Report on Ethnographic 

Market Research/Analysis 

of Federal Depository 

Library Program Workflow

October 31, 2016

Nancy.Foster@Ithaka.org
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 1

Project Overview...................................................................................................... 2

Background.............................................................................................................. 3

The approach: ethnography, work-practice study, and user-centered design ... 3

The context: the Government Publishing Office (GPO) and the Federal 

Depository Library Program (FDLP)................................................................... 4

The Library Services System.................................................................................5

Methodology ............................................................................................................ 6

Major Findings......................................................................................................... 8

Qualitative Requirements for the Library Services System................................... 11

Proceeding with Design and Development of the LSS...........................................13
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 2

Project Overview

In August 2015, the Government Publishing Office (GPO) commissioned Ithaka S+R to 

conduct a participatory work-practice study of the Federal Depository Library Program 

(FDLP) in order to develop qualitative requirements for the new Library Services 

System. The new suite of tools and services will enable GPO to improve its organizational 

workflow and business processes while leveraging new technology features and 

functionality to enhance services for the public, depository libraries, and GPO staff.

Ithaka S+R conducted observations, structured interviews, work-practice studies 

(scrutiny of video-recorded work tasks), and a user-centered design workshop, finding a 

high degree of commitment to the Program among depository personnel. There were 

also a number of workflow inefficiencies and obstacles, which include but are not limited 

to:

» A perceived complexity of Program requirements and the difficulty of finding relevant 

documentation

» Time-consuming processing workflows

» Trouble locating or developing complete and accurate metadata records for individual 

documents

» Challenges in locating document records during processing, cataloging, and reference work

» Difficulty of developing and maintaining an institution’s selection profile

Depository personnel strongly indicated a need for easier access to training, help, and a 

way to get difficult questions answered, as well as greater overall usability of FDLP tools.

Ithaka S+R recommends that work practices and identified obstacles be considered in 

designing a new suite of tools and services. A full list of recommended qualitative 

requirements to address identified issues appears on pages 10-12. These requirements 

fall into four broad categories:

» Usability issues

» Choosing and managing content

» Discovery of Federal documents

» Finding information about the Federal Depository Library Program
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 3

Background

In August 2015, the Government Publishing Office (GPO) commissioned Ithaka S+R to 

conduct a participatory work-practice study of the Federal Depository Library Program 

(FDLP). Often described as the Government's first "right-to-know" program, the FDLP 

was established by Congress to enable an informed citizenry to participate in the 

democratic process. The FDLP is a nationwide network of different types of libraries that 

provides free and open access to Government information, making tangible documents

available through participating libraries and providing access to electronic documents 

online, now and for future generations. With the vision of providing Government 

information when and where it is needed, the FDLP will continue to contribute 

substantially to GPO achieving its mission of Keeping America Informed. The usercentered study focused on gathering information on the needs of depository libraries in 

order to develop a suite of tools and services that will enhance support for depository 

libraries by reducing workload requirements and increasing efficiencies of operations for 

the Program. The suite of tools and services, known as the Library Services System 

(LSS), will enable GPO to improve its organizational workflow and business processes 

while leveraging new technology features and functionality to enhance services for the 

public, depository libraries, and GPO staff.

Ithaka S+R’s role in this project was to conduct ethnographic research in FDLP libraries 

in order to develop qualitative requirements for the new system. The qualitative 

requirements for the LSS formulated through this study will complement the technical 

requirements that will be developed by another team. By using this approach, GPO is 

aligned with the GPO strategic plan and the National Plan for Access to U.S. Government 

Information, both of which focus on being customer-centric.

The approach: ethnography, work-practice study, and usercentered design

Over the past fifteen years, academic and public libraries have used qualitative 

assessment methods, and ethnography in particular, to understand and address the 

needs of people who use library systems, spaces, and services. Ethnography is the 

hallmark method of sociocultural anthropology; within the study of human culture and 

society, ethnography comprises observation and participation within a group of people 

combined with careful documentation and the production of a written account of the way 

the people live together. In the library setting, the scope of ethnographic study is limited 

to work practices associated with finding, using, disseminating, and preserving 
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 4

information and the participants in the study will include the people who work in 

libraries as well as those who use them.

Work-practice study is an ethnographic method that focuses on the activities in which 

people engage when they do their work. In the case of FDLP libraries, work practices are 

activities that FDLP librarians and technical staff perform to accomplish the work of the 

FDLP library. Prescribed procedures for FDLP libraries result in shared patterns of 

activity. However, local conditions and individual abilities and preferences produce 

considerable variation across libraries. Ethnographic study of on-the-ground practices 

identifies not only patterns and variations, but also brings to the surface details and 

nuances that support building a better LSS.

User-centered design is a process that begins with an understanding of user work 

practices and obstacles and then designs solutions to support workflows and address 

identified problems. It is inclusive and participatory, involving many participants in the 

ethnographic studies and working through a cross-disciplinary project team. The sevenmember GPO project team included GPO staff with expertise in all aspects of FDLP 

operations as well as representation from the technical team that will be planning the 

design and development of the new LSS. 

The context: the Government Publishing Office (GPO) and

the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP)

The GPO was created by the U.S. Congress in 1860 and began operating the following 

year with 350 employees. Now in its 155th year, the GPO employs 1,700 people to meet 

its mission as “the Federal Government's primary centralized resource for producing, 

procuring, cataloging, indexing, authenticating, disseminating, and preserving the 

official information products of the U.S. Government in digital and tangible forms” 

(https://www.gpo.gov/about/). The GPO’s Federal Digital System (FDsys) provides 

permanent public access at no charge to Federal Government information 

(www.fdsys.gov).1

The GPO also provides free public access to Federal Government information through 

the FDLP, a partnership between the GPO and about 1,150 libraries throughout the U.S.2

1 At the time of this study and the issuance of this report, FDsys is GPO’s online system of record. Following a period of 

beta testing, it will be replaced by the next generation system, govinfo. This report of the study will be valid with FDsys, 

govinfo, or any successor online system of record.

2 Note that participation in the Program varies over time and the numbers of participating libraries given here are 

approximations as of the time of writing.
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 5

The origins of the FDLP as we now know it date to 1813 when Congress authorized 

legislation that provided for distribution of Congressional documents to selected 

universities, historical societies, state libraries, and other institutions. Over the years the 

Program has grown to reach its current size.

Between 1895 and 1897, GPO librarian Adelaide Hasse developed the Superintendent of 

Documents (SuDoc) classification system for use with Government publications. This 

unique classification system reflects the structure of the U.S. Government by organizing 

publications by the originating agency. The SuDoc system is used in many depository 

collections. After 1922, depository libraries no longer were required to receive all 

documents distributed by the GPO. Today 46 regional depositories receive all 

publications distributed through the FDLP for permanent retention. Approximately 1103 

selective depositories select specific categories of publications across a range of formats 

to meet the needs of their Congressional District and local clientele. Each FDLP library 

has a coordinator who is responsible for meeting the requirements for participation in 

the Program. Regional depositories may permit the disposal of depository materials from 

selectives after retention for five years. All depository libraries receive FDLP materials at 

no cost in exchange for making information available to the public and for providing 

appropriate assistance to users (http://www.fdlp.gov/file-repository/about-thefdlp/lscm-year-in-review/2733-lscm-fy2015-year-in-review and 

https://www.gpo.gov/pdfs/about/FY17_and_15_Performance_Report.pdf).

The Library Services System

GPO has undertaken efforts to design and implement a suite of automated tools and 

services that will streamline the interaction of the three major user groups of the FDLP: 

GPO, depository libraries, and the general public. This suite of tools, known collectively 

as the Library Services System (LSS), will enable GPO to improve its organizational 

workflow and business processes while leveraging new technology features and 

functionality to enhance library acquisitions, cataloging, record distribution, federated 

searching, indexing operations, and other relevant activities for depository libraries.

LSS will support reliable data that is both normalized and authoritative, intuitive 

workflows that support efficiencies of operations, and Program documentation that is 

easy to navigate. This single source will aggregate data currently in several information 

silos, such as:

» The Federal Depository Library Program site (FDLP.gov), which contains information about 

the Program for its participating libraries

» The Program’s integrated library system including the Catalog of U.S. Government 

Publications
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 6

» The Depository Selection Information Management System (DSIMS), which enables libraries 

to add and delete item numbers from their selection profiles

A website will present a unified gateway to FDLP information and services. In the back 

end of the system, a data warehouse will provide for storage and preservation of data. 

The system will support FDLP workflows by depository personnel as well as searching 

and browsing for information by librarians and members of the public. The new system 

will provide better support for workflows and improved performance and accuracy for 

search-based tasks.

Methodology

Depository personnel from 21 sites were included in data-gathering activities. The 

resulting information was analyzed by a multi-disciplinary team in order to develop a 

nuanced understanding of frontline work practices and communicate it understandably

to designers and developers.

The methods included:

» Review of GPO/FDLP websites and tools as well as documents concerning the processing of 

Government information; current and envisioned systems; and desired features and 

functionality of the system used by depository librarians as communicated to GPO trainers and 

outreach librarians.

» Structured interviews by telephone with personnel at 21 FDLP libraries to familiarize the 

research team with the overall landscape of FDLP libraries and with specific characteristics of 

the libraries in the sample and to obtain baseline information for selecting 12 FDLP libraries 

for site visits.

» Site visits to 12 FDLP libraries that were selected by the GPO project team for 

representativeness by size (small, medium, and large), type (academic, public, law, and 

Federal agency), and selection rate (less than one percent to 100 percent). Sites included 

libraries throughout the U.S. mainland, a U.S. Territory, and an Indian reservation. On site 

visits, data were collected through observations, structured interviews, and work-practice 

studies with one to six individuals, depending upon the size and organization of the site. Workpractice studies entailed video-recording of selected work tasks followed by audio-recorded 

discussions of the tasks as viewed together by the interviewer and interviewee. All site-visit 

interviews were recorded and transcribed.

The following table displays the amount of data collected for this project. As in other 

studies of this nature, raw data has been kept confidential to protect the privacy of 

participants.
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 7

Number of 

transcript 

pages

Video 

footage in 

hours

Telephone interviews 69

Observation notes and photos at site visits 150

Workplace interviews 394

Work-practice studies 260 14.5

Website walkthroughs 79

Totals 952 14.5

Telephone interview notes were analyzed and tabulated thematically and then shared 

with the project team for feedback. Site visit data were analyzed through an iterative 

process starting with the development of categories for thematic coding of transcripts. 

Coded transcript data were then grouped by category and site to gauge the prevalence of 

key themes, with the creation of subcategories as needed. This analysis in turn provided

the basis for concept development.

Concept development was initiated by the consultants working with the full set of data

and completed in project team meetings facilitated by the primary consultant using

excerpts drawn from the interview transcripts. This led to the development of an artifact 

comprising two full-page images of an imagined FDLP site, which was designed by GPO 

personnel.

The artifact was used in a design workshop attended by personnel from 18 depository 

libraries. In the design workshop, participants were asked to mark portions of the images 

that they liked, disliked, and deemed important. They were also asked to write in any 

elements they thought belonged on the page but were missing. They were then debriefed 

on their marked-up artifacts. Participants were then asked to respond to a brief written 

questionnaire, which asked them to select their work tasks from a comprehensive list. 

They were also asked to review a list of FDLP-related tools and mark the ones they liked 

best and the ones they found most difficult to use. In the last question, they were asked 

to imagine two things they would do to change the FDLP site and tools if they could 

magically make any improvements they desired.

After workshop participants had completed their tasks, Ithaka S+R facilitated the project

team in analyzing workshop outputs.
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 8

Major Findings

In this section, we review the major findings of the project. These findings are derived 

from telephone interview, site visit, and design workshop data. Data were analyzed in 

work sessions of the project team facilitated by Ithaka S+R. In addition, Ithaka S+R 

conducted extensive analyses on the data within its own team of ethnographers and 

library specialists.

Depository personnel need to find FDLP rules and regulations: FDLP 

coordinators demonstrate commitment to the Program and, in particular, to ensuring 

that the Program is appropriately and effectively administered. They are concerned 

about complying with FDLP rules and regulations with regard to their own decisions and 

work processes and those of the people they supervise. They are particularly concerned 

about minimal requirements for collections and proper processes for withdrawing and 

disposing of documents. They are also concerned about making good use of resources 

(especially “taxpayer dollars”) and ensuring that federally published documents are 

available for members of the public to find and use. 

Depository personnel have trouble with shipping lists: When processing

material, whether tangible or online, depository personnel capably process it following 

steps that are generally consistent from one site to another. They have difficulty with 

certain aspects of the work, especially with regard to shipping lists (inaccuracy, difficulty 

of finding correct list, seeing documents that they have not selected on their own lists) 

and document identification (questionable metadata, delay between shipment and 

availability of record).

SuDoc numbers, document titles, and other information may be changeable 

or difficult to differentiate: There are numerous challenges in systems and processes 

for identifying items and documents due to the necessity, over time, to make changes to 

SuDoc numbers. Additionally, enormous overlap in names of documents, combined with 

inconsistencies in the handling of punctuation and other elements, complicates the 

identification and location of desired documents. Beyond even these problems, there is 

some confusion over the term “item,” which is sometimes used in reference to a single 

document rather than to a cluster of publications in the SuDoc scheme.

Item selection is difficult: Different aspects of collection development and 

management may be taken on by the coordinator or other depository personnel. In 

general, we saw that coordinators were most likely to lead the overall process and to use 

web tools to make additions and changes to the selection profile for their institutions. 

Support personnel were more likely to play a significant role in claiming or withdrawing 
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 9

material and they experienced problems with both processes. For those who register 

selection changes, the DSIMS system proves extremely challenging for the following 

reasons: it is slow and cumbersome; it does not include all the information FDLP 

librarians need, sending most of them to Documents Data Miner 2 as a supplement.1

They use DSIMS infrequently and tend to forget login information as well as how to use 

the various features.

The catalog is hard to use: The Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP) is 

widely used by depository personnel across positions and job responsibilities, and it 

presents several problems. Along with DSIMS, the CGP is one of the least liked FDLP 

tools. Respondents showed and described the CGP as a hard-to-use tool that returns 

inadequate results.

Depository personnel find some cataloging tasks to be time consuming and 

difficult: Copy cataloging is done at most but not all sites. Depository personnel ingest 

or copy records to the extent possible, mainly using MARCIVE, GPO’s Cataloging Record 

Distribution Program, OCLC WorldShare Management Services, or the CGP Z39.50 

gateway. They do this generally with success, encountering problems finding the correct 

SuDoc number or ingesting duplicated MARCIVE records. When catalog records are 

incomplete or unavailable, depository personnel create new records by making small 

changes to copied records for similar documents. In some cases, copy cataloging can 

require a great deal of work. On several occasions, researchers saw catalogers generate 

Dewey or LC call numbers for items that lacked or had incomplete call numbers in their 

system of choice. We also saw librarians taking pains to complete records for very old 

documents that had been donated to a library and for which no adequate record could be 

found.

Electronic documents pose certain difficulties: The selection and processing of 

electronic documents appeared in the research sample to be far more streamlined in 

general than similar tasks performed in connection with tangibles. Some depository 

personnel stumbled in the process of choosing which electronic documents to select 

although in one case we were told that the choice was easier for electronic documents 

because electronic documents are easier to inspect. We saw that personnel at several 

sites had trouble reviewing e-book titles in the CGP. We also heard that over-selection of 

electronic documents could flood a small library’s online catalog with records, 

overshadowing other holdings in the library’s collection.2

1 Document Data Miner 2 (DDM2) is a collection management tool for depository libraries that brings together 

information from the List of Classes, Item Selection Profile, and Superseded List. DDM2 was developed and is hosted at 

Wichita State University.

2 Note that finding known electronic documents and searching for relevant documents are both problematic, as discussed 

elsewhere in this report.
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 10

Reference librarians sometimes struggle to connect patrons to the most 

relevant and useful government documents: Responding to reference questions 

in the FDLP sites we visited is mainly integrated into the work of reference librarians but 

there are some differentiated services. One such service is the outreach, training, and 

specialist support that the coordinator or the designated FDLP reference librarian 

provides to other reference librarians at a site. Another is the development of finding

aids, LibGuides, and webpages specifically for government documents. FDLP reference 

service is integrated into reference service in general insofar as it is provided by all 

reference librarians when it is related to the patron’s needs. In other words, when 

reference librarians assist patrons, they seek sources of any type that may answer the 

question, generally using the library’s OPAC but sometimes using specialized databases 

and finding aids, including the CGP. Librarians encounter difficulties connecting patrons 

to content when the CGP, the OPAC, or finding aids do not return adequate results. 

Depository personnel encounter problems that lie outside the control of the GPO but 

that complicate their work with government documents. For example, links to 

government documents may change or the patron may need documents in electronic 

format that are not available in free (non-proprietary) repositories. Frequently reported 

cases include historical census information, older statistical information, and 

Congressional or Presidential documents in certain date ranges.

Depository libraries use a variety of tools, some provided by GPO and some 

provided independently: The FDLP.gov and FDsys websites are liked by depository

personnel. Within FDLP.gov, they particularly like the List of Classes and the Item 

Lister.1 In addition, depository personnel like tools that help them complete FDLP tasks 

but that are not provided by GPO, such as GOVDOC-L and Documents Data Miner 2 

(DDM2). At the same time, there are GPO-provided tools that are considered hard to use 

by a significant number of respondents. These are Needs and Offers, Catalog of U.S. 

Government Publications (CGP), and Depository Selection Information Management 

System (DSIMS). Interestingly, FDsys is both well-liked and said to be hard to use.

Depository personnel use available help and would like easier pathways to 

help for specific questions: The length of service/knowledge of FDLP nexus is a 

singularly important factor in an FDLP librarian’s expectations and interactions with 

FDLP tools. The most experienced and knowledgeable depository personnel may have 

many suggestions for improvement but they use the tools well and help others learn the 

ropes. At any level of expertise, FDLP librarians will sometimes need help, whether that 

means help to complete a task or help in fixing a problem. In this regard, it seems that 

1 “List of Classes” refers to a publication entitled, List of Classes of United States Government Publications Available for 

Selection by Depository Libraries (https://www.fdlp.gov/file-repository/collection-management/list-of-classes/2682-

list-of-classes-print-version-revised-11-2015).
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 11

the way they want to request and use help is related to whether they need to reduce 

uncertainty or ambiguity. If they need to reduce uncertainty, for example, to find and 

complete the right form, they would prefer to do a simple search for what they need, 

possibly augmented with a demonstration video. If they need to reduce ambiguity, for 

example, to understand and apply a policy, they prefer to browse through explanatory 

documents. In any case, depository personnel want to be able to identify and send a 

question to the right person or department if they cannot resolve the matter alone. 

Additionally, all personnel want easy access to training materials. New personnel need 

training that will help them “hit the ground running.”

Search and browse functions should be improved: Depository personnel 

encounter obstacles when they try to find information and documents, that is, they find 

it hard to search and browse FDLP-provided sites and tools, particularly the FDLP.gov 

site and the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). They are particularly 

impeded by “unforgiving” search, inadequate faceting or filtering, and lack of a 

consistent organizational scheme and nomenclature across FDLP-related sites and tools.

Overall usability of sites and tools is an issue: While we paid more attention in 

these studies to systems and processes, we also discovered that depository personnel 

have some specific concerns about usability, including sign-in, look and feel, labels and 

terminology, search and browse (discussed separately), and ease of finding explanatory 

information.

Qualitative Requirements for the Library 

Services System

In this section, we summarize key observations and recommend corresponding 

qualitative requirements for the new system.

Based on the telephone interviews, on-site studies, analytical activities, and the design 

workshop, Ithaka S+R recommends that common obstacles and work-practice needs be 

considered in designing the new Library Services System. To this end, the qualitative 

requirements for the LSS based on ethnographic studies will be incorporated into the 

technical design process along with information about the Program collected within 

FDLP.

FDLP coordinators are committed to complying with Program requirements.

1. Ensure that precise, up-to-date information about all aspects of the FDLP is easy for 

coordinators and other depository personnel to find and use
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 12

2. Streamline systems and processes for withdrawing and disposing of documents

Depository personnel seek streamlined workflows.

3. Provide easy navigation to current and past shipping lists that are fully usable in digital 

format and make it possible for depository personnel to easily recognize the items on a 

complete shipping list that are actually included in their institution’s selection profile

(e.g., by bolding their selections)

4. Reduce redundant operations wherever possible (e.g., make it possible to perform the 

same operation on items from different pages in DSIMS at the same time)

5. Simplify and streamline the claims process so that, for example, depository personnel can 

claim multiple documents using the same form.

6. Post offered material and find needed material in a unified tool that remembers past 

information and requires only a few steps

7. Provide better reporting and notification for changes to document records, call numbers, 

superseded documents, and so on.

Depository personnel experience slow system performance during some tasks, especially 

in the DSIMS system; they also find it difficult to gather all metadata about item 

numbers and documents, which sometimes leads them to turn from GPO tools to such 

alternatives as DDM2.

8. Enable quick aggregation of all metadata related to an item or document, such as title and 

SuDoc stem. 

9. Improve system performance while making more data available through the selection 

system

Compared to other, non-GPO systems such as Google or HeinOnline, depository 

personnel find the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications hard to use, particularly 

with regard to locating the exact records they seek but also in connection with 

conducting a search for useful documents in a reference situation.

10. Provide a simplified way for depository personnel to find and download the records they 

need

11. Design LSS in anticipation that over time the CGP will become more comprehensive and 

have improved search and browse

Depository personnel, who without exception performed FDLP tasks as part of their 

much larger non-FDLP library responsibilities, expend time and effort learning how to 

use FDLP tools and re-learning how to use infrequently used tools. When tasks are 

performed rarely or intermittently, the need for help increases.
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 13

12. Provide help in different ways through pervasive redundancy of search features

» For information that addresses uncertainty, highlight the use of searching and provide 

explanatory text and, in some cases, demonstration video

» For information that addresses ambiguity, highlight the use of browsing, using 

explanatory text to help personnel navigate to what they need

» To the extent possible, integrate helpful information and sources of training related to 

the tools that are included within LSS and the tasks that will commonly be performed 

with those tools

» Make it easy for depository personnel to identify and get in touch with the office or 

individual who is best able to respond to a question they cannot answer alone

Depository personnel find that FDLP tools do not always compare favorably to other 

library and general online tools (e.g., newer OPACs, Google, ProQuest Congressional), 

which they find to be more intuitive and easier to use.

13. Improve the overall usability of the system, including:

» Provide single sign-in with indication of signed-in status

» Integrate all aspects of the system and provide a seamless, intuitive interface, one look 

and feel, and clear information throughout

» Conduct usability testing on terminology for the site 

» Add change notification based on the SuDocs in a given library’s selection profile

» Provide a mechanism within FDLP systems for delivering search results to patrons

» Improve search and browse across all FDLP sites and tools but especially FDLP.gov and 

the CGP

Proceeding with Design and Development of 

the LSS

The findings and requirements developed from the ethnographic study of the work 

practices of depository personnel form one significant part of the informational basis for 

design and development of the new LSS.

The findings have been incorporated into section 3.1.2 Motivation for New System of the 

Concept of Operations (ConOps) document and the requirements have been 

incorporated into section 3.2 Description of Desired Changes.

As the development team begins work, they will be briefed on the ethnographic study 

and provided with a copy of the report in order to give them a comprehensive 
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 14

understanding of the problems from the user point of view. Once the development team 

understands user work practices and problems, they can design solutions.

We anticipate that improving system performance and addressing usability issues will go 

a long way toward alleviating the problems that depository personnel encounter when 

they use FDLP tools provided by GPO. Issues related to current sub-systems should be 

addressed at the highest possible level. That is, where possible, problems with the 

current system should be addressed through the architecture of the technology and the 

structure of information in the system instead of by fixing each and every current tool 

separately.

The study described in this document and its outcomes are intended ultimately to 

enhance the ability of the public to find and use Government information. By providing 

high-performing tools to depository personnel, it is believed that this objective can be 

better accomplished.
REPORT ON ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSITORY LIBRARY PROGRAM 15

Acknowledgement

This study would not have been possible without active participation from the FDLP 

community. GPO would like to thank the following libraries for their part in phone 

interviews and/or site visits.

Bangor Public Library

Bangor, Maine

California State Library

Sacramento, California

Cornell Library

Vermont Law School

South Royalton, Vermont

Eli M. Oboler Library

Idaho State University

Pocatello, Idaho

Encarnacion Valdes Library 

Pontifical Catholic Univ. of Puerto Rico

Ponce, Puerto Rico

Fairchild-Martindale Library

Lehigh University

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

Fenwick Library

George Mason University

Fairfax, Virginia

Harford Community College Library

Bel Air, Maryland

Homer Babbidge Library

University of Connecticut

Storrs, Connecticut

Interior Library

U.S. Department of the Interior

Washington, DC

Leech Lake Tribal College Library 

Cass Lake, Minnesota 

McWherter Library 

University of Memphis

Memphis, Tennessee

Sitting Bull College Library

Fort Yates, North Dakota

Stratton Taylor Library 

Rogers State University

Claremore, Oklahoma

Troy H. Middleton Library 

Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge

Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Walter E. Helmke Library

Indiana University – Purdue University 

Fort Wayne (IPFW)

Fort Wayne, Indiana

Washington State Law Library

Olympia, Washington

Wiener-Rogers Law Library

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Las Vegas, Nevada

Plus 3 others