0%

97.4%

Continuing education services for library advisory board

37.1%

60.0%

43.9%

29.0%

32.1%

50.0%

39.3%

24.1%

37.0%

30.8%

Consulting services

71.4%

92.0%

93.0%

80.6%

56.4%

71.4%

67.2%

72.2%

81.5%

82.1%

The level of satisfaction that libraries expressed with the services their respective Library Systems provided was typically high, although it varied across services and across Systems, as shown in the following table.

Table II.C.7

Mean Satisfaction with Following Services Library Received from Library System

BCLS


(N=35)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=79)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=61)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Funds for collection development: books and other materials

9.18

8.75

8.00

8.81

8.86

9.64

8.13

8.70

9.31

8.62

Funds for library video collection operation

8.70

--

7.00

8.19

8.70

9.45

8.44

8.37

9.28

8.00

Funds for computers

8.91

8.71

8.33

8.28

8.40

9.00

8.40

8.21

8.44

7.78

Funds for installing an Internet connection

9.50

8.50

8.75

7.70

9.50

7.00

8.20

7.45

7.00

7.80

Funds for upgrading the library's Internet connection

9.14

8.89

8.67

7.73

8.83

8.00

7.50

7.12

8.50

5.83

Training library staff in the management and use of electronic resources

9.00

9.00

8.52

8.32

8.72

8.50

8.06

7.88

9.31

8.64

Training and helping library staff to write grants, assistance with grant writing

8.21

8.63

8.71

8.44

8.70

7.44

8.19

7.24

9.54

7.44

Training library staff in the development of long-range plans

8.07

8.64

8.32

7.70

8.42

8.20

8.26

6.75

9.33

7.75

Purchasing for the library (or assisting with the purchasing of) video and teleconferencing/distance learning equipment

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

Purchasing and upgrading library's hardware and software

9.10

8.23

8.00

7.17

8.65

8.25

6.90

8.27

8.50

8.25

Purchasing equipment for accessing electronic resources

10.00

8.30

7.80

7.70

8.80

8.25

8.00

8.07

6.67

8.80

Purchasing office and other equipment for library

8.83

8.80

7.25

8.31

8.85

8.75

8.25

7.77

8.00

8.80

Funding bilingual/ESL and literacy projects

7.60

8.20

7.75

8.39

9.06

9.00

8.50

7.20

8.69

8.40

Funding projects serving youth

9.25

7.86

8.08

7.60

9.00

8.83

8.37

6.78

7.50

8.28

Funding projects serving older adults

9.00

8.62

8.47

7.33

9.04

8.90

8.69

 

8.14

8.33

Funding projects to serve people with disabilities

8.75

8.80

8.40

6.67

8.87

9.25

8.43

5.20

7.83

7.60

Proving funds for planning projects

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

Providing funds for library automation projects

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

**

Assistance with reference questions

9.42

9.52

9.15

9.47

9.32

9.50

9.06

8.24

8.48

8.67

Continuing education services for staff

9.00

9.50

8.84

9.15

9.15

9.77

8.54

8.78

9.44

8.78

Continuing education services for library advisory board

9.15

9.33

8.57

8.82

9.37

8.87

8.40

7.39

10.00

8.53

Consulting services

9.37

9.42

9.20

8.81

9.22

9.09

8.72

8.13

10.00

8.46

* Cells included 1 to 7 libraries.


** All but one cell included fewer than 10 libraries.

Libraries across all ten Systems considered their respective System to be "very helpful" or "helpful" in meeting their needs. Libraries associated with TTPLS and WTLS considered their respective System to be most helpful in meeting their needs.

Table II.C.8

Helpfulness of Library System in Meeting Library's Needs

BCLS


(N=34)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=77)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=61)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Very helpful

67.6%

76.0%

73.7%

80.6%

67.5%

85.7%

54.1%

62.3%

85.2%

66.7%

Helpful

20.6%

20.0%

12.3%

9.7%

28.6%

14.3%

24.6%

28.3%

14.8%

12.8.%

Moderately helpful

5.9%

4.0%

10.5%

3.2%

3.9%

--

11.5%

5.7%

--

12.8%

Of little help

2.9%

--

3.5%

3.2%

--

--

8.2%

1.9%

--

7.7%

Not at all helpful

--

--

--

--

--

--

1.6%

1.9%

--

--

Unsure

2.9%

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

--

Mean*

1.42

1.28

1.44

1.27

1.36

1.14

1.79

1.53

1.15

1.61

Libraries reported that the services their respective Library Systems provided had a great or moderate impact on different aspects of their holdings and operations. Libraries associated with WTLS and TTPLS saw the greatest impact of the respective System on their library. HALS libraries saw the least impact.

Table II.C.9

Library

Mean Extent to which System Helped Library Improve*

BCLS


(N=34)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=57)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=77)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=61)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=27)

AALS


(N=39)

Collection

1.45

1.40

1.59

1.33

1.40

1.07

1.80

1.48

1.22

1.44

Technology

1.87

1.24

1.64

1.90

1.90

1.58

2.23

1.96

1.27

1.86

Operations

1.82

1.68

1.75

1.83

1.82

1.42

2.15

2.04

1.28

1.84

Management

1.97

1.56

1.91

1.75

1.73

1.42

2.13

2.12

1.31

1.84

Planning

2.06

1.62

1.92

1.89

1.89

1.58

2.34

2.23

1.16

1.92

Range of service

2.03

1.64

1.93

1.76

1.76

1.38

2.43

2.22

1.32

1.89

Quality of services

2.10

1.50

1.80

1.61

1.68

1.23

2.13

1.94

1.24

1.75

Ability to serve individuals not served before

2.16

1.96

2.21

1.59

2.12

1.42

2.60

2.43

1.42

1.78

*Means were based on a 4-point improvement scale where "1" referred to "to a great extent" and "4" referred to "not at all."

A considerable percent of member libraries in all Library Systems agreed that they had derived multiple benefits from their membership.

Table II.C.10

Major Benefits Library Derived from Membership in System

BCLS


(N=34)

TPLS


(N=25)

CTLS


(N=55)

STLS


(N=31)

NETLS


(N=76)

TTPLS


(N=14)

NTRLS


(N=59)

HALS


(N=53)

WTLS


(N=26)

AALS


(N=39)

Offered programs to meet the needs of special populations

32.4%

40.0%

36.4%

48.4%

40.8%

42.9%

27.1%

35.8%

50.0%

33.3%

Increased staff's knowledge and competence of library management and operations

82.4%

92.0%

89.1%

83.9%

89.5%

100.0%

86.4%

81.1%

96.7%

82.1%

Have a current materials collection that is broad in scope and can better meet community needs

73.5%

68.0%

81.8%

90.3%

77.6%

100.0%

66.1%

83.0%

96.2%

76.9%

Library is better able to utilize new technology and resources to service the community

76.5%

100.0%

78.2%

64.5%

76.3%

92.9%

62.7%

69.8%

92.3%

74.4%

Library offers enhanced access to a variety of information

70.6%

96.0%

80.0%

74.2%

75.0%

100.0%

59.3%

69.8%

92.3%

66.7%

Library is able to obtain additional funding and other resources to improve services

61.8%

56.0%

65.5%

64.5%

76.3%

71.4%

69.5%

71.7%

96.2%

74.4%

Library is able to plan services to meet the future needs of the community

44.1%

64.0%

65.5%

61.3%

63.2%

50.0%

54.2%

41.5%

69.2%

46.2%

Part Two, Section Two B | Part Two, Section Two D

Page last modified: March 2, 2011