Budget Report 2002: A Precarious Holding Pattern
PL budgets nudge ahead, but materials spending dips and fundraising slows, even as more people use libraries
by Norman Oder -- Library Journal, 1/15/2003
Library usage rises in economic hard times, and that raises a paradox: the more libraries are needed, the less money there is to support them. Last year we reported a decline in the rate of growth for library budgets (see "The New Wariness," LJ 1/02, p. 55–57). Now we see the end of halcyon days: over the last five years overall budgets have risen 33% (or nearly 7% each year), with materials budgets up 25%, but libraries are now in a precarious holding pattern.
Total budgets (see table, below) will rise only 2.3% between the current and next fiscal years, while salaries will go up 2.9%. The average materials budget for FY03, however, will dip 2.1%, the first decline in the past five years. It's not that there is less demand for materials, but libraries have high fixed costs, mainly personnel, and the materials budget is often most vulnerable.
Of 1800 libraries sent LJ's Budget Survey 2002, 365 responded, a more than 20% response rate. A notable segment reported continuing budget increases, often owing to a strong local economy or secure funding gained through a separate taxing district. For most, however, last year's wariness was borne out this year in local and state funding decreases. In several states, like Arkansas, Colorado, and North Carolina, direct support for libraries—a relatively small percentage of total funding—declined. In Ohio, where large-scale state support has meant well-funded libraries, cuts were often painful. Elsewhere, reduced state revenues have in turn reduced aid to localities, which has a ripple effect on libraries. Funding also has been pared in some cities like New York, where the three library systems have absorbed a nearly 14% drop in FY02 and FY03.
Some signs of growthPer capita funding for PLs continues to grow—it is projected to be $35.98 in FY03, a rise of more than $1 from the current $34.71. Three quarters of respondents project an increase. Per capita circulation in FY02 was reported at 8.08, a slight increase from that reported in last year's survey, 8.06. However, respondents expect per capita circulation to rise to 8.45 in FY03.
Internet usage inside libraries rose even faster, by nearly 25%, and remote usage was up 45% in those libraries (nearly six of ten) that measure such usage. Remote access grew fastest at larger libraries.
Staffing rose an average of 4.1%, but libraries reported a slight decrease in hours—a little less than 1%—to cope with diminished budgets. Several cut weekend or evening hours.
Larger libraries hit hardLarger libraries among survey respondents seem to be suffering the most. Libraries serving populations of 500,000 or more projected slight decreases in their total budgets, significant drops in their materials budgets (some 4%), and slight increases in salary money, the last a result of attrition and hiring freezes.
While the downward trend in fundraising reported last year continued, not all library segments suffered losses: the 34 largest libraries that reported—those serving populations of 500,000 or more—actually acknowledged a more than 15% increase in fundraising. Those libraries raised an average of $1.69M.
Among libraries that reported a decline in fundraising, some of the same culprits as last year could be blamed: a slower economy and stock market losses. Libraries serving populations of 50,000 to 99,999 raised an average of $37,000, while the smallest libraries, serving populations under 10,000, garnered an average of $5000.
Grants & GatesAs for grants, the respondents reported receiving an average of $273,900 in the last fiscal year. State governments remained the largest source of grants (74%), followed by private foundations (40%), the federal government (34%), and individual gifts (13%). While two-thirds of the respondents this year said they had received Gates Learning Foundation monies, some 82% of that subset said the funds had run out, and only one-fifth of them had replaced the funds.
Of course, librarians have known that the Gates money is finite—in last year's report, more than half the respondents said they would try to increase their budgets—but this past year has not been the easiest in which to respond. Larger libraries—those serving populations of 500,000 or more—were more than twice as likely to have been able to replace their Gates subsidies.
Libraries reported they were most likely to spend grants on books and other materials (57%), technology/automation (50%), special projects (47%), staff/hours (26%), Internet/web (24%), literacy programs/training (22%), and capital costs (16%).
Internet costsInternet-related expenditures continue to rise slowly. Respondents reported that 4.6% of their budgets go to the Internet, a 28% increase from three years ago. Smaller libraries spent a disproportionate amount on new hardware, while large libraries spent more on staffing.
Only 20% of respondents—a number consistent with last year's survey—said they had to cut back on spending to pay for technology. Libraries expect their Internet expenditures for FY03 to be 7.9% above that in FY02.
The Budget Survey shows the importance of E-rate funds to libraries; 61% of respondents applied for the discounts, with an average award of $51,524. For the smallest libraries, the awards averaged $1,779 and for libraries serving populations of 25,000 to 49,999, the average was $5,809. Libraries serving 100,000–499,999 gained savings averaging $47,486, while libraries serving 500,000 or more expect to save an average of $294,194.
The long viewGiven the continued recession, few respondents were optimistic about the future. There's certainly cause for dismay among library supporters: nearly all public agencies have been squeezed.
Still, it is clear that libraries remain vital to communities and that they serve an enormous spectrum of people and needs. Library administrators taking the long view reminded us that library funding tends to flow in cycles: after lean years, the money has generally returned.
| Population Served | Total Budget 2002 | Total Budget 2003 | Change of Total Budget | Materials Budget 2002 | Materials Budget 2003 | Change of Materials Budget | Salary Budget 2002 | Salary Budget 2003 | Change of Salary Budget |
| Total Sample (weighted) | $6,101,000 | $6,236,000 | +2.3% | $847,000 | $829,000 | -2.1% | $3,734,000 | $3,844,000 | +2.9% |
| Under 10,000 | 168,000 | 171,000 | 1.79 | 25,000 | 25,000 | 0.0 | 102,000 | 105,000 | 2.94 |
| 10,000 to 24,999 | 660,000 | 680,000 | 3.03 | 88,000 | 90,000 | 2.27 | 399,000 | 414,000 | 3.76 |
| 25,000 to 49,999 | 1,774,000 | 1,868,000 | 5.30 | 277,000 | 285,000 | 2.89 | 1,078,000 | 1,132,000 | 5.01 |
| 50,000 to 99,999 | 2,343,000 | 2,433,000 | 3.84 | 309,000 | 311,000 | 0.65 | 1,419,000 | 1,481,000 | 4.37 |
| 100,000 to 499,999 | 6,719,000 | 6,926,000 | 3.10 | 984,000 | 971,000 | -1.32 | 4,094,000 | 4,304,000 | 5.1 |
| 500,000 to 999,999 | 25,369,000 | 25,165,000 | -0.10 | 3,661,000 | 3,495,000 | -4.53 | 16,330,000 | 16,707,000 | 2.31 |
| 1 million or more | 57,298,000 | 59,076,000 | -0.30 | 7,094,000 | 6,847,000 | -3.48 | 33,785,000 | 33,785,000 | 0.01 |
| *LJ mailed out 1800 questionnaires to public libraries in September 2002, with 365 responding, for an overall response rate of 20% Source: Library journal Budget Survey, 2002 |
|||||||||
| Author Information |
| Norman Oder is Senior News Editor, LJ |
|
