FOPL Statistics Activities

Stephen Abram, MLA , FOPL Executive Director

March 6, 2014

2

About the Federation

A not-for-profit membership association established in 2005.

Provides a single, strong voice for public libraries in Ontario to enhance library policies and programs.

Services focus on four strategic pillars: advocacy, marketing, research and consortia purchasing.

Over 215 members representing libraries of all sizes and geographic regions, and serving 80% of Ontario’s population.

Our Board of Directors is composed of an equal number of library board trustees and library chief executives.

What is FOPL?

Simply put: Ontario’s Public Libraries. Now more than ever before, they play a critical role in the social, educational, cultural and economic success of the communities in our province. Public Libraries are an essential investment in the future of our communities and are essential drivers of success in school preparedness, reading readiness, economic and employment success, and social equity. As the development of the knowledge economy progresses, public libraries are a vital link for every resident and every community to ensure success of all Ontarians, regardless of location or background.

3

FOPL Talking Points

The Public Library value proposition is strong and includes (but isn’t limited to):

– Excellent Return on Investment– Strong Economic Development– Great Employment Support– Welcoming New Canadians– Provable Early Literacy Development– Ongoing Support for Formal Education and Homework Help– Serve the whole community equitably– Affordable access to community resources– Access to Government Services and e-government– Questions Deserve Quality Answers – Support Cultural Vitality– Recognized and Valued Leisure Activities for majority of Ontarians

4

What’s the ‘Problem”?

We have a very COMPLEX (not complicated) value proposition

We have great competencies BUT we need to up our game on influence, advocacy, and focus.

We need the tools and we need to collaborate on them nimbly and quickly.

5

OLA’s VIP

Value Impact / Influence Positioning

6

The Public Library Value Proposition

1. Excellent Return on Investment

2. Strong Economic Development

3. Great Employment Support

4. Welcoming New Canadians

5. Provable Early Literacy Development

6. Ongoing Support for Formal Education and Homework Help

7. Serve the whole community equitably

8. Affordable access to community resources

9. Access to Government Services and e-government

10. Questions Deserve Quality Answers

11. Support Cultural Vitality

12. Recognized and Valued Leisure Activities for majority of Ontarians

13. Infrastructure Support (AODA and Buildings)

7

Activities

Research on Value (i.e. School Readiness Study from OISE, )

Royal Society Testimony and Recommendations

Webinar on Ontario Data Collection 2011-12 iSchool Symposium: Defining New Metrics

for Library Success (April 22-23, 2014) http://www.metricsandlibraries.org/

Consulting with Dr. Robert Molyneux8

Why Measurements?

With nicely crafted visuals libraries could do the following:

1.  Communicate effectively with their trustees to get their advice on strategy as well as support.2.  Communicate budget 'asks' effectively that place the library in the community value delivery context.3.  Position budget growth (or at least lessen cuts) for community goal alignment and strategic impact.4.  Explain why technology and community room spaces are as valuable (maybe more) than books.5.  Position hybrid collection use properly in ‘circulation’.6.  Justify restoration or extension of library hours.7.  Show that your library either performs as well as or better than others or justify investments to perform to provincial, national or sectoral norms.

9

Core Statistics (CLA Draft)

1. Service points and visits

2. Reference questions

3. Circulation (of particular item types)

4. Population served

5. E-resource holdings

6. Children’s membership and services

7. Staffing

8. Internet/PAC/WiFi

9. Programming

10. Total operating expenditures

10

Core Measurements (FOPL Draft)

1. Overall value of a library membership (usage not cardholders)2. Value of an 'open hour' (new metric unique to MPI TPL study that aggregates cost + value)3. Economic impact (vs. ROI) (Households and Population)4. Per Capita 'Usage" comparison across systems, groups (like small, medium. large, urban, suburban, rural, remote, FN, etc.), and jurisdictions (province/state)5. A 'new' usage algorithm to modernize the old circulation stat and combine digital and print usage into a standard, comparable metric6. A metric for technology access tied to the digital/economic divide(s)7. A standard operational effectiveness metric (Value for Tax Dollars)8. Average cost per household (taxes are based on household rather than population and better reflects funding models)9. A metric for Use of Space (meetings, study, rooms) which was new for the MPI study and hadn't been done before11

I have a dream . . .

Standard our sector on impact metrics that lend themselves to the communication, influence, and financial challenges faced by public libraries to communicate their value in the 21st Century context.

Build a set of standardized core statistics that build up to these measurements so we could lead most libraries to start working with a new program to communicate value (and build on their strengths in communicating pure 'usage').

Ultimately create a tool such as a specially designed spreadsheet or dynamic website where you input the numbers based on the standards and advice from some group (us?!) that spits out decent data, information and visuals easily on the other side.

12

Thank You

www.fopl.ca

Stephen Abram, Executive Director416-395-0746sabram@fopl.ca

Kim Silk and MPI TPL Study

TPL provided all data for the MPI study:

1. Service points and visits – we looked at branch level and system-wide

2. Reference questions- we had in-person (real questions and directional), online and phone reference.

3. Circulation (of particular item types) – we had circulation of e-books and print broken down by age group

4. Population served – we used city of Toronto population for 2012; we also used a study done by Strategic Council that found that 72% of Torontonians had used TPL in the past year (2012) which is how we estimated membership. I was mistaken in my earlier email about gate count; many TPL branches don’t have a gate to count entries.

5. E-resource holdings – we had database usage across various products

6. Children’s membership and services – we didn’t use child cardholders; we did count children’s materials and programs

7. Staffing – we had staffing by home location, which indicated that TPL employees spend their salaries locally

8. Internet/PAC/WiFi – we has PAC # of sessions and wifi # of sessions. We estimated that an average session was 1 hour.

9. Programming – at branch level by program type, # of programs offered. We did not have attendance which would have been better. Data hole here.

10. Total operating expenditures – provided by TPL.

14