America's Star Libraries: Insights from the Top-Rated Libraries

LJ Index of Public Library Service 2009, Round 2: Public Libraries star-rated in both rounds of the LJ Index to date share their insights - America's Star Libraries - top-rated libraries - star libraries

By Keith Curry Lance & Ray Lyons -- Library Journal, 11/15/2009

The Star Libraries

Who's In, Who's Out

Editorial: The New Star Libraries

Insights from the Stars

Getting Better Data

Spotlight on 9 Stars

Find a Library

FAQ

We wish to underscore that this rating system is not cast in stone. Indeed, it is hoped that discussion of LJ Index ratings and the four statistics on which they are based currently will lead to the addition of new output measures to the national data collection. This would open up the possibility of expanding the LJ Index to include additional output measures. To this end, selected libraries that have now been star-rated in both rounds of the LJ Index to date were asked to respond to four questions:

• To what do you credit the statistics driving your library's rating?
• How did you use your library's star library rating from earlier this year?
• On what additional service outputs does your library collect data locally?
• Which of those local service outputs do you believe are ready to be collected nationally?

Traditionally, the public library community has focused on statistics on circulation and, to a lesser extent, visits. The LJ Index includes two additional service outputs—program attendance and public Internet computer use—that alone or in combination contributed to some public libraries getting star library ratings. While providing access to information and a place to consume it remain important, these additional measures reflect other key roles: introducing library users to new information and guiding them in its use and helping to bridge the “digital divide” between technology haves and have-nots. When directors of these libraries were asked to identify reasons why their libraries had such high statistics for these two outputs, they pointed to the community's setting and demographics, various indicators of unusually high service capacity, and specific library efforts.

Boulder Public Library (BPL), CO ($5 million–$9.9 million, ****) serves the city of Boulder, one of the major suburbs of Denver and the center of its own metropolitan area, due to the presence of the University of Colorado's main campus and a plethora of high-technology companies (e.g., IBM) and its proximity to Rocky Mountain National Park. BPL reported more than eight public Internet computer uses per capita compared to between one and five for other star libraries. Director Tony Tallent attributes this to a combination of several factors including the numerous computers available for public use. Located in downtown Boulder along the Boulder Creek path, the main library is perfectly set for “inviting folks to come in to discover...computers that can connect them to the world ....” Though Boulder is generally an affluent and highly educated community, Tallent also sees his library closing the digital divide. “We discover each day that many people who come through our doors simply don't have access to a computer of their own.” With BPL's main library, two traditional branches, and the Carnegie Library for Local History, Tallent notes that, “for a city [our] size, it is easy to get to a library to take advantage of the computers and good support from staff.”

Richland County Public Library (RCPL), SC ($10 million–$29.9 million, ***) in Columbia, the state capital, is also one of the nation's leading retirement cities and home of the University of South Carolina and Fort Jackson (the army's largest training base). The new director, Melanie Huggins, credits her library's high Internet computer usage per capita (4.9 vs. less than 3.0 for most star library peers) to service capacity and community demographics. At most Richland County outlets, available computers are in use 80 percent of the time. A likely “capacity” reason for this is the great hours of her library's outlets—9 a.m. to 9 p.m., Monday–Thursday, in most cases. Huggins also believes the access to public Internet computing is valued highly by most RCPL users but especially by “those who can't afford” a computer, a high-speed connection, and the cost of authoritative databases.

Camden Public Library, ME ($400,000–$1 million, ****) sits in a small coastal harbor town that is a summer resort. Director Nikki Maounis identifies several factors in her library's high program attendance per capita (2.3 vs. less than 1.6 for most star library peers): a full-time director of programming, daily story times, regular events on the library grounds (a harbor-side park-like setting with an amphitheater), and evening and weekend hours of service.

Multnomah County Library, OR ($30 million and over, *****) serves the Portland area. Director Vailey Oehlke simply credits her library's program attendance per capita (.47 vs. less than .30 for most star library peers) to “being in sync with the needs and interests of our users.”

When we asked directors receiving a star library rating for the second time how they used the first rating, their responses included not only some good examples of exercising “bragging rights” but also some exemplary and readily replicable applications of the rating and its underlying statistics in planning, budgeting, fundraising, and assessment.

Boulder's Tallent reports that he and his staff “were so pleased with the LJ 4-Star rating that we immediately crafted a small celebration campaign”—the key feature of which was a giant banner placed at each library facility's entrance. The banners “had great images of our staff with the phrase 'Welcome to your .... library!'” The rating was also reported in the library newsletter and on its web site and blog. Perhaps more important, though, the rating provoked some serious reflection on local data collection and reporting efforts. “[It] fueled our passion [to study] how well we collect our user statistics. Within several weeks, we had identified a couple of key areas where we think our statistics were potentially being underreported,” says Tallent. “Needless to say, we have tightened these areas and are looking at some clearer ways to share our user statistics not only with our staff but with our public.”

Camden's Maounis describes a similar publicity blitz, including a banner placed on the Main Street side of the library property for maximum visibility. A local newspaper article explained the LJ Index and Camden's rating. The library's logo, letterhead, annual report, and postcards all feature the star library logo. Even better, the rating was mentioned at budget hearings to document more fully the amount of service the library provides within the limits of its resources. Maounis also mentions the rating in grant proposals, believing that it confers stature. Most intriguing, LJ Index data is being used in a strategic planning effort. A key question is, “How do we raise Camden's performance on the other three service outputs to the level of its performance on program attendance?”

Multnomah County's Oehlke also referred to the rating in budget presentations, in addition to posting a news release on the library's web site and announcing the news at events for library staff and stakeholders, such as the library's governing board, foundation, and Friends group.

Wornstaff Memorial Public Library ($100,000–$499,999, *****), which serves a small village in Ashley, OH, circulates an impressive 41 items per capita and performs well on two of the three other LJ Index measures. While Director Elizabeth Barker echoes typical efforts for publicizing the star rating, she notes that she has used the rating to respond to the 30 percent cut to Ohio's hitherto enviable state funding for public libraries. She cites their star status as part of the “pushback” to the governor's original proposal of a 50 percent cut, and she plans to enlist the star rating when she presses for support for a local property tax levy to replace the lost state funds.

An honorable mention for exemplary local use of the LJ Index goes to Bixby Memorial Library in Vergennes, VT, which is not (yet) a star library. Trustee Peter Morris said his board is using the LJ Index in its decision-making and the development of a campaign to improve library awareness and funding. Reviewing their LJ Index outputs in relationship to spending peers, the trustees and director found they were underreporting visits. A simple solution: acquire an automatic door counter. They also plan to add more Internet computers to meet demand, which “will likely increase Internet computer use.” Ultimately, they believe, said Morris, “statistics can help us make our case.”