ED 398 932

AUTHOR

TITLE

INSTITUTION

REPORT NO

PUB DATE

NOTE

AVAILABLE FROM

PUB TYPE

DOCUMENT RESUME

IR 055 990

Bertot, John Carlo; And Others

The 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the

Internet: Progress and Issues. Final Report.

National Commission on Libraries and Information

Science, Washington, D. C.

ISBN-0-16-048736-6

Jul 96

81p.

U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of

Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC

20402-9328; U.S. National Commission on Libraries and

Information Science, 1110 Vermont Ave., N.W.,

Washington, DC 20005-3522. Electronic version at

http://www.nclis.gov/

Reports Research/Technical (143)

Tests /Evaluation Instruments (160)

EDRS PRICE MF01/PC04 Plus Postage.

DESCRIPTORS *Access to Information; Costs; Demography; Depository

Libraries; Information Policy; *Information Services;

*Internet; Library Development; Library Role;

*Library Services; Library Surveys; Longitudinal

Studies; *Public Libraries

IDENTIFIERS *Connectivity

ABSTRACT

This 1996 National Commission on Libraries and

Information Science (NCLIS) survey gathered data from a national

sample of public libraries concerning the current level of public

library involvement with the Internet. The purpose of this study

to: (1) provide policymakers, researchers, and library professir

with longitudinal data that measured changes in public library

Internet involvement since the first survey in 1994; (2) identify

costs for public library Internet services; and (3) identify issues

and inform the policy debate concerning public library roles in the

electronic networked environment. This final report is divided into

three sections: Introduction; Study Results; and Progress and Issues.

The introduction discusses, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the

Library Services and Construction Act/Library Services and Technology

Act; intellectual property and the National Information

Infrastructure; and an electronic federal depository library program.

The second section discusses study methodology; public library

demographics; accessing the Internet; the current state of public

library Internet connectivity; Internet uses and public access

services; and benefits to connecting to the Internet. The third

section focuses on disparities; connectivity versus services; the

goal of universal service; quality of network services; the life

cycle of public library Internet development; and preparation for the

next survey. Appendices include the survey instrument, survey alert,

and cover letter, and information about the authors. (Contains 27

references, and 45 figures that present survey data.) (Author/AEF)
ekN, National Commission on

>0

Libraries and Information Science

SPIV

The 1996 National Survey

of Public Libraries

and the Internet:

Progress and Issues

)

John Carlo Bertot

Final Report

July 1996

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

This document has been reproduced as

received from the person or organization

originating it.

Minor changes have been made to

improve reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent

official OERI position or policy.

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

Charles R. McClure Douglas L. Zweizig
U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science

(NCLIS)

Jeanne Hurley Simon, Chairperson

Martha B. Gould, Vice Chair

C.E. Abramson

Shirley Gray Adamovich

Walter Anderson

James H. Billington, Librarian of Congress

(Winston Tabb, serves for the Librarian of Congress)

LeVar Burton

Joan R. Challinor

Carol K. DiPrete

Mary S. Furlong

Frank J. Lucchino

Bobby L. Roberts

Gary N. Sudduth

Joel D. Valdez

Robert S. Willard

The views, opinions, and recommendations expressed in this report

are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect official position or policy of the

U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science.

For copies of this report, contact:

U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science

1110 Vermont Avenue, N.W.

Suite 820'

Washington, DC 20005-3522

Telephone (202) 606-9200

Fax (202) 606-9203

Electronic versions of this report are available at the following:

http://www.nclis.gov

http://istweb.syr.edu/Project/Faculty/McClure.html

Artwork by:

Agnes Ainilian
National Commission on

or Libraries and Information Science

The 1996 National Survey

of Public Libraries

and the Internet:

Progress and Issues

Final Report

July 1996

John Carlo Bertot Charles R. McClure Douglas L. Zweizig

4
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office

Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328

ISBN 0-16-048736-6

5
United States

National Commission on

libraries and Information Science

July 1996 The Honorable William J. Clinton

President of the United States

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue

Washington, D.C. 20500

The Honorable Al Gore, Jr.

Vice President of the United States

The Old Executive Office Building

Washington, D.C. 20501

Dear Mr. President and Mr. Vice President:

The Members of the U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science

(NCLIS) are pleased to present this report, The 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and

the Internet: Progress and Issues. This research responds to the Commission's statutory

mandate to promote activities that extend and improve the Nation's library and information

handling capability as essential links in the emerging global network infrastructure.

In 1994 NCLIS issued Public Libraries and the Internet: Study Results, Policy Issues,

and Recommendations which reported that 20.9% of U.S. public libraries were connected to

the Internet. Based on this research, the Commission sponsored a 1995 study of Internet costs

for public libraries that were reported in Internet Costs and Cost Models for Public Libraries.

These studies are based on the conviction that public libraries will be an essential component

of the national information infrastructure of the future. The 9,050 public libraries in the U.S.

provide the basis for extending the benefits of advanced information services to all Americans.

The Commission's 1996 survey of public libraries and the Internet was conducted in

order to:

determine the percentage of public libraries connected to the Internet in 1996;

identify changes in public library connectivity between 1994 and 1996;

project public library Internet involvement into the future;

determine the percentage of public libraries that offer public access to Internet

services;

identify the type of Internet services public libraries are providing to the public.

1110 Vermont Avenue, N.W. Suite 820

Washington, D.C. 20005-3522

(202) 606-9200

Fax: (202) 606-9203

Federal Recycling Program 0 Printed on Recycled Paper
2

Our research in this area prompts the Commission's concern about the capacity of

public libraries to serve as vital community links to networks. Although public library

involvement with the Internet is increasing rapidly, there are serious discrepancies related to

the level of public library Internet service, type of Internet connectivity, the costs for Internet,

and the provision of Internet access services to the public.

The Commission's latest study of public libraries and the Internet reveals the

following:

Between 1994 and 1996 public library Internet connectivity increased 113%

overall from 20.9% to 44.6%);

By 1997, public library Internet connectivity may exceed 90%;

Public library use of Internet varies with the size of population served;

Public libraries in communities under 5,000 are significantly (59%) less likely to

use the Internet than those serving populations from 100,000 to 1 million +;

Public libraries in different regions of the U.S. have different levels of Internetconnectivity;

Nearly 40% of public libraries without Internet have no plans to connect in the

next 12 months;

The NCLIS surveys of public library Internet involvement reveal discrepancies

related to

the extent of connectivity

the type of connectivity

connectivity costs, and

the provision of Internet public access services.

The Commission's research prompts concern that public libraries serving smaller

communities of 25,000 or less may not be able to provide public Internet access. Without

Internet access, public libraries serving residents of smaller communities may lack any means

of access. We must therefore work together to identify policies and programs so that public

libraries in every community will fulfill a -central role in assuring universal access to advanced

information and communications services. To do less is to widen the gap between the

information 'haves' and the 'have nots'.

The Members of the National Commission look forward to working with you to

extend your leadership in connecting "...every classroom, every clinic, every library, every hospital

in America into a national information superhighway by the year 2000."

Sincerely,

tey

Jeanne Hurley Simon

NCLIS Chairperson

At oN
Acknowledgments

John Carlo Bertot

Charles R. McClure

Douglas L. Zweizig

July 1996

The completion of this 1996 national survey of public

libraries and the Internet is due, in large part, to the many

public librarians who completed and returned the survey

questionnaire. The high response rate to the survey indicates the continued interest on the part of the public library community in the use and development of the

Internet. To all those who took the time to complete the

questionnaires and provide the data that we analyzed and

reported here, we thank you very much.

The authors would also like to express their thanks to

members of the Advisory Board. These individuals provided guidance and suggestions, and participated in pretesting the survey instrument. Advisory Board members

include: Bob Bocher, Wisconsin Department of Public Libraries; Craig Buthod, Seattle Public Library; Mary Lou

Caskey, Mid-York Library System, Utica, NY; Carol

Di Prete, Roger Williams University and Commissioner,

National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS); Keith Curry Lance, Colorado Department

of Education; Mary Jo Lynch, American Library Association; Donna Mancini, the Public Library of Nashville and

Davidson County; Amy Owen, Utah State Library Division; Barbara G. Smith, Maryland Division of Library Development and Services; and Eleanor Jo Rodger, Urban

Libraries Council.

The support and encouragement of NCLIS to conduct

this survey and to compare its findings to the one conducted in 1994 was most appreciated. Executive Director

Peter R. Young helped to organize the study, provided suggestions and ideas for data collection and analysis, and

worked with other organizations to involve them in the

study. His direct involvement and assistance contributed

significantly to the completion of the project. The support

of the commissioners and NCLIS staff is also greatly appreciated.

Others to whom we are deeply indebted are the Federal-State Cooperative System (FSCS) Data Coordinators

in each of the various states and staff at the state library

agencies. These individuals worked very hard to encourage libraries to respond to the questionnaire. They contacted library directors, reminded them to complete the

survey, and often visited them directly to encourage them

to reply. Were it not for their assistance, the study would

not have had the high response rate it enjoyed. Thank

you very much for your help.

Finally, the authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Beth Mahoney for her excellent work in the

final production of this report. We also greatly appreciate

the copyediting done by Martine Beachboard.

Hi
Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION 1

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the Federal-State Joint Board on Universal Service 2

Library Services and Construction Act/Library Services and Technology Act 3

Intellectual Property and the NII 3

An Electronic Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) 4

STUDY RESULTS 5

Methodology 5

Survey Instrument Development 5

Survey Procedures 6

Sampling and Data Analysis Procedures 6

Longitudinal Comparisons 8

Quality of Data 8

Some Public Library Demographics 8

Accessing the Internet 9

Factors Affecting Public Library Involvement with the Internet 9

Public Library Motivation for Interest in the Internet 9

The Current State of Public Library Internet Connectivity 11

Percentage of Public Libraries Connected to the Internet and Population Served 13

Type of Network Connection and Connection Provider 17

Public Library Information Technology (IT) Costs, Internet Service Costs, and Future

Library Connection Resource Allocation 23

Internet Public Library Uses and Public Access Services 30

Weekly Public Library Uses of the Internet 30

Public Library Provision of Public Access Internet Services 33

Public Library Remote Dial-In Internet Services 43

Public Library World-Wide Web and Gopher Servers 44

Identified Public Library Benefits to Connecting to the Internet 45

PROGRESS AND ISSUES 46

Disparities Remain 46

Connectivity Versus Services 48

The Goal of Universal Service 49

Quality of Network Services 50

Life Cycle of Public Library Internet Development 52

Preparing for the Next Survey 52

REFERENCES 54

Appendix A: Survey Instrument 57

Appendix B: Survey Alert 63

Appendix C: Survey Cover Letter 65

About the Authors 67

v
List of Figures

Figure 1. Check on Study Sample and Response Quality. 9

Figure 2. 1994-1996 Public Library Average ALA-Accredited MLS FTEs, Operating Expenditures,

and Materials Expenditures by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 10

Figure 3. Factors Affecting Public Library Involvement with the Internet by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region. 11

Figure 4. 1994-1996 Primary Motivation for Public Library Interest in the Internet by Population

of Legal Service Area and Region. 12

Figure 5. 1994-1996 Public Libraries Connected to the Internet by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region. 14

Figure 6. Public Libraries Planning to Connect to the Internet in the Next 12 Months by

Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 14

Figure 7. 1994-1996 and Projected Public Library Internet Connectivity. 15

Figure 8. U.S. Population Served by Public Libraries Connected to the Internet. 16

Figure 9. Factors Affecting Public Library Involvement with the Internet by Libraries

Connected to the Internet. 17

Figure 10. 1994-1996 Public Library Type of Dial-Up Internet Connection by Population

of Legal Service Area and Region. 18

Figure 11. Maximum Speed of Public Library Dial-Up Connection by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region. 19

Figure 12. Public Library Type and Maximum Speed of Leased-Line Connection by Population

of Legal Service Area and Region. 20

Figure 13. 1994-1996 Public Library Leased-Line Connections by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region. 20

Figure 14. 1994-1996 Public Library Type of Network Connection Provider by Population

of Legal Service Area and Region. 22

Figure 15. Estimated Public Library Percentage of Operating Budget for Library IT and

Percentage of Library IT Expenditures for Library Internet Services by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region. 24

Figure 16. Public Library Operating Expenditures Spent on Library IT by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region. 24

Figure 17. Public Library Operating Expenditures Spent on Library Internet Services by

Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 26

Figure 18. Public Library Estimated System/Server Hardware Resource Allocation for the

Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 27

vi

1 0
Figure 19. Public Library Estimated System Communications Hardware/Fees Resource

Allocation for the Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 27

Figure 20. Public Library Estimated Software Resource Allocation for the Next Fiscal Year

by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 28

Figure 21. Public Library Estimated Training and Education Resource Allocation for the

Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 28

Figure 22. Public Library Estimated Content/Resource Development Resource Allocation

for the Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 29

Figure 23. Public Library Estimated Program Planning, Management, and Staffing Resource

Allocation for the Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 29

Figure 24. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly E-Mail Use by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region. 30

Figure 25. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly Listserv/Discussion Group Use by Population

of Legal Service Area and Region. 31

Figure 26. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly Bibliographic Utility (e.g., Accessing Card Catalogs)

Use by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 31

Figure 27. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly World-Wide Web Sessions by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region. 32

Figure 28. Overall Public Library Provision of Public Access Internet Services by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region. 34

Figure 29. Overall Public Library Fee Charges for Public Access Internet Services by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region. 34

Figure 30. Public Library Public Access E-Mail Internet Services by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region. 35

Figure 31. Public Library Public Access Newsgroup Internet Services by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region. 35

Figure 32. Public Library Public Access Text-Based World-Wide Web Internet Services by

Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 36

Figure 33. Public Library Public Access Graphical World-Wide Web Internet Services by

Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 37

Figure 34. Public Library Public Access Gopher Internet Services by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region. 38

Figure 35. Overall Public Library Public Access Remote Dial-In Internet Services by Population

of Legal Service Area and Region. 39

Figure 36. Public Library Public Access Remote Dial-In Internet Services by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region. 39

vii

11
Figure 37. Public Library Internet Services Component Costs by Libraries that Provide Public

Access Graphical World-Wide Web Internet Services. 40

Figure 38. Public Library Internet Service Providers by Libraries that Provide Public Access

Graphical World-Wide Web Internet Services. 40

Figure 39. Average Public Library Public Access and Staff Terminals and Graphical Workstations by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 41

Figure 40. Ratio of Public Library Public Access Terminals and Graphical Workstations to Average Library Population by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 42

Figure 41. Ratio of Public Library Staff Terminals and/or Workstations to Library ALA-Accredited

MLS FTEs by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 43

Figure 42. Public Library Remote Dial-In Internet Service Configuration by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 44

Figure 43. Percentage of Public Library Gopher/World-Wide Web Servers by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 45

Figure 44. Primary Public Library Gopher/World-Wide Web Server Operator by Population of Legal Service Area and Region. 46

Figure 45. Identified Public Library Benefits that Internet Connectivity Provides. 47

viii

12
The 1996 National

Survey of Public

Libraries and the

Internet: Progress and

Issues

Final Report

INTRODUCTION

The 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the

Internet builds and expands upon the original 1994

National Commission on Libraries and Information

Science (NCLIS) national study. During the two years

since that first national study, a series of events occurred that continue to influence the development of

the national and global information infrastructures in

general and public library involvement in that infrastructure development in particular (U.S. Advisory

Council on the National Information Infrastructure,

1996). These events include, but are not limited to:

Passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (EL.

104-104);

Development of Universal Service guidelines by

the Federal Communications Commission (FCC),

in conjunction with the Joint Board, as mandated

by the Telecommunications Act of 1996;

Introduction of the Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) (as part of H.R. 1617) as a replacement for the Library Services and Construction

Act (LSCA) to substantially augment public library electronic network infrastructure development;

Development of intellectual property legislation,

based on the work of the Information Infrastructure Task Force Working Group on Intellectual

Property Rights, suitable to the electronic publishing environment (Information Infrastructure

Task Force, 1995); and,

Transition by the Government Printing Office

(GPO) to enhance its electronic government document services due to an increasing amount of

agency electronic publications (Government

Printing Office, 1996).

These policy initiatives create an extremely fluid and

volatile policy context. On the one hand, the federal

government is in the process of reducing its involvement in locally-based National Information Infrastructure (NII) initiatives through the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and possible action on

LSTA. On the other hand, the federal government is

creating a regulatory framework that can dramatically

affect the ability of such community-based institutions

as the public library to participate in the NII through

the FCC's Federal-State Joint Board development of

Universal Service regulations. These policy initiatives

may substantially affect the ability of public libraries

to actively engage in the evolving NII.

13
2 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

The purpose of this section is for the authors to

present a selective review of key policy initiatives, as

defined above. Readers who desire a more extensive

review of public library literature in relation to electronic networked services can refer to the following:

The Clinton administration and the National Information Infrastructure (NII) (Bertot and McClure,

1996b);

Enhancing the role of public libraries in the National

Information Infrastructure (McClure, Bertot, and

Beachboard, 1996);

Internet costs and cost models for public libraries

(McClure, Bertot, and Beachboard, 1995a);

Policy initiatives and strategies for enhancing the role

of public libraries in the national information infrastructure (NII): Final Report (McClure, Bertot, and

Beachboard, 1995b);

Public access to the Internet (Kahin and Keller,

1995); and,

Public libraries and the Internet: Study results, policy

issues, and recommendations (McClure, Bertot, and

Zweizig, 1994).

The above references will provide readers with a more

detailed review of public library involvement in the

electronic networked environment and the policy context for that environment.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the FederalState Joint Board on Universal Service

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104)

signaled the first major revision to the telecommunications regulatory environment since the break-up of

AT&T in the early 1980s. Essentially, the Act deregulates the cable, local telephone, and long distance markets to allow regional bell operating companies

(RBOCS), long distance carriers (e.g., MCI, Sprint, and

AT&T), and cable companies to compete in each

other's markets upon meeting certain anti-competitive benchmarks that demonstrate competitor access

to cable, local telephone, and long distance carrier

markets (Benton Foundation, 1996). The ultimate goal

of the Act is to provide for a regulatory environment

that fosters telecommunications advancements that

lead to a more competitive nation and benefit consumers through competition in the telecommunications

marketplace (Bertot and McClure, 1996b).

A critical and exceptionally complex notion of the

NII that pervades the current policy debate concerning telecommunications reform is that of universal

service/access. In general, universal access is a concept derived from the telephone industry and entails

the provision of dial tone not necessarily services

to all areas. Extending this notion to the NII essentially means that advanced telecommunications technologies the wires, cables, etc. should be available throughout the nation on an equitable basis.

Universal service, on the other hand, is based on

the notion that market forces and consumer demand

may determine the availability of services and content. In an advanced telecommunications environment

this model implies that telecommunications carriers

will provide telecommunications services in markets

where there is a demand and reasonable expectation

of profit.

The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-104),

however, neither clearly defined universal access and

service nor distinguished the two. Passage of the Act

included provision for the Snowe-Rockfeller-KerryExon amendment that provided for discounted rates

for schools and libraries. The Act also mandated the

creation of a Federal-State Joint Board, to be chaired

by the FCC, to evolve a definition of universal service.

Service and access are complementary aspects of connecting to and using the NII that require careful consideration and clarification. "Universal access to the

information superhighway implies equal and reasonable opportunity for the individual to be connected to

the Internet.... Universal service, however, implies

some baseline or minimal level of Internet services to

which the federal government assures the public it can

access and use" (McClure, 1994, p. 13). These themes

will be discussed in more detail in the concluding section of this report.

The current environment in which the FCC is to

develop its universal uervice rulemaking and potentially provide for reduced service fees to such public

institutions as public libraries and the K-12 community is such that:

Approximately six million U.S. households currently do not receive any telephone service and a

disproportionate share of these are low-income

minority and rural households (National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 1995);

14
Final Report 3

Fifty percent of public schools have access to the

Internet, but only 9% of all instructional rooms

in those schools can access the Internet (U.S. Department of Education, 1996);

As this study shows, 44.6% of public libraries

have some type of Internet connection, but such

connectivity varies by library population of legal service area and region; and,

An increasing percentage of public libraries are

connecting to the Internet and providing public

access to Internet-based services through library

connections (Public Library Association, 1995)

a finding substantiated by this study.

The FCC and Federal-State Joint Board, therefore, need

to consider the variation in access to basic telephone

service by households as well as the community-based

public institution infrastructures' adequacy and capabilities.

Library Services and Construction Act/Library

Services and Technology Act

Federal funding of libraries, particularly public libraries, is generally small in dollar amounts but significant in the effect it can have on the ability of public

libraries to leverage local community resources to

match Federal funding (McClure, Bertot, & Zweizig,

1994). The most significant of federal programs that

funds public libraries is the Library Services and Construction Act (LSCA) (20 USC 16), a state-based matching fund program. LSCA, the only specific federal

source of public library funding, is inadequate in its

ability to assist public libraries to participate in the NII

due to its non-competitive funding allocation, distribution of funds through state library agencies, and

historical provision of construction funding (McClure,

Bertot, & Zweizig, 1994). LSCA may need to undergo

a transformation that specifically provides for public

library-based electronic network initiatives. In part, the

American Library Association (ALA)-sponsored LSTA

is one such effort being debated by the 104th Congress

(H.R. 1617). The intention is that LSTA, if passed,

would replace LSCA as the primary federal funding

mechanism for public libraries.

The LSTA is an effort by Congress, in part, to (H.R.,

1617, Sec. 212(a)(3)(A, E)):

Establish national library service goals for the 21st

century. Such goals are that every person in

America will be served by a library that

- Provides all users access to information

through regional, State, national, and international electronic networks; and,

Provides adequate hours of operation, facilities, staff, collections, and electronic access to

information.

LSTA essentially provides for two main grant categories: Information Access through Technology grants

and Information Empowerment through Special Services grants. These grant categories enable and promote public libraries to develop and carry out advanced technology infrastructure development.

Included in the LSTA is the requirement that state

library agencies perform an annual evaluation of the

grant programs to demonstrate the effectiveness of the

grants (Sec. 251(b)(1-5). As of spring 1996 a conference

committee convened to discuss LSTA differences between the Senate and the House. Congressional inaction on LSTA has added to the unpredictability of the

future role of libraries in the NIL

Intellectual Property and the NII

NII policy initiatives widely recognize the risks to

and importance of protecting the intellectual property

rights of authors and copyright holders in a pervasively networked environment. The administration

committed itself to "investigating how to strengthen

domestic copyright laws and international intellectual

property treaties to prevent piracy and to protect the

integrity of intellectual property" (Information Infrastructure Task Force, 1993, p. 5).

To that end, the Information Infrastructure Task

Forc (IITF) Working Group on Intellectual Property

published a preliminary draft report (green paper),

Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure (Working Group on Intellectual Property,

1994). The report concluded that, while major changes

to the statute are not necessary, the Copyright Act does

require some modification, including redefinition of

"transmission" and "publication" and clarification of

"first sale doctrine" (Information Industry Association,

1994). The report also called for a ban on devices or

services designed to defeat technical protections that

copyright owners developed to safeguard their works

and identifies the need to better educate the public to

understand intellectual property rights.

15
4 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

The 1994 report endorsed giving copyright owners

an exclusive right to control digital transmissions of

their works: "the initial Green Paper went too far in

extending the exclusive rights of copyright holders and

paid only superficial attention to the needs of users of

electronic information" (ALAWON, 1995, p. 5). While

current copyright law provides copyright owners a

form of exclusive reproduction rights, "It has never

before now given them an exclusive reading right...."

(ALAWON, 1995, p. 5). Such protection, then, would

provide copyright owners with control over both the

access to and distribution of their material.

After a public comment period, the working group

issued its final report, Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure: The Report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights (1995). The final report varied little from the initial Green Paper that

the Working Group published. The report did, however, make the following key recommendations for

copyright law amendment (Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights (1995, Appendix I):

Redefine "distribution" and "publication" to include transmission;

Redefine "transmit" to include the transmission

of a reproduction; and,

Exempt libraries from the one-copy limit by permitting libraries to possess three copies of material.

Some analysts from the education and library communities found that the final report was a legalistic

document that went too far in protecting publishers'

rights.

Intellectual property issues have important implications for the public, the library community, and the

publishing community, and will influence the economic arrangements by which libraries will be able to

make digital holdings available or, perhaps more significantly, gain access to digital holdings. Existing

print-media publishers are becoming increasingly

aware of the economic value of their media products.

As more of these publishers form partnerships with

commercial on-line service providers, public libraries

may be forced to reconsider their libraries' economic

interests.

The Senate and House introduced bills in the 104th

Congress (S. 1284 and H.R. 2441, respectively) that essentially would modify current copyright law based

on the recommendations of the working group. It remains unclear if the 104th Congress will act on these

bills. The issues, however, will continue to be debated

by stakeholders in the information production and

consumption industries for some time to come.

An Electronic Federal Depository Library Program

(FDLP)

The Government Printing Office (GPO) FDLP, originally created in the late 1800s to ensure an informed

citizenry through the distribution of federal government publications to approximately 1400 libraries

throughout the nation, is facing the need for fundamental change due to the increased reliance on electronic networks as a means to access and distribute

government information.

The continued development of the NII is challenging the traditional means through which the public

can access, and the federal government can disseminate, government information through the FDLP. The

increasing use of and access to the Internet by the library community in general and the public library

community in particular, provide an opportunity for

significantly augmenting the FDLP neither the GPO,

the public, nor libraries are limited to accessing and

disseminating printed government documents and

publications.

The Government Printing Office (GPO), under

mandate of law (P.L. 104-53), undertook a study to

determine the feasibility, requirements, and potential

barriers to creating a more electronically-based FDLP

(Government Printing Office, 1996).

In part, the GPO concluded that (Government Printing Office, pp. 3-5):

There is widespread interest in expanding the

content of the FDLP to make it more comprehensive, and a great deal of optimism that the rapid

expansion of agency electronic publishing offers

cost-effective options to do so.

With the increasing emphasis on electronic dissemination and decreasing compliance with

statutory requirements for agencies to print

through GPO, identifying and obtaining information for the FDLP is becoming increasingly difficult.

To ensure permanent public access to official electronic government information products, all of

the institutional program stakeholders (information producing agencies, GPO, depository librar16
Final Report 5

ies and National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) must cooperate to establish authenticity, provide persistent identification and

description of government information products,

and establish appropriate arrangements for its

continued accessibility.

In a distributed environment, where libraries and

users often access government electronic information services rather than local collections, tools

for identifying and locating information will be

critical components of an effective program.

For the successful implementation of a more electronic FDLP, the Congress, GPO and the library

community must have additional information

about future agency publishing plans, as well as

an expert evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and

usefulness of various electronic formats that may

be utilized for depository library dissemination

or access.

While there are many benefits inherent in the use

of electronic information, including more timely

and broader public access, there are no conclusive data at this time to support the assertion that

it will result in significant savings to the program

as a whole in the next few years.

These findings identify the challenges that GPO will

face in creating a more electronically based FDLP program. The challenges are formidable, but necessary,

as the means of federal government document publication, dissemination, and access change considerably

through the electronic networked environment.

The challenges facing the GPO FDLP, however, may

serve to significantly alter and expand the role of public libraries in providing access to federal government

information and services. The increased reliance of the

federal government on electronic means of access to

and dissemination of government information, combined with the increasing involvement with the

Internet by public libraries, allows public libraries the

potential to enhance access to electronic federal government information services.

The above discussion serves to partially set the

policy context for this study. The increasing realization of the NII presents the public library community

with numerous challenges concerning the role of public libraries in an electronic networked environment.

On the one hand, through the ubiquitous and distributed nature of the Internet, public libraries have the

potential to augment their role as community-based

information hubs, acting essentially as network navigators, electronic resource locators, and electronic service providers. On the other hand, the electronic networked environment potentially redefines many aspects of public library policy: document and publication provision, intellectual property concerns, and the

telecommunication rates to fund library services. New

legislation may specifically support information technology applications for libraries. This study presents

both longitudinal and descriptive data to inform policy

makers, researchers, and the library community as to

the ability of public libraries to successfully meet the

challenges of the electronic networked environment.

STUDY RESULTS

This 1996 NCLIS survey gathered data from a national sample of public libraries concerning the current level of public library involvement with the

Internet. The data collection occurred between January and March 1996. The purpose of this study was

to: (1) provide policymakers, researchers, and library

professionals with longitudinal data that measured

changes in public library Internet involvement since

the first Public Libraries and the Internet study (McClure,

Bertot, and Zweizig, 1994); (2) Identify costs for public library Internet services; and, (3) Identify issues and

inform the policy debate concerning public library

roles in the electronic networked environment.

Methodology

This 1996 NCLIS-supported survey closely followed the methodology used in the 1994 survey in

order to allow direct comparisons of results from the

two surveys. These methods included the process of

developing and testing the survey instrument, the

drawing of the sample, and the method of drawing

estimates from the responses.

Survey Instrument Development

The study team based the initial draft of the survey

instrument on the survey form used in 1994, making

modifications to reflect current Internet technologies

and public library issues. Questions relating to costs

of Internet activities were augmented from findings

reported in the NCLIS-supported Internet Costs and

Cost Models for Public Libraries (McClure, Bertot, and

Beachboard, 1995). In addition, the Advisory Board

for this study provided suggestions for topics to ad17
6 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

dress concerning public library involvement with the

Internet. Key questions from the 1994 survey were

maintained to provide longitudinal data for 1994-1996

public library Internet involvement. In November

1995, the Advisory Board reviewed a draft of the survey instrument. The study team used the comments

from the board and NCLIS members and staff to produce a second version of the survey instrument.

Board members each pretested the second draft of

the survey instrument with at least five public librarians of the type who would receive the final questionnaire. By December 20, 1995, the study team received

over 35 completed pretest instruments along with comments from the Board members. The study team finalized the survey instrument on December 30, 1995,

and mailed out the final survey to participating public libraries during the second week of 1996 with a request for response by January 31, 1996 (see Appendix

A for a copy of the final survey instrument).

Survey Procedures

This study employed a number of devices to increase the likelihood of prompt response from libraries:

Sending a postcard via first-class mail to sampled

libraries one week before the survey mailing to

alert the library director that the survey would

be coming. The postcard explained the importance of prompt response and asked the library

director to notify the survey office if a survey was

not received as of January 15, 1996 (see Appendix B for a copy of the postcard).

Sending a cover letter on NCLIS stationary and

signed by Jeanne Hurley Simon, the chairperson

of the Commission, along with the survey. The

letter explained the purpose of the survey and

stressed the importance of prompt response (see

Appendix C for a copy of the letter).

Providing notices in pertinent library literature

to announce the conduct of the survey. An announcement appeared in w Hotline in an early

1996 issue, giving notice of the intended survey

and its purpose, promising a report in the summer of 1996.

Mailing surveys via first-class mail with a firstclass stamp affixed to the return envelope.

Sending a letter, through NCLIS, to each state library agency in early January 1996 with a list of

those public libraries in the state that were included in the sample. This letter asked for any

cooperation the state library agency could provide in ensuring a high response rate. State Data

Coordinators for the Federal-State Cooperative

System (FSCS) were especially helpful in following-up with non-respondents.

Performing a second mailing of the survey on

February 26, 1996 to 250 selected non-responding libraries to increase the response rate within

certain regional and population of legal service

area strata.

Faxing each state library agency with non-responding libraries a list that included the names

of non-responding libraries in early March 1996.

The fax asked for assistance in increasing the response rate. Once again, the FSCS State Data Coordinators proved especially helpful in increasing the survey's response rate.

Making the survey available on a Web site so that

those libraries with graphical access to the WorldWide Web could complete the survey on-line. To

review a copy of this survey, point your browser

to: http : / /research.umbc.edu / bertot/

nclissurvey.html.

Returning respondent phone call and email queries concerning survey questions and procedures.

Clearly, the cooperation of the state library agencies

was instrumental in the ability of the researchers to

obtain a high response rate in a matter of a few months.

Sampling and Data Analysis Procedures

The researchers used the same sample as used in

the 1994 public library Internet study in order to measure longitudinal changes in public library involvement. For the 1994 survey, the sample was selected

from the FSCS for Public Library Data 1991 Universe

File of public libraries maintained by the National

Center for Education Statistics (NCES). For the present

survey, that sample was checked against the 1993 FSCS

Universe File to verify that sampled libraries continued in the universe and to identify changes in library

names and addresses. The 1991 FSCS list was composed of 9,050 public libraries, whereas the 1993 list

contained a population of 8,929 public libraries.

Based on the above technique, a sample was drawn

18
Final Report 7

of 1,495 public libraries. Within the original sample,

the researchers in 1995 identified 21 public library

changes, of which 15 were due to consolidations and

name changes. The remaining six libraries were removed from the sample, leaving a sample size of 1,489.

A total of 1,059 surveys were returned, for a response

rate of 71.1%.

In drawing the original sample, the public library

universe file was stratified by library legal service

population' class (the legal service population classes

were as follows: 1 Million+; 500,000-999,999; 250,000-

499,999; 100,000-249,999; 50,000-99,999; 25,000-49,999;

10,000-24,999; 5,000-9,999; Under 5,000;) and, within

legal service population class, by four Census Regions

(the region groupings were as follows: MIDWEST: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota,

Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin; NORTHEAST: Connecticut, Maine,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New

York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont; SOUTH:

Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Washington, DC,

Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North.Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina,

Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia; WEST:

Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Idaho,

Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington, Wyoming). The sample was selected by NCES

using a systematic probability proportional to size

sampling procedure, the measure of size being the

square root of the population of library legal service

area. (For more detailed information on the sampling

technique used in this study and the drawing of the

sample from the NCES Public Library Universe File,

contact Steven Kaufman at NCES or Douglas Zweizig

at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.)

This sampling method assigns each sampled library

a weight to reflect its contribution to the estimates for

the population stratum to which it belongs. The sample

included all larger libraries (those serving populations

of 100,000 or greater), and thus those libraries each

received a weight of one. Libraries serving smaller

communities received larger weights to the degree that

the proportion of their stratum sampled was smaller.

Furthermore, after determining the final response rate,

adjustments were made to the weights within sampling strata to allow for national estimates that compensated for non-responding libraries.

In order to produce a national estimate, the adjusted

weights for the libraries that furnished a value were

summed. This provided an estimated count of the libraries nationally with that value. For example, to

estimate the number of libraries with an Internet connection (question 7 on the 1996 survey), the adjusted

weights of all responding libraries that indicated they

had some type of an Internet connection were

summed.' Percentages were then calculated in the

conventional way.

Any estimates to be derived in the future from this

data set will need to follow these same procedures of

computing estimates from the weights. Direct calculations from the sample data will not produce correct

estimates.

Because the weights were determined within the

population and region classes, estimates can be made

for the population and region levels and through aggregation for the national level. Because of the sample

size and the weighting procedure, estimates cannot

be made for individual states or for other classes that

might be of interest, such as consortia or library systems. The sample design was constructed in this manner in order to keep the sample size as small as possible and to allow a rapid reporting of data in this dynamic research area. Producing estimates at the state

level would require such a large sample size that it

would approach the population of libraries and would

lose the advantage of a quick response survey.

Although estimates of the standard error are pos-

'Population of the legal service area is the number of people in the geographic area for which a public library has been

established to offer services and from which (or on behalf of which) the library derives income, plus any area served under

contract for which the library is the primary service provider (NCES, 1993, p. 109).

2As an example, Bridgeville Public Library of Delaware, based on the FSCS Population of Legal Service Area (less than 5,000)

and Census Region categories (South), has been assigned a weighting factor of 9.75 by NCES. In producing national public

library estimates for public libraries in the same Population and Region category, each Bridgeville Public Library variable

response is multiplied by its assigned weight. Based on Bridgeville's indication of an Internet connection, it is estimated that

9.75 other public libraries in the same stratum have some type of an Internet connection. Totals for the stratum are achieved

through summing all the weights for the responses in that stratum. Analysis for each public library and survey question

must follow the above procedure to produce accurate national estimates.

19
8 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

sible with this sampling approach, they were not calculated for this quick response survey because their

calculation is more complicated and time consuming

than needed to produce the national estimates. Furthermore, such calculations require specialized software that is not written for the general user. Therefore, significance tests have not been performed. The

quality of the estimates can be inferred from the sample

quality achieved as shown in Figure 1 [and from the

close match between estimates of expenditures from

this sample and population data reported by NCES

(1995)]. However, it should be kept in mind that the

quality of estimates is directly related to the numbers

providing responses. In producing national estimates,

the re-weighting of responding public library data

compensates for non-responding public libraries. The

questions left blank or skipped by responding public

libraries, however, do affect the precision of the national estimates. Overall response rates for specific

questions are not included since, due to the weighted

sample, one library response does not correspond to

one library estimate. Thus, making the calculation of

response rates for each question is impractical.

Longitudinal Comparisons

In order to be able to make direct comparisons between the 1994 and 1996 data, a set of key questions

were asked in the same form. These questions were:

Question Number

(1996) Variable

Question 2

Question 3

Question 4

Question 6

Question 7

Question 13a

Question 13b

Question 14

FTE Librarians

Library Operating Expenditures

Library Materials Expenditures

Primary Motivation for

Interest in the Internet

(with the exception of the

choice of "library governing

body" that was added for

1996)

Current Connection to the

Internet

Dial-up Connection

Leased Line Connection

(through aggregation)

Type of Internet Provider

Other questions are not comparable with 1994 because

of modifications in the questions made to reflect

changes in public library Internet involvement and

technology.

Quality of Data

An analysis of respondents indicated no non-response bias. The survey results are representative of

national demographics indicating excellent representation of the broader public library population (see

Figures 1 and 2).

Some Public Library Demographics

Public library expenditures and number of employees vary by both region and population of legal service area. As library population of legal service area

increases, so does the number of full-time equivalents

(FTEs) with American Library Association (ALA)-accredited Master in Library Science (MLS) in their title

and material and operating expenditures. The national

average of ALA-accredited MLS Fibs is 4.0, while the

average public library having operating expenditures

last fiscal year of $559,928.14 and material expenditures of $84,273.50 (see Figure 2). These figures closely

match those found by NCES (1995), providing additional verification of the quality of the data.

Overall, Figure 2 shows that public libraries have

increased operating and material expenditure budgets

as compared to 1994 (McClure, Bertot, and Zweizig,

1994). The data do show, however, some notable decreases in library ALA-accredited MLS FTEs from 1994

to 1996 in the 1 million +, 500,000-999,999, and 25,000-

49,999 (-9.6%, -22.0%, and -22.1%, respectively) population of legal service area categories and the Midwest

and West (-11.1% and -14.5%, respectively) regional

categories. It is unclear to the researchers as to specific reasons for these differences in FTE data. One

possible explanation is that public libraries in those

regional and population categories that responded to

the survey have experienced some decrease in ALAaccredited MLS FTEs and operating expenditures that

is magnified through the weighted sample. The magnification due to weighting, combined with some libraries that did not complete that information on the

survey, can impact the responses to these questions.

It is important to note, though, that the overall ALAaccredited MLS FTEs operating expenditure, and material expenditure data closely match the most recent

NCES public library ALA-accredited MLS FTE and

expenditure data (1995).

Figure 2 also clearly shows that, as library population of legal service area increases, so too do the aver29
Final Report 9

Figure 1. Check on Study Sample and Response Quality.

Percentage in

Population*

Percentage of

Respondents

1 million + 0.2% 0.2%

500,000-999,999 0.6% 0.6%

250,000-499,999 1.1% 1.0%

100,000-249,999 3.2% 3.4%

50,000-99,999 5.7% 5.8%

25,000-49,999 9.7% 9.9%

10,000-24,999 18.3% 18.2%

5,000-9,999 17.1% 17.2%

Less than 5,000 44.1% 43.6%

Total Number of Respondents = 1059

* Using 1993 public library percentages.

Response Rate = 71.1%

age number of library FTEs and the average operating and material expenditures. Figure 2 indicates, however, that the distribution of public library material and

operating expenditures, as well as the number of FTE

staff, is not even across the nation. As with the 1994

data, materials and operating expenditures for the last

fiscal year and FTEs were greatest in the West, followed

by the South.

Accessing the Internet

This section of the report presents findings concerning motivations and factors affecting public library

involvement with the Internet.

Factors Affecting Public Library Involvement with the

Internet

Public libraries indicate that several factors affect

their involvement with the Internee As Figure 3 indicates, public libraries consider all identified factors

to be important in determining public library Internet

involvement, with importance ratings ranging from

1.46 to 1.94 (1=very important, 5=very unimportant).

Key factors affecting public library Internet involvement include communications costs (1.46), followed

by systems costs (1.52), the availability of state money

(1.61), and a tie between the availability of in-house

computer technical expertise and the availability of

staff time to develop expertise on the Internet (1.64).

In general, the data show that as public library population of legal service area decreases, the importance

of the factors increases, particularly those factors related to Internet services costs.

While the survey did not ask public libraries to indicate the year in which the library Internet connection was established, data presented in Figure 5 show

that a majority of public libraries serving population

of legal service areas of 100,000 or greater had some

type of Internet connection in 1994. Due to an established technology infrastructure and experience with

the Internet, it is expected that Internet services costs

and funding considerations would be less important

to public libraries in these population service categories.

Figure 3 demonstrates few regional differences for

factors affecting public library involvement with the

Internet. In general, however, public libraries in the

West consider Internet services costs and the availability of federal and/or state money to be less important

than do public libraries in other regions.

Public Library Motivation for Interest in the Internet

As Figure 4 shows, 27.6% of public libraries consider statewide initiatives to be the primary motivation for public library interest in the Internet. In addition, 21.0% of public libraries indicate that the primary

motivation for Internet interest comes from the library

administration, closely followed by 20.6% indicating

'It is important to note that, although the survey provided a general description of these factors, public librarians may define

these differently and have differing abilities to identify such factors. As such, these data are best seen as estimates of these

factors affecting public library involvement with the Internet.

21
Population of Legal Service Area 1996 1994 Change in Percentage Operating Expenditures Materials Expenditures FTEs Operating Expenditures Materials Expenditures 1.1 Es Operating Expenditures Materials Expenditures FTEs 1 million + 167.9 $30,422,011 $3,907,868 185.8 $30,551,227 $3,517,661 -9.6% -0.4% 11.1% 500,000-999,999 72.4 $14,365,313 $2,303,469 92.8 $14,338,160 $2,326,304 -22.0% 0.2% -1.0% 250,000-4999,999 38.9 $6,624,655 $967,047 33.8 $5,329,118 $779,110 15.1% 24.3% 24.1% 100,000-249,999 16.2 $2,856,098 $418,778 15.6 $2,287,103 $355,837 3.8% 24.9% 17.7% 50,000-99,999 8.2 $1,198,756 $182,361 8.3 $1,111,280 $162,449 -1.2% 7.9% 12.3% 25,000-49,999 6.0 $725,418 $100,436 7.7 $627,939 $94,150 -22.1% 15.5% 6.7% 10,000-24,999 3.1 $353,533 $54,652 2.8 $282,987 $47,205 10.7% 24.9% 15.8% 5,000-9,999 1.6 $138,961 $22,515 1.3 $101,300 $20,270 23.1% 37.2% 11.1% Less than 5,000 1.0 $39,463 $9,180 0.9 $25,928 $5,811 11.1% 52.2% 58.0% Region 1996 1994 Change in Percentage Operating Expenditures Materials Expenditures 1.1. Es Operating Expenditures Materials Expenditures II Ls Operating Expenditures Materials Expenditures FTEs Midwest 3.2 $403,293 $65,832 3.6 $363,014 $60,848 -11.1% 11.1% 8.2% Northeast 3.7 $449,817 $58,327 3.5 $390,635 $56,389 5.7% 15.2% 3.4% South 5.6 $735,648 $120,264 4.5 $576,612 $96,445 24.4% 27.6% 24.7% West 5.9 $1,096,018 $155,786 6.9 $997,899 $127,531 -14.5% 9.8% 22.2% Overall 4.0 $559,928 $84,274 4.1 $484,068 $73,930 -2.4% 15.7% 14.0% 22 23
Final Report 11

Figure 3. Factors Affecting Public Library Involvement with the Internet by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region.

Population of Legal Servcie Area

System/

Server

Costs

Software

Costs

Comm.

Cost

Training/

Education

Costs

Content/

Resources

Costs

In-house

Expertise

Staff

Time

Federal

Money

2.87

State

Money

2.46 1 million + 1.97 3.15 1.94 2.70 3.13 2.39 2.13

500,000-999,999 2.14 2.47 2.13 2.09 2.25 1.75 1.94 3.28 2.93

250,000-499,999 1.78 2.22 1.78 2.34 2.54 1.76 1.82 2.47 2.21

100,000-249,999 1.65 2.17 1.72 2.28 2.68 1.83 1.74 2.57 2.17

50,000-99,999 1.86 2.33 1.64 2.67 2.55 2.02 1.72 2.46 2.06

25,000-49,999 1.73 2.10 1.77 2.12 2.31 1.88 1.66 2.38 1.86

10,000-24,999 1.72 2.15 1.59 1.90 2.25 1.75 1.49 2.04 1.84

5,000-9,999 2.00 1.70 1.31 1.74 1.79 1.60 1.29 1.51 1.39

Less than 5,000 1.33 1.48 1.32 1.56 1.62 1.49 1.49 1.52 1.41

1 = Very Important / 5 = Very Unimportant

Region

System/

Server

Costs

Software

Costs

Comm.

Cost

Training/

Education

Costs

Content/

Resources

Costs

In-house

Expertise

Staff

Time

Federal

Money

State

Money

Midwest 1.54 1.79 1.46 1.75 1.96 1.72 1.58 1.84 1.63

Northeast 1.56 1.76 1.49 1.82 1.89 1.58 1.38 1.75 1.57

South 1.43 1.81 1.40 1.79 1.86 1.63 1.49 1.69 1.49

West 1.54 1.89 1.45 2.03 2.14 1.61 1.54 2.08 1.90

Overall 1.52 1.79 1.46 1.81 1.94 1.64 1.64 1.81 1.61

interest by community strategic planning. There is a

clear three-way split in terms of motivation for public

library interest in the Internet by library population of

legal service area: Library strategic planning serves

as the primary impetus for public library Internet interest for the largest libraries, library administration

provides library interest in medium-sized libraries,

and statewide initiatives supply Internet interest in

small libraries. In comparing the primary interest of

public library Internet access to 1994, there is a dramatic increase in the motivation of community strategic planning (+17.4%) for public library Internet interest.

There are few regional differences in public library

motivation for interest in the Internet (see Figure 4).

Public libraries in all regions consider the primary

motivation for library interest in the Internet to be statewide initiatives. Libraries in the South and West, however, consider community strategic planning to affect

the library's interest in the Internet more heavily (24.5%

and 23.6%, respectively) than do libraries in the Midwest and Northeast (19.2% and 18.7%, respectively).

Moreover, libraries in the South and West experienced

the largest increases in community strategic planning

activities since 1994, 22.1% and 21.8%, respectively, as

compared to 14.3% for libraries in the Midwest and

16.6% for libraries in the Northeast.

The Current State of Public Library Internet

Connectivity

The following section details the current state of

public library connectivity, including the percentage

of public libraries connected to the Internet, the type(s)

of Internet connection public libraries have, the future

Internet connectivity plans non-Internet connected

public libraries have, the type of network connection

provider public libraries use, and the estimated cost

of public library Internet services. Comparisons to the

1994 Public Libraries and the Internet study are made

where possible.

Percentage of Public Libraries Connected to the Internet

and Population Served

24
12 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 4. 1994-1996 Primary Motivation for Public Library Interest in the Internet by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

1996

Library

Strategic

Planning.

Statewide

Initiatives

Library

Administration

Library

Governing

Board

Community

Strategic

Planning

Internal

Staff

Expertise

. Other

1 Million + 51.4% 0.0% 27.3% 0.0% 14.8% 0.0% 6.5%

500,000-999,999 51.3% 6.4% 19.9% 3.0% 6.4% 7.3% 5.8%

250,000-499,999 45.0% 11.0% 23.3% 0.0% 14.1% 6.7% 0.0%

100,000-249,000 28.1% 19.5% 21.3% 1.6% 18.1% 7.4% 4.0%

50,000-99,999 24.0% 18.1% 27.6% 0.6% 21.8% 3.7% 3.4%

25,000-49,999 24.8% 20.2% 24.9% 1.5% 16.8% 7.9% 3.9%

10,000-24,999 13.1% 25.2% 23.3% 2.5% 21.8% 9.5% 4.7%

5,000-9,999 12.7% 26.4% 19.8% 3.0% 27.0% 4.7% 6.3%

Less than 5,000 8.4% 34.1% 18.4% 8.8% 18.9% 4.3% 7.1%

Region

Midwest 13.1% 26.8% 19.6% 6.9% 19.2% 6.8% 7.6% Northeast 16.3% 28.2% 25.0% 3.2% 18.7% 3.5% 5.1% South 14.1% 26.6% 20.6% 5.4% 24.5% 4.9% 3.9%

West 12.9% 30.7% 16.0% 2.0% 23.6% 10.2% 4.6%

Overall 14.2% 27.6% 21.0% 4.9% 20.6% 5.8% 5.8%

Population of Legal Service Area

1994

Library

Strategic

Planning

Statewide

Initiatives

Library

Administration

Library

Governing

Board

Community

Strategic

Planning

Internal

Staff

Expertise Other

1 Million + 57.2% 0.0% 19.6% - 0.0% 17.6% 5.6%

500,000- 999,999 57.6% 13.5% 14.2% 0.0% 9.8% 4.9%

250,000-499,999 31.0% 22.8% 30.2% 1.3% 14.7% 0.0%

100,000- 249,000 28.3% 16.4% 33.5% 3.9% 9.8% 8.1%

50,000-99,999 20.6% 23.2% 30.0% - 2.4% 14.8% 9.0%

25,000-49,999 20.4% 28.1% 33.5% 2.2% 6.4% 10.1%

10,000-24,999 19.3% 29.3% 31.6% 2.4% 8.8% 8.7%

5,000-9,999 20.9% 32.8% 28.5% 2.5% 6.1% 9.3%

Less than 5,000 12.2% 41.0% 20.3% 4,4% 5.9% 16.2%

Region

Midwest 15.1% 33.3% 23.6% - 4.9% 7.9% 15.2%

Northeast 20.3% 36.1% 21.4% 2.1% 9.1% 11.0%

South 15.1% 28.8% 39.8% 2.4% 4.5% 9.5%

West 26.4% 33.8% 25.7% 1.8% 6.8% 5.6%

Overall 17.8% 33.1% 26.5% - 3.2% 7.4% 11.7%

Continued

25
Final Report 13

Figure 4 (continued). 1994-1996 Primary Motivation for Public Library Interest in the Internet by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Change in Percenta e

Library

Strategic

Planning

Statewide

Initiatives

Library

Administration

Library

Governing

Board

Community

Strategic

Planning

Internal

Staff

Expertise Other

1 Million + -5.8% 0.0% 7.7% 14.8% -17.6% 0.9%

500,000-999,999 -6.3% -7.1% 5.7% 6.4% -2.5% 0.9%

250,000-499,999 14.0% -11.8% -6.9% 12.8% -8.0% 0.0%

100,000-249,000 -0.2% 3.1% -12.2% 14.2% -2.4% -4.1%

50,000-99,999 3.4% -5.1% -2.4% 19.4% -11.1% -5.6%

25,000-49,999 4.4% -7.9% -8.6% 14.6% 1.5% -6.2%

10 000-24 999 -6.2% -4.1% -8.3% 19.4% 0.7% -4.0%

5,000-9,999 -8.2% -6.4% -8.7% 24.5% -1.4% -3.0%

Less than 5,000 -3.8% -6.9% -1.9% 14.5% -1.6% -9.1%

Region

Change in Percentage

Library

Strategic

Planning

Statewide

Initiatives

Library

Administration

Library

Governing

Board

Community

Strategic

Planning

Internal

Staff

Expertise Other

Midwest -2.0% -6.5% -4.0% - 14.3% -1.1% -7.6%

Northeast -4.0% -7.9% 3.6% - 16.6% -5.6% -5.9%

South -1.0% -2.2% -19.2% - 22.1% 0.4% -5.6%

West -13.5% -3.1% -9.7% 21.8% 3.4% -1.0%

Overall -3.6% -5.5% -5.5% - 17.4% -1.6% -5.9%

At present, 44.6% of all public libraries have some

type of Internet connection (see Figure 5). This is an

increase of 23.7% from the 20.9% level of public library

connectivity in 1994. In general, as public library population of legal service area increases, so too does the

percentage of public library Internet connectivity, with

82.0% of public libraries with population of legal service areas of greater than 1 million and 31.3% of public libraries with population of legal service areas of

less than 5,000 having some type of Internet connection. Indeed, nearly all public libraries with population of legal service areas of 100,000 or greater have

some type of Internet connection (percentage of connectivity ranging from 82.0% to 96.1%). As Figure 5

indicates, the largest increases in public library Internet

connectivity occurred in libraries with population of

legal service areas between 25,000 and 249,999 (percentage increases ranging from 31.3% to 45.5%).

Public library Internet connectivity varies by region,

with 53.7% of libraries in the West having some type

of Internet connection, followed by 51.1% in the Northeast, 44.5% in the Midwest, and 39.0% in the South

(see Figure 5). The greatest percentage of increase in

Internet connectivity from 1994 occurred in the Midwest with 29.1%, followed by 25.5% in the West, 25.2%

in the Northeast, and 20.4% in the South.

When public libraries not currently connected to

the Internet were asked to indicate future Internet connectivity plans, 56.7% indicated that their libraries

planned to have some type of Internet connection by

March 1997 (see Figure 6). Of that 56.7%, 16.3% indicated that the library planned to have a library staffonly Internet connection, while 40.4% indicated that

the library planned to have a library staff and public

access Internet connection. As public library population of legal service area decreases, the percentage of

public libraries indicating no Internet connection plans

increases (percentages ranging from 0.0% to 47.3%).

Public libraries that serve larger population of legal

service areas, therefore, will continue to have greater

26
14 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 5. 1994-1996 Public Libraries Connected to the Internet by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

1996 1994 Change in Percentage 1 million + 82.0% 77.0% 5.0%

500,000-999,999 93.1% 64.0% 29.1%

250,000-499,999 96.1% 76.0% 20.1%

100,000-249,999 88.2% 54.4% 33.8%

50,000-99,999 75.0% 43.7% 31.3%

25,000-49,999 73.1% 27.6% 45.5%

10,000-24,999 53.1% 23.2% 29.9%

5,000-9,999 40.6% 12.9% 27.7%

Less than 5,000 31.3% 13.3% 18.0%

Region

1996 1994 Change in Percentage Midwest 44.5% 15.4% 29.1% Northeast 51.1% 25.9% 25.2%

South 39.0% 18.6% 20.4% West 53.7% 28.2% 25.5% Overall 44.6% 20.9% 23.7%

Figure 6. Public Libraries Planning to Connect to the Internet in the Next 12 Months by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Library Staff

Use Only

Library Staff Use

and Public Access

No Connection

Planned

1 million + 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%

500,000-999,999 25.7% 74.3% 0.0%

250,000-499,999 31.9% 68.1% 0.0%

100,000-249,999 25.4% 70.0% 4.6%

50,000-99,999 29.8% 53.3% 16.9%

25,000-49,999 30.5% 42.1% 27.4%

10,000-24,999 21.7% 43.0% 35.3%

5,000-9,999 18.4% 44.7% 37.0%

Less than 5,000 12.6% 40.1% 47.3%

Region

Library Staff

Use Only

Library Staff Use

and Public Access

No Connection

Planned

Midwest 20.5% 37.5% 42.0% Northeast 18.0% 43.8% 38.2%

South 12.9% 40.2% 46.9%

West 9.0% 59.6% 31.4% Overall 16.3% 40.4% 43.3%

27
Final Report 15

Figure 7. 1994-1996 and Projected Public Library Internet Connectivity.

80.0%

70.0 % a,

(1)

PO 0

8 C.)

bOell ea

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

Library Staff Only Access

7 Public Access

Total

50.3%

44.4%

20.9%

27.8%

25 7%

16.6%

12.7%

10.0% 8 2%

0.0% -

1994 1996 1997*

Public Library Internet Connectivity by Year

76.0%

* Projected Connectivity by

March 1997

percentages of public library Internet connections in

general and public access-capable connections in particular.

As Figure 6 shows, future public library Internet

connection plans vary by region. Public libraries in

the Midwest indicate the greatest percentage of library

staff-only Internet connection plans with 20.5%, followed by 18.0% in the Northeast, 12.9% in the South,

and 9.0% in the West. The near reverse trend is true

for library staff and public access connection plans,

with 59.6% of public libraries in the West indicating

plans for library staff and public access, followed by

43.8% of libraries in the Northeast, 40.2% in the South,

and 37.5% in the Midwest. Public libraries in the South

indicate the highest percentage of "no planned Internet

connection" with 46.9%, while public libraries in the

West indicate the lowest percentage of "no planned

Internet connection" with 31.4%. Such plans for

Internet connectivity will continue the disparity in

connection by region (as shown in Figure 5), with the

West outpacing the rest of the nation.

Figure 7 provides a slightly different view of the

past, current, and future state of public library Internet

connectivity. Of the 20.9% of public libraries connected

to the Internet in 1994, slightly more public libraries

provided public access Internet services (12.7%) than

Internet services for library staff only (8.2%). In 1996,

the growth in public access Internet services increased

to 27.8% with only 16.6% of public libraries having

library staff-only Internet connections. Should public

libraries not currently connected to the Internet follow through with their connection plans by March

1997, 76.0% of public libraries will have some type of

Internet connection, of which 50.3% will provide public access Internet services and 25.7% will provide library staff-only Internet services. More public libraries that are connecting to the Internet, therefore, are

providing public access Internet services than library

staff-only Internet services. The authors note that the

estimated 1997 public access figures may be underestimated due to some public libraries that currently

have library staff-only connections offering public access Internet services in the future.

Establishing the current percentage of public libraries connected to the Internet was a critical aspect of

this study to ascertain changes in connectivity since

1994, as well as to determine the current state of public library Internet connectivity. Equally as important,

however, is determining what percentage of the U.S.

population is served by a public library with some type

of Internet connection. Based on February 1, 1996

28
16 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 8. U.S. Population Served by Public Libraries Connected to the Internet*.

100.0%

90.0%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0.0%

1996 1997**

U.S. Population Served by Year

El Library Staff Only Access

EIPublic Access

111 Total

* Based on U.S. Population of

264,179 Million

** Projected U.S. Population

Served by March 1997

Census data (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1996) and a

weighted estimate of the U.S. population served by a

public library with Internet connectivity, 78.3% of the

U.S. population is served by a public library that has

an Internet connection (see Figure 8).4 Of that 78.3%,

45.0% have access to a library that provides public access Internet services while 33.3% will have access to

a library that provides staff only Internet services. In

estimating the U.S. population served by an Internetconnected public library by March 1997, 91.0% of the

U.S. population will be in a legal population area

served by a public library that has an Internet connection. Of that 91.0%, 53.3% will have access to a library

that provides public access Internet services while

37.6% will have access to a library that provides staffonly Internet services. Once again, the authors note

the potential underestimating of percentage of the U.S.

population that will have access to a public library that

provides public access Internet services as libraries that

currently only provide library staff only Internet services begin providing public access Internet services

as well.

Figure 9 compares public libraries that currently

have some type of Internet connection to those libraries that currently do not possess an Internet connection along the factors that affect current library involvement with the Internet (as presented in Figure 3, with

1=Very Important and 5=Very Unimportant). The data

show that public libraries not currently connected to

the Internet consistently rate cost factors (average importance rankings from 1.34 to 1.53), the availability

of in-house expertise and staff time (average importance rankings of 1.51 and 1.40, respectively), and the

availability of federal and state money (average importance rankings of 1.45 and 1.35, respectively) as

more important than do currently connected libraries. Libraries without an Internet connection at

present, therefore, identify the costs of Internet connectivity, the availability of state and federal money

for connectivity, and the internal library preparedness

as barriers to developing library Internet connections.

Type of Network Connection and Connection Provider

'These computations are based on the legal population served by public libraries as defined and reported in data described

by NCES (1995).

29
Final Report 17

Figure 9. Factors Affecting Public Library Involvement with the Internet by Libraries Connected to the

Internet.

System/

Server

Costs

Software

Costs

Comm.

Cost

Training/

Education

Costs

Content/

Resources

Costs

In-house

Expertise

Staff

Time

Federal

Money

State

Money

Not Connected 1.34 1.52 1.29 1.53 1.50 1.51 1.40 1.45 1.35

Connected 1.74 2.09 1.66 2.05 2.43 1.80 1.61 2.23 1.91

1 = Very Important / 5 = Very Unimportant

The following data detail the type of Internet connection, bandwidth and speed of the connection, and

Internet provider public libraries are currently using

to access the Internet. The percentages presented for

this section will not total to 100.0%, as libraries were

asked to list all the types of connections, providers,

and access speeds of their Internet connections. As the

data show, many libraries have multiple types of connections and providers.

As Figure 10 shows, the most common type of dialup Internet connection is text-based terminal access

(46.2% of public libraries with a dial-up connection).

This is followed by 28.4% of public libraries having a

workstation Serial Line Internet Protocol (SLIP) or

Point-to-Point (PPP) connection and 20.2% of public

libraries having an Internet gateway (e.g., a commercial provider such as America On-Line) connection. It

is interesting to note that public libraries, in general,

have comparable percentages of dial-up Internet connections for all population of legal service area categories except for the less than 5,000 population of legal service area category, in which such libraries have

the highest percentage of terminal access (50.9%) and

the lowest percentage of workstation SLIP/PPP access

(14.3%).

The type of public library Internet connection varies substantially by region (see Figure 10). Public libraries in the Midwest and Northeast are more likely

to have dial-up text-based terminal Internet access

(46.0% and 57.1%, respectively). Public libraries in the

South and West, however, have relatively equal percentages of text-based terminal Internet access (33.2%

and 39.7%, respectively) and workstation SLIP/PPP

Internet access (36.7% and 38.8%, respectively).

In comparing the public library type of dial-up connection from 1994 to 1996, public libraries have, overall, decreased the percentage of text-based terminal

access connections (-0.9%), increased the percentage

of Internet gateway connections (+6.3%), and increased

the percentage of workstation SLIP/PPP connections

(+16.6%). Public libraries servicing population of legal service areas of 249,999 or less tend to have increased their workstation SLIP/PPP connections in

greater percentages (percentages ranging from 11.9%

to 28.1%) than public libraries servicing population of

legal service areas of 250,000 or greater (percentages

ranging from 7.6% to 17.2%). Interestingly, public libraries in the Midwest and Northeast increased the

percentage of text-based terminal Internet access by

4.4% and 6.3%, respectively, as compared to public libraries in the South and West that decreased the percentage of text-based terminal Internet access by 13.6%

and 7.2%, respectively. At the same time, public libraries in all regions increased their percentage of

workstation SLIP/PPP access, led by public libraries

in the South with 22.1% and the West with 22.0%.

Public library dial-up connections essentially operate at the same maximum modem speed (see Figure

11). In all, 32.6% of public library dial-up connections

run at a baud-rate of 14,400 bits-per-second (bps), followed by 31.5% that run at a baud rate of 9,600bps,

and 31.0% that run at a baud rate of 28,800bps. In general, public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 10,000 or greater have higher percentages

of 28,800bps modems than other public libraries (percentages ranging from 34.2% to 59.1%), while libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 9,999

or less have higher percentages of 9,600bps modems

than other public libraries (percentages ranging from

32.6% to 46.2%). The distribution of 14,400bps modems is relatively constant across all library population of legal service areas. The very small public libraries, therefore, have slower Internet dial-up con30
1996 1994 * Change in Percentage Terminal Access Internet Gateway Access Workstation SLIP/PPP Access Other Terminal Access Internet Gateway Access Workstation SLIP/PPP Access Other Terminal Access Internet Gateway Access Workstation SLIP/PPP Access Other 1 Million + 39.3% 25.8% 34.9% 0.0% 40.5% 12.3% 17.7% 0.0% -1.2% 13.5% 17.2% 0.0% 500,000-999,999 49.2% 13.0% 35.3% 2.4% 35.9% 9.3% 27.7% 8.3% 13.3% 3.7% 7.6% -5.9% 250,000-499,999 49.7% 16.4% 30.7% 3.3% 48.7% 11.1% 21.2% 4.0% 1.0% 5.3% 9.5% -0.7% 100,000-249,999 37.0% 22.8% 35.9% 4.4% 52.9% 13.1% 7.8% 8.5% -15.9% 9.7% 28.1% -4.1% 50,000-99,999 36.3% 22.6% 33.6% 7.6% 51.7% 18.7% 15.0% 6.1% -15.4% 3.9% 18.6% 1.5% 25,000-49,999 43.8% 18.9% 35.3% 2.0% 54.3% 16.8% 19.5% 7.3% -10.5% 2.1% 15.8% -5.3% 10,000-24,999 48.5% 14.6% 32.7% 4.1% 47.4% 13.6% 15.2% 7.1% 1.1% 1.0% 17.5% -3.0% 5,000-9,999 48.0% 14.8% 32.3% 4.9% 45.7% 26.9% 11.2% 8.0% 2.3% -12.1% 21.1% -3.1% Less than 5,000 50.9% 26.7% 14.3% 8.2% 43.9% 8.1% 2.4% 17.2% 7.0% 18.6% 11.9% -9.0% Region 1996 1994 * Change in Percentage Terminal Access Internet Gateway Access Workstation SLIP/PPP Access Other Terminal Access Internet Gateway Access Workstation SLIP/PPP Access Other Terminal Access Internet Gateway Access Workstation SLIP/PPP Access Other Midwest 46.0% 22.1% 25.9% 6.1% 41.6% 13.2% 13.8% 9.9% 4.4% 8.9% 12.1% -3.8% Northeast 57.1% 15.7% 21.7% 5.6% 50.8% 16.9% 7.1% 10.6% 6.3% -1.2% 14.6% -5.0% South 33.2% 25.9% 36.7% 4.2% 46.8% 13.5% 14.6% 11.8% -13.6% 12.4% 22.1% -7.6% West 39.7% 17.3% 38.8% 4.3% 46.9% 8.3% 16.8% 2.8% -7.2% 9.0% 22.0% 1.5% Overall 46.2% 20.2% 28.4% 5.3% 47.1% 13.9% 11.8% 9.4% -0.9% 6.3% 16.6% -4.1% * Due to the slight difference in 1994-1996 connectivity survey questions, these percentages do not total 100%. 31 32 a-M ta CD-O PZ CIO \ID 8' i" P ),7`, aO BeycoOrtrDrt P.OF0rDrt8' ro0s r tort8' 0co)1) ro
Final Report 19

Figure 11. Maximum Speed of Public Library Dial-Up Connection by Population of Legal Service Area

and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Speed of Connection

9600 bps 14400 bps 28800 bps Other

1 million + 9.0% 25.8% 57.3% 7.9%

500,000-999,999 11.4% 29.5% 59.1% 0.0%

250,000-499,999 22.1% 39.8% 35.7% 2.5%

100,000-249,999 15.7% 38.1% 42.1% 4.1%

50,000-99,999 22.0% 33.2% 39.5% 5.4%

25,000-49,999 31.8% 25.6% 34.2% 8.4%

10,000-24,999 23.3% 32.9% 40.0% 3.7%

5,000-9,999 32.3% 27.8% 33.6% 6.2%

Less than 5,000 46.2% 37.3% 13.0% 3.5%

Region

Speed of Connection

9600 bps 14400 bps 28800 bps Other

Midwest 30.9% 33.6% 31.2% 4.3%

Northeast 43.9% 26.3% 23.2% 6.6%

South 22.4% 31.9% 42.0% 3.7%

West 17.6% 44.7% 32.9% 4.8%

Overall 31.5% 32.6% 31.0% 4.9%

nectivity capabilities than do medium-large public libraries.

As Figure 11 indicates, dial-up connection speed

varies by region. Public libraries in the Midwest and

Northeast have greater percentages of 9,600bps modems (30.9% and 43.9%, respectively) than do public

libraries in the South and West (22.4% and 17.6%, respectively). Public libraries in the West are more apt

to have a maximum modem speed of 14,400bps, with

44.7%, whereas public libraries in the South are more

likely to have a maximum modem speed of 28,800bps,

with 42.0%.

Public libraries that access the Internet through

leased-line connections are more likely to do so

through an on-line public access catalog (OPAC) gateway than through a local area network (LAN), with

48.7% and 37.6%, respectively (see Figure 12). In general, as public library population of legal service area

increases, so too does the use of LANs. Meanwhile, as

population of legal service area decreases, the use of

OPAC gateway Internet access increases. An interesting exception for OPAC and LAN access to the Internet

exists for public libraries with a population of legal

service area of less than 5,000 these libraries have

the highest percentage, 64.1%, of LAN use for Internet

access and the lowest percentage, 35.9%, for OPAC

Internet access. Libraries in the Midwest and Northeast are more likely to have OPAC access to the Internet

(48.4% and 58.7%, respectively) than libraries in the

South and West (28.4% and 35.8%, respectively). Public libraries in the West have the highest percentage of

LAN Internet access with 52.0%, followed by 37.1% in

the Midwest, 27.1% in the South, and 25.5% in the

Northeast.

The 1996 OPAC and LAN categories were combined to compare 1994 and 1996 public library leased

line Internet access (see Figure 13). Overall, there is a

33.0% increase in public library leased-line access, with

the most significant increases in leased-line access occurring in public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 25,000 or greater (change in percentage ranging from 39.0% to 68.3%). The most significant increase in leased-line Internet access occurred

in libraries in the West, 40.6%, and Northeast, 36.0%.

Public libraries with leased-line Internet connections most commonly access the Internet through a

56kbps line (see Figure 12) with 72.8%, followed by a

T1 line with 18.2%, and Other with 9.0%. Leased-line

33
20 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 12. Public Library Type and Maximum Speed of Leased-Line Connection by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Type of Leased Line Connection Speed of Leased Line Connection

On-line Public

Access

Local Area

Network Other 56K T1 T3 Other

1 million + 45.3% 39.9% 14.8% 44.8% 46.0% 0.0% 9.2%

500,000-999,999 46.2% 44.3% 9.5% 42.7% 57.3% 0.0% 0.0%

250,000-499,999 51.7% 39.4% 8.9% 58.1% 35.6% 0.0% 6.3%

100,000-249,999 42.7% 43.9% 13.4% 60.0% 28.0% 0.0% 12.1%

50,000-99,999 54.5% 37.7% 7.8% 63.7% 30.7% 0.0% 5.6%

25,000-49,999 49.8% 35.3% 14.9% 76.6% 18.2% 0.0% 5.2%

10,000-24,999 54.0% 28.6% 17.4% 82.1% 7.5% 0.0% 10.4%

5,000-9,999 52.1% 14.5% 33.4% 83.3% 0.0% 0.0% 16.7%

Less than 5,000 35.9% 64.1% 0.0% 86.4% 0.0% 0.0% 13.6%

Region

Type of Leased Line Connection Speed of Leased Line Connection

On-line Public

Access

Local Area

Network Other 56K T1 T3 Other

Midwest 48.4% 37.1% 14.5% 78.8% 12.3% 0.0% 8.9%

Northeast 58.7% 25.5% 15.8% 76.0% 13.4% 0.0% 10.6%

South 28.4% 27.1% 6.2% 64.2% 25.9% 0.0% 9.9%

West 35.8% 52.0% 12.1% 66.1% 27.6% 0.0% 6.2%

Overall 48.7% 37.6% 13.7% 72.8% 18.2% 0.0% 9.0%

Figure 13. 1994-1996 Public Library Leased-Line Connections by Population of Legal Service Area and

Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

1996 1994 Change in Percentage

1 Million + 82.4% 28.4% 54.0%

500,000-999,999 87.1% 18.8% 68.3%

250,000-499,999 78.2% 15.1% 63.1%

100,000-249,999 56.0% 17.0% 39.0%

50,000-99,999 48.4% 5.0% 43.4%

25,000-49,999 47.9% 2.1% 45.8%

10,000-24,999 45.9% 10.0% 35.9%

5,000-9,999 30.3% 2.0% 28.3%

Less than 5,000 23.5% 2.3% 21.2%

Region

1996 1994 Change in Percentage

Midwest 40.8% 4.8% 36.0%

Northeast 33.4% 3.9% 29.5%

South 38.8% 9.8% 29.0%

West 53.3% 12.7% 40.6%

Overall 39.6% 6.6% 33.0%

34
Final Report 21

connections in the Other category were nearly all Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) connections.

It is interesting to note that no public libraries indicated the use of T3 Internet connectivity. As the library population of legal service area decreases, the

percentage of public libraries with a 56kbps leasedline connection increases (percentages ranging from

42.7% to 86.4%). As the population of legal service

area increases, however, so too does the percentage of

Tl public library connections (percentage of leasedline ranging from 7.5% to 57.3%). No public library

that serves a population of legal service area of 9,999

or less has a T1 connection.

Public libraries in the Midwest and Northeast have

higher percentages of 56kbps connections with 78.8%

and 76.0%, respectively, than do public libraries in the

South and West, with 64.2% and 66.1%, respectively

(see Figure 12). The opposite is true for T1 leased-line

connections. Public libraries in the South and West

have, by nearly a factor of two, greater percentages of

T1 leased-line connections, with 25.9% and 27.6%, respectively, as compared to public libraries in the Midwest and Northeast, with 12.3% and 13.4%, respectively.

As Figure 14 demonstrates, public libraries make

nearly equal use of state library network (19.0%), local and/or state government organization (18.5%),

commercial (17.5%), and regional/statewide network

(16.5%) Internet service providers. Libraries that serve

population of legal service areas of 249,999 or less make

more use of state library networks (percentages ranging from 16.3% to 29.0%) than do libraries that serve

population of legal service areas of 250,000 or greater

(percentages ranging from 0.0% to 12.6%). Public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of

50,000 and above use commercial Internet providers

up to twice as much (percentages ranging from 33.2%

to 41.0%) as libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 49,999 or less (percentages ranging from

9.1% to 27.3%). It is interesting to note that larger public libraries (those libraries that serve population of

legal service areas of 250,000 or greater) and smaller

libraries (those libraries that serve population of legal

service areas of 24,999 or less) make more use of local

and/or state government organizations as Internet

service providers (percentages ranging from 17.5% to

27.5%) than do medium-sized libraries (those libraries that serve population of legal service areas between

25,000 and 249,999), with percentages ranging from

16.8% to 18.5%. Of particular interest as well is that

over half of the libraries that serve population of legal

service areas of 9,999 or less rely on a combination of

state library networks, local and/or state government

organizations, and local educational organizations for

their Internet service.

The Other category, with an overall percentage of

11.3%, indicates some new developments in public library Internet service providers. Libraries indicating

Other as an Internet service provider essentially identified two provider types: (1) Systems/automation

vendors such as Data Research Associates, and (2) A

hybrid Internet service provider approach that involved organizations such as a regional library consortium, state government, and commercial service

providers.

Figure 14 also shows that libraries in the Midwest

and Northeast tend to rely on local and/or state government organizations as Internet service providers

(18.7% and 20.9%, respectively), followed by regional/

statewide network providers (17.4% and 20.6%, respectively), state library networks (15.9% and 18.5%, respectively), and commercial providers (16.6% and

11.7%, respectively). Libraries in the South and West

tend to rely on commercial providers (23.0% and

26.3%, respectively), followed by state library network

providers (26.5% and 17.7%, respectively), local and/

or state government service providers (15.6% and

16.1%, respectively), and local educational organization service providers (11.8% and 13.7%, respectively).

Libraries in the South and West are, therefore, more

apt to use commercial or state library networks as their

Internet service providers, while libraries in the Midwest and Northeast are more likely to use local and/

or state government or regional/statewide networks

as their Internet service providers.

The 1994-1996 comparative data (see Figure 14)

show that public libraries have moved from a reliance

on statewide library network service providers (12.2%)

to local and/or state government (+15.9%) and regional/statewide network service providers (+6.8%).

Of particular interest is the large migration of public

libraries that serve population of legal service areas of

24,999 or less that have made a large migration from

statewide library network service providers (percentages ranging from -12.1% to -13.9%) to local and/or

state government service providers (percentages ranging from +20.1% to +23.5%). The regional changes

show three key aspects of public library Internet provider use changes: (1) There is an increased reliance

in all regions on local and/or state government

Internet service providers; (2) Public libraries in the

South are using commercial providers in larger percentages than any other library region (+20.0%); and,

35
22 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 14. 1994-1996 Public Library Type of Network Connection Provider by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

1996

Local/State

Government Commercial

Educational

Organization Free-Net

State Library

Network

Regional/

Statewide

Network Other

1 million + 20.4% 33.8% 17.6% 14.8% 0.0% 21.3% 26.9%

500,000-999,999 17.5% 41.0% 16.9% 6.3% 9.4% 12.8% 21.0%

250,000- 499,999 27.5% 34.9% 8.2% 6.3% 12.6% 28.1% 11.0%

100,000-249,999 16.8% 33.8% 15.5% 9.1% 23.3% 19.7% 15.4%

50,000-99,999 16.8% 33.2% 13.1% 3.9% 21.6% 28.8% 16.6%

25,000-49,999 18.5% 22.0% 17.8% 11.7% 25.5% 18.3% 12.7%

10,000-24,999 23.1% 27.3% 11.5% 5.4% 16.3% 23.6% 18.2%

5,000-9,999 22.1% 17.2% 10.8% 7.5% 20.9% 12.7% 17.2%

Less than 5,000 26.1% 9.1% 14.5% 5.3% 29.0% 18.3% 7.1%

Region

Midwest 18.7% 16.6% 13.2% 8.3% 15.9% 17.4% 9.9%

Northeast 20.9% 11.7% 8.5% 4.0% 18.5% 20.6% 15.8%

South 15.6% 23.0% 11.8% 5.2% 26.5% 8.8% 9.1%

West 16.1% 26.3% 13.7% 4.3% 17.7% 15.2% 6.9%

Overall 18.5% 17.5% 11.4% 5.7% 19.0% 16.5% 11.3%

Population of Legal Service Area

1994

1 million + 5.4% 21.9% 24.0% 0.0% 16.6% 11.0% 21.1%

500,000- 999,999 2.1% 22.2% 15.9% 17.7% 17.0% 6.4% 10.7%

250,000-499,999 3.6% 27.7% 25.5% 2.4% 14.0% 13.5% 10.2%

100,000-249,999 4.0% 22.3% 16.4% 4.4% 20.7% 8.8% 22.0%

50,000-99,999 1.5% 11.3% 22.1% 5.2% 24.0% 14.9% 18.2%

25,000-49,999 4.3% 19.3% 15.6% 1.2% 33.7% 6.1% 16.7%

10,000-24,999 3.0% 14.1% 13.7% 5.7% 30.2% 7.3% 19.0%

5,000-9,999 0.0% 20.3% 7.8% 0.0% 33.2% 14.8% 17.3%

Less than 5,000 2.6% 5.9% 9.3% 10.2% 41.1% 8.7% 18.1%

Region

Midwest 2.6% 19.5% 5.7% 8.8% 25.7% 13.0% 20.0%

Northeast 3.1% 11.9% 13.4% 4.1% 33.8% 6.4% 22.2%

South 1.8% 3.0% 22.1% 3.2% 39.7% 15.0% 11.2%

West 2.3% 24.4% 21.5% 6.7% 25.0% 5.5% 12.5%

Overall 2.6% 14.4% 14.0% 5.7% 31.2% 9.7% 18.1%

Continued

36
Final Report 23

Figure 14 (continued). 1994-1996 Public Library Type of Network Connection Provider by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Change in Percentage

Local/State

Government Commercial

Educational

Organization Free-Net

State Library

Network

Regional/

Statewide

Network Other

1 million + 15.0% 11.9% -6.4% 14.8% -16.6% 10.3% 5.8%

500,000-999,999 15.4% 18.8% 1.0% -11.4% -7.6% 6.4% 10.3%

250,000-499,999 23.9% 7.2% -17.3% 3.9% -1.4% 14.6% 0.8%

100,000-249,999 12.8% 11.5% -0.9% 4.7% 2.6% 10.9% -6.6%

50,000-99,999 15.3% 21.9% -9.0% -1.3% -2.4% 13.9% -1.6%

25,000-49,999 14.2% 2.7% 2.2% 10.5% -8.2% 12.2% -4.0%

10,000-24,999 20.1% 13.2% -2.2% -0.3% -13.9% 16.3% -0.8%

5,000-9,999 22.1% -3.1% 3.0% 7.5% -12.3% -2.1% -0.1%

Less than 5,000 23.5% 5.2% -4.9% -12.1% 9.6% -11.0%

Region

Change in Percentage

Local/State

Government Commercial

Educational

Organization Free-Net

State Library

Network

Regional/

Statewide

Network Other

Midwest 16.1% -2.9% 7.5% -0.5% -9.8% 4.4% -10.1%

Northeast 17.8% -0.2% -4.9% -0.1% -15.3% 14.2% -6.4%

South 13.8% 20.0% -10.3% 2.0% -13.2% -6.2% -2.1%

West 13.8% 1.9% -7.8% -2.4% -7.3% 9.7% -5.6%

Overall 15.9% 3.1% -2.6% 0.0% -12.2% 6.8% -6.8%

(3) Public libraries in the Northeast and South have

substantially reduced their use of state library network

Internet service providers (-15.3% and -13.2%, respectively).

Public Library Information Technology (IT) Costs,

Internet Service Costs, and Future Library Connection

Resource Allocation

Public libraries spend an average of 4.2% of their

operating expenditures on all library IT (see Figure 15).

Overall, however, 30.2% of public libraries indicated

that they do not know their current percentage of ITrelated operating expenditures (see note 2 on page 9).

Public libraries that serve population of legal service

areas between 10,000 and 499,999 have the largest overall IT-related operating expenditure percentages (percentages ranging from 4.5% to 6.1%). Public libraries

that serve population of legal service areas between

500,000-1 Million+ and Less than 5,000-9,999 expend

the least percentage of library operating budgets on

IT (percentages ranging from 1.7% to 3.8%).

To provide some sense of the overall public library

IT-related expenditures in dollar amounts, the percentages of public library IT-related percentages were

multiplied by the operating expenditure estimates

provided in Figure 2. The authors would like to note

that these are only rough estimates, particularly due

to the 30.2% of respondents who indicated that they

do not currently know their public library IT-related

operating expenditures. Furthermore, due to rounding in operating expenditure dollar amounts and ITrelated expenditure percentages, not all the dollar

amounts in Figure 16 total to those presented in Figure 15.

Based on multiplying the IT-related operating expenditure percentages by the total library operating

expenditures provided in Figure 2, public libraries

spend an average of $23,516.98 on library IT (see Figure 16). As public library population of legal service

area increases, IT-related expenditures increase. Public libraries that serve population of legal service ar37
24 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 15. Estimated Public Library Percentage of Operating Budget for Library IT and Percentage of Library IT Expenditures for Library Internet Services by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Estimated

for IT

IT Don't

Know %

System

%

Software

%

Comm.

%

Training

%

Content

%

Planning %

Other

%

1 million + 1.7% 38.4% 43.0% 11.5% 17.0% 3.3% 2.9% 10.8% 11.5% 500,000-999,999 3.8% 29.4% 20.3% 10.2% 27.9% 11.5% 7.4% 10.8% 11.8%

250,000-499,999 4.5% 34.5% 31.0% 10.7% 23.8% 4.5% 3.9% 9.0% 17.2%

100,000-249,999 4.8% 26.0% 28.0% 17.3% 26.1% 9.1% 3.5% 6.5% 9.4% 50,000-99,999 5.1% 21.2% 31.9% 19.2% 19.2% 7.3% 7.3% 7.2% 8.0% 25,000-49,999 6.1% 19.3% 38.1% 14.4% 23.0% 10.3% 4.7% 3.7% 5.8%

10,000-24,999 4.9% 20.1% 32.8% 13.0% 17.6% 10.3% 6.7% 8.7% 10.9% 5,000-9,999 2.7% 35.4% 30.4% 11.7% 15.8% 4.4% 0.8% 5.8% 7.3% Less than 5,000 3.2% 43.7% 33.0% 23.8% 16.0% 13.0% 8.5% 2.8% 2.8%

Region

Estimated

% for IT

IT Don't

Know %

System

%

Software

%

Comm.

%

Training %

Content

%

Planning %

Other

%

Midwest 3.8% 38.5% 31.6% 15.9% 25.4% 9.3% 5.3% 5.5% 7.0% Northeast 3.4% 25.6% 35.2% 12.6% 19.9% 8.9% 7.2% 5.9% 10.3% South 5.5% 21.9% 37.6% 23.1% 19.3% 9.4% 4.6% 7.0% 7.6% West 6.1% 28.7% 27.2% 20.6% 24.8% 8.8% 4.5% 6.8% 7.3% Overall 4.2% 30.2% 33.0% 15.6% 22.7% 9.1% 5.5% 6.1% 8.0%

Figure 16. Public Library Operating Expenditures Spent on Library IT by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Total Operating Expenditures

on Library IT

1 Million + $517,174.18

500,000-999,999 $545,881.88

250,000-499,999 $298,109.45

100,000-249,000 $137,092.71

50,000-99,999 $61,136.57

25,000-49,999 $44,250.53

10,000-24,999 $17,323.10

5,000-9,999 $3,751.95

Less than 5,000 $1,262.81

Region

Total Operating Expenditures

on Library IT Midwest $15,325.15 Northeast $15,293.78 South $40,460.61 West $66,857.08 Overall $23,516.98

38
Final Report 25

eas of 1 Million+ spend an average of $517,178.18 on

library IT as compared to public libraries that serve

population of legal service areas of less than 5,000 that

spend an average of $1,262.81 on library IT.

As Figures 15 and 16 show, public libraries in the

West expend the most on library IT, with 6.1%

($66,857.08), followed by libraries in the South with

5.5% ($40,460.61), libraries in the Midwest with 3.8%

($15,325.15), and libraries in the Northeast with 3.4%

($15,293.78).

Public library participants were asked to estimate

what portion of library IT-related expenditures went

toward providing library Internet services (see Figure

15). Public libraries spend an average of 33.0% of their

IT-related operating expenditures on system/server

hardware costs, followed by 22.7% on communications

hardware/fees, 15.6% on software costs, 9.1% on training and education costs, 8.0% on other Internet-service provision costs (e.g., building modifications and

upgrades), 6.1% on program planning, management,

and staffing costs, and 5.5% on content and resource

development costs (see note 2 on page 9). A majority

of public library Internet services IT-related operating

funds, therefore, go towards hardware, software, and

communications costs (71.3%). Public library training, content development, and planning percentage

expenditures combined sum to only 20.7% of the total

public library Internet-related IT expenditures. The

overall Internet service expenditures hold relatively

constant across public library population of legal service area categories.

The Internet services cost percentages, when combined with the estimated IT expenditures and operating expenditure figures, indicate that public libraries

spend an average of $7,760.60 on system/server hardware costs, followed by $5,338.35 on communications

hardware/fees, $3,668.65 on software costs, $2,140.05

on training and education costs, $1,881.36 on other

Internet-service provision costs (e.g., building modifications and upgrades), $1,434.54 on program planning, management, and staffing costs, and $1,293.43

on content and resource development costs (see Figure 17). In general, as library population of legal service area increases, so too do total dollar amounts on

Internet services costs. It is interesting to note that for

public libraries with a population of legal service area

between 500,000 and 999,999, the costs of communication hardware/fees exceed those of systems hardware costs. While not asked on this survey, this may

have to do with one-time versus recurring Internet

service costs 64.0% of libraries in this category had

an Internet connection in 1994. A majority of these

libraries, therefore, would be investing in the maintenance e.g., connection costs of their Internet programs.

Internet service expenditure percentages and dollar amounts vary by public library region, with public

libraries in the West and South spending substantially

more on Internet services than public libraries in the

Midwest and Northeast (see Figures 15-17). In all cost

categories system (expenditure range of $4,842.75

to $18,185.12), communication (expenditure range of

$3,892.59 to $16,580.55), software (expenditure range

of $1,927.02 to $13,772.56), training (expenditure range

of $1,361.15 to $5,883.42), content (expenditure range

of $812.23 to $3,008.57), and planning (expenditure

range of $842.88 to $4,546.28) libraries in the West

and South outspend public libraries in the Midwest

and Northeast by a factor or three or more, leading to

substantial disparities in spending and incurred costs

by public library region. As will be discussed in later

sections of this report, these costs are generally related

to the type of Internet connection libraries have and

the services libraries provide through those connections better connectivity and enhanced electronic

services generally involve greater costs.

Figures 18-23 indicate the extent to which public

library respondents thought that their library Internet

services expenditures would remain the same, increase, or decrease over the next year. Once again,

survey respondents had difficulty in estimating future

Internet service expenditures, with percentages of

"don't know" for the cost categories ranging from

27.5% to 37.8% (see Figures 18-23). Those who did

respond, however, generally indicate that their Internet

service-related expenditure will increase by 1-5% (percentages ranging from 14.3% to 23.0%) or greater than

5% (percentages ranging from 9.9% to 22.0%) across

all cost categories. Almost a quarter (25.0%) of all

public libraries did indicate that they anticipate their

Internet-related expenditures to remain the same

across all cost categories (percentages ranging from

25.1% to 28.4% see Figures 18-23). In general, libraries serving population of legal service areas of

9,999 or less expect their current Internet-related cost

expenditures to remain the same, while libraries serving population of legal service areas of 50,000 and

above expect their Internet-related cost expenditures

to increase. Such data indicate that the disparities in

spending will accelerate the disparities in public library Internet connectivity and services, with public

libraries that service larger population of legal service

areas having substantially higher percentages of con39
40 Population of Legal Service Area System Costs Software Costs Communications Costs Training/ Education Costs Content/ Resources Costs Planning Costs Other Costs 1 Million + $222,384.90 $59,475.03 $87,919.61 $17,066.75 $14,998.05 $55,854.81 $59,475.03 500,000-999,999 $110,814.02 $55,679.95 $152,301.04 $62,776.42 $40,395.26 $58,955.24 $64,414.06 250,000-499,999 $92,413.93 $31,897.71 $70,950.05 $13,414.93 $11,626.27 $26,829.85 $51,274.83 100,000-249,000 $38,385.96 $23,717.04 $35,781.20 $12,475.44 $4,798.24 $8,911.03 $12,886.71 50,000-99,999 $19,502.57 $11,738.22 $11,738.22 $4,462.97 $4,462.97 $4,401.83 $4,890.93 25,000-49,999 $16,859.45 $6,372.08 $10,177.62 $4,557.80 $2,079.77 $1,637.27 $2,566.53 10,000-24,999 $5,681.98 $2,252.00 $3,048.87 $1,784.28 $1,160.65 $1,507.11 $1,888.22 5,000-9,999 $1,140.59 $438.98 $592.81 $165.09 $30.02 $217.61 $273.89 Less than 5,000 $416.73 $300.55 $202.05 $164.17 $107.34 $35.36 $35.36 Region System Costs Software Costs Communications Costs Training/ Education Costs Content/ Resources Costs Planning Costs Other Costs Midwest $4,842.75 $2,436.70 $3,892.59 $1,425.24 $812.23 $842.88 $1,072.76 Northeast $5,383.41 $1,927.02 $3,043.46 $1,361.15 $1,101.15 $902.33 $1,575.26 South $15,213.19 $9,346.40 $7,808.90 $3,803.30 $1,861.19 $2,832.24 $3,075.01 West $18,185.12 $13,772.56 $16,580.55 $5,883.42 $3,008.57 $4,546.28 $4,880.57 Overall $7,760.60 $3,668.65 $5,338.35 $2,140.05 $1,293.43 $1,434.54 $1,881.36 41 r011-

mTa

M anfD (D elr.cr 0-1 fa, El g, 0 0 ezrt 00tr1x'0co '13rta0rgr :07 rtiro0rt0
Final Report 27

Figure 18. Public Library Estimated System/Server Hardware Resource Allocation for the Next Fiscal Year

by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

1 million + 16.5% 8.3% 17.1% 44.1% 14.1%

500,000-999,999 2.4% 8.6% 21.6% 51.4% 15.9%

250,000-499,999 8.1% 11.5% 32.5% 24.5% 23.4%

100,000-249,999 9.5% 13.5% 26.4% 28.8% 21.9%

50,000-99,999 13.3% 22.9% 22.5% 25.3% 16.0%

25,000-49,999 8.4% 11.4% 12.6% 16.1% 11.5%

10,000-24,999 11.6% 19.8% 14.4% 23.9% 30.2%

5,000-9,999 7.6% 34.3% 5.4% 16.1% 36.6%

Less than 5,000 6.5% 35.9% 6.5% 15.4% 35.6%

Region

Remain the

Decline Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

Midwest 11.0% 30.6% 9.8% 15.0% 33.7%

Northeast 9.9% 25.5% 11.1% 23.0% 30.5%

South 11.4% 18.7% 20.7% 26.8% 22.5%

West 5.7% 19.8% 25.6% 33.1% 15.7%

Overall 10.0%1 25.5% 14.3% 22.0% 28.2%

Figure 19. Public Library Estimated System Communications Hardware/Fees Resource Allocation for the

Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

1 million + 18.1% 9.0% 27.8% 29.6% 15.5%

500,000-999,999 5.5% 9.2% 23.8% 47.3% 14.2%

250,000-499,999 4.0% 9.9% 28.6% 34.6% 22.9%

100,000-249,999 4.8% 21.2% 28.5% 25.2% 20.4%

50,000-99,999 7.4% 30.2% 20.1% 45.0% 13.5%

25,000-49,999 4.8% 27.1% 23.1% 25.7% 19.3%

10,000-24,999 4.3% 19.9% 28.0% 17.1% 30.7%

5,000-9,999 3.8% 29.0% 22.5% 15.7% 29.1%

Less than 5,000 1.6% 29.3% 18.6% 11.8% 38.6%

Region

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

Midwest 5.4% 29.2% 18.1% 17.4% 29.9%

Northeast 3.2% 20.8% 28.1% 11.5% 36.3%

South 3.6% 22.0% 23.7% 29.8% 20.9%

West 2.4% 29.4% 26.8% 29.2% 12.3%

Overall 4.0% 25.7% 23.0% 19.7% 27.5%

yw
28 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 20. Public Library Estimated Software Resource Allocation for the Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know 1 million + 17.9% 28.6% 8.9% 38.2% 15.3%

500,000-999,999 0.0% 9.1% 34.6% 42.0% 14.3%

250,000-499,999 2.4% 11.6% 44.5% 20.0% 21.5%

100,000-249,999 6.7% 23.2% 29.2% 20.2% 20.7%

50,000-99,999 10.3% 37.4% 20.1% 17.5% 14.7%

25,000-49,999 8.2% 23.8% 17.4% 28.0% 22.5%

10,000-24,999 3.9% 26.6% 20.1% 19.8% 29.5%

5,000-9,999 6.0% 29.2% 19.0% 13.9% 31.9%

Less than 5,000 8.9% 32.2% 14.8% 6.9% 37.2%

Region

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know Midwest 11.0% 30.8% 13.8% 16.1% 28.2% Northeast 1.8% 30.4% 21.9% 8.8% 37.1% South 5.7% 23.6% 20.6% 27.8% 22.3% West 6.8% 21.7% 30.7% 23.4% 17.3% Overall 7.0% 28.1% 19.6% 17.3% 28.0%

Figure 21. Public Library Estimated Training and Education Resource Allocation for the Next Fiscal Year

by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know 1 million + 8.3% 33.6% 8.3% 35.8% 14.1%

500,000-999,999 0.0% 13.9% 32.8% 39.8% 13.5%

250,000-499,999 1.6% 20.3% 27.4% 25.1% 25.6%

100,000-249,999 0.9% 28.1% 28.1% 22.4% 20.6%

50,000-99,999 31.0% 44.1% 18.6% 18.8% 15.3%

25,000-49,999 3.1% 20.4% 29.2% 25.1% 24.2%

10,000-24,999 4.9% 22.0% 25.7% 18.8% 28.6%

5,000-9,999 3.7% 19.7% 30.5% 11.4% 34.8%

Less than 5,000 5.2% 24.7% 11.7% 13.9% 44.5%

Region

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

Midwest 5.8% 29.5% 17.2% 15.7% 31.8% Northeast 0.5% 15.0% 28.1% 16.2% 40.3%

South 4.8% 30.0% 23.5% 20.8% 20.9% West 1.6% 26.3% 26.3% 26.5% 19.3% Overall 3.6% 25.1% 22.6% 18.3% 30.4%

43
Final Report 29

Figure 22. Public Library Estimated Content/Resource DevelopmentResource Allocation for the Next

Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

5% Don't Know

1 million + 16.5% 16.5% 8.8% 44.1% 14.1%

500,000-999,999 0.0% 18.4% 28.3% 35.9% 17.5%

250,000-499,999 5.7% 20.7% 24.0% 19.9% 29.6%

100,000-249,999 3.1% 25.7% 27.0% 17.7% 26.5%

50,000-99,999 3.3% 26.6% 27.4% 16.8% 25.9%

25,000-49,999 0.0% 22.1% 25.8% 17.7% 34.4%

10,000-24,999 4.0% 27.9% 15.6% 14.4% 38.0%

5,000-9,999 8.2% 32.9% 18.1% 7.9% 33.0%

Less than 5,000 4.5% 31.9% 13.9% 0.0% 49.7%

Region

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

Midwest 6.3% 29.8% 16.6% 11.9% 35.4%

Northeast 1.1% 27.3% 18.8% 3.4% 49.8%

South 3.3% 24.7% 20.8% 16.5% 34.6%

West 6.0% 30.0% 25.1% 17.6% 23.5%

Overall 4.2% 28.4% 19.5% 11.0% 37.0%

Figure 23. Public Library Estimated Program Planning, Management, and Staffing Resource Allocation for

the Next Fiscal Year by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

1 million + 24.8% 25.3% 0.0% 35.8% 14.1%

500,000-999,999 0.0% 28.7% 16.4% 28.4% 26.4%

250,000-499,999 3.6% 30.3% 17.3% 15.1% 33.7%

100,000-249,999 2.6% 26.3% 25.2% 16.6% 29.2%

50,000-99,999 4.3% 39.0% 17.5% 17.6% 21.5%

25,000-49,999 7.0% 27.3% 19.4% 15.5% 30.7%

10,000-24,999 7.3% 26.2% 16.5% 11.1% 39.0%

5,000-9,999 0.0% 35.4% 15.0% 5.6% 44.0%

Less than 5,000 4.7% 18.9% 27.1% 0.0% 49.2%

Region

Decline

Remain the

Same

Increase

1-5%

Increase

> 5% Don't Know

Midwest 8.1% 30.5% 18.5% 10.5% 32.4%

Northeast 3.4% 21.0% 18.1% 4.3% 53.2%

South 1.9% 27.5% 18.6% 15.6% 36.3%

West 1.2% 29.3% 31.6% 12.3% 25.6%

Overall 4.8% 27.3% 20.2% 9.9% 37.8%

44
30 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

nectivity and electronic service capabilities.

A relatively small percentage of public libraries

expect their Internet-related cost expenditures to decrease (percentages ranging from 3.6% to 10% see

Figures 18-23). Interestingly, the highest percentage

of libraries anticipating decreased expenditures are

those, generally, with substantial Internet connectivity. It is, therefore, possible that anticipated expenditure reductions for, say, system and software costs, reflect a transition from one-time library investments in

basic Internet connectivity to on-going connection

maintenance.

Overall, public libraries in the West and South expect that their Internet-related cost expenditures will

increase by nearly a factor of two over the next year

compared to public libraries in the Midwest and

Northeast across all cost categories (see Figures 18-23).

Indeed, 50.0% or more of public libraries in the South

and West expect their library Internet expenditures to

increase by 1-5% or greater than 5% in the next year

(see Figures 18-23). These figures indicate that discrepancies in Internet-related expenditures will increase, creating regions of higher quality and more

pervasive connectivity in the South and West as compared to the Midwest and Northeast.

Internet Public Library Uses and Public Access

Services

This section details the extent to which public library staffs make use of Internet-related resources and

make Internet-based services available to library patrons. Library staff-related uses of the Internet include

e-mail, listservs, and World-Wide Web (Web) sessions.

Patron services encompass the above, but also include

such Internet-related aspects as public access terminals, remote dial-in services, and Web browsing.

Weekly Public Library Uses of the Internet

Figures 24 through 27 show the predominant

weekly public library uses of the Internet by library

staff. Overall, 17.7% of public library staff do not use

e-mail, followed by 53.0% who use e-mail less than 25

times per week, 16.4% who use e-mail 26-50 times per

week, 5.5% who use e-mail 51-100 times per week, and

7.4% who use e-mail more than 100 times per week

(see Figure 24). In general, public library staffs that

serve population of legal service areas of 100,000 or

greater make the greatest use of e-mail, while library

staffs that serve population of legal service areas of

99,999 or less make the least amount of use of e-mail.

Figure 24. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly E-Mail Use by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week

1 million + 0.0% 13.9% 13.0% 20.4% 52.7%

500,000-999,999 2.1% 10.9% 14.0% 14.4% 58.7%

250,000-499,999 7.4% 15.4% 21.8% 13.8% 41.6%

100,000-249,999 6.8% 34.6% 27.2% 7.2% 24.1%

50,000-99,999 8.1% 44.2% 23.5% 10.4% 13.7%

25,000-49,999 8.5% 54.4% 18.3% 10.2% 8.7%

10,000-24,999 22.9% 50.9% 17.2% 6.3% 2.8%

5,000-9,999 21.3% 53.8% 19.5% 4.3% 1.2%

Less than 5,000 24.3% 65.3% 8.3% 0.0% 2.2%

Region

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week Midwest 15.1% 58.0% 17.0% 3.9% 5.9% Northeast 27.0% 44.3% 15.1% 6.2% 7.5% South 14.0% 52.2% 17.6% 7.9% 8.3% West 5.6% 61.9% 16.4% 5.3% 10.8% Overall 17.7% 53.0% 16.4% 5.5% 7.4%

45
Final Report 31

Figure 25. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly Listserv/Discussion Group Use by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week

1 million + 0.0% 20.4% 13.4% 14.3% 51.9%

500,000-999,999 2.1% 20.9% 25.9% 9.8% 41.3%

250,000-499,999 6.1% 29.3% 26.3% 8.2% 30.2%

100,000-249,999 13.6% 46.9% 15.3% 11.3% 12.9%

50,000-99,999 19.2% 52.7% 13.9% 7.8% 6.4%

25,000-49,999 24.2% 53.1% 13.7% 5.9% 3.0%

10,000-24,999 40.5% 44.5% 10.0% 2.9% 2.2%

5,000-9,999 61.8% 33.6% 2.4% 2.2% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 65.3% 24.2% 9.1% I 1.4% 0.0%

Region

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week

Midwest 51.4% 32.2% 9.0% 4.1% 3.3%

Northeast 49.9% 34.7% 10.3% 3.4% 1.7%

South 27.3% 47.0% 15.6% 4.3% 5.7%

West 23.3% 55.3% 8.3% 5.4% 7.7%

Overall 43.3% 38.5% 10.5% 4.0% 3.7%

Figure 26. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly Bibliographic Utility (e.g., Accessing Card Catalogs) Use by

Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week

1 million + 6.5% 27.3% 13.4% 6.5% 46.3%

500,000-999,999 9.4% 19.0% 13.8% 10.9% 46.9%

250,000-499,999 15.4% 35.7% 7.4% 13.9% 27.6%

100,000-249,999 11.0% 47.5% 16.2% 11.8% 13.6%

50,000-99,999 17.5% 52.6% 14.9% 5.9% 9.1%

25,000-49,999 18.7% 55.4% 15.3% 5.0% 5.7%

10,000-24,999 24.1% 50.6% 14.8% 8.7% 1.8%

5,000-9,999 32.2% 51.6% 12.9% 1.5% 1.8%

Less than 5,000 42.3% 45.4% 10.9% 0.0% 1.4%

Region

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week

Midwest 32.4% 53.1% 7.4% 3.4% 3.6%

Northeast 33.6% 39.8% 19.8% 3.1% 3.6%

South 19.2% 50.3% 14.4% 8.3% 7.8%

West 11.1% 60.6% 12.4% 6.8% 9.0%

Overall 27.9% 49.1% 13.4% 4.6% 5.0%

46
32 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 27. Overall Public Library Staff Weekly World-Wide Web Sessions by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week

1 million + 6.5% 24.5% 20.8% 7.4% 40.8%

500,000-999,999 7.3% 17.1% 10.9% 17.2% 47.5%

250,000-499,999 15.7% 18.1% 23.2% 10.1% 32.8%

100,000-249,999 13.7% 37.5% 23.2% 11.5% 14.1%

50,000-99,999 10.3% 45.9% 24.7% 11.2% 8.0%

25,000-49,999 21.9% 42.7% 20.0% 7.0% 8.4%

10,000-24,999 30.6% 44.7% 17.2% 4.5% 3.1%

5,000-9,999 46.6% 39.6% 12.5% 1.3% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 50.7% 40.8% 6.5% 2.0% 0.0%

Region

Never

Less than 25

Times/Week

26-50

Times/Week

51-100

Times/Week

More than 100

Times/Week

Midwest 37.1% 40.8% 14.5% 2.6% 4.9%

Northeast 45.4% 36.2% 10.7% 5.2% 2.5%

South 19.2% 48.8% 16.2% 9.1% 6.6%

West 13.1% 44.8% 25.8% 6.2% 10.2%

Overall 33.8% 41.1% 14.9% 5.0% 5.1%

Indeed, over 70.0% of public library staffs that serve

population of legal service areas of 9,999 or less never

use e-mail or use it less than 25 times per week. Public library staffs in the four regions make essentially

the same amount of use of e-mail. Notable exceptions

exist, however, with 27.0% of public library staffs in

the Northeast never using e-mail and 10.8% of public

library staffs in the West using e-mail more than 100

times per week.

Figure 25 shows that 43.3% of public library staffs

never use Internet-based listservs or discussion groups

in a given week, followed by 38.5% who use listservs

or discussion groups less than 25 times per week, 10.5%

who use listservs or discussion groups 26-50 times per

week, 4.0% who use listservs or discussion groups 51-

100 times per week, and 3.7% who use listservs or discussion groups more than 100 times per week. Overall, as public library population of legal service area

increases, so too does public library staff use of listservs

or discussion groups. Public library staffs that serve

population of legal service areas of 250,000 or greater

make substantially more use of listservs or discussion

groups (percentages ranging from 30.2% to 51.9%) than

do public library staffs that serve population of legal

service areas of 249,999 or less (percentages ranging

from 0.0% to 12.9%). In fact, 71.0% to over 95.0% of

public library staffs that serve population of legal service areas of 99,999 or less either never use or use

listservs or discussion groups less than 25 times per

week.

As Figure 25 shows, public library staffs in the Midwest and Northeast are more apt to never use listservs

or discussion groups (51.4% and 49.9%, respectively),

whereas public library staffs in the South and West

are more apt to use listservs or discussion groups at a

rate of less than 25 times per week (47.0% and 55.3%,

respectively).

Public library staffs make infrequent use of such

Internet-based bibliographic utilities as card catalogs,

with 27.9% of public library staffs never using bibliographic utilities per week, 49.1% who use bibliographic

utilities less than 25 times per week, 13.4% who use

bibliographic utilities 26-50 times per week, 4.6% who

use bibliographic utilities 51-100 times per week, and

5.0% who use bibliographic utilities more than 100

times per week (see Figure 26). In general, public library staffs that serve population of legal service ar4 7
Final Report 33

eas of 250,000 or greater make considerably more use

of bibliographic utilities than do library staffs that serve

population of legal service areas of 249,999 or less. In

particular, over 70.0% of public library staffs that serve

population of legal service areas of 99,999 or less never

use or use bibliographic utilities less than 25 times per

week. Public library staffs in the Midwest and Northeast are more likely to never use (32.4% and 33.6%,

respectively) or use bibliographic utilities less than 25

times per week (53.1% and 39.8%, respectively).

Figure 26 shows that public library staffs in the

South and West, however, are more likely to use bibliographic utilities less than 25 times per week (50.3%

and 60.6%, respectively) or 26-50 times per week

(14.4% and 12.4%, respectively). Public library staffs

in the South and West, therefore, make greater use of

Internet-based bibliographic utilities than do library

staffs in the Midwest and Northeast.

As Figure 27 shows, public library staffs make infrequent use of the Web, with 33.8% of public library

staffs who never use the Web, followed by 41.1% who

use the Web less than 25 times per week, 14.9% who

use the Web 26-50 times per week, 5.0% who use the

Web 51-100 times per week, and 5.1% who use the Web

more than 100 times per week. Overall, public library

staffs that serve population of legal service areas of

250,000 or greater make considerably more use of the

Web than do library staffs that serve population of legal service areas of 249,999 or less. Of particular interest is that nearly half of library staffs that serve population of legal service areas of 9,999 or less never use

the Web (46.6% for public library staffs that serve a

population of legal service area of 5,000-9,999 and

50.7% for public library staffs that serve a population

of legal service area of less than 5,000) or do so less

than 25 times per week (39.6% for public library staffs

that serve a population of legal service area of 5,000-

9,999 and 40.8%, for public library staffs that serve a

population of legal service area of less than 5,000).

There are discrepancies in public library staff Web

use by region, with a majority of public libraries staffs

in the Midwest and Northeast never using (37.1% and

45.4%, respectively) or using the Web less than 25 times

per week (40.8% and 36.2%, respectively). More public library staffs in the South and West, on the other

hand, use the Web less than 25 times per week (48.8%

and 44.8%, respectively) or 26-50 times per week

(16.2% and 25.8%, respectively). As such, public library staffs of libraries in the South or West are more

likely to use the Web than are public library staffs of

libraries in the Midwest or Northeast.

Public Library Provision of Public Access Internet

Services

Overall, a majority of public libraries do not provide public access Internet services (see Figure 28). A

nearly even percentage of public libraries provide

graphical Web public access services (23.7%), gopherbased public access services (22.7%), and text-based

Web services (22.3%). Only 11.6% of public libraries

provide public access newsgroup services, while just

10.0% of public libraries provide e-mail account services. Interestingly, public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 5,000-9,999 and less than

5,000 provide the highest percentage of public access

e-mail accounts (15.2% and 17.2%, respectively). Libraries that serve a population of legal service area of

less than 5,000, however, have the lowest percentage

of graphical Web service provision with 19.7% as compared to 36.9% of public libraries that serve a population of legal service area of 1 million+. It is worth noting that public libraries that serve population of legal

service areas of 249,000 or less provide more public

access to newsgroups (percentages ranging from 8.7%

to 13.6%) than do public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 250,000 or greater (percentages ranging from 6.2% to 8.8%).

Figure 28 also shows some noteworthy public access service differences by region. More libraries in

the Midwest, 12.9%, provide e-mail account services

than libraries in any other region. Libraries in the West,

however, provide more newsgroup services, 16.1%,

than other libraries. Overall, libraries in the Northeast provide a greater percentage of text-based Web

services (27.7%), while libraries in the Midwest provide a higher percentage of graphical Web services

(29.3%). Finally, libraries in the Northeast provide the

greatest percentage, 28.5%, of gopher-based services.

In general, public libraries do not charge for their

public access Internet services (see Figure 29). Of all

public libraries providing public access Internet services, 3.6% have some type of fee for their graphical

Web services, 3.3% have some type of fee for their email account services, 3.1% have some type of fee for

their text-based Web services, 1.7% have some type of

fee for their gopher-based services, and 1.2% have

some type of fee for their newsgroup services.

Of the 10.0% of public libraries that provide public

access e-mail account services, 79.7% provide those

48
34 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 28. Overall Public Library Provision of Public Access Internet Services by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

E-mail

Accounts

Newsgroups

Services

Text-Based

WWW

Graphical

WWW

Gopher-Based

Resources Other

1 million + 9.4% 8.8% 22.8% 36.9% 22.2% 0.0%

500,000-999,999 6.8% 6.8% 28.1% 26.8% 27.5% 4.0%

250,000-499,999 7.1% 6.2% 28.1% 23.9% 24.7% 10.1%

100,000-249,999 6.7% 13.2% 24.6% 27.8% 22.7% 4.9%

50,000-99,999 4.1% 13.4% 24.7% 25.3% 25.5% 6.9%

25,000-49,999 8.6% 12.3% 23.5% 26.3% 22.7% 6.6%

10,000-24,999 9.8% 13.6% 23.1% 27.8% 24.9% 0.7%

5,000-9,999 15.2% 8.7% 24.2% 26.6% 21.9% 3.5%

Less than 5,000 17.2% 13.6% 22.4% 19.7% 25.3% 1.7%

Region

E-mail

Accounts

Newsgroups

Services

Text-Based

WWW

Graphical

WWW

Gopher-Based

Resources Other

Midwest 12.9% 10.9% 21.4% 29.3% 22.6% 2.9%

Northeast 9.0% 11.1% 27.7% 20.6% 28.5% 3.0%

South 9.8% 12.0% 23.7% 28.7% 21.8% 4.1%

West 10.6% 16.1% 21.7% 23.4% 22.6% 5.6%

Overall 10.0% 11.6% 22.3 %' 23.7% 22.7% 3.5%

services to patrons only at the main/central library,

followed by 15.4% that provide those services to patrons at the main/central library and all library

branches, and 4.9% that provide those services to patrons at the main/central library and some branches

(see Figure 30). Public libraries that serve population

of legal service areas of 100,000 or greater tend to provide public access e-mail account services in the main/

central library and all branches of the main/central

library or some branches (percentages range from

55.2% to 100.0%), whereas public libraries that serve

population of legal service areas of 99,999 or less tend

to provide public access e-mail account services in only

the main/central library (percentages range from

42.5% to 100.0%). Nearly all libraries in the Midwest

and Northeast provide e-mail account services in only

the main/central library (94.5% and 95.8%, respectively), followed by libraries in the West with 65.2%.

Half (50.0%) of libraries in the South, however, provide e-mail account services in the central/main library

and all branches.

As Figure 31 demonstrates, 75.4% of the 11.6% of

public libraries that provide newsgroup public access

services provide such services at the main/central library only, followed by 17.3% that provide public access newsgroup services at the main/central library

and all branches, and 7.2% that provide public access

newsgroup services at the main/central library and

some branches. A majority of public libraries that serve

population of legal service areas of 100,000 or greater

provide newsgroup services in the main/central liFigure 29. Overall Public Library Fee Charges for Public Access Internet Services by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region.

E-mail

Accounts

Newsgroups

Services

Text-Based

WWW

Graphical

WWW

Gopher-Based

Resources Other

3.3% 1.2% 3.1% 3.6% 1.7% 0.3%

49
Final Report 35

Figure 30. Public Library Public Access E-Mail Internet Services by Population of Legal Service Area and

Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

1 million + 0.0% 0.0% 100.0%

500,000-999,999 18.4% 81.6% 0.0%

250,000-499,999 12.5% 55.2% 32.2%

100,000-249,999 27.8% 66.2% 6.0%

50,000-99,999 42.5% 17.9% 39.5%

25,000-49,999 68.8% 21.2% 10.1%

10,000-24,999 83.8% 16.2% 0.0%

5,000-9,999 89.2% 10.8% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Region

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

Midwest 94.5%' 5.5% 0.0%

Northeast 95.8% 1.5% 2.7%

South 45.5% 50.0% 4.5%

West 65.2% 20.1% 14.8%

Overall 79.7% 15.4% 4.9%

Figure 31. Public Library Public Access Newsgroup Internet Services by Population of Legal Service Area

and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

1 million + 0.0% 50.0% 50.0%

500,000-999,999 40.8% 36.9% 22.3%

250,000-499,999 15.6% 40.3% 44.1%

100,000-249,999 39.4% 42.2% 18.3%

50,000-99,999 62.8% 22.2% 15.0%

25,000-49,999 78.1% 14.8% 7.1%

10,000-24,999 77.6% 18.8% 3.6%

5,000-9,999 81.2% 18.8% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Region

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

Midwest 88.9% 10.1% 1.0%

Northeast 82.4% 12.3% 5.3%

South 54.3% 33.1% 12.6%

West 70.4% 18.6% 11.0%

Overall 75.4% 17.3% 7.2%

50
36 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

brary and all branches or the main/central library and

some branches (percentages range from 18.3% to

50.0%). Public libraries that serve population of legal

service areas of 99,999 or less, however, generally provide public access newsgroup services in only the

main/central library (percentages ranging from 62.8%

to 100.0%).

A majority of libraries in all regions tend to provide newsgroup services in only the main/central library (percentages ranging from 54.3% to 88.9%). Libraries in the South and West, however, are more likely

to provide patron newsgroup services in the main/

central library and all branches (33.1% and 18.6%, respectively) or the main/central library and some

branches (12.6% and 11.0%, respectively) than libraries in the Northeast and Midwest (10.1% and 12.3%,

respectively, in the main/central library and all

branches, and 1.0% and 5.3%, respectively, in the

main/central library and some branches).

Of the 22.3% of public libraries that provide textbased public access Web services, 70.3% provide such

services at the main/central library only, followed by

20.7% that provide text-based web services at the

main/central library and all branches, and 9.0% that

provide text-based web services at the main/central

library and some branches (see Figure 32). Overall,

public libraries that serve population of legal service

areas of 100,000 greater provide text-based public access Web services at the main/central library and all

branches (percentages ranging from 46.2% to 70.5%)

or at the main/central library and some branches (percentages ranging from 13.9% to 40.2%). Public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 99,999

or less essentially provide text-based Web services at

the main/central library only (percentages ranging

from 53.7% to 100.0%).

Libraries in the Midwest, Northeast, and West are

most likely to provide text-based Web services at only

the main/central library (percentages ranging from

64.6% to 88.6%). A majority of libraries in the South

(55.8%), however, provide text-based Web services in

the main/central library and some of all branches.

Libraries in the South, therefore, provide more pervasive text-based Web patron services.

As Figure 33 indicates, of the 23.7% of public libraries that provide patron access graphical Web services, 80.6% of libraries provide such services at the

main/central library only, followed by 10.1% that proFigure 32. Public Library Public Access Text-Based World-Wide Web Internet Services by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

1 million + 0.0% 61.6% 38.4%

500,000-999,999 14.3% 70.5% 15.3%

250,000-499,999 3.5% 56.3% 40.2%

100,000-249,999 40.0% 46.2% 13.9%

50,000-99,999 53.7% 23.3% 23.0%

25,000-49,999 79.0% 17.3% 3.7%

10,000-24,999 70.5% 20.8% 8.7%

5,000-9,999 90.0% 10.0% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Region

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

Midwest 88.6% 10.7% 0.8%

Northeast 73.8% 20.9% 5.3%

South 44.2% 32.7% 23.1%

West 64.6% 22.5% 12.9%

Overall 70.3% 20.7% 9.0%'

51
Final Report 37

Figure 33. Public Library Public Access Graphical World-Wide Web Internet Services by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

1 million + 13.5% 24.6% 61.9%

500,000-999,999 31.9% 27.3% 40.8%

250,000-499,999 28.1% 15.1% 56.8%

100,000-249,999 48.9% 30.8% 20.4%

50,000-99,999 71.8% 12.2% 16.1%

25,000-49,999 82.7% 10.1% 7.3%

10,000-24,999 91.3% 6.9% 1.8%

5,000-9,999 96.7% 3.3% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Region

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

Midwest 89.1% 6.6% 4.3%

Northeast 93.8% 2.2% 4.0%

South 62.5% 21.0% 16.4%

West 70.2% 13.9% 15.8%

Overall 80.6% 10.1% 9.3%

vide graphical Web services at the main/central library

and all branches, and 9.3% that provide graphical Web

services at the main/central library and some

branches. In general, public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 100,000 or greater provide public access graphical Web services at the main/

central library and all branches (percentages ranging

from 15.1% to 30.8%) or at the main/central library

and some branches (percentages ranging from 20.4%

to 61.9%). Public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 99,999 or less generally provide

graphical Web services at only the main/central library

(percentages ranging from 71.8% to 100.0%).

A majority of public libraries in the Midwest

(89.1%), Northeast (93.8%), South (62.5%), and West

(70.2%) provide graphical Web services at only the

main/central library. Considerably more libraries in

the South and West, however, are apt to provide

graphical Web services at the main/central library and

all branches (21.0% and 13.9%, respectively) at the

main/central library and some branches (16.4% and

15.8%, respectively) than libraries in the Midwest and

Northeast.

Of the 22.7% of public libraries that provide public

access gopher services, 75.9% provide such services at

the main/central library only, followed by 17.8% that

provide gopher services at the main/central library

and all branches, and 6.3% that provide gopher services at the main/central library and some branches

(see Figure 34). Overall, public libraries that serve

population of legal service areas of 100,000 or greater

provide public access gopher services at the main/central library and all branches (percentages ranging from

19.7% to 62.3%) or at the main/central library and

some branches (percentages ranging from 10.5% to

59.2%). Public libraries that serve population of legal

service areas of 99,999 or less generally provide gopher services at only the main/central library (percentages ranging from 63.5% to 100.0%).

Libraries in the Midwest, Northeast, and West are

most likely to provide gopher services at only the

main/central library (percentages ranging from 65.8%

to 86.1%). A majority of libraries in the South (51.7%),

however, provide gopher services in the main/central library and all branches or the main/central library

52
38 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 34. Public Library Public Access Gopher Internet Services by Population of Legal Service Area and

Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

1 million + 21.1% 19.7% 59.2%

500,000-999,999 25.6% 62.3% 12.0%

250,000-499,999 12.4% 53.5% 34.1%

100,000-249,999 40.8% 48.7% 10.5%

50,000-99,999 63.5% 29.4% 7.1%

25,000-49,999 77.9% 13.7% 8.4%

10,000-24,999 78.3% 16.6% 5.1%

5,000-9,999 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 100.0% 0.0% 0.0%

Region

At Main/Central

Library Only

At Main/Central

Library & All Branches

At Main/Central

Library & Some Branches

Midwest 86.1% 10.3% 3.5%

Northeast 83.7% 15.0% 1.3%

South 48.4% 38.5% 13.2%

West 65.8% 19.4% 14.8%

Overall 75.9% 17.8% 6.3%

and some branches. Public libraries in the South, therefore, provide more distributed public access gopher

services to patrons.

In general, a vast majority of public libraries do not

provide patrons with remote dial-in capabilities to library public access Internet services (see Figure 35).

In all, 10.1% of public libraries provide dial-in textbased Web services, followed by 6.5% of public libraries that provide dial-in gopher services, 6.3% of public libraries that provide dial-in e-mail account services,

3.4% of public libraries that provide dial-in graphical

Web services, and 2.6% of public libraries that provide

dial-in newsgroup services. While a trend is difficult

to discern among dial-in services by population of legal service area, the data show that, overall, as public

library population of legal service area increases, so

too does the provision of dial-in services. This is particularly true for text-based Web, graphical Web, and

gopher services in public libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 250,000 or greater (percentages ranging from 0.0% to 33.1%). It is particularly interesting to note that the highest percentage of

dial-in e-mail account services occurs in libraries that

serve a population of legal service area of less than

5,000, with 10.4%.

Libraries in the Midwest and Northeast are more

likely to provide dial-in capabilities to e-mail account

services (7.0% and 7.9%, respectively) than libraries in

the South and West (3.1% and 4.1%, respectively). Libraries in the Northeast and South are more likely to

provide dial-in capabilities to text-based Web services

(13.4% and 10.6%, respectively) than are libraries in

the Midwest and West (7.9% and 2.5%, respectively).

Other dial-in capabilities for public access Internet services appear relatively even across the four library regions.

Figure 36 presents the distribution of those public

libraries that provide remote dial-in Internet services

by population of legal service area and region. The

data demonstrate an interesting split by population

of legal service area: (1) In general, larger public libraries provide dial-in Web and gopher services, and

(2) Smaller libraries provide dial-in e-mail account and

newsgroup services. A different picture emerges,

though, when looking at the data by region. Libraries

in the Midwest and Northeast (35.7% and 30.5%, respectively) are approximately twice as likely to pro53
Final Report 39

Figure 35. Overall Public Library Public Access Remote Dial-In Internet Services by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

E-mail

Accounts

Newsgroups

Services

Text-Based

WWW

Graphical

W W W

Gopher-Based

Resources

1 million + 0.0% 0.0% 7.4% 6.9% 0.0%

500,000-999,999 9.2% 6.7% 28.1% 10.1% 33.1%

250,000-499,999 6.8% 1.6% 27.0% 2.0% 18.2%

100,000-249,999 3.3% 3.5% 11.4% 2.2% 3.2%

50,000-99,999 1.8% 1.0% 11.4% 9.1% 4.5%

25,000-49,999 6.0% 3.0% 6.6% 4.0% 5.7%

10,000-24,999 7.0% 4.1% 11.1% 3.7% 7.3%

5,000-9,999 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 1.6% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 10.4% 2.0% 12.9% 2.0% 9.2%

Region

E-mail

Accounts

Newsgroups

Services

Text-Based

W W W

Graphical

W W W

Gopher-Based

Resources

Midwest 7.0% 2.7% 7.9% 3.6% 5.4%

Northeast 7.9% 2.1% 13.4% 2.2% 8.3%

South 3.1% 2.2% 10.6% 5.2% 6.0%

West 4.1% 4.0% 2.5% 3.7% 5.7%

Overall 6.3% 2.6% 10.1% 3.4% 6.5%

Figure 36. Public Library Public Access Remote Dial-In Internet Services by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

E-mail

Accounts

Newsgroups

Services

Text-Based

W W W

Graphical

W WW

Gopher-Based

Resources

1 million + 0.0% 0.0% 51.6% 48.4% 0.0%

500,000-999,999 10.6% 7.7% 32.2% 11.6% 38.0%

250,000-499,999 12.2% 2.9% 48.6% 3.5% 32.8%

100,000-249,999 13.9% 14.9% 48.4% 9.2% 13.6%

50,000-99,999 6.4% 3.8% 40.9% 32.8% 16.1%

25,000-49,999 . 23.6% 11.9% 26.2% 15.9% 22.4%

10,000-24,999 21.0% 12.3% 33.5% 11.2% 21.9%

5,000-9,999 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 25.0% 0.0%

Less than 5,000 28.5% 5.5% 35.4% 5.5% 25.2%

Region

E-mail

Accounts

Newsgroups

Services

Text-Based

W W W

Graphical

WW W

Gopher-Based

Resources

Midwest 35.7% 13.6% 40.3% 18.4% 27.7%

Northeast 30.5% 8.2% 51.5% 8.4% 31.9%

South 11.6% 8.2% 39.0% 19.3% 21.9%

West 19.7% 19.4% 35.3% 17.9% 27.3%

Overall 21.8% 8.9% 35.0% 11.8% 22.5%

54
40 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 37. Public Library Internet Services Component Costs by Libraries that Provide Public Access

Graphical World-Wide Web Internet Services.

System

Costs

Software

Costs

Communications

Costs

Training/

Education

Costs

Content/

Resources

Costs

Planning

Costs

No Graphical Web 35.3% 19.1% 24.3% 10.2% 5.1% 6.1%

Graphical Web 37.1% 12.3% 25.4% 9.2% 7.9% 8.0%

Overall 35.8% 24.7% 9.9% 6.0% 6.7%

vide dial-in e-mail services than libraries in the South

and West (11.6% and 19.7%, respectively). Furthermore, libraries in the Midwest and West (13.6% and

19.4%, respectively) are more likely than libraries in

the Northeast and South to provide dial-in newsgroup

services (both at 8.2%). Also, a majority, 51.5%, of libraries in the Northeast provide dial-in access to textbased Web services. Finally, libraries in the Midwest,

South, and West (18.4%, 19.3%, and 17.9%, respectively) are twice as likely as libraries in the Northeast

(8.4%) to offer dial-in graphical Web services.

Figures 37 and 38 compare the costs of Internet service provision (survey question 12) and type of public

library Internet service provider (survey question 14)

to public libraries currently providing graphical Web

versus non-graphical Web access. Neither set of figures show substantial differences between libraries

providing public access graphical versus non-graphical Web access, indicating that overall library Internet

costs and Internet service providers for public library

Internet connections are approximately the same for

graphical and non-graphical Web library services.

Public libraries provide slightly more text-based

public access terminals than graphical workstations,

with 34.5% and 27.7%, respectively (see Figure 39).

Interestingly, libraries serving population of legal service areas of 99,999 or less provide near equal percentages of public access text-based terminals and graphical workstations (percentages ranging from 22.4% to

36.0%), whereas public libraries serving population of

legal service areas of 100,000 or greater provide a

higher percentage of public access text-based terminals (percentages ranging from 39.7% to 59.9%) than

graphical workstations (percentages ranging from

19.9% to 37.7%).

In terms of average public access terminal or workstation numbers, however, libraries that serve population of legal service areas of 100,000 or greater have

considerably more available public access terminals

(average number ranging from 11.1 to 109.1) and

graphical workstations (average number ranging from

3.8 to 26.1) than do libraries that serve population of

legal service areas of 99,999 or less (average number

of text-based terminals ranging from 0.6 to 7.6, and

average number of graphical workstations ranging

from 0.5 to 2.9).

Also, as public library population of legal service

area increases, so too do the percentage and average

Figure 38. Public Library Internet Service Providers by Libraries that Provide Public Access Graphical

World-Wide Web Internet Services.

Local / State

Provider

Comm.

Provider

Educational

Provider Free-Net

State

Library

Regional /

State Other

No Graphical Web 17.0% 18.4% 12.3% 6.3% 17.1% 17.0% 12.0%

Graphical Web 19.3% 20.7% 10.7% 6.5% 22.2% 11.9% 8.8%

Overall 17.6% 18.9% 11.9% 6.3% 18.4% 15.7% 11.2%

55
Final Report 41

Figure 39. Average Public Library Public Access and Staff Terminals and Graphical Workstations by

Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Percentage of

Text-Based

Terminals

Percentage of

Graphical

Workstations

Average

Number of

Text-Based

Terminals

Average

Number of

Workstations

Percentage

of Staff

Terminals

Average

Number of

Staff

Terminals

1 million + 39.8% 19.9% 109.1 19.8 71.8% 65.7

500,000-999,999 59.9% 37.7% 82.4 26.1 85.2% 75.4

250,000-499,999 40.7% 29.9% 35.5 12.8 77.4% 34.5

100,000-249,999 39.7% 29.7% 11.1 3.8 75.0% 12.6

50,000-99,999 35.2% 30.3% 7.6 2.9 77.2% 9.0

25,000-49,999 36.0% 34.6% 2.8 1.7 71.2% 5.5

10,000-24,999 33.7% 27.6% 2.5 0.9 68.4% 3.1

5,000-9,999 33.8% 27.3% 0.9 0.6 44.9% 1.1

Less than 5,000 31.7% 22.4% 0.6 0.5 39.5% 0.7

Region

Percentage of

Text-Based

Terminals

Percentage of

Graphical

Workstations

Average

Number of

Text-Based

Terminals

Average

Number of

Workstations

Percentage

of Staff

Terminals

Average

Number of

Staff

Terminals

Midwest 30.3% 24.8% 4.2 1.6 55.8% 5.4

Northeast 39.1% 21.0% 2.5 0.9 53.1% 3.0

South 30.8% 38.6% 6.5 3.2 73.3% 6.6

West 39.4% 39.0% 11.4 3.5 61.2% 10.5

Overall 34.5% 27.7% 4.9 1.9 58.5% 5.5

number of terminals and/or workstations specifically

for library staff use. Nearly 70.0% or more of public

libraries that serve population of legal service areas of

greater than 10,000 provide separate library staff

Internet terminals and/or workstations (percentages

ranging from 68.4% to 85.2%). Fewer than 45.0% of

public libraries that serve population of legal service

areas of less than 10,000, however, provide separate

library staff Internet terminals and/or workstations

(percentages ranging from 39.5% to 44.9%).

As Figure 39 shows, public libraries in the South

and West are more likely than libraries in the Midwest

and Northeast to have public access graphical workstations (38.6% and 39.0%, respectively, as compared

to 24.8% and 21.0%, respectively), have a higher average number graphical workstations (3.2 and 3.5, respectively, as compared to 1.6 and 0.9, respectively),

and provide staff-only Internet access terminals (73.3%

and 61.2%, respectively, as compared to 55.8% and

53.1%, respectively). Overall, public libraries in the

Northeast and West (39.1% and 39.4%, respectively)

have a higher percentage of text-based public access

terminals than do public libraries in the Midwest and

South (30.3% and 30.8%, respectively). Libraries in the

South and West, however, have a higher average number of text-based public access terminals (6.5 and 11.4,

respectively), than do libraries in the Midwest and

Northeast (4.2 and 2.5, respectively).

While the data show that, generally, as library population of legal service area increases the percentage and

average number of public access and staff-only terminals/workstations increase, these percentages and

numbers can be misleading. Based on the average

population served and ALA-accredited MLS FlEs4by

56
42 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 40. Ratio of Public Library Public Access Terminals and Graphical Workstations to Average Library

Population by Population of Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Average

Population

Average Number

of Text Terminals

Average

Number of

Workstations

Population

Per Text

Terminals

Population

Per

Workstations

1 million + 1,671,560 109.1 19.8 15,321 84,422

500,000-999,999 690,334 82.4 26.1 8,378 26,450

250,000-499,999 343,250 35.5 12.8 9,669 26,816

100,000-249,999 149,049 11.1 3.8 13,428 39,233

50,000-99,999 71,546 7.6 2.9 9,414 24,671

25,000-49,999 34,811 2.8 1.7 12,433 20,477

10,000-24,999 16,476 2.5 0.9 6,590 18,307

5,000-9,999 7,503 0.9 0.6 8,337 12,505

Less than 5,000 2,485 0.6 0.5 4,142 4,970

Region

Average

Population

Average Number

of Text Terminals

Average

Number of

Workstations

Population

Per Text

Terminals

Population

Per

Workstations

Midwest 27,937 4.2 1.6 6,652 17,461

Northeast 34,042 2.5 0.9 13,617 37,824

South 91,945 6.5 3.2 14,145 28,733

West 102,811 11.4 3.5 9,019 29,375

Overall 50,203 4.9 1.9 10,150 26,525

responding libraries, Figures 40 and 41 provide ratio

data of library public access terminals/workstations

to the average library population served and library

P I Es. These figures show large discrepancies in public access and staff-only terminal/workstation availability by library population of legal service area and

region.

In general, as public library population of legal service area increases, the availability of public access

terminals/workstations decreases. Indeed, patron

populations served by public libraries with a population of legal service area of less than 5,000 are more

able to gain access to a text-based terminal (a ratio of 1

terminal per an average population of 4,142) or graphical workstation (a ratio of 1 workstation per an average population of 4,970), as compared to patrons

served by public libraries that serve a population of

legal service area of 1 million+ (a ratio of 1 terminal

per an average population of 15,321; a ratio of 1 workstation per an average population of 84,422). Such

discrepancies do not exist with staff-only terminals/

workstations, with nearly all libraries in the population of legal service area categories possessing an average ratio of 1 terminal per ALA-accredited MLS FTE

(see Figure 41). The notable exception is libraries that

serve a population of legal service area of 1 million+

- these libraries have an average ratio of 1 terminal

to every 2 ALA-accredited MLS FTEs.

As Figure 40 shows, public libraries in the Midwest

(1 terminal for every 6,652 persons) and West (1 terminal for every 9,019 persons) provide more public

access text-based terminals to their populations served

than do public libraries in the Northeast (1 terminal

for every 13,617 persons) and South (1 terminal for

4 It is important to note that the average FTE figures are based on library ALA/MLS professional staff as defined by

the FSCS universe file. As such, the number of library staff using staff-only public access terminals/workstations

could be higher than reported in Figure 38.
Final Report 43

Figure 41. Ratio of Public Library Staff Terminals and/or Workstations to Library FTEs by Population of

Legal Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Average FTEs

Average Number of

Staff Terminals

Per Workstations

Terminals and/or

Workstations

Per FTE

1 million + 165.9 65.7 0.4

500,000-999,999 69.8 75.4 1.1

250,000-499,999 38.9 34.5 0.9

100,000-249,999 16.2 12.6 0.8

50,000-99,999 8.2 9.0 1.1

25,000-49,999 5.3 5.5 1.0

10,000-24,999 3.1 3.1 1.0

5,000-9,999 1.6 1.1 0.7

Less than 5,000 1.0 0.7 0.7

Region

Average FTEs

Average Number of

Staff Terminals

Per Workstations

Terminals and/or

Workstations

Per FTE

Midwest 2.9 5.4 0.5

Northeast 3.7 3.0 1.2

South 5.6 6.6 0.8

West 5.4 10.5 0.5

Overall 4.0 5.5 0.8

every 14,145 persons). Public libraries in the Northeast provide the fewest public access graphical workstations (1 workstation for every 37,824 persons), followed by public libraries in the West (1 workstation

for every 29,375 persons), public libraries in the South

(1 workstation for every 28,733 persons), and public

libraries in the Midwest (1 workstation for every 17,461

persons). As shown in Figure 41, public libraries in

the Northeast and South have nearly twice as many

staff-only terminals/workstations (1.2 and 0.8, respectively) as do libraries in the Midwest and West (both

at 0.5).

Public Library Remote Dial-In Internet Services

Of those libraries that provide remote dial-in

Internet services (see Figure 35), the average library

dial-in service has 1.5 modems, of which 38.3% have a

maximum modem speed of 9,600bps, followed by

35.4% that have a maximum modem speed of

28,800bps, and by 26.4% that have a maximum modem speed of 14,400bps (see Figure 42). Only 11.4%

of public library remote dial-in services offer SLIP/

PPP connections. As such, a vast majority of public

library dial-in services are text-based. Of particular

interest is that public libraries that serve population

of legal service areas between 5,000 and 49,999 have

the highest percentages of SLIP/PPP connections (percentages ranging between 13.7% and 20.7%) and

28,800bps modems (percentages ranging from 41.1%

to 53.7%). Libraries that serve a population of legal

service area of less than 5,000, however, have the lowest average number of dial-in service modems (0.2),

the lowest percentage of SLIP/PPP connections (2.1%),

and the lowest percentage of 28,800bps modems

(15.0%).

As Figure 42 demonstrates, public library remote

dial-in Internet services vary by library region, with

libraries in the South and West offering a higher average number of dial-in modems (2.0 and 2.3, respectively) than libraries in the Midwest and Northeast

(both at 1.2). Libraries in the West offer the highest

percentage of SLIP/PPP connections with 18.7%, followed by libraries in the Northeast with 13.9%, libraries in the South with 12.3%, and libraries in the Mid58
44 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 42. Public Library Remote Dial-In Internet Service Configuration by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Configuration of Remote

Dial-In Service Maximum Speed of Connection

Average Maximum

Number of Modems SLIP/PPP 9600 bps 14400 bps 28800 bps

1 million + 12.3 7.4% 29.5% 41.9% 28.6%

500,000-999,999 18.7 9.7% 27.9% 28.8% 43.3%

250,000-499,999 6.4 10.0% 40.3% 36.7% 23.0%

100,000-249,999 2.9 12.8% 31.3% 38.8% 29.9%

50,000-99,999 1.6 9.6% 38.4% 24.2% 37.4%

25,000-49,999 1.4 13.7% 42.8% 16.1% 41.1%

10,000-24,999 1.8 16.6% 30.2% 18.0% 51.9%

5,000-9,999 0.3 20.7% 16.9% 29.4% 53.7%

Less than 5,000 0.2 2.1% 54.2% 30.7% 15.0%

Region

Configuration of Remote

Dial-In Service Maximum Speed of Connection

Average Maximum

Number of Modems SLIP/PPP 9600 bps 14400 bps 28800 bps

Midwest 1.2 6.2% 47.6% 24.5% 27.8%

Northeast 1.2 13.9% 36.9% 17.5% 45.6%

South 2.0 12.3% 37.0% 29.7% 33.4%

West 2.3 18.7% 24.0% 37.9% 38.1%

Overall 1.5 11.4% 38.3% 26.4%

west with 6.2%. Libraries in the Midwest have the

highest percentage of 9,600bps modems (47.6%), while

libraries in the West have the highest percentage of

14,400bps modems (37.9%), and libraries in the Northeast have the highest percentage of 28,800bps modems

(45.6%).

Public Library World-Wide Web and Gopher Servers

Overall, 5.5% of public libraries maintain a gopher

server and 10.7% maintain a Web server (see Figure

43). The percentage of public library gopher and Web

servers increases as library population of legal service

area increases. In all 55.1% of public libraries that serve

a population of legal service area of 1 million+ that

have a Web server and only 3.5% of public libraries

that serve a population of legal service area of less than

5,000 that have a Web server. Similarly, 14.3% of public libraries that serve a population of 1 million+ operate a gopher server, while 3.8% of libraries that serve a

population of legal service area of less than 5,000 operate a gopher server. Of particular interest is that

public libraries that serve population of legal service

areas of 250,000 or greater are more likely to maintain

both a Web and gopher server (percentages ranging

from 10.6% to 16.8%) than are public libraries that serve

population of legal service areas of 249,999 or less (percentages ranging from 0.0% to 5.4%).

Nearly the same percentage of public libraries in

the four regions maintain a gopher server, with libraries in the West, 6.0%, maintaining the highest percentage of gopher servers (see Figure 43). Libraries in the

West and South, however, maintain nearly twice the

percentage of Web servers (17.7% and 15.3%, respectively) as do libraries in the Midwest and Northeast

(9.8% and 6.5%, respectively). The data also show that

libraries in the South and West (2.3% and 2.1%, respectively) are more likely than libraries in the Midwest

and Northeast (1.5% and 1.3%, respectively) to main59
Final Report 45

Figure 43. Percentage of Public Library Gopher/World-Wide Web Servers by Population of Legal Service

Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Gopher Server Web Server Percent Both

1 million + 14.3% 55.1% 14.3%

500,000-999,999 24.8% 49.2% 16.8%

250,000-499,999 14.5% 35.6% 10.6%

100,000-249,999 10.3% 24.3% 5.4%

50,000-99,999 5.0% 16.9% 2.9%

25,000-49,999 7.0% 13.7% 2.6%

10,000-24,999 4.8% 11.2% 0.0%

5,000-9,999 3.0% 3.5% 1.0%

Less than 5,000 3.8% 3.5% 0.0%

Region

Gopher Server Web Server Percent Both

Midwest 5.5% 9.8% 1.5%

Northeast 5.6% 6.5% 1.3%

South 4.7% 17.7% 2.3%

West 6.0% 15.3% 2.1%

Overall 5.5% 10.7% 1.7%

tain both a gopher and a Web server.

A vast majority of public library gopher or Web

servers are operated by library staff (see Figure 44).

Notable exceptions exist, however for libraries that

serve population of legal service areas between 10,000

and 49,999. These libraries indicate a higher use of

local organizations, commercial providers, and Other

institutions as operators of their Web and gopher services. A review of the Other category responses indicates that these libraries rely on statewide library agencies and combinations of local organizations and commercial providers to operate and maintain their Web

and gopher servers. Libraries in the Midwest and

South tend to rely on Other (35.2% and 45.4%, respectively) statewide library agencies and regional library

consortia to maintain their Web and gopher servers

more so than libraries in the Northeast and South.

Interestingly, more libraries in the West (12.9%) than

any other region rely on local organizations to operate their Web or gopher servers, while more libraries

in the Northeast (11.9%) and South (11.1%) rely on

commercial providers to run their Web and gopher

servers.

Identified Public Library Benefits to Connecting to

the Internet

The survey obtained data from public libraries describing the most important benefit gained by their

library through the library's Internet connection. The

written responses were grouped according to an overall coding scheme derived from the data (see Figure

45). Due to the qualitative nature of the question, these

responses are not weighted. Overall, the top three most

important benefits of connecting to the Internet are the

ability of libraries to:

(1) Access electronic Internet-based information, with

219 mentions;

(2) Communicate with other professionals, libraries

and the public, with 79 mentions; and,

(3) Enhance reference service capabilities, with 72

mentions.

Public libraries find other benefits to connecting to the

Internet, including improving the quality of library

services, enhancing the library's status with the public, and reducing costs by acquiring library material

via the Internet.

The above section presented the data from the survey. The next section identifies issues concerning pub60
46 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Figure 44. Primary Public Library Gopher/World-Wide Web Server Operator by Population of Legal

Service Area and Region.

Population of Legal Service Area

Library Staff

Local

Organization

Commercial

Provider Other

1 million + 86.8% 0.0% 0.0% 13.2%

500,000-999,999 79.5% 3.5% 9.4% 7.7%

250,000-499,999 68.0% 0.0% 10.1% 21.9%

100,000-249,999 58.6% 11.7% 4.3% 25.3%

50,000-99,999 59.5% 0.0% 3.0% 37.6%

25,000-49,999 57.7% 15.2% 10.9% 16.3%

10,000-24,999 16.1% 0.0% 19.2% 64.6%

5,000-9,999 66.5% 0.0% 0.0% 33.5%

Less than 5,000 91.5% 0.0% 0.0% 8.5%

Region

Library Staff

Local

Organization

Commercial

Provider Other

Midwest 60.3% 3.1% 1.3% 35.2%

Northeast 59.0% 1.7% 11.9% 27.4%

South 42.6% 0.9% 11.1% 45.4%

West 70.6% 12.9% 4.5% 11.9%

Overall 58.6% 3.9% 7.3% 30.1%

lic library involvement with the Internet and evolving NII based on the survey data.

PROGRESS AND ISSUES

Public libraries deserve some congratulations and

recognition for the strides they have made in connecting to the Internet and in moving into the global information superhighway. Not only has there been a significant increase in connectivity, but public libraries

are committing significant resources to support their

information technology (IT) infrastructure, increasing

the number and band-width of their connections to

the Internet, and providing additional public access

terminals for their communities to access the Internet

directly. Many public libraries are rapidly embracing

the global networked environment and are implementing strategies to provide networked information services to their patrons.

The findings presented in the previous section of

the report show that public libraries in the United

States have made impressive gains in connectivity:

from 21% of public libraries connected to the Internet

in 1994; to 44% connected in 1996; and a projected 76%

connected by March 1997. In terms of public access to

the Internet, public libraries went from 13% providing public access to the Internet in 1994, to 28% in 1996,

and to a projected 50% by March 1997 (see Figures 5-

7).

Thus, on the one hand significant progress is being

made by public libraries to transition into the global

networked environment - and those making this transition can take pride in their accomplishments. On the

other hand, while these statistics are impressive, the

data also identify a number of issues and concerns regarding public libraries and their move onto the

Internet. This final section of the report identifies selected topics and issues for additional discussion.

Disparities Remain

By 1997 virtually all public libraries serving populations of 100,000 or greater will have Internet connections (see Figures 5 and 6). But for communities of

99,999 or less, a significant percentage of the libraries

will have no connections and even fewer will provide

public access to the Internet. Indeed, for public libraries serving populations of less than 5,000 almost half

61
Final Report 47

Figure 45. Identified Public Library Benefits That Internet Connectivity Provides.

Benefit * Totals **

Access

access to information available on or through the Internet

219

Communication

email with other professionals, libraries and public

79

Reference 72

reference service improved (by speed, by providing current info)

Services

the quality of library services were improved

35

Continuing Education

training or education for staff and public

25

Public Relations

providing Internet service improved library status with public

21

Cost Savings

libraries able to acquire new or expensive resources now available

through the Internet

14

No Benefit

no benefit from Internet (not connected long enough, too busy to use)

13

Inter-Library Loan

benefit seen in Inter-Library Loan

11

Resource Sharing

with other agencies (government, libraries)

6

Cataloging

improved cataloging work

4

Grand Total 499

* Of the 499 benefits listed by respondents, some libraries listed two or more.

** Due to the qualitative nature of the data, these responses are not weighted

will not have any type of Internet connectivity by

March 1997. In terms of regions, 47% of libraries in

the South will not have connections to the Internet

whereas only 31% in the West will not have connections.

In comparing the percent of public libraries that

provide public access to the Internet from 1994, to 1996,

and projected to 1997, the growth rate is much smaller

than the rate that the libraries are obtaining Internet

access for the library only (see Figure 6). Thus, despite

significant gains in overall connectivity only 50% of

the public libraries are projected to be able to provide

public access to the Internet by March 1997. The vast

majority of the public libraries not providing public

access to the Internet serve populations of 99,999 or

less.

Disparities also remain regarding the type of connectivity that the various public libraries have to the

Internet. Roughly half of the libraries serving populations of 500,000 or more have T1 connectivity to the

Internet, whereas very few of the libraries serving

populations of 49,999 or less have T1 connectivity (see

Figure 12). Interestingly, the South and West have almost twice as many libraries connected with T1 compared to libraries in the Midwest and the Northeast.

The type of connectivity enjoyed by the library has a

significant impact on the level and type of networked

services that the library can then provide.

Additional disparities occur in terms of the resources that public libraries commit to information

technology expenditures. Average annual public library IT operating expenditures in the West are $66,857

compared to $15,325 in the Northeast or about four

times greater IT expenditures in public libraries in the

West than in the Northeast (see Figure 16). Annual

62
48 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

average communication costs for public libraries are

$5,338, but in the West they average $16,580 (see Figure 17). Overall, public libraries in the West have

greater expenditures for Internet-related costs, have

higher connectivity rates, and provide a greater extent and type of Internet services. The perception of

what types of costs, e.g., hardware, software, communications, etc., have the greatest impact on the public

library's involvement in the Internet also vary considerably (survey question 5) depending on the population size the library serves.

As shown earlier in the report, public libraries in

the West and South expect that their Internet-related

cost expenditures will increase by nearly a factor of

two over the next year compared to public libraries in

the Midwest and Northeast. Other significant differences in expected increases in Internet-related expenditures are likely to increase disparities in public library

Internet connectivity and services in the future.

Given these disparities in IT expenditures, connectivity rates, and the type of connectivity available to

public libraries, additional disparities appear, then, in

terms of the types of Internet-based services that the

libraries can provide. Just as one example, approximately 50% of public libraries serving populations of

500,000 or more have Web servers whereas only 17%

of the libraries serving populations of 50,000 - 99,999

have Web servers and only 3.5% of the libraries serving populations of 9,999 or less have such Web-based

services (see Figure 43).

Another perspective, however, on disparities in

access comes from examining the number of public

library workstations available per population. For libraries serving populations of one million or more

there are 84,422 individuals per workstation compared

to the overall average of 26,525 individuals per workstation (see Figure 40). Thus, one could conclude that

by one measure, public libraries serving larger population centers have much greater connectivity rates that

those serving smaller population centers. But, in fact,

it may be more difficult for a user to access the available workstations in the library serving that larger

population center than in a library serving the smaller

population center.

As readers review the various Figures in this report, a range of other disparities are apparent among

public libraries regarding their use of the Internet. National and state policymakers as well as the public library community, however, have yet to determine

goals for resolving such disparities or agreeing on strategies to minimize such disparities. Indeed, now that

we know such disparities exist in terms of connectivity, type of connectivity, and ability to provide networked services to the public, what should be done?

Who, or what organizations, are responsible for dealing with these issues? Is it inevitable that such disparities will exist?

Connectivity Versus Services

The data reported from this study should not be

interpreted to mean that because most public libraries

will soon have some type of Internet connectivity, they

are providing a range of Internet-based services and

resources. There are a number of different levels of

connectivity that should be identified:

Dial-up Connectivity: The library can, through

the use of a workstation and modem, access the

Internet in text mode only.

Dial-up Connectivity with SLIP/PPP: The library

can, through the use of a workstation and modem with SLIP/PPP access the Internet in full

graphics mode although such access is likely

to be painfully slow.

Dedicated Line Connectivity: The library typically has leased a dedicated line from a (relatively) slow bandwidth of 56K, to perhaps ISDN,

to T1, or perhaps to T3.

In each of these situations, connectivity may be provided for library staff only, or for the public and the

library staff. As the data from this survey suggest,

public library connectivity has increased, but the level

and extent of public library connectivity still require

significant improvement to provide high quality networked services.

In terms of services and resources provision, there

are also a number of levels to be considered:

No Services or Resources Provided. In this situation, the public library simply provides access

to the Internet. Patrons use a library workstation to access resources and services provided by

others on the Internet.

Resources Provision. The library makes available

information resources such as databases, electronic newsletters, local government information,

etc. In effect, the library transfers patron access

from print sources to electronic sources.

63
Final Report 49

Self-Assisted Services. This type of networked

services allows the user to access resources, and

without the assistance of another, put a hold on a

book, make a reservation to attend a library program, or manipulate data.

Interactive Services. In this type of service the

patron may engage in interactive video reference

services with library staff, participate in a discussion about a best seller, or collaborate with other

users in the use of particular library resources.

Knowledge-based Services. In this situation, the

library provides on-demand, customized information services: for example, the library automatically informs the user electronically that,

based on her previous reading habits, a new book

has arrived or a certain Web site may be of interest to her, etc.

These levels of resource and services provisions are

illustrative only to make the point that most public

libraries have yet to proceed much beyond resources

provision and some self-assisted services. For example, the data show that 31% of public libraries with

connectivity to the Internet have such connectivity via

a 28.8 baud dial-up modem (see Figure 11). While such

connectivity is better than nothing, it does not enable

the access to and delivery of advanced and high quality services. Acceptable and high quality resource provision, self-assisted, interactive, and knowledge-based

services require high-bandwidth at the T1 level and

beyond.

The Figures that show 78.3% of the population of

the library legal service area being served by a public

library with some type of Internet connectivity in 1996

and projected to be 91% of the American population

in 1997 may sound impressive but can be very misleading (see Figures 7 and 8). In fact, a library that has

one Internet dial-up connection and serves a legal

population of about 200,000 provides relatively poor

Internet-based connectivity, and possibly offers no services as described above; whereas there can be another

public library also serving a population of about

200,000 with 28 public access workstations, with T1

connectivity, managing its own Website, and offering

a range of networked services. Both public libraries,

for purposes of these Figures, provide their population with Internet connectivity.

Thus, the sound bite that by March 1997 one can

project 76% of public libraries to be connected to the

Internet can be extremely misleading until further

analysis determines the type, extent, and impact of connectivity that the library has, and the degree and quality to which networked electronic resources and services are also being provided by the library. It is important to recognize that being connected to the

Internet is only a first, albeit important, step for public libraries as they transition to the global networked

environment. Many additional steps are required

some of which we may not now know for the library to be a successful and effective provider of networked information resources and services.

The Goal of Universal Service

The goal of public libraries to provide Universal

Service to the public for access to the Internet is one

that has received much attention and discussion during recent years. But as this discussion and policy

debate continues, there is little agreement on what

constitutes "Universal Service" and what types of "services" constitute basic and advanced services. What

is known, however, is that connectivity to the Internet

is not provision of networked services. Thus, policy

makers should not confuse the data from this survey

describing levels of connectivity with the degree to

which public libraries provide networked-based services.

As this report is being written, the FCC FederalState Joint Board is in the process of developing rules

to implement universal service provisions mandated

in the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (EL. 104-104 section 254). As discussed in the introduction to this report, libraries and schools may receive special attention to provide affordable access to the Internet and

the availability to Internet services. Section 254b offers the following principles to advance Universal Service:

Ouality and Rates: Quality services should be

available at just, reasonable, and affordable rates.

Access to Advanced Services: Access to advanced

telecommunications and information services

should be provided to all regions of the Nation.

Access in Rural and High Cost Areas: Consumers in all regions of the Nation, including lowincome consumers and those in rural, insular, and

high cost areas, should have access to telecommunications and information services... that are

reasonably comparable to those services provided

rti 64
50 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

in urban areas and that are available at rates that

are reasonably comparable to rates charged for

similar services in urban areas.

Equitable and Nondiscriminatory Contributions:

All providers of telecommunications services

should make an equitable and non-discriminatory contribution to the preservation and advancement of universal service.

Access to Advanced Telecommunications Services for Schools. Health Care, and Libraries: Elementary and secondary schools and classrooms,

health care providers, and libraries should have

access to advanced telecommunications services

as described in subsection (h).

Additional Principles: Such other principles as

the Joint Board and the Commission determine

are necessary and appropriate for the protection

of the public interest, convenience, and necessity

and are consistent with this Act.

Later, in section (B) of the universal services provision,

the law states, "all telecommunications carriers serving a geographic area shall . . . provide such services

to elementary schools, secondary schools, and libraries for educational purposes at rates less than the

amounts charged for similar services to other parties."

Such language raises very complicated issues. For

example, the data reported in this survey suggest that

approximately 25% of public libraries that serve 9% of

the country's population will require an Internet connection after March 1997 (see Figures 5-8). The data

also show that these public libraries have small communities, typically 5,000 or under, and often are located in rural areas. For a host of reasons, the costs to

connect the last 25% of public libraries and the costs

for those libraries to provide networked services are

likely to be significant. At what point can it be said

that public libraries are providing "universal service"

to the public? At a 75% connectivity rate? When 90%

provide Web-based information resources and services?

As the FCC and the Federal-State Joint Board develop rules to implement these and other universal

services provisions, it is important to recognize that

serious disparities already exist in the provision of

Internet connectivity and services through public libraries. The extent to which these disparities can be

resolved by the Telecommunications Act of 1996, by

states, local communities, and the public library community has yet to be determined.

Quality of Network Services

Just as public library connectivity to the Internet is

not service, connectivity to the Internet, in and of itself, does not mean that the library manages and evaluates its Internet connections and services effectively.

Data reported from this survey do not address the

quality of the networked services that are being provided, the extent to which members in the library's

community use such services, or the degree to which

networked meet the needs of the library's community.

The 1996 survey data found that only 10.7% of public libraries maintain a Website (see Figure 43). Knowing this statistic is useful but in reality, users of public

library Websites know that the quality of these sites

varies considerably. Some Websites have only a

homepage with a picture of the library and its hours

of operation. Others have extensive online services,

access to their OPAC, online reference and referral services, and links to other Websites. The public library

community is only beginning to identify quality standards and criteria of excellence for assessing networked services and determining the degree to which

these services meet community information needs.

Determining what exactly constitutes the "network" or "networked services" is a complicated task

in itself. Yet, without a clear sense of how best to define these terms, evaluation will be difficult. Public

library administrators may wish to think of the network as comprising these components:

Technical infrastructure: the hardware, software,

equipment, communication lines, and technical

aspects of the network.

Content: the information resources available on

the network.

Services: the activities in which users can engage and the services that users may use to complete various tasks.

Support: the assistance and support services provided to help users better use the network.

Management: the human resources, governance,

planning, and fiscal aspects of the network.

These five basic components suggest the general areas where public library administrators can begin as65
Final Report 51

sessment efforts of their networks and networked services.

Public libraries were early adapters in the use of

performance measures with the publication of Output

Measures for Public Libraries (Van House, et. al., 1987).

As public libraries extend their Internet connectivity

and services, thought will need to be given to developing networked-based performance measures. Such

measures can:

Identify the successful and less successful aspects

of the network and network services in light of

user needs and institutional goals.

Provide trend data to assess changes in the network and network services over time.

Assist decision makers in allocating or reallocating resources and in planning for future network

development.

Assist network managers in justifying expenditures and accounting for those expenditures.

Monitor network activities and services to detect

any changes in activities or the quality of services.

Determine the degree to which users are satisfied with the network and network services.

Serve as a first step in benchmarking (identifying best-practice performance, using that performance as a goal, investigating the factors that led

to the performance, and then trying to replicate

that level of performance).

Simply stated, performance measures ask decision

makers to answer the questions: How well is the service or activity doing what the library claims it should

be doing? At what cost? And with what effects?

There are a number of ways to categorize the measures that will be needed. One approach is to think of

measures in the following areas:

Extensiveness: this is a measure of the amount

or extent to which the services are provided: for

example, the number and types of people using

the service.

Efficiency: this is a measure of the cost or resources required to provide the service: for example, cost per service transaction.

Effectiveness: an effectiveness measure is one that

focuses attention on the degree to which the objectives of the program or service are met.

Service quality: such measures are concerned

with how well a service or activity is done: e.g.,

percentage of transactions where users acquire

the information they need.

Impact: an impact measure focuses attention on

the benefit or result of the service or activity: e.g.,

the degree to which using Internet services empowers the user to resolve other problems or improved his/her quality of life.

Usefulness: this is a measure of appropriateness,

the degree to which the services are useful or

appropriate for the individual user: e.g., percentage of services of interest to different types of user

audiences.

These areas for assessment suggest the importance of

considering different types of measures in assessing

various aspects of network activities and services for

public libraries.

In a broader organizational context, resource allocation, planning, and improving services require measurement and evaluation of networked information

services. Without measures that can evaluate particular services, decision makers must rely on intuition and

anecdotal information as a basis for assessing the usefulness and value of a particular service. Perhaps most

importantly, measurement and evaluation provide

users with an opportunity to offer feedback on how

well services are meeting their needs. To a large degree, however, public library administrators have limited knowledge about the performance and quality of

their networked activities and services.

Developing, operationalizing, and validating a

range of performance measures is essential if public

libraries intend to: determine which networked information services are effective; understand the impact

of networking on the educational process; and identify the costs required to build and maintain the network. Without such information, administrators of

networked systems and services will be unable to justify such services and unable to determine the degree

to which they meet user needs.

Public libraries will need to develop a regular program of data collection, performance measures, and

66
52 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

related statistics of networking activities and services.

Many public libraries are already seeing evidence that

"hits" on their Websites are going up while circulation rates stay stagnant or decline; or that networkedbased reference and referral transactions are increasing while traditional measures of reference transactions (on-site) stay the same or decline. Traditional

performance measures will need to be augmented to

assess the public library's activities and performance

in the networked environment (Bertot and McClure,

1996c).

Life Cycle of Public Library Internet Development

A life cycle of public library Internet development

appears to be emerging. Briefly, that life cycle is awareness of the Internet, planning and obtaining Internet

connectivity, learning how to use the Internet and acquire resources and services successfully, using the

connectivity for internal library operations, making

public access to the Internet available, training the

public in Internet use, upgrading connectivity and

bandwidth, putting up library electronic resources on

the Internet, developing evaluation techniques, and

providing a range of innovative and networked-based

services. Throughout this process there is an ongoing

adoption and beta-testing of new technologies and

services. While other components of this life cycle are

likely, it suggests a general process that many public

libraries follow in their Internet development.

The analysis of data reported from this survey, as

well as that reported in the 1994 survey, lacks a context in terms of this life cycle. This life cycle occurs

over a number of years, and while some public libraries may take greater or lesser time within these various stages, the library's place in this life cycle can provide an important context in understanding other data

that they reported from the survey. Thus, in hindsight,

an excellent additional question that should have been

included on the survey is: How many years has this library been connected to the Internet?

For example, libraries reported costs for various

types of Internet-related expenditures (question 12).

A library that has just begun its connectivity may have

significant start-up and capital expenditures compared

to a library that has been connected for three years

and is now in the process of developing Internet services. Within a particular region, it would be especially interesting to have information describing costs

or types of connectivity in light of this life cycle. Data

might be much more understandable when being cornpared across regions or across different populations

served.

Knowing the stage at which a public library is involved in the life cycle of Internet development would

also help researchers and policymakers to better understand the type of connectivity to the library and

the type and extent of Internet-based services that the

library provides. Thus, when reviewing the data reported in this survey, one cannot ascertain connectivity or services provision in light of the library's experience and stage in Internet development. This "lesson" as well as others identified in the next section

should be considered if the survey is repeated in 1998.

Preparing for the Next Survey

The 1994 survey was prompted primarily because

of the opportunity, then, to obtain national data describing public libraries and the Internet that could be

used to resolve policy issues regarding the role of libraries in the NII. As a result of the 1994 survey data,

NCLIS and others were able to provide testimony, meet

with federal policy makers, and work to extend the

role of public libraries in the NII. The 1994 survey

data remained the only comprehensive descriptive

data available that described public library involvement and use of the Internet until the publication of

the 1996 data reported here.

As stated earlier in this report, the 1996 survey had

less focus on affecting NII policy than on (1) obtaining

longitudinal data such that trends in public library use

of the Internet could be identified, (2) descriptive information about public library use of the Internet could

be used for internal library planning, and (3) key issues affecting the future development of public libraries in the Internet could be identified. In fact, however, data from the 1996 survey were analyzed and

reported in April, 1996 to the FCC, Federal-State Joint

Board on universal service regarding disparities in

public library Internet access and use. Such data may

affect FCC rulemaking to promote policies that assist

libraries have more affortable access to networked services.

Additional analyses and assessment of key issues

can be done with the data reported here. Furthermore,

there are numerous other topics and issues that the

survey was not able to address due to space and resource limitations. The authors hope that others will

use data from this survey to expand discussion of issues and topics only introduced in this report. Indeed,

67
Final Report 53

leaders in the public library community should begin

to consider, now, how a 1998 survey might be undertaken, which organizations should be or are willing to

sponsor such an effort, and possibly revising the methodology used when conducting the next survey.

NCLIS has taken on responsibility for conducting

the 1994 and 1996 surveys. Increasingly, however,

additional resources beyond those from NCLIS will

be needed to continue the administration of the survey. Federal agencies such as the Department of Education, the National Center for Educational Statistics

(NCES), and others have shown interest in these surveys. Additional organizations such as the American

Library Association (ALA), the Public Library Association (PLA), the Urban Libraries Council (ULC), the

Chief Officers of State Library Agencies (COSLA), participation from the private and publishing sectors, and

perhaps individual public libraries might join in a consortium to support a next public libraries and the

Internet survey.

Future surveys should also consider different methods for data collection either as part of a national survey or as replacement for the written questionnaire

survey that has been used for the 1994 and 1996 surveys. For example, the authors experimented with

mounting the 1996 survey on a Website and encouraged all libraries receiving the survey to respond via

that Website (Bertot and McClure, 1996a; to view a

copy, point your browser to http:/ /

research.umbc.edu/bertot/nclissurvey.html). Some

60 libraries did respond via the Website and provided

suggestions for how the survey might be better administered electronically in the future.

Another area that future surveys might address is

topics related to the quality of networked services provided by public libraries. As discussed earlier in this

section, descriptive counts that stress the extensiveness of services, while useful, will need to be extended

such that a range of performance measures assessing

effectiveness, impact, and quality of services can be

assessed. The national surveys conducted in 1994 and

1996 may provide a basis for developing such measures.

The authors have found that the level of effort required to obtain high response rates to the surveys,

i.e., 77% in 1994 and 71% in 1996, is significant and

time consuming. Yet, due to the sampling and weighting scheme used (as developed by NCES) and discussed earlier in the methods section of this report,

such high response rates are essential if the survey is

to result in accurate and generalizable data. Indeed,

even with the high response rates obtained thus far,

the method does not allow for generalization of findings to individual states.

Thought might also be given to extending or revising the data collection to allow for follow-up activities. For example, the data reported here seem to

present some anomalies in terms of connectivity levels across different regions of the country. Survey data

produces findings that are primarily descriptive and

only to a limited extent might they be explanatory. Since

the data are descriptive only, follow-up site visits, phone

interviews, focus group sessions, electronic surveys or

discussions, etc. might be used to better explain the

findings.

Although the authors suggest that a broader base

of support be established for conducting future public libraries and the Internet surveys, and although we

suggest rethinking aspects of the method with the objective of improving the usefulness of survey results,

we believe that such a survey every two years is essential for the public library community and policy makers to:

Obtain data describing the growth, trends, and

issues related to public libraries' use and involvement in the Internet.

Provide a common base of information from

which individuals from different stakeholder

groups can discuss and analyze the role of public libraries in the networked environment

equally.

Make known to the library community and federal, state, and local policy makers information

and issues describing how public library involvement in the Internet affects the public good.

Assess individual library network development

and plans for future network services.

Better plan for and design public library involvement in the Internet to best benefit the public at

large.

The benefits from such national surveys are clear. The

importance of conducting such surveys has been dem68
54 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

onstrated on numerous occasions. Thus, the challenge

for improving and extending this survey is one that

must be addressed and resolved.

REFERENCES

ALAWON. (1995, March 2). ALA summarizes disagreements with 'Green Paper' on copyright. American Library Association Washington Office Newsline, 3.

Back issues of ALAWON are available. EMAIL:

listserv@uicvm.uic.edu. MESSAGE: send filename

filetype. For a complete listing of back issues, EMAIL:

listserv@uicvm.uic.edu. MESSAGE: send ala-wo

filelist.

Benton Foundation, The. (1996). The Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the changing communications landscape. Available: http: / /www.benton.org /Goingon/

k-telecom.html

Bertot, John Carlo, and McClure, Charles R. (1996a).

Electronic surveys: Methodological implications for

using the World-Wide Web to collect survey data. Proceedings of the 59th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science. Medford, NJ: Learned Information, forthcoming.

Bertot, John Carlo, and McClure, Charles R. (1996b).

The Clinton administration and the national information infrastructure (NII). In P. Hernon, C.R. McClure,

and H. Relyea (Eds.), Federal Information Policies in the

1990s: Issues and Conflicts. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation, pp. 19-44.

Bertot, John Carlo, and McClure, Charles R. (1996c).

Sailor assessment final report: Findings and future sailor

development. Baltimore, MD: Division of Library Development and Services.

Information Industry Association. (1994, July). Information policy on-line. Available: Internet:

<11a.ipo@his.com>.

Information Infrastructure Task Force. (1993). The

National Information Infrastructure: An agenda for action.

Washington, DC: Department of Commerce.

Information Infrastructure Task Force. Working Group

on Intellectual Property Rights. (1995). Intellectual property and the National Information Infrastructure. Washington, DC: Department of Commerce.

Information Infrastructure Task Force. Working Group

on Intellectual Property Rights. (1994). Intellectual property and the National Information Infrastructure: A preliminary draft of the report of the Working Groups on Intellectual Property rights. Washington, DC: Department

of Commerce.

Kahin, Brian, and Keller, James (Eds.). (1995). Public

access to the Internet. Boston, MA: MIT Press.

McClure, Charles R., Bertot, John Carlo, and

Beachboard, John C. (1996). Enhancing the role of

public libraries in the national information infrastructure. Public Libraries, July/August: 2-8.

McClure, Charles R., Bertot, John Carlo, and

Beachboard, John C. (1995a). Internet costs and cost models for public libraries. Washington, DC: National Commission on Libraries and Information Science.

McClure, Charles R., Bertot, John Carlo, and

Beachboard, John C. (1995b). Policy initiatives and strategies for enhancing the role of public libraries in the National Information Infrastructure (NII): Final Report.

ERIC: ED 386-202.

McClure, Charles R. (1994). Public access to the information superhighway through the nation's libraries.

Statement for the U.S. Congress, House of Representatives

Committee on Science and Space Technology Subcommittee on Science. ERIC: ED 376821.

McClure, Charles R., Bertot, John Carlo, and Zweizig,

Douglas L. (1994). Public libraries and the Internet: Study

results, policy issues, and recommendations. Washington,

DC: National Commission on Libraries and Information Science.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1993). Public libraries in the United States: 1991 [NCES 92-297].

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

National Center for Education Statistics. (1995). Public libraries in the United States: 1993 [NCES 95-129].

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement.

National Telecommunications and Information Administration. (1995). Falling through the net: A survey

of "have nots" in rural and urban America. Washington,

DC: Department of Commerce.

Public Library Association. Public Library Data Service. (1995). Statistical report '95, special section: Tech69
Final Report 55

nology survey. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

U.S. Advisory Council on the National Information

Infrastructure. (1996). A nation of opportunity: Realizing the promise of the information superhighway. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.

U.S. Bureau of the Census. (1996). Monthly estimates

of the United States population: April 1, 1980 to May

1, 1996. Available: http:/ /www.census.gov /population/ estimate-extract/nation / infile1-1. txt

U.S. Congress. House. (1995). H.R.2441 NII Copyright

Protection Act of 1995. Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office.

U.S. Congress. House. (1995). H.R. 1617 Museum and

Library Services Act. Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office.

U.S. Congress. Senate. (1996). Telecommunications Act

of 1996 (EL. 104-104). Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office.

U.S. Congress. Senate. (1995). S. 1284 NII Copyright

Protection Act of 1995. Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office.

U.S. Government Printing Office (1996). Report to the

Congress: Study to identify measures necessary for a successful transition to a more electronic federal depository library program. [500.11]. Washington, DC: Government

Printing Office.

Van House, Nancy A., Lynch, Mary Jo, McClure,

Charles R., Zweizig, Douglas L., and Rodger, Eleanor

Jo. (1987). Output measures for public libraries. (2nd

ed.). Chicago, IL: American Library Association.

70
Final Report 57

Appendix A

Survey Instrument

71
58 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

Survey of Public Library Internet Use

Instructions: This survey is about your library's level of involvement with or use of the Internet. Please take the time to

answer the questions below by marking the appropriate selection or filling in answers as necessary. Your responses will

assist us to gain an understanding of public library uses of the Internet. Thank you for your participation! PLEASE

RETURN YOUR QUESTIONNAIRE BY JANUARY 31,1996. For questions concerning the survey, contact:

John Carlo Bertot

Department of Information Systems

University of Maryland Baltimore County (410) 455-3883 phone

5401 Wilkens Avenue (410) 455-1073 fax

Baltimore, MD 21228 <bertot@umbc.edu> e-mail

If your library is not now using the Internet, please fill out questions 1 to 8 and return.

PART A: General Library Information and Internet Connection Issues; To be completed by the library

director

1. Name of person responding: Title:

2. Total number of librarians (include ALA/MLS and others with the title) in FTE:

3. What were the total library operating expenditures for the last completed fiscal year?

4. What were the total library materials expenditures for the last completed fiscal year?

5. Please assess the degree to which the following possible factors affect your library's

current level of involvement with the Internet: (PLEASE CIRCLE ONE NUMBER FOR EACH ITEM)

Very

Important

Very

Unimportant

Don't

Know

a) Costs of system/server hardware (e.g., workstations,

terminals, servers)

1 2 3 4 5

b) Costs of software (e.g., operating systemsUnix,

Windows NT applications softwareWordPerfect)

1 2 3 4 5

c) Costs of communications hardware/fees (e.g., routers,

modems, long distance charges)

1 2 3 4 5

d) Costs of training and education (for staff and users) 1 2 3 4 5

e) Costs of content/resource development (e.g., special

collections development, Web home page development)

1 2 3 4 5

f) Availability of in-house computer technical expertise 1 2 3 4 5

g) Availability of staff time to develop expertise on

the Internet

1 2 3 4 5

h) Availability of federal money 1 2 3 4 5

i) Availability of state money 1 2 3 4 5

j) Other (please specify): 1 2 3 4 5

6. Interest in the Internet at this library is motivated primarily by : (CHECK [X] ONE ONLY)

Library strategic planning Community interest

State-wide network initiatives Internal staff expertise

Interest of the library administration Other (please specify):

Interest of the library governing body

7. Is your library currently connected to the Internet in any way?

YES (please complete questions 9 through 19) NO (please complete question 8)

72
Final Report 59

8. If your library does not now have any access to the Internet, does your library plan to connect to the Internet in any

way in the next 12 months? (CHECK [X1 ONE ONLY)

YES, for library staff use only

YES, for library staff use AND public access

NO Internet connection planned in the next 12 months

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION! Please return the questionnaire in the enclosed envelope.

PART B: Internet Benefit and Cost Issues; To be completed by the library director or library employee

with most knowledge of the library's use of the Internet

9. Name of person responding: Title:

Internet e-mail address:

10. Please describe the most important benefit to your library that having access to the Internet provides:

11. Please estimate the overall percentage of total library operating expenditures for ALL information technologies (IT)

for the last completed fiscal year (to include hardware/software costs, OPAC /CD-ROM subscription fees, telecommunication costs, training, CD-ROM, etc.):

stimated Percentage for IT: Don't know

12. Please estimate the percentage of total library operating expenditures for all information technologies (IT) associated

with providing Internet-related services for staff and patrons for the last completed fiscal year AND estimate the

amount of increase or decrease you anticipate for the next fiscal year for these Internet costs: (PLEASE COMPLETE FOR EACH ROW)

COST CATEGORY ESTIMATED % OF ANTICIPATED EXPENDITURE

IT EXPENDITURES

Remain Increase Increase Don't

Decline Same 1-5% >5% Know

a) System/server hardware costs (e.g.,

workstations, servers)

b) Software costs (e.g., operating systems %

Unix applications software

WordPerfect )

c) Communications hardware/fees (e.g.,

routers, modems, long distance charges)

d) Training and education costs (for staff

and users)

e) Content/resource development costs

(e.g., special collections development,

Web home page development)

f) Program planning/management/ CI

staffing costs (e.g., RFP development/

analysis, consultant fees)

g) Other (please specify):

TOTAL EXPENDITURES FOR IT 100 %

73
60 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

PART C: Library Internet Connection and Service Issues; To be completed by the library director or

library employee with most knowledge of the library's use of the Internet

13. What type of connection to the Internet AND maximum connection speed does your library have?

(a) FASTEST Dial-up Speed of Connection

(CHECK [X] ALL THAT APPLY) (CHECK [X] ONE ONLY)

Terminal access (e.g., via text only 9600 bits per second or less

[non-graphical] access) 14,400 bits per second

Internet gateway access (e.g., via commercial 28,800 bits per second or greater

on-line provider such as America On-Line & Other (please specify):

CompuServe)

Workstation SLIP (Serial Line Internet Protocol) or

PPP (Point to Point Protocol) access

Other (please specify):

Li None

(b) Leased Line FASTEST Leased-Line Speed of Connection

(CHECK [X] ALL THAT APPLY) (CHECK [X] ONE ONLY)

On-line Public Access Catalog (OPAC) gateway

Local Area Network (LAN) access

Other (please specify):

None

56 K (bits per second)

T1 (1.5 million bits per second)

T3 (45 million bits per second)

Other (please specify):

14. What type of Internet connection provider does your library use? (CHECK [X] ALL THAT APPLY)

Local/state government organization (e.g., county/state information services department)

Commercial provider (e.g., PSI, Delphi, America On-Line, CompuServe, etc.)

Local educational organization (e.g., community college or university)

Free-net (e.g., a community run network such as Cleveland Freenet, Big Sky)

State library network (e.g., a state-wide network run by the state library agency such as Maryland's Sailor

network, Nebrask@ Online, etc.)

Regional/statewide network provider (e.g., NYSERNet, Solinet, NorthWestNet, etc.)

Other (please specify):

15. Please ESTIMATE the number of uses in your library of the following Internet activities by library staff

in a typical week: (CHECK [X] ONE FOR EACH QUESTION)

Never

NUMBER OF

Less than

USES BY STAFF PER

26-50 51-100

times /wk times /wk

WEEK

More than

25 times /wk 100 times /wk

a) Electronic Mail

b) Listservs/Discussion Groups

c) Bibliographic Utilities (e.g., accessing card

catalogs)

d) World-Wide Web sessions

e) Other (please specify): Li

74
Final Report 61

PART D: Public Access Issues; To be completed by the library director or library employee with most

knowledge of the library's use of the Internet

16. Please indicate whether your library provides patrons the following types of Internet services AND whether your

library charges patron fees for such services: (CHECK [X] ALL THAT APPLY)

INTERNET SERVICE

No Yes Fee for Service

At Main/

Central

Library

Only

At Main/

Central

Library

and All

Branches

At Main/

Central

Library

and Some

Branches

Remote/

Dial-in

Service Yes No

E-mail accounts

(e.g., e-mail services)

Newsgroup services (e.g., access

to newsgroup readers)

Text-based World-Wide Web

browsing (e.g., using Lynx software)

Graphical World-Wide Web

browsing (e.g., using Netscape or

Mosaic software)

Gopher-based resource location

Other: (please specify)

17. Please describe the type AND number of your main/central library's public access terminals: (CHECK [X] ALL

THAT APPLY)

Terminals with text-based interfaces (e.g., VT-100 terminals,

PCs/compatibles or Macs with terminal emulation software)

Workstations with graphical interfaces (e.g., Windows PCs or

Macs)

Are there additional terminals/workstations just for library staff access?

If yes, how many? Number of terminals/workstations

18. If applicable, please describe your main/central library's remote/dial-in service:

a) Maximum number of modem connections available to patrons: Connections

b) Is this either SLIP (Serial Line Internet Protocol) or PPP (Point to Point Protocol) access? Yes

c) Fastest supported speed of connection: 9600 bits per second or less second

14,400 bits per second

28,800 bits per second or greater

19. If your library operates a gopher and/or web server, is it primarily operated by: (CHECK [X] ONLY ONE)

Library staff? A commercial Internet provider (e.g., PSI)?

Number of terminals

Number of workstations

Yes No

No

A local community organization Other (please specify):

(e.g., community college)?

Please provide your library's gopher and/or web server address(es):

Gopher: telnet

Web: http://

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION! Please return the questionnaire in the enclosed envelope

75
Final Report 63

Appendix B

Survey Alert

76
64 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

SURVEY OF PUBLIC LIBRARY INTERNET USE

University of Maryland Baltimore County

Department of Information Systems

5401 Wilkens Avenue

Baltimore, Maryland 21228

First Class Mail

NOTICE:

SURVEY ALERT FOR THE LIBRARY DIRECTOR

Dear Library Director: December 1995

The National Commission on Libraries and Information Science is conducting a national fast-response

survey of the involvement of public libraries in the Internet. John Carlo Bertot, Charles R. McClure, and Douglas L.

Zweizig are co-principal investigators for the study.

This study is a follow-up to the Commission's 1994 study of public library Internet involvement. The results

from the study will provide critical information that charts the 1994-1996 changes in public library Internet connectivity

and collects information about public library Internet costs, options, and benefits for library and policy officials.

As with the 1994 study, your library has been selected to be in the sample drawn by the National Center for

Education Statistics. The survey will be mailed in early January and will ask for a response by the end of the month.

It is extremely important that your library respond, whether or not your library responded to the 1994

survey or is presently using the Internet. If you have any questions or have not received your survey by January 15,

please contact:

John Carlo Bertot

SURVEY OF PUBLIC LIBRARY INTERNET USE

University of Maryland Baltimore County

Department of Information Systems

5401 Wilkens Avenue

Baltimore, Maryland 21228

THANK YOU FOR YOU HELP!

Phone: (410) 455-3883

Fax: (410) 455-1073

email: bertot@umbc.edu

77
Final Report 65

Appendix C

Survey Cover Letter

78
66 1996 National Survey of Public Libraries and the Internet

United States

National Commission on

Libraries and Information Science

Dear Public Library Director:

January 1996

The U.S. National Commission on Libraries and Information Science (NCLIS) as a

permanent, independent Federal agency, is charged by law (P.L. 91-345) to advise the President

and Congress on National library and information services policies. In 1996 the Commission

is conducting a study to assess public library use of the Internet. John C. Bertot, assistant

professor at the Department of Information Systems, University of Maryland Baltimore

County; Dr. Charles R. McClure, distinguished professor at the School of Information Studies

at Syracuse University; and Dr. Douglas L. Zweizig, professor at the School of Library and

Information Studies at the University of Wisconsin - Madison are investigators for NCLIS for

the public libraries and the Internet project.

As a result of a similar study in 1994, NCLIS found that 20.9% of public libraries were

connected to the Internet. The 1996 survey will chart 1994-1996 changes in the amount and

type of public library connectivity. Study findings will provide essential information for

libraries and policy officials about the type and costs of Internet services, as well as the options

and benefits of Internet connectivity, especially in the provision of public access to the

Internet. Your library's participation in this study will assist the National Commission in

advising policy makers about the roles of public libraries in the National network

infrastructure.

Your institution has been selected to participate in this study based on your response

to the 1994 survey. Your library's response is very import. t to the validity of this study.

Your library's response to the questionnaire accompanying this letter will be treated in

confidence; no individual libraries will be identified in the NCLIS report resulting from this

study. A quick response survey questionnaire is attached to this letter. The survey asks

about your library's plans for and/or present use of the Internet. If you have a member of

your staff who is responsible for your library's Internet connection, please forward this survey

to that person for completion, after you have responded to the Library Director questions.

If you have questions regarding this survey please contact John C. Bertot, Department

of Information Systems, University of Maryland Baltimore County, 5401 Wilkins Avenue,

Baltimore, MD 21228-5398. Phone (410) 455-3883 - voice. Fax (410) 455-1073. Internet

address: bertot@umbc.edu Thank you for taking the time to return the completed survey

questionnaire by 31 January 1995 by using the enclosed postage paid envelope. In

appreciation for your cooperation, we will be pleased to provide you with a copy of the final

project report.

Sincerely,

41,n,-e

Jeanne ur

4ey Simon

NCLIS Chairperson

79
Final Report 67

About the

Authors

John Carlo Bertot <bertot@umbc.edu> is Assistant Professor at the Department of Information Systems, University of Maryland Baltimore

County, where he teaches courses in federal and state government information management and policies and management information systems. He has published articles and reports on federal, State, and county

government information policy and the use of information technology

to deliver government information and services. Most recently, he was

co-author, with Charles R. McClure, of the Sailor Assessment Final Report: Findings and Future Sailor Development (Baltimore, MD: Division of

Library Development and Services, 1996), a study undertaken to develop electronic network performance measures using Maryland's Sailor

network, and Internet Costs and Cost Models for Public Libraries (Washington, DC: National Commission on Libraries and Information Science,

1995). He also served as co-principal investigator, with McClure, in the

1995 National Science Foundation - funded study, Policy Initiatives and

Strategies for Enhancing the Role of Public Libraries in the National Information Infrastructure.

Charles R. McClure <cmcclure @mailbox.syr.edu> is Distinguished Professor at the School of Information Studies, Syracuse University, where

he teaches courses in U.S. government information management and

policies, information resources management, library/information center management, and planning and evaluation of information services.

He completed his doctorate in library and information services at Rutgers

University. He has authored some thirty monographs and over 180 articles, reports, and chapters on topics related to library and information

center planning, evaluation, management, information resources management, networking, and government information. McClure's research

activities have won a number of national awards from the American

Library Association, the Association of Library and Information Science

Education, and the American Society for Information Science. McClure

is the associate editor Government Information Quarterly and was the

founding editor of the journal Internet Research: Electronic Networking

Applications and Policy. His latest books are Assessing the Academic Networked Environment: Strategies and Options (Washington, DC: Coalition

for Networked Information, 1996) and his co-edited book Federal Information Policies in the 1990s (Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp., 1996).

Douglas L. Zweizig <dzweizig@facstaff.wisc.edu> is a Professor at the

School of Library and Information Studies at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He has conducted national studies of literacy activities in

libraries and financial practices in public libraries and publishes in the

literature of planning and evaluation for libraries. From 1990 to 1994, he

was the project director for the Public Library Association's Public Library Data Service. He has been actively involved in the American Library Association and is a frequent speaker at many professional meetings and conferences. From 1993 to 1995, he was the co-principal investigator for the U.S. Department of Education-funded project, "Evaluating Library Programs and Services," and lead author of The TELL IT!

Manual; The complete program for evaluating library performance (Chicago:

IL: American Library Association, 1996). He is co-author, with Charles

R. McClure, of the publications Planning and Role Setting for Public Libraries and Output Measures for Public Libraries, 2nd ed. (Chicago: IL:

American Library Association, 1987). Currently, he is co-principal investigator for the multi-year National Evaluation of the DeWitt Wallace

Reader's Digest Fund Library Power project.

80 'U.S. Government Printing Office: 1996 - 413-636/60019
9

ISBN 0 6-048736-6

780160 487361

81

9 0 0 0 0

1 1
(9/92)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Office of Educational Research and Improvement (OERO

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

REPRODUCTION BASIS

I icI

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release

(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing all

or classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,

does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission to

reproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, may

be reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release

form (either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").