Institute of Museum and Library Services 

Status of Technology and Digitization 

In the Nation’s Museums and Libraries 

2002 Report

Technology Survey page 1 
Table of Contents 

Introduction 

Executive Summary 

Action Recommendations Based on the Survey Results 

Background on Study and Methodology 

Survey Results for Museums 

Survey Results for Public Libraries 

 

Survey Results for Academic Libraries 

Survey Results for State Library Administrative Agencies 

(SLAAs) 

Survey Results: IMLS Roles 

Appendix: Survey 

Technology Survey page 2 
Introduction 

The status of the Internet is shifting from being the dazzling new thing to 

being a purposeful tool that Americans use to help them with some of life’s 

important tasks. As Internet users gain experience online, they increasingly 

turn to the Internet to perform work-related tasks, to make purchases, and 

do other financial transactions, to write e-mails with weighty and urgent 

content, and to seek information that is important to their everyday lives.1

This excerpt from Getting Serious Online, a 2002 study by the Pew Internet and American 

Life Project, notes the public’s increasing use and reliance on the Internet as a practical 

tool. This changing approach to the Internet and other powerful emerging technologies is 

also changing the way museums and libraries interact with their communities. 

The American public has much to gain from the adoption and implementation of 

technology by museums and libraries. Technology connects more people to more of the 

services and information only museums and libraries provide. It enables access to unique 

cultural, scientific, and artistic collections; to vast information and research resources; and 

to educational opportunities for students of all ages. 

It is within this context that IMLS undertook a study of the use of technology and 

digitization activities in libraries and museums nationwide. 

 

1

 John B. Horrigan and Lee Rainie, Getting Serious Online: As Americans gain experience, they use the Web 

more at work, write emails with more significant content, perform more online transactions, and pursue 

more activities online [online PDF] (Washington: Pew Internet & American Life Project, March 3, 2002 

[cited April 2002]); available at http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/toc.asp?Report=55. 

Technology Survey page 3 
Executive Summary 

This section first presents key cumulative findings of the survey that measured technology 

use and digitization activities by museums and libraries. It then presents a series of tables 

and graphs that compare survey responses by museums and libraries based on a variety of 

categorizations. The most significant of these categorizations is the one on which most 

sections of this report are based: museum, public library, academic library, and State 

Library Administrative Agency (SLAA). Further categorizations are by such measures as 

budget size, size of populations served, and current extent of technology use and 

digitization. 

Key Cumulative Findings 

The survey results quantify, for the first time, the current status of technology use and 

digitization activities by museums and libraries. The reliability of findings varies 

somewhat based on the rate at which institutions in various categories responded to the 

survey (see “Background on Study and Methodology” for a detailed discussion of 

reliability of responses). Nonetheless, some broad and significant cumulative findings are 

clear. 

Technology Use 

Libraries’ technology use is pervasive, particularly the basic technologies that automate 

and support services to the public. 

The different kinds of libraries in the survey have sources of funds that have enabled them

to invest in technologies. 

• Public libraries have benefited from E-Rate discounts, grants from the Bill 

& Melinda Gates Foundation, and IMLS’ Grants to States program, which 

is Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) funds administered by the 

State Library Administrative Agencies. 2

• Academic libraries use operating funds, gifts from donors and IMLS funds 

to support their technology needs. 

• State Library Administrative Agencies (SLAAs) use LSTA and operating 

funds to implement technology. 

Museums’ technology use is strong in the medium-sized and large museums, but lags 

significantly in the smaller museums. 

 

2

 Charles R. McClure, Joe Ryan, and John Carlo Bertot, Public Library Internet Services and the Digital

Divide: The Role and Impacts from Selected External Funding Sources [online PDF] (Lexington, KY: Chief 

Officers of State Library Agencies, January 2002 [cited April 2002]); available at http://slistwo.lis.fsu.edu/~jcbertot/DDFinal03_01_02.pdf. 

Technology Survey page 4 
• Eighty-seven percent of museums are using some technology to automate 

operations and support programming. 

• Roughly 13 percent of museums currently use no technologies, and 42 

percent of those have no immediate plans for adding technologies. 

• Sixty-seven percent of the survey’s museum respondents have budgets of 

$250,000 or less. Among this group, only 55 percent have access to the 

Internet, e-mail, and standard office software. Only 41 percent have a Web 

site. 

There are fewer sources of funds available for museum investment in technology. 

• The funding programs that have benefited libraries have not been available 

to museums. 

• Key sources of funding include operating funds, gifts from donors, and inkind contributions. Twenty percent of all museums reported having ‘no 

funding for technology.’ 

Museums and public libraries alike demonstrate a marked gap between small and large 

institutions. 

Small museums are less likely to be using technologies than medium-sized and 

large museums. The distinction is pronounced: While 87 percent of all 

museums have some technology, the percentage of small museums with 

technology is significantly lower. Thirteen percent of small museums use no

technology. Small public libraries fared better than their museum counterparts. 

For example, 85 percent have e-mail and Internet access. Yet they lag in use of 

online catalogs, desktop computers and Web sites. 

Digitization Activities 

Digitization activities are an emerging focus in museums and libraries, with substantial 

work being done by State Library Administrative Agencies (SLAAs).

• More than 78 percent of all SLAAs reported digitization activities in the 

past year. Compare this with 32 percent of museums, 34 percent of 

academic libraries, and 25 percent of public libraries. Larger museums, 

academic libraries, and public libraries are more active than the smaller 

ones. 

• SLAAs lead in all areas of digitization, including funding (primarily 

through the receipt of LSTA funds from IMLS and other funds from their 

states), collaboration among institutions, and digitization policies. 

• All groups have plans to digitize in the next 12 months and beyond, 

indicating a significant expansion of digitization activities. 

Technology Survey page 5 
• Collaboration in digitization activities and the adoption of policies and 

standard practices for digitization in museums, academic libraries, and 

public libraries lag significantly behind the SLAAs. These are important 

areas for development. 

Key Technology Use Findings 

A substantial majority of all respondents use new technologies. Those used most 

commonly are listed below. Those used most commonly are listed in Figure 1. 

 Figure 1: Strengths in Technology Use 

Type of Institution Most Commonly Used Technology

− Desktop computers 

− Access to Internet 

− E-mail use 

− Standard office software. 

Museums 

87% indicated they currently use some 

kinds of technology

Note: In general, the larger the museum’s annual budget, the 

more likely the museum is to use the listed technology. 

− Desktop computers 

− Access to the Internet 

− E-mail use 

− Computerized catalog of library collection 

Public Libraries

99% indicated that they currently use some 

kinds of technology

Note: In general, the larger the population served, the more 

technology is used by a public library. 

Academic Libraries 

100% indicated they currently use some 

kinds of technology

− Desktop computers 

− Access to the Internet 

− E-mail use 

− Computerized catalog of library collection. 

− Web site 

SLAAs

100% indicated they currently use some 

kinds of technology

− Computerized catalog of library collection. 

− Web site 

− Standard office software 

− Notebook (laptop) computers 

 

Exemplary Project: Colorado Digitization Project 

Museums, libraries, archives, and historical societies in Colorado have discovered that 

collaboration is a powerful approach for putting collections online. IMLS funded the 

Colorado Digitization Project (CPD), a multifaceted effort to make the rich primary 

source holdings of Colorado's cultural heritage organizations available online. Through 

grants to cultural heritage organizations and a combination of training, collaborative 

Technology Survey page 6 
outreach, research, and technical support, the CDP created an extensive infrastructure to 

support the creation of digital collections. The project Web site, Heritage, provides a 

gateway to the collections, as well as a digital “toolbox” for digital project administrators, 

and resources for teachers. 

http://coloradodigital.coalliance.org/

Almost all libraries and SLAAs have sources of funding technology; one source for many 

of them, particularly SLAAs, is IMLS. A large, but markedly lower, segment of museums 

has technology funding. Only 2 percent of museums use IMLS funding for technology. 

(see Figures 2a and 2b) 

 

 Figure 2a: Figure 2b: 

Institutions That Have

IMLS Funding

20% 15%

62%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

%

Public

Libraries

Academic

Libraries

SLAAs

Institutions

100

Percentage

Institutions That Have Some 

Funding for Technology

80%

99% 100% 100%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Museums Public

Libraries

Academic

Libraries

SLAAs

Institutions

Percentage

Web sites and technology that supports programming are employed by most surveyed 

institutions, although their presence is far from pervasive. (see Figures 3-5) 

 Figure 3: 

Who Has a Web site?

62%

75%

95% 97%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Museums Public

Libraries

Academic

Libraries

SLAAs

Institution

Percentage

 

 

Technology Survey page 7 
 

Figure 4: Current Use of Technology to Support Programming 

54%

42%

61%

76%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Museum Public

Libraries

Academic

Libraries

SLAA

Institution

Percentage

Figure 5: Types of Programming Activities Supported by Technology

Type of 

Institution 

Information on exhibits is presented to the public via the Web Educational programs presented via onsite computer Educational programs presented to the public via the Web Disseminate research findings and publications via the Web Provide programs and exhibits on Web Site 

Museums X X X

Public Libraries X X X 

Academic Libraries X X X 

SLAAs X X X

Exemplary Project: Digital Collections—Museums and Libraries Find Common Ground 

Museums and Libraries in every corner of the country have been affected by the World 

Wide Web. What issues face these institutions as they consider the best ways to use the 

Web to expand access to their collections? This was the subject of a unique gathering of 

30 library, archive, and museum policymakers sponsored by the Council on Library and 

Information Resources and the Chicago Historical Society. Supported by an IMLS 

LSTA-funded National Leadership Grant, the meeting proved that museums and libraries 

share acres of common ground in the new digital world. 

http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_c0900.htm

Technology Survey page 8 
Key Digitization Activities Findings 

Digitization activities are significantly less pervasive among institutions than use of 

technology. Only SLAAs are above 50 percent in digitization activities. (see Figure 6) 

 Figure 6: Which Institutions Have Digitization Activities? 

32% 34%

78%

25%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Museums Public

Libraries

Academic

Libraries

SLAAs

Institution

Percentage

 What is being digitized? 

 Historical documents/archives and photographs were frequently selected for 

digitization by all types of institutions.(see Figure 7) 

Figure 7: Materials Currently Being Digitized 

Type of 

Institution 

Government

publications 

Historical 

documents

/archives 

Images 

of 

artifacts

Images of 

items in 

the 

collection Maps

Newspapers

Manuscripts 

Photographs 

Course 

materials

Museums x x x X

Public 

libraries x x x X 

Academic 

libraries x X X x 

SLAAs x x x X

 What do institutions hope to accomplish with their digitization projects? 

There is considerable convergence of chief goals among the different groups. Museums 

and libraries look at “collections” differently, but, in general, all of the groups have similar 

goals. (see Figure 8) 

Figure 8: Rankings of Primary Goals of Digitization 

Technology Survey page 9 
Goals Museums 

Public 

Libraries 

Academic 

Libraries SLAAs 

Increase access to the collections and 

collections’ records 1 4 3 3 

Preserve materials of importance or 

value 2 1 2 2 

Provide greater information about the 

institution’s collections to artists,

scholars, students, teachers, and the 

public

3 - - - 

Reduce damage to original materials

4 5 5 5 

Increase interest in the museum 

5 - - - 

Increase access to books, journals, 

documents, and other materials - 2 1 1 

Provide access to digital collection on a 

Web site - 3 4 4 

 What funding sources are used for digitization projects?

Principal sources of funding for digitization also varied widely by type of institution. (see 

Figure 9)

Figure 9: Top Funding Sources by Institution 

Funding Source Museums 

Public 

Libraries 

Academic 

Libraries SLAAs 

Operating funds 24% 14% 25% 16%

IMLS grants ** 8% 13% 60% 

Foundation grants 11% 7%   

Gifts from donors 14% 8% **  ** 

State funds   14% 46% 

** Institutions indicated do use this funding source. Only top three to four percentages of 

 funding sources shown for each type of institution. 

Exemplary Project: Web Delivers Digital Picture of Native American History

The Native American collections of Montana are rich with images of the Cheyenne, the 

Gros Ventres, and twelve other Plains Indians cultures. An IMLS LSTA-funded National 

Leadership Grant allowed Montana State University Libraries at Bozeman and the 

Museum of the Rockies to create a searchable database of 1,500 images from five 

collections across the state. http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_c0500.htm

Technology Survey page 10 
 What are the hindrances to digitization? 

Among institutions with current or planned digitizing activities, hindrances to more 

extensive digitization are the same regardless of institution type. Those with no current or 

planned digitizing report more hindrances that vary somewhat by institution type. (see 

Figure 10) 

Figure 10: Most Common Hindrances by Institution Type 

Type of 

Institution 

Lack of funds to support digitizationOther projects have higher prioritiesLack of available expertiseConcern about costs of preservation and managementDo not see a role for our institution in digitization Do not see the usefulness of digitization for our institution 

For institutions with current or future digitizing plans

Museums x x x x

Academic Libraries x x x x 

Public Libraries x x x x 

SLAAs x x x x

For institutions with no digitizing plans

Museums x x x x

Public Libraries x x x x 

Academic Libraries x x x x 

SLAAs x x x x

 Who has digitization policies?

Less than half of responding museums, public libraries, and academic libraries have 

digitization policies in place or in development. Only among SLAAs—where more than 

half of respondents are doing digitization—are policies in place or in development. (see 

Figure 11) 

Figure 11: Digitization Activities and Policies by Institution Type 

Doing digitization Policies in place Policies in 

development 

Museums 32% 12% 20%

Public libraries 24% 3% 17% 

Academic libraries 34% 8% 15% 

Technology Survey page 11 
SLAAs 78% 25% 42%

Exemplary Project: Hardscrabble Mountaineers, Spanish Settlers, Native Americans—

The Cultures of Taos Valley Unearthed

New Mexico's Taos Valley is steeped in the cultures of Native Americans, Spanish 

settlers, mountain pioneers, and artists' colonies. The unique southwest collections in 

local museum archives were once the sole purview of curators. Now, thanks to an IMLS 

grant and the online catalog of the University of New Mexico, three Taos Valley 

museums' archives are available to everyone, including 14 year-old Joe Kierst, who is 

100 pages into his historical novel about Peg-leg Smith, Cerain St. Vrain, William

Becknal, and other hardscrabble mountaineers. 

http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_m0701.htm

Key IMLS Roles Findings 

Funding to support technology implementation and digitization activities was the 

outstanding role identified for IMLS by both museums and libraries. Other ways of 

assisting with funding needs were also desired: identifying other sources of funding; 

identifying costs and resources needed; and identifying cost-effective technologies. 

Another IMLS role that was strongly supported is the identification of best practices, 

model projects, and information about standards, guidelines, and resources. This finding 

is based on combined responses about roles for both technology support and digitization 

activities. 

A substantial number of museums and libraries said that they did not know what IMLS’ 

role should be. Some indicated that IMLS does not have a role. 

Technology Survey page 12 
Action Recommendations Based on the Survey Results 

Action Recommendations for Potential Research 

1. Repeat the technology and digitization survey in 2004. 

IMLS plans to repeat the Status of Technology and Digitization in the Nation’s Museums 

and Libraries survey in 2004, in order to measure the changes and developments that 

occur. In developing the next survey, attention should be paid to these issues: 

• The museum universe used for the next survey should support sampling by 

museum type. This will permit more in-depth data gathering. 

• The next survey should look at the hindrances libraries and museums face in 

implementing technologies. More specific questions could clarify the use of 

technologies for internal work and those used to provide service to the public. 

It would also be helpful to ask about the usefulness of technologies that support 

services to the public. 

• The survey asked about hindrances to digitization, but it did not ask for more 

specific information from libraries and museums that indicated no role or 

usefulness of digitization in their institutions. The next survey should try to 

identify possible reasons, such as ‘We have no collections that are worth 

digitizing.’ This would help clarify the breadth of potential digitization 

activities and what might be needed to overcome hindrances. 

• The next survey should gather information about the technologies that emerge 

in the intervening years. ‘Other’ technologies respondents listed in this survey 

included e-books, image databases, and wireless networks. 

2. Investigate programming activities in museums and libraries, with special attention to 

how technology is used in them. 

Programming activities, their purposes, and the ways they are handled—including the use 

of technology—differ among museums and the various kinds of libraries. Programs 

represent an important form of service to the public. It would be useful to investigate what 

kinds of programming activities museums and libraries are doing, with particular 

emphasis on how technology is involved. Best practices and exemplary programs should 

be identified and highlighted. 

3. Study how museums and libraries can collaborate on the systematic digitization of 

America’s collections of materials and objects. 

With the solid base of digitization activities now taking place across the U.S., it is perhaps 

time to consider how museums and libraries can collaborate on the systematic digitization 

of America’s collections of materials and objects. IMLS should undertake a study that: 

Technology Survey page 13 
• works with states, regional groups and institutions, and other federal agencies 

to inventory how they identify and make decisions about which resources are 

appropriate for digitization; 

• explores how organizations identify current and potential audiences and their 

needs for digital resources; 

• considers how organizations can develop appropriate business models to 

support digitization initiatives. 

Exemplary Project: Delving into the Wilds of Florida 

Both libraries and museums have collections critical for the study of the natural world. 

An IMLS LSTA-funded National Leadership Grant at work in Florida is supporting a 

new Web site that, for the first time, allows simultaneous searching across diverse 

museum and library databases of Florida Ecology. 

http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_c0600.htm

Action Recommendations for Museums, Libraries, and SLAAs 

1. Learn about the importance of having policies to ensure the long-term availability and 

usefulness of digital content. 

Libraries and museums that are engaged in or considering digitization projects should 

understand the importance of having policies to ensure the long-term availability and 

usefulness of the digital content that is created. Of particular importance are policies on 

metadata, standards for imaging, preservation of digital images, selection of materials to 

be digitized, and access policies. 

IMLS’ draft Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections 

(http://www.imls.gov/pubs/forumframework.htm) can provide helpful information to 

museums and libraries as they develop their digitization projects. 

2. Explore the usefulness of registering digital products in centralized digital registries. 3

One of the challenges created by digitization is the difficulty of knowing what digital 

resources exist and where they are located. To address this problem for projects supported 

 

3 Two national registries are: 

• Association of Research Libraries' (ARL): Digital Initiatives Database: 

http://www.arl.org/did/

• OCLC's Cooperative Online Resource Catalog (CORC): http://www.oclc.org/corc

Technology Survey page 14 
through its LSTA-funded National Leadership Grants program, IMLS is considering a 

grant award in 2002 to pilot the use of a new tool known as the Open Archives Initiative 

metadata harvesting protocol. If successful, the pilot would provide access to the more 

than 100 digital collections created with the IMLS LSTA-funded National Leadership 

Grant program since 1998. It would also help IMLS identify emerging best practices for 

the creation, management, and interoperability of digital resources. 

3. Explore opportunities to coordinate digitization initiatives statewide and regionally. 

The State Library Administrative Agencies (SLAAs) are in a particularly advantageous 

position to coordinate digitization initiatives within their states and regionally. They may 

want to consider the opportunities in their area to promote and coordinate collaboration 

among libraries and museums. Exemplars of SLAA coordination are: 

• Washington State Digital Library Resources: http://digitalwa.statelib.wa.gov/ 

• Library of Virginia Digital Library program: 

http://www.lva.lib.va.us/dlp/index.htm

• Colorado Digitization Project: coloradodigital.coalliance.org

Action Recommendations for IMLS 

1. Make libraries and museums aware of the funding that is currently available through 

IMLS’ grant programs. Emphasize how the programs can support technology 

implementation and digitization activities. 

A number of IMLS programs can be used to fund technology use and digitization 

activities: 

• National Leadership Grants for Museums: 

http://www.imls.gov/grants/museum/mus_nlgm.asp

• National Leadership Grants for Libraries: 

http://www.imls.gov/grants/library/lib_nlgl.asp

• National Leadership Grants for Libraries and Museums: 

http://www.imls.gov/grants/l-m/index.htm

• Museum Services programs, including Learning Opportunities Grants that will 

become available in FY 2003: 

http://www.imls.gov/grants/museum/index.htm 

• Grants to States: http://www.imls.gov/grants/library/lib_gsla.asp

• Native American Library Services: 

http://www.imls.gov/grants/library/lib_nat.asp

• Native Hawaiian Library Services: 

http://www.imls.gov/grants/library/lib_nhls.asp

Technology Survey page 15 
2. Identify strategies to increase funding for technology in museums. 

While libraries have benefited from several funding initiatives that support the use of 

technology, support for technology in museums is limited. IMLS is addressing the need 

for more dedicated funding for technology in museums through two core funding 

programs. Learning Opportunity Grants, available in 2003, include a priority of building 

technology capacity in museums of all types and sizes. Museums Online, a National 

Leadership Grant, funds technology innovations in providing museum services. 

Additional strategies should be identified to increase funding for technology use in 

museums. 

3. Identify strategies to increase funding for technology in small public libraries. 

Public libraries are eligible for IMLS’ LSTA-funded Grants to States program, E-Rate 

discounts, and equipment and training from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. There 

is still a substantial gap between small public libraries and the medium and large ones in 

terms of technologies currently implemented. IMLS will continue to promote its LSTAfunded Grants to States program as a way to address the need to implement technology in 

libraries. 

4. Educate and promote awareness among libraries and museums about the role of 

digital cultural heritage resources in education, research, and learning. 

IMLS will emphasize the potential museums and libraries can realize to deliver their 

educational resources in digital formats. As the Connecticut History Online project 

(http://www.lib.uconn.edu/cho/) and other IMLS-funded projects have demonstrated, 

digitized collections of cultural heritage materials offer rich and varied resources to 

students of all ages. 

• IMLS’ monthly e-newsletter Primary Source will continue to highlight 

excellent digitization projects. 

(http://www.imls.gov/whatsnew/current/pscurrent.htm) 

• IMLS’ annual Web-Wise Conference focuses on successful digitization 

projects. (www.imls.gov/pubs/conferences.htm)

• IMLS staff will make presentations about digitization initiatives, models and 

best practices at meetings within the museum and library communities.

 

5. Educate museum and library staff about the need to adopt standards, policies, and 

practices to enhance the usefulness and persistence of digital resources. 

IMLS will provide leadership to the field by advocating the use of standards and best 

practices in digitization initiatives. 

Technology Survey page 16 
IMLS: 

• requires applicants for LSTA-funded National Leadership Grant digitization 

projects to identify the policies and standards they are using. 

• initiated the Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections 

(http://www.imls.gov/pubs/forumframework.htm). IMLS will periodically 

review the document and make it widely available to museums and libraries. 

In addition, IMLS will: 

• explore ways to provide enhanced access to the digital resources created with 

IMLS funding; 

• fund research on problems such as preservation of digital resources and the 

interoperability of library, archival, and museum information; 

• support identification and promotion of best practices, standards, and model 

projects; 

• support analyses, tools and services, such as user needs studies, model business 

plans, and rights management services, to enhance the accessibility of digital 

resources. 

6. IMLS will encourage collaboration among museums and libraries to develop digitized 

virtual collections of cultural heritage collections. 

The Colorado Digitization Project (http://coloradodigital.coalliance.org/) and other IMLS-funded 

collaborative projects demonstrate how unique, dispersed primary source collections can 

be digitized and linked to create online databases accessible to anyone using the World 

Wide Web. IMLS will encourage partnerships and collaborative efforts through its grant 

programs. 

Technology Survey page 17 
Background on Study and Methodology 

Background for Conducting the Study 

In 1996, the Institute of Museum and Library Services was created when Congress passed 

the Museum and Library Services Act, drawing together federal support for these centers 

of learning and community engagement. IMLS administers museum programs under the 

Museum Services Act and library programs authorized by the Library Services and 

Technology Act (LSTA). IMLS administers a variety of grant programs under each law. 

For instance, LSTA funds both the IMLS Grants to States program (which is administered 

by SLAAs) and the competitive National Leadership Grants for Libraries program, among 

others. 

Since aspects of both funding programs impact the applications of technology in libraries 

and museums, IMLS undertook this study of their technology use and digitization 

activities, and the perceived role of IMLS in both of these areas. This report of the study 

offers insights into the uses, challenges, and technology capacity of both types of 

institutions. 

IMLS’ Office of Research and Technology was responsible for this study. The role of this 

office is to help identify the needs of the museum and library communities and the 

effectiveness of IMLS’ programs in addressing the needs. 

The contractor for the survey was the Center for Organizational Excellence, located in 

Rockville, Maryland. 

Purpose of the Survey 

The purpose of the survey was to collect information on the use of technologies, 

digitization activities, and related plans and policies of libraries, museums, and State 

Library Administrative Agencies across the country. 

The survey consisted of four sections: 

• Background on the respondent: demographic information on museums and libraries, 

including type, size, and location. 

• Status of technology: current and planned use of technology, funding sources, use of 

technology in programming. 

• Digitization plans, practices, and policies: current and planned digitization activities, 

funding sources, hindrances, digitization goals and materials being digitized, policies 

in use, and collaboration activities. 

• IMLS role: how IMLS should support implementation of technologies and digitization 

in individual institutions and within the museum and library communities. 

Technology Survey page 18 
IMLS will use the findings of this survey to determine its appropriate role in supporting 

technology and digitization activities, in museums and libraries, particularly to support 

services to the public. The information provided by the survey results will help IMLS 

shape the focus and thrust of the agency’s grant programs and related activities. The 

research will help IMLS to be better positioned to meet the future needs of libraries and 

museums. 

The final published information can be used by museums, libraries, and State Library 

Administrative Agencies to understand where they are in the continuum of technology 

implementation, and to plan for further technology developments. The report can help 

individual institutions with fundraising and advocacy activities.

Involving the Museum and Library Communities 

IMLS involved stakeholders from the museum and library communities at key points in 

the survey process. 

• Prior to conducting the survey, IMLS convened a group of museum, public library, 

academic library, and State Library Administrative Agency representatives to discuss 

content and approaches. 

• A number of individuals representing each of the survey groups participated in the 

pilot test of the survey, including taking the preliminary survey online, then 

participating in a focus group. Their comments and suggestions were very helpful in 

the final survey design. 

• As the survey report was being prepared, individuals from each of the groups in the 

survey read and provided helpful comments and feedback. 

IMLS appreciates the assistance received from the many individuals who helped with the 

survey. 

Methodology for identifying the sample 

The potential respondent universe was composed of four groups: public libraries, 

academic libraries, State Library Administrative Agencies, and museums. 

All 51 State Library Administrative Agencies received surveys. 

Random samples for museums, public libraries, and academic libraries were identified. 

The available museum and library populations for the survey were identified by using: 

• a database of museums supplied by the National Conference for State Museum

Associations (NCSMA) 

• the American Library Directory on Disc by Bowker.

• Museums: The database of the museum universe did not have sufficient 

information to stratify by museum discipline, so a simple random sample 

across all museums in the database was selected. (see Figure 12)

Technology Survey page 19 
Figure 12: Museum Universe and Sample Size

Museums Universe Sample Size

15,437 1,500

Note: The planned sample size for museums was 1,500. However, when substantial 

numbers of surveys were undeliverable, a re-sampling was done, resulting in a total of 

1,558 surveys sent to museums. 

 

 Public libraries were stratified in terms of the size of the population served by the 

library. Because there was particular interest in comparing across groups, an equal 

number of institutions from each category was sampled. For population categories that 

contained less than 150, the total population was used for the sample. (see Figure 13) 

Figure 13: Public Library Universe and Sample Size

Population Served Universe Sample Size 

Under 5,000 2,871 150 

5,000 – 9,999 1,348 150 

10,000 – 24,999 1,675 150 

25,000 – 49,999 762 150 

50,000 – 99,999 526 150 

100,000 – 249,999 254 150 

250,000 – 499,999 56 56 

500,000 – 999,999 43 43 

Over 1,000,000 20 20 

Total 7,555 1,019 

 Academic libraries were stratified by the type of academic setting the library serves. 

The database did not allow for stratifying the academic library groups by public and 

private institution, so the stratification was done with 2-year colleges versus 4-year 

colleges and universities. (see Figure 14) 

 

Figure 14: Academic Library Universe and Sample Size

Type of academic library Universe Sample size 

2-year colleges 1,222 150 

4-year colleges and universities 2,460 150 

Total 3,682 300

Conducting the Survey 

Technology Survey page 20 
The data collection was conducted during May and June 2001. To elicit a greater 

response rate, the deadline was extended by two weeks and a follow-up letter or e-mail 

was sent to all institutions in the samples. 

Response Rate and Validity of the Data 

A total of 2,836 surveys were sent: 1,558 to museums, 1,227 to public and academic 

libraries, and 51 to State Library Administrative Agencies.4

 A total of 701 survey 

responses were received. There were six surveys that were not identified as a library or 

museum, so they were not used in the analysis. The overall response rate to the survey was 

25 percent. (See Figure 15)

 

Figure 15: Survey Response Rates 

Group Surveys sent Survey responses Response rate 

Museums 1,558 341 22%

Public libraries 1,019 237 23% 

Academic libraries 300 80 27% 

SLAAs 51 37 73%

 

The findings of the survey are statistically representative at the following levels: 

 Public Libraries at the 90 percent (+/–10 percent) level 

 Academic Libraries at the 90 percent (+/–10 percent) level 

 Museums at the 90 percent (+/–5 percent) level 

 State Library Administrative Agencies (SLAAs) at the 95 percent (+/–5 percent) level 

At these confidence levels, the findings for State Library Administrative Agencies are 

definitive. The specific results for museums, public libraries, and academic libraries can 

be discussed in terms of trends for each. Trend results are also discussed when breaking 

the data by demographic information, such as size of population served (public libraries) 

and size of budget (museums). 

Definitions 

The following definitions are provided for key terms used in the survey: 

Technology refers to computer-based equipment, software applications, and 

telecommunication network capabilities that are used in libraries and museums. 

4 There were 92 fewer surveys sent than the total identified in the initial sample for libraries. These 92 were 

a combination of libraries that were located in Canada or Mexico, as well as those for which contact 

information was not available. Survey expertise indicated that since the number was under 100, the survey

results would not be impacted by not replacing those institutions. 

Technology Survey page 21 
Digitization is defined as the process of converting, creating, and maintaining books, art 

works, historical documents, photos, journals, etc. in electronic representations so they can 

be viewed via computer and other devices. (By digitizing portions of their collections, 

museums and libraries can provide the public with access to materials that otherwise 

might not be seen, such as historical documents and collections of objects that are not 

generally on display.) 

Programming refers to activities and services that are designed to instruct, inform, and 

engage people in museums and libraries. Programming takes many forms, both physical 

and virtual. The term has different connotations in the museum and library communities. 

Technology Survey page 22 
Survey Results for Museums 

Summary of the Survey Findings 

Technology use: Eighty-seven percent of museums that responded indicated they 

currently use some kinds of technologies. The technologies most in use include desktop 

computers, access to the Internet, e-mail, standard office software, and Web sites. Among 

small museums (with budgets less than $250,000), the percentage that have these 

technologies are significantly lower than for all museums. Thirteen percent of museums, 

all of them small, reported that they have none of the technologies. While many museums 

reported using a variety of funding sources, almost 20 percent of them reported having ‘no 

funding for technology.’ 

Digitization: A significant percentage of museums are involved in digitization activities. 

More than 30 percent of museums had digitization activities in the past 12 months, 

including 21 percent of small museums. A smaller number (18 percent) indicated that 

they plan digitization activities in the next 12 months. 

Funding is the most-cited hindrance to digitization activities, though other institutional 

priorities and lack of staff expertise were also noted. 

Museums that are not involved in digitization activities also cite the lack of funds and 

expertise as hindrances. Some, however, did not see a role for or usefulness of 

digitization in their institutions. 

Only a small number of museums have digitization policies in place, though a number are 

in the process of developing them. Very few register their digital content in national 

registries like ARL or OCLC CORC. 

Key Respondent Demographics 

At the time the surveys were sent, there were 15,437 museums eligible for surveying. 

Surveys were sent to 1,558 museums, and 341 responses were received. The response rate 

was 22 percent. 

The confidence level for the museum data is 90% (+/- 5 percent), which means the data 

are a reliable indicator of trends. 

History museums, historic houses/sites, and art museums were the most numerous 

respondents. (see Figure 16)

Figure 16: Percent of Survey Respondents Compared to Museum Universe by 

Museum Type 

Technology Survey page 23 
Type of museum % of survey respondents % of universe 

History 31% 29%

Historic house / site 23% 26% 

Art 16% 15%

• Eighteen percent of the respondents identified themselves as specialized distinct 

subject museums. The responses for other kinds of museums included general 

museum (4 percent), natural history/anthropology museum (3 percent), children’s 

museum (2 percent). All other types (aquarium, arboretum or botanical garden, nature 

center, science or technology center, and zoological park) each represented less than 1 

percent of the total of respondents. 

• Annual budget size of responding museums breaks out as in Figure 17. Size 

descriptions were assigned to the various budget categories. 

Figure 17: Annual Budget Size of Responding Museums 

Size of annual budget % of museum 

respondents 

Size description 

Less than $250,000 67% Small 

$250,001 to $500,000 9% 

$500,001 to $1,000,000 10% Medium 

$1,000,001 to $10,000,000 14% 

$10,000,001 and greater 0% Large 

• More than two-thirds of the respondents with the following museum types have annual 

budgets of less than $250,000: general museum; historic house/site; history museum; 

natural history/anthropology museum; nature center; and specialized distinct subject 

museum. All responding zoos and aquariums have annual budgets greater than 

$2,000,000. Budgets for the remaining types of museums (arboretum or botanical 

garden, art museum, children’s museum) ranged across all size descriptors. 

Exemplary Project: Minneapolis Institute of Arts 

The Minneapolis Institute of Arts is a leader in providing information online. In its 

IMLS-funded project "What Clicks?” the museum will conduct an intensive audience 

research and product evaluation study. The results will help museums learn how to 

improve their digital products, including exhibitions, lesson plans, and image databases, 

to increase their accessibility to and use by the public. http://www.artsmia.org/

Technology Survey page 24 
The Status of Technology – Museums 

“What technologies (hardware and software) does your institution currently use for its 

day-to-day operations?” What technologies does it plan to acquire or implement in the 

next 12 months? 

Figure 18 lists technologies used by museums in descending order: 

Figure 18: Technologies Currently in Use in Museums 

Technologies currently in use 

% of survey

respondents 

Desktop computers 74% 

Access to the Internet 71% 

E-mail 71%

Standard office software, e.g., word processing 70% 

Web site 62% 

Database software for collections management 54% 

Desktop publishing software 54% 

Accounting/payroll software 50% 

Database software for membership development 47% 

Graphics software 44% 

Network server 33% 

Computerized catalog of your library collection (if 

any) 29% 

Notebook (laptop) computers 27% 

Intranet 15%

None of the above 13%

Point of Sale software 11% 

PDAs, i.e., PalmPilot 9% 

Video tours 7% 

Extranet 4%

Virtual reality tours 4% 

Marketing and promotion software 2% 

• Five “basic” technologies reported by museums are shown in Figure 19. Small 

museums report significantly lower usage. 

Figure 19: Basic Technologies Reported by Museums

Technologies 

currently in use 

% of all 

museums using 

listed 

technologies 

% of small 

museums 

using listed 

technologies 

% of mediumsized 

museums 

using listed 

technologies 

% of large 

museums 

using listed 

technologies 

Desktop computers 74% 60% 96% 97%

Access to the 

Internet 

71% 55% 94% 100%

Technology Survey page 25 
E-mail 71% 55% 94% 100%

Standard office 

software 

70% 55% 96% 97%

Web site 62% 41% 93% 100% 

• Thirteen percent of respondents, all of them museums with annual budgets less than 

$250,000, indicated that they have none of the technologies. Forty-two percent of this 

group of small museums reported that they have no plans to implement any of the 

listed technologies in the next 12 months. 

• Fifteen percent of all museums (19 percent of the small ones) plan to add a Web site in 

the next 12 months. 

• Very few museums (less than 4 percent) are using more specialized technologies, like 

‘Extranets,’ ‘Marketing and promotion software,’ or ‘Virtual reality tours.’ 

• In general, the larger the museum’s annual budget, the more likely the museum is to 

use the listed technologies. 

What are the current sources of funds for this technology? (Check all that apply.)

• Operating funds (57 percent) 

• Gifts from donors (43 percent) 

• In-kind contributions (23 percent) 

• IMLS grants were identified as a source of funding by 2 percent of museums. 

• Almost 20 percent of all museums report that they have no funding for technology. 

What technology does your institution currently use for programming? (Check all that 

apply.) What does it plan to use for programming in the next 12 months that it does not 

currently use? 

• More than 54 percent of museums indicate that technology is currently used to support 

programming. More than 53 percent indicate they plan to use additional technologies 

to support programming in the next 12 months. 

• Small museums are more likely (more than 60 percent) to respond ‘Not applicable’ to 

both current and planned technology questions than are larger museums. 

• For those museums that use technology for programming, the most common kind is 

‘Information on exhibits is presented to the public via the Web’ (37 percent). This is 

consistent across all museums, regardless of budget size. 

Technology Survey page 26 
• ‘We provide programs and exhibits on our Web site’ is the programming technology 

most often planned for the next 12 months (26 percent of all museums). 

Technology is useful for your institution’s programming because...? 

• Results of the question vary by size of annual budget. (see Figure 20)

Figure 20: Technology is Useful to Your Museum Programming Because:

Benefit All museums Small museums (annual 

budget less than $250,000) 

Provides a richer educational 

experience 56% 43% 

Increases the number of people 51% 43% 

Makes programs more interactive 48% 38% 

Not applicable 35% 44% 

What hinders the use of technology in your institution’s programming?

• ‘Cost’ was identified as the primary hindrance to the use of technology in 

programming (79 percent of all museums), closely followed by lack of expertise (63 

percent). Lack of resources in general (money, people, time, etc.) was a common 

write-in response. 

Digitization Plans, Practices, and Policies - Museums 

In the past 12 months, have you been or are you currently involved in digitization, for 

example, current projects, funding, setting standards, implementing, etc.? (see Figure 21)

Figure 21: Digitization Activities in Small and Large Museums

All museums 

Smaller museums 

(annual budget 

less than $250,000) 

Larger museums 

(annual budget greater 

than $1,000,000) 

Digitization activities in the 

past 12 months? 

Yes – 32% 

No – 68% 

Yes – 21% (32) 

No – 80% (124) 

Yes – 64% (21) 

No – 36% (12) 

Digitization activities 

planned for the next 12 

months? 

Yes - 17% 

No - 83% 

Yes - 18% (23) 

No - 82% (103) 

Yes - 42% (8) 

No – 58% (11) 

What hinders your efforts at digitization? 

Respondents were asked to rank their three most important responses from a list. The 

most important hindrances among museums that are currently digitizing or have plans for 

the future are ranked in Figure 22. 

Figure 22: Ranking of Digitization Hindrances for Museums

Technology Survey page 27 
Digitization hindrances 

Currently

digitizing 

Next 12 

months 

Beyond 12 

months 

Lack of funds to support digitization 1 1 1 

Other projects have higher priorities 2 (tie) 2 2 

Lack of available expertise 2 (tie) 3 3 

Concern about costs of preservation 

and management 

4 4 4

‘Other’ with written comments 

emphasizing lack of staff and staff time 

5 5 5

Museums without digitization activities or plans frequently cited these hindrances: 

• Lack of funds to support digitization 

• Other projects have higher priorities 

• Lack of available expertise 

• Do not see a role for our institution in digitization 

 

What are the primary goals for your institution’s digitizing activities? 

Respondents ranked their three highest priority goals, as shown in Figure 23. ‘Not 

applicable’ was highly ranked, a reflection of the large percentage of museums (68 

percent) that are not involved in digitization activities. 

Figure 23: Highest Priority Digitization Goals for Museums 

Highest priority

digitization goals 

Rank among 

all 

respondents 

Rank among 

small 

museums 

Rank among 

medium-sized 

museums 

Rank among 

large 

museums 

Increase access to the 

collections and 

collections records 

1 3 1 1 

Preserve materials of 

importance or value 2 2 2 4 

Not applicable 3 1 8 9

Provide greater 

information about the 

institution’s collections 

to artists, scholars,

students, teachers, 

and the public 

4 5 3 2 

Reduce damage to 

original materials 

5 4 3 8

Increase interest in the 

institution 

6 6 5 5

Exemplary Project: Bronx Zoo 

The Wildlife Conservation Society and the Bronx Zoo are developing two multimedia 

Technology Survey page 28 
components to the Tiger Mountain exhibit of Siberian Tigers with the aid of an IMLS 

LSTA-funded National Leadership Grant. Available at interactive touch screen terminals 

within the zoo, the digital exhibits will provide visitors with both a behind-the-scenes 

look at modern zoo animal care as well as a snapshot of the state of tigers in the world. 

Visitors have the options of observing animal behavioral enrichment activities, watching 

digital video, reading journal entries, or viewing photos from researchers in the field. 

http://wcs.org/home/zoos/bronxzoo/

What materials has your institution selected for digitization? 

Museums’ current and future digitizing activities will focus on: 

• Images of items in the collection (34 percent) 

• Photographs (30 percent) 

• Images of artifacts (24 percent) 

• Historical documents/archives (21 percent ) 

Where do you currently obtain funds to support your digitizing efforts? (Check all that 

apply.)

Museums with funding for digitization activities or projects (13 percent) reported these 

sources: 

• Operating funds (24 percent ) 

• Gifts from donors (14 percent) 

• Foundation grants (11 percent) 

• Sixty-four percent of responding museums indicated they have no funding for 

digitization. 

Does your institution cooperate with other organizations to develop digitization programs, 

i.e. partnerships, consortia, etc.? 

• Nineteen percent of museums currently digitizing are cooperating with other 

institutions’ digitization projects. They report cooperating with a wide variety of 

institutions, including other museums and state agencies. 

Does your institution have digitization policies in place? In development? (see Figure 24) 

Figure 24: Digitization Policies in Museums

All museums 

Smaller museums 

(annual budget less 

than $250,000) 

Larger museums 

(annual budget greater 

than $1,000,000) 

Digitization policies 

currently in place? 

Yes – 12% 

No – 88% 

Yes – 6% (9) 

No – 94% (138) 

Yes – 29% (9) 

No – 71% (22) 

Digitization policies 

in development? 

Yes – 20% 

No – 80% 

Yes – 14% (21) 

No – 86% (132) 

Yes – 39% (14) 

No – 61% (19) 

Technology Survey page 29 
• Policies “in place” include: ‘Digital formats,’ ’Priorities for digitization,’ ‘Materials to 

be digitized,’ and ‘Access.’ 

• Policies “in development” are identical to the “in place” list, with the addition of 

‘Intellectual property issues.’

Does your institution allow access to its digital collection by the public? 

• Forty-seven percent of museums that have some portion of their collection digitized 

allow public access to their digital collections. Those that do allow access primarily 

use the Web (76 percent), followed by their own computer network (52 percent). Very 

few (less than 7 percent) use a third party. 

• Primary target audiences of digital materials, in order of priority, are: ‘Anyone with 

Internet access’ (61 percent), ‘Researchers/scholars’ (46 percent), and ‘Staff members’ 

(35 percent). 

• Seventy-two percent of these museums that have some portion of their collection 

digitized give free access (no charge) to ‘Anyone with Internet access.’ 

Are your digital products listed with any digital registry? 

• Two percent of responding museums report that their digital products are listed with a 

registry outside of their own catalogs. Based on the names of registries that they 

provided (American Zoo and Aquarium Association, International Species Information 

System, EAD, American Memory (LoC), and the Museum Loan Network), it appears 

that there is not a standard definition or understanding of what a “registry” is. 

• Nine percent of responding museums have digital products listed in their institutions’ 

catalogs. Catalog tools include Access®, animal/medical records, Embark Collections 

Management®, Filemaker Pro®, the gallery Web site, and Past Perfect®. 

Technology Survey page 30 
Survey Results for Public Libraries 

Summary of the Survey Findings 

Technology use: Ninety-nine percent of public libraries that responded indicated that they 

currently use some kinds of technologies. The technologies most widely used are: access 

to the Internet, e-mail, computerized catalogs of library collections, desktop computers, 

standard office software, and Web sites. Among the small libraries (those serving 

populations under 10,000), e-mail and Internet access are strong (more than 85 percent), 

but they lag in online catalogs, desktop computers, standard office software, and Web 

sites. Only 1 percent of respondents said that ‘None of the above’ technologies are in use. 

Ninety-nine percent report some funding source for technology. 

Digitization: Twenty-five percent reported activities in the past 12 months. Among the 

small libraries, only 8 percent reported any activities in that time period. Beyond the next 

12 months, 31 percent expect to be involved in digitization. Among the survey groups, 

public libraries are the least involved in digitization activities. 

Funding is the most-cited hindrance to digitization activities, though other institutional 

priorities, lack of expertise and staff time were also noted. 

Only three percent of the responding public libraries have digitization policies in place, 

although 17 percent reported that they are developing policies. Two percent list their 

digital products with a registry, and seven percent have them listed in the libraries’ 

catalogs. 

Key Respondent Demographics 

 At the time the surveys were sent, there were 7,555 public libraries eligible for 

surveying. Surveys were sent to 1,019 public libraries, and 237 responses were 

received. The response rate was 23 percent. 

 The confidence level for the public library data is 90 percent (+/- 10 percent), which 

means the data are a reliable indicator of trends. 

 The responding public libraries indicated the populations served as in Figure 25. 

Figure 25: Responding Public Libraries and the Population Served

Population served % of survey respondents Size descriptor 

0 to 4,999 13% 

5,000 to 9,999 14% 

Small 

10,000 to 24,999 15% 

25,000 to 49,999 13% 

50,000 to 99,999 13% 

Medium 

100,000 to 249,999 16% Large 

Technology Survey page 31 
250,000 to 499,999 8% 

500,000 to 999,999 4% 

1 million or more 4% 

Exemplary Project: The Children of Birmingham—Past, Present, and Future 

The Birmingham Cultural Alliance Program (BCAP), a collaboration of six museums and 

the public library funded by IMLS, take the city’s children through the great decades of 

Birmingham’s past. For the inner-city children, it is an opportunity to discover the rich 

legacy of their cultural heritage. They explore agricultural advances of George 

Washington Carver. They follow the heroic World War II flights of the Tuskegee 

Airmen. They listen to the music of jazz legends like Erskin Hawkins. They march with 

the visionaries of the Alabama Christian Movement for Human Rights from

Birmingham's 16th Street Baptist Church--the epicenter of the Civil Rights Movement 

that changed the nation forever. http://www.imls.gov/closer/hlt_c0202.htm 

The Status of Technology – Public Libraries 

What technologies (hardware and software) does your institution currently use for its dayto-day operations? What technologies does it plan to acquire or implement in the next 12 

months? 

Figure 26 lists technologies used by public libraries in descending order. The six “basic” 

technologies are highlighted. 

Figure 26: Technologies Currently in Use and Anticipated by Public Libraries

Technology Survey page 32 
Technologies Currently in use: 

% of respondents 

Next 12 months: 

% of respondents 

Access to the Internet 99% 1%

E-mail 98% 1%

Computerized catalog of 

your library collection (if 

any)

90%

5%

Desktop computers 89% 1%

Standard office software, 

e.g., word processing 86% 1%

Web site 75% 14%

Network server 72% 7% 

Desktop publishing software 71% 3% 

Graphics software 60% 4% 

Accounting/payroll software 64% 4% 

Database software for 

collections management 59% 

2% 

Notebook (laptop) computers 48% 7% 

Intranet 37% 7%

Database software for 

membership development 27% 

2% 

PDAs, i.e., PalmPilot 15% 6% 

Marketing and promotion 

software 10% 

5% 

Extranet 8% 2%

Video tours 3% 7% 

Virtual reality tours 3% 5% 

Point of Sale software 3% 1% 

None of the above 1% 52%

• In libraries serving populations of more than 10,000, the use of technologies increases 

with each step to the next population group. Thus, public libraries serving populations 

of more than 100,000 have the heaviest use of all types of technology. 

• Few libraries reported planning to add technologies in the next 12 months. Fifty-two 

percent checked ‘None of the above.’ 

• Libraries planning to add technologies during the next 12 months are clustered among 

the population ranges serving 5,000 to 249,999. The one exception is ‘Web site,” for 

which all sizes of libraries have plans. 

What are the current sources of funds for this technology? (Check all that apply.)

• Ninety-nine percent of public libraries report having some funding source for 

technology. 

• Operating funds (65 percent of all responding public libraries) 

Technology Survey page 33 
• State funds (56 percent) 

• City government funds (45 percent) 

• IMLS (LSTA-funded Grants to States and LSTA-funded National Leadership 

Grants program) (20 percent) 

Exemplary Project: Diverse Needs, Diverse Solutions

The 63 libraries of the Queens Borough Public Library system, based in Jamaica, New 

York, serve two million people in one of the most culturally diverse counties in the U.S. 

It has the second largest English-as-a-Second-Language program in the nation and the 

highest circulation rate of any public library system in the country. Strong partnerships 

with schools and community groups facilitate outreach to key groups. “Latchkey” 

children work at the library after school to provide technology assistance to library 

patrons. Entrepreneurs visit the Small Business Resource Center for programs to help 

them find economic opportunity. For the area's most recent arrivals, the New American

program provides “coping skills” and native-language collections. For them, the library is 

an information gateway to a new way of life. 

http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt2_0400.htm

What technology does your institution currently use for programming? (Check all that 

apply.) What does it plan to use for programming in the next 12 months that it does not 

currently use?

• More than 42 percent of public libraries use technology to support programming, and 

more than 33 percent plan to add programming technologies in the next 12 months. 

• Technology is currently used most often in programming to present educational 

programs via onsite computer (22 percent) and to present information on exhibits to 

the public via the Web (19 percent). 

• Technology most often planned in the next 12 months: ‘We provide programs and 

exhibits on our Web site’ (18 percent). 

• More than 64 percent of public libraries serving a population of 25,000 or less reported 

the use of technology to support programming as ‘Not applicable.’ But more than 85 

percent of libraries serving a population of 500,000 or greater currently use technology 

to support programming, especially for ‘Information on exhibits is presented to public 

via the Web.’ 

Technology is useful for your institution’s programming because...? (see Figure 27) 

Figure 27: Technology is Useful to Your Public Library Programming Because:

Benefits Agreement among public libraries 

Provides a richer educational experience 61% 

Increases the number of people 55% 

Technology Survey page 34 
Makes programs more interactive 45% 

Not applicable 30% 

What hinders the use of technology in your institution’s programming? 

• ‘Cost’ (74 percent of all public libraries) and ‘Lack of staff expertise’ (54 percent) 

were identified as hindrances to the use of technology in programming. ‘Lack of staff 

time’ was a common write-in response. 

Digitization Plans, Practices, and Policies - Public Libraries

In the past 12 months, have you been or are you currently involved in digitization, for 

example, current projects, funding, setting standards, implementing, etc.? (see Figure 28) 

Figure 28: Digitization Activities in Small and Large Public Libraries

All public 

libraries 

Larger public 

libraries (population 

served over 10,000) 

Smaller public libraries 

(population served 

under 10,000) 

Digitization activities in the 

past 12 months? 

Yes – 25% 

No – 75% 

Yes – 30% (51) 

No – 70% (118) 

Yes – 8% (5) 

No – 92% (54) 

Figure 29 summarizes current and planned digitization activities among all public library 

respondents. 

Figure 29: Current and Planned Digitization Activities in Public Libraries

Digitization activities in 

past 12 months 

Digitization plans for next 

12 months 

Digitization plans beyond 

12 months 

Yes: 25% Yes: 13% Yes: 31% 

No: 75% No: 87% No: 69% 

What hinders your efforts at digitization? 

Libraries were asked to rank the top three hindrances. Figure 30 shows the rank among 

the responses. 

Figure 30: Ranking of Digitization Hindrances for Public Libraries

Digitization hindrances 

Currently

digitizing 

Next 12 

months 

Beyond 12 

months 

Lack of funds to support digitization 1 1 (tie) 1 

Other projects have higher priorities 2 3 (tie) 2 

Lack of available expertise 3 5 (tie) 3 

Concern about costs of preservation and 

management 

4 5 (tie) 4

Not applicable’ 5 3 (tie) * 

Technology Survey page 35 
‘Other’ with written comments 

emphasizing lack of staff and staff time 

6 1 (tie) 5

*No response. 

• Public libraries with no plans to digitize cited similar hindrances: ‘Lack of funds to 

support digitization’ and ‘Other projects have higher priority.’ These libraries also had 

high rates of response to ‘Do not see a role for our institution in digitization’ or ‘Do 

not see the usefulness of digitization for our institution.’ 

Exemplary Project: Libraries Link Rural NY Residents to Job Information 

Though a project funded by IMLS, rural residents of Livingston, Ontario, Wayne, and 

Wyoming Counties in New York need go no further than their local library to initiate a 

job search. The Pioneer Library System teamed with the New York State Department of 

Labor to make thirteen small, rural libraries points of access for essential employment 

services and information. http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_l0300.htm

What are the primary goals for your institution’s digitizing activities? 

Respondents were asked to rank their three most important goals from a list. Figure 31 

shows the overall ranking for each item.

Figure 31: Highest Priority Digitization Goals for Public Libraries

Highest priority digitization goals Rank 

Not applicable 1 

Preserve materials of importance or value 2 

Increase access to books, journals, documents, etc. 3 

Provide access to digital collection on a Web site 4 

Increase access to the collections and collections records 5 

Reduce damage to original materials 6 

• Goal priorities are fairly consistent across public libraries by size of population served. 

What materials has your institution selected for digitization? 

• Photographs (30 percent ) 

• Historical documents/archives (29 percent) 

• ‘Not applicable’ was the most frequent response (54 percent) to the question about 

what is being digitized. 

Where do you currently obtain funds to support your digitizing efforts? (Check all that 

apply.)

• Public libraries with funding for digitization activities (15 percent) reported these 

sources: Operating funds (14 percent), Gifts from donors (8 percent), Foundation 

Technology Survey page 36 
grants (7 percent), IMLS grants (7 percent) (IMLS’ LSTA-funded Grants to States 

program). 

Does your institution cooperate with other organizations to develop digitization programs, 

i.e. partnerships, consortia, etc.? 

• Thirty-nine percent of public libraries that are currently digitizing report cooperative 

arrangements with other institutions, most frequently with historical societies, other 

public libraries, academic libraries, and SLAAs. 

Does your institution have digitization policies in place? In development? 

• Three percent of responding public libraries have digitization policies currently in 

place. ‘Materials to be digitized’ was the most frequently cited policy category. 

• Seventeen percent of public libraries indicate they are developing digitization policies. 

Does your institution allow access to its digital collection by the public? 

• Forty-eight percent of public libraries that have some portion of their collection 

digitized allow access to their digital collections primarily use the Web or through 

their own computer network. 

• For those public libraries that allow access, the target audiences are ‘anyone with 

Internet access’ (75 percent) and ‘visitors on site’ (45 percent). 

• Seventy-nine percent of these public libraries give free access (no charge) to ‘Anyone 

with Internet access.’

Are your digital products listed with any digital registry? 

• Only two percent of responding public libraries listed their digital products with a 

registry. 

• Seven percent of responding libraries have digital products listed in their own catalogs. 

Technology Survey page 37 
Survey Results for Academic Libraries 

Summary of the Survey Findings 

Technology use: One hundred percent of academic libraries that responded indicated they 

currently use some kinds of technologies. The technologies most in use are: Access to 

Internet, e-mail, Web site, desktop computers, computerized catalogs, and standard office 

software. Below this group are technologies in use in 57 percent to 80 percent of the 

academic libraries: network servers, desktop publishing software, database software for 

collections management, accounting/payroll software, and Intranets. 

When asked about implementing technologies in the coming year, there were significantly 

fewer responses. Adding ‘video tours’ and ‘notebook (laptop) computers’ were noted 

most often. 

Digitization: Thirty-four percent of academic libraries reported digitization activities 

within the past 12 months. Nineteen percent expect to be involved in digitization work in 

the next 12 months, and 44 percent beyond 12 months. 

Hindrances to digitization include lack of funds, other institutional priorities, concerns 

about the costs of preservation and management, and staff issues, such as expertise and 

time. 

The highest priority in academic digitization efforts is increasing access to books, 

journals, documents, etc. The collections they focus on are historical documents and 

archives, photographs, and course material. 

Thirty-eight percent of the academic libraries that are digitizing reported that they 

cooperate with other organizations in digitization programs. 

Only eight percent of academic libraries have digitization policies currently in place, 

though 16 percent report having some in development. 

Six percent have listed their digital content in a digital register, though 21 percent list 

digital content in their online catalogs. 

Key respondent demographics 

 At the time the surveys were sent, there were 3,862 academic libraries eligible for 

surveying. Surveys were sent to 300 academic libraries and 80 responses were 

received. The response rate was 27 percent. 

• The confidence level for the academic library data is 90 percent (+/- 10 percent), 

which means the data are a reliable indicator of trends.

Technology Survey page 38 
The Status of Technology – Academic Libraries 

What technologies (hardware and software) does your institution currently use for its dayto-day operations? What technologies does it plan to acquire or implement in the next 12 

months? 

Figure 23 lists the technologies used by academic libraries in descending order. Six 

“basic” technologies reported by academic libraries are highlighted. 

Figure 32: Technologies Currently in Use in Academic Libraries

Technology Survey page 39 
% of survey respondents 

Access to the Internet 99%

E-mail 99%

Web site 95%

Desktop computers 94%

Computerized catalog of your 

library collection (if any) 92%

Standard office software, e.g., 

word processing 87%

Network server 80% 

Desktop publishing software 68% 

Database software for 

collections management 67% 

Accounting/payroll software 58% 

Intranet 57%

Notebook (laptop) computers 48% 

PDAs, i.e., PalmPilot 29% 

Extranet 23%

Database software for 

membership development 19% 

Marketing and promotion 

software 9% 

Virtual reality tours 9% 

Video tours 8% 

Point of Sale software 5% 

None of the above 0% 

There were considerably fewer responses (a maximum of six) to the question about 

technologies planned in the next 12 months: 

• None of the above (37 percent) 

• Video tours (21 percent) 

• Notebook (laptop) computers (16 percent) 

• Computerized catalog of your library collection (12 percent) 

• Database software for collections management (12 percent) 

Exemplary Project: Teachers Redraw Lesson Plans with Art Databases 

Art treasures from around the world are making their way into classrooms in central 

Indiana. An IMLS LSTA-funded National Leadership Grant supports a joint project of 

the libraries of Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis and the Indianapolis 

Museum of Art that delivers images of artworks directly to teachers through the Internet. 

The project is proving that the study of art enhances a variety of subjects, including 

geography, math, and science. http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_c0700.htm

Technology Survey page 40 
What are the current sources of funds for this technology? (Check all that apply.)

• The highest responses were: 

• Operating funds (73 percent) 

• State funds (5 percent) 

• Gifts from donors (32 percent) 

• IMLS (15 percent) 

• No funding for technology (no responses) 

What technology does your institution currently use for programming? (Check all that 

apply.) What does it plan to use for programming in the next 12 months that it does not 

currently use? 

• Sixty-one percent of academic libraries indicate that technology is currently used to 

support programming. More than 54 percent indicate they plan to add programming 

technologies in the next 12 months. 

• The most common uses are ‘Educational programs presented to the public via the 

Web’ (37 percent) and ‘Educational programs presented via onsite computer’ (34 

percent). 

• ‘Providing programs and exhibits on our Web site’ is the technology most often 

planned (28 percent). 

Technology is useful for your institution’s programming because...? 

• Provides a richer educational experience (74 percent) 

• Increases the number of people who learn from programs (69 percent) 

• Makes programs more interactive (68 percent) 

What hinders the use of technology in your institution’s programming? 

• ‘Cost’ (73 percent) and ‘Lack of staff expertise’ (53 percent) were identified as 

hindrances. 

Digitization Plans, Practices, and Policies – Academic Libraries 

In the past 12 months, have you been or are you currently involved in digitization, for 

example, current projects, funding, setting standards, implementing, etc.? 

Figure 33 summarizes the responses to questions about current and future digitization 

activities. 

Technology Survey page 41 
Figure 33: Current and Planned Digitization Activities in Academic Libraries 

Digitization activities in 

past 12 months 

Digitization plans for next 

12 months 

Digitization plans beyond 

12 months 

Yes: 34% Yes: 19% Yes: 44% 

No: 66% No: 81% No: 56% 

Exemplary Project: A New Way of Playing Old Songs

The Johns Hopkins University maintains one of the country's largest online collections of 

sheet music, with images of more than 29,000 pages of popular American music from

1780 to 1960. In an ambitious project supported by an IMLS LSTA-funded National 

Leadership Grant, the collection will be enhanced allowing users to see the sheet music 

images, play the scores, and search the lyrics with pinpoint accuracy. The collection will 

also serve as a testbed for a workflow management system that can help other large 

collection holders streamline the process of creating digital library repositories. 

http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_l0900.htm

What hinders your efforts at digitization?

As academic libraries look to the next 12 months, they ranked four hindrances the same: 

‘Lack of funding to support digitization,’ ‘Other projects have higher priorities,’ ‘Other’ 

comments that emphasized lack of staff and staff time, and ‘Not applicable.’ Figure 34

shows the rank among responses. 

Figure 34: Ranking of Digitization Hindrances in Academic Libraries 

Digitization hindrances 

Currently

digitizing 

Beyond 12 

months 

Lack of funds to support digitization 1 1 

Other projects have higher priorities 2 2 

Concern about costs of preservation and 

management 

3 4

Lack of available expertise 4 3 

As academic libraries look to the next 12 months, they ranked four hindrances the same: 

‘Lack of funding to support digitization,’ ‘Other projects have higher priorities,’ ‘Other’ 

comments that emphasized lack of staff and staff time, and ‘Not applicable.’ Figure 34

shows the rank among responses. 

What are the primary goals for your institution’s digitizing activities? 

Respondents were asked to rank their three most important goals from a list. Figure 35 

shows the overall ranking for each item.

Figure 35: Highest Priority Digitization Goals in Academic Libraries

Technology Survey page 42 
Highest priority digitization goals Rank 

Increase access to books, journals, documents, etc. 1 

Preserve materials of importance or value 2 

Increase access to the collections and collections records 3 

Provide access to digital collection on a Web site 4 

Reduce damage to original materials 5 

Not applicable 6 

Support educational programs 7 

What materials has your institution selected for digitization? (Check all that apply.)

Materials cited by academic libraries that reported digitization activities: 

• Historical documents and archives (33 percent) 

• Photographs (25 percent) 

• Course material (25 percent) 

Materials for future digitization efforts would also include ‘Images of artifacts.’ 

• ‘Not applicable’ was the most frequent response (49 percent) to the question of 

what is being digitized. 

Where do you currently obtain funds to support your digitizing efforts? (Check all that 

apply.)

Academic libraries with funding for digitization activities (22 percent) cited these funding 

sources: 

• Operating funds (25 percent) 

• State funds (14 percent) 

• IMLS grants (11 percent) (IMLS’ grant programs funded through LSTA) 

Exemplary Project: Teaching with Digital Content—Describing, Finding, Using Digital 

Cultural Heritage Materials

Teaching with digital primary source documents makes a range of exciting possibilities 

available to teachers, librarians, and museum curators and educators. Yet it also brings 

new challenges. New programs need to be developed to integrate digital primary source 

materials into K-12 curriculum and assignments, as well as into the educational programs 

of museums and libraries. An IMLS LSTA-funded National Leadership Grant project at 

the University of Illinois Library at Urbana-Champaign helps these educators incorporate 

digitized primary source materials into their classes. They obtain technology training, 

learn how to create digital collections that provide historical context, explore the use of 

modes of communication, such as e-mail discussion lists, and study strategies to enhance 

visual literacy. 

http://images.library.uiuc.edu/projects/tdc/

Technology Survey page 43 
Does your institution cooperate with other organizations to develop digitization programs, 

i.e. partnerships, consortia, etc.? 

• Almost 38 percent of academic libraries currently digitizing report that they are in 

cooperative arrangements, most frequently citing other ‘Academic libraries,’ ‘State 

library agencies,’ and ‘Consortia,’ as partners. 

• More than 62 percent of academic libraries currently digitizing are not in cooperative 

arrangements with other institutions. 

• For academic libraries currently digitizing, 91 percent reported that they play no role 

in digitization projects beyond their institution. Similarly, for academic libraries not

currently digitizing, 91 percent reported that they play no role in digitization projects 

beyond their institution. 

Does your institution have digitization policies in place? In development? 

• Eight percent of responding academic libraries have digitization policies currently in 

place. 

• Sixteen percent of the libraries have digitization policies in development. The most 

frequently cited subject for developing policies is ‘Preservation.’ 

Does your institution allow access to its digital collection by the public? 

• Eighty-seven percent of academic libraries that have some portion of their collection 

digitized report that they allow access to their digital collections, primarily though the 

Web, followed by their own computer networks. 

• For those academic libraries that allow access, the primary target audiences are 

‘Faculty at your institution’ (47 percent) and ‘Researchers/scholars’ (41 percent). 

• Seventy-two percent of these academic libraries give free access (no charge) to 

‘Anyone with Internet access.’ 

Are your digital products listed with any digital registry? 

• Only six percent of responding academic libraries have digital products listed with a 

registry. 

• Twenty-one percent have digital products listed in their own catalogs. 

 

Technology Survey page 44 
Survey Results for State Library Administrative Agencies 

(SLAAs) 

Summary of Survey Findings 

Technology use: One hundred percent of SLAAs that responded indicated they currently 

use some kinds of technologies. The technologies most in use are: desktop computers, 

access to the Internet, e-mail, network servers, standard office software, and Web site. All 

of these are in use in at least 97 percent of responding SLAAs. 

The next group of technologies that were listed at 57 percent and higher are: computerized 

catalogs, accounting/payroll software, desktop publishing software, graphics software, 

intranet, and database software for collections management. 

The SLAAs that plan to add technologies in the next year will focus on Intranets, virtual 

reality tours, and PDAs (hand-held computers). 

Digitization: More than 78 percent of SLAAs reported digitization activities in the past 12 

months. Thirty-eight percent plan activities in the next 12 months, and 40 percent beyond 

12 months. Among all of the groups, the SLAAs are the most actively involved in 

digitization. 

Hindrances they cited include lack of funds, other institutional priorities, and lack of 

available expertise. 

The highest priorities in their digitization efforts are to increase access to books, journals, 

collections, and collection records, preserve materials of importance or value, reduce 

damage to original materials, and provide access via a Web site. 

The collections they focus on are historical documents and archives, photographs, and 

government publications. 

Twenty-five of the responding SLAAs have digitization policies in place, and 42 percent 

have them in development. 

Key Respondent Demographics 

All 51 of the eligible SLAAs were sent a survey, and 37 responses were received. The 

response rate was 73 percent. 

The confidence level for the SLAAs statistical findings is 95 percent (+/- 5 percent), 

which means the results are definitive. 

Exemplary Project: Connecticut History Online 

With IMLS funding, the Connecticut Historical Society, in partnership with Mystic Seaport 

and the Thomas Dodd Research Center of the University of Connecticut, developed a 

comprehensive, Web-based virtual collection of graphic images that document the history of

the Connecticut community. The project addressed the need for common metadata, a variety 

of search mechanisms, and resources for using the database in the educational environment. 

The partnership is engaged in a long-term effort to encourage teachers to make meaningful 

use of the database. 

www.cthistoryonline.org/

Technology Survey page 45 
The Status of Technology – SLAAs 

What technologies (hardware and software) does your institution currently use for its dayto-day operations? What technologies does it plan to acquire or implement in the next 12 

months? 

Figure 36 lists technologies used by SLAAs in descending order. The seven “basic” 

technologies are highlighted. 

Figure 36: Technologies Currently in Use in SLAAs

Technology Survey page 46 
% of survey

respondents 

Desktop computers 100%

Access to the Internet 100%

E-mail 100%

Network server 100%

Notebook (laptop) computers 97%

Standard office software, e.g., word 

processing 97%

Web site 97%

Computerized catalog of your library 

collection (if any) 92% 

Accounting/payroll software 89% 

Desktop publishing software 89% 

Graphics software 68% 

Intranet 65%

Database software for collections 

management 57% 

PDAs, i.e., PalmPilot 30% 

Database software for membership 

development 19% 

Extranet 19%

Marketing and promotion software 5% 

Point of Sale software 8% 

Video tours 8% 

Virtual reality tours 3% 

None of the above 0% 

• Thirty percent of SLAAs indicated that they do not plan to add technologies in the 

next 12 months. 

• Those that do plan to add technologies listed ‘Intranet’ (26 percent), ‘Virtual reality 

tours’ (22 percent), ‘PDAs,’ i.e., hand-held computers (22 percent). 

Exemplary Project: State Libraries Untangle Web of State and Local Information

State and local government organizations post information for citizens on the Internet, 

but it is often still difficult to navigate through these sites to find the information needed. 

With an IMLS LSTA-funded National Leadership Grant, the Washington State Library 

demonstrated to four other state libraries how to develop a useful gateway to online 

government information. http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_l0500.htm 

What are the current sources of funds for this technology? (Check all that apply.)

• State funds (92 percent) 

Technology Survey page 47 
• IMLS (62 percent) (IMLS’ LSTA-funded Grants to States program) 

• Operating funds (38 percent). 

• All of the SLAAs have funds for technology. (None indicated having no funding 

source.) 

What technology does your institution currently use for programming? (Check all that 

apply.) What does it plan to use for programming in the next 12 months that it does not 

currently use? 

SLAAs identified two current programming uses most often: 

 Disseminate research findings and publications via the Web site (60 percent) 

 Information on exhibits is presented to the public via the Web (43 percent) 

 More than 34 percent indicated that they plan to add a different programming 

technology use next year, particularly ‘We want to provide programs and exhibits on 

our Web site’ (19 percent). 

Technology is useful for your institution’s programming because...? 

• Makes programs more interactive (58 percent) 

• Increases the number of people who learn from programs (55 percent) 

• Provides a richer educational experience for patrons (50 percent) 

What hinders the use of technology in your institution’s programming? 

• Lack of staff expertise (53 percent) 

• Cost (50 percent) 

• Write-in responses emphasized lack of time and available staff. 

Digitization Plans, Practices, and Policies – SLAAs 

In the past 12 months, have you been or are you currently involved in digitization, for 

example, current projects, funding, setting standards, implementing, etc.? 

• More than 78 percent of all SLAAs report digitization activities in the past 12 months. 

• Thirty-eight percent of SLAAs report digitization plans in the next 12 months, and 40 

percent beyond the next 12 months. 

What hinders your efforts at digitization?

SLAAs were asked to rank the top three hindrances. Figure 37 cumulatively ranks the 

responses. 

Technology Survey page 48 
Figure 37: Ranking of Digitization Hindrances for SLAAs

 

Currently

digitizing 

Next 12 

months 

Beyond 12 

months 

Lack of funds to support digitization 1 1 (tie) 1 

Other projects have higher priorities 2 3 (tie) 2 

Lack of available expertise 3 5 3 

Concern about costs of preservation and 

management 

4 6 4

‘Other’ with written comments 

emphasizing lack of staff and staff time 

5 1 (tie) 5

Not applicable 6 3 (tie) * 

*No Response 

Exemplary Project: High-Tech Teaching in Small Town Texas

The border town of Cotulla, Texas, is a world away from the busy city of San Antonio. 

Yet thanks to satellite receiver equipment purchased with IMLS funding, townsfolk there, 

and in three other isolated Texas towns, are now linked to a variety of professional 

training programs and other big-city resources. The librarians, who are far from state 

universities, have access to continuing education programming from the Texas State 

Library and the American Library Association. 

http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_l0700.htm 

What are the primary goals for your institution’s digitizing activities? 

Respondents were asked to rank their three most important goals from a list. Figure 38

shows the overall ranking for the highest priority goals. 

Figure 38: Highest Priority Digitization Goals for SLAAs

Rank

Increase access to books, journals, documents, etc. 1 

Preserve materials of importance or value 2 

Increase access to the collections and collections records 3 

Provide access to digital collection on a Web site 4 

Reduce damage to original materials 5 

Increase access to state services 6 

Provide greater information about the institution’s collections to 

artists, scholars, students, teachers, and the public 

7 

What materials has your institution selected for digitization? Check all that apply. 

• Historical documents/archives (60 percent) 

• Photographs (43 percent) 

Technology Survey page 49 
• Government publications (37 percent) 

Future digitization efforts would include the same kinds of materials, plus 

• Maps (38 percent) 

• Manuscripts (35 percent) 

Where do you currently obtain funds to support your digitizing efforts? (Check all that 

apply.)

• IMLS (54 percent) 

• State funds (46 percent) 

• Operating funds (16 percent) 

• Thirty percent of respondents indicate they currently have no funding for digitization 

Does your institution cooperate with other organizations to develop digitization programs, 

i.e. partnerships, consortia, etc.? 

• Seventy-two percent of SLAAs that have current digitization projects cooperate with 

other institutions to develop digitization programs. Cooperative efforts occur most 

frequently with ‘Academic libraries,’ ‘Individual public libraries,’ and ‘State 

archives.’ 

Thirty-one percent of the SLAAs with current digitization projects report some roles with 

other institutions to develop digitization programs: 

• Encourage cooperative projects 

• Issue sub-grants 

• Provide best practices or guidelines 

• Provide information 

• Provide staff or equipment for digitization efforts 

• Set policies or standards 

• Undertake demonstration projects 

Does your institution have digitization policies in place? In development? 

Twenty-five of the responding SLAAs have digitization policies currently in place. The 

policies most cited include: 

• Best practices 

• Digital format 

Technology Survey page 50 
• Intellectual property issues 

• Materials to be digitized 

• Priorities for digitization 

• Quality control 

• Forty-two percent of SLAAs indicate they have digitization policies in development. 

Among these respondents, the two most frequently cited policies in development are 

‘Materials to be digitized’ and ‘Priorities for digitization.’ 

Does your institution allow access to its digital collection by the public? 

• The SLAAs that have some portion of their collection digitized (89 percent) report that 

they allow access to their digital collections, primarily via the Web. 

• Among the SLAAs that allow access, the primary target audience is ‘Anyone with 

Internet access’ (83 percent), followed by ‘Visitors onsite at the institution’ (44 

percent). 

• Eighty-three percent of these SLAAs give free access (no charge) to ‘Anyone with 

Internet access.’ 

Are your digital products listed with any digital registry? 

• Only three percent of responding SLAAs have digital products listed with any registry. 

Registries include: Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the Colorado 

Digitization project. 

• Twenty-eight percent of SLAAs have digital products listed in their own catalogs. 

Technology Survey page 51 
Survey Results: IMLS Roles 

IMLS Role: Implementing Technologies in Individual Institutions 

Respondents were asked to rank the three most important IMLS roles in terms of 

individual institutions. Figure 39 shows the cumulative rankings of responses by 

institution type. (For example, ‘Provide funding‘ is designated the most important IMLS 

role by every institution type. The second most important role is ‘Identify and promote 

standards and best practices in technology’ by all but public libraries, which ranked that 

role fourth.) 

‘Provide funding’ was ranked most highly among all the groups. 

Figure 39: Most Important Ways IMLS Can Help Individual Institutions Implement 

Technology

Museums Public

libraries 

Academic 

libraries 

SLAAs

Provide funding 1 1 1 1 

Identify and promote standards and best practices in 

technology 2 4 2 2 

Provide information on sources of funding 3 3 4 3 

Inform about cost effective technologies and efficient 

implementation 4 2 3 4 

Provide information about available and appropriate 

technologies 5 5 7 5 (tie) 

Identify guidelines for costs and resources required 

for implementation 6 7 6 7 

Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 7 (tie) 6 5 11 

Identify and provide information about model 

technology implementations 7 (tie) 8 8 5 (tie) 

Help museums/libraries evaluate effectiveness of 

their technologies 9 10 11 9 

Identify advantages of implementing technologies 10 11 9 (tie) 12 

Assess and report status of technology adoption and 

implementation 11 9 9 (tie) 8 

IMLS does not have role in technology 

implementation 

12 12 12 10

IMLS Role: Implementing Technologies in the Museum and Library 

Communities 

Respondents were asked to rank the three most important IMLS roles for the museum and 

library communities. Figure 40 shows the cumulative ranks for the responses. 

Technology Survey page 52 
Figure 40: Most Important Ways IMLS Can Help the Museum and Library 

Communities Implement Technology

Museums Public

libraries 

Academic 

libraries 

SLAAs

Provide funding 1 1 1 1 

Identify and promote standards and best practices in 

technology 2 2 2 2 

Provide information on sources of funding 3 3 3 3 (tie) 

Inform about cost effective technologies and efficient 

implementation 4 4 4 8 

Provide information about available and appropriate 

technologies 5 5 5 7 

Identify guidelines for costs and resources required 

for implementation 6 (tie) 7 9 5 

Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 6 (tie) 6 6 11 (tie) 

Identify and provide information about model 

technology implementations 8 8 7 6 

Assess and report status of technology adoption and 

implementation 9 9 10 3 (tie) 

Help museums/libraries evaluate effectiveness of 

their technologies 10 10 11 9 (tie) 

Identify advantages of implementing technologies 11 11 8 11 (tie) 

IMLS does not have role in technology 

implementation 

12 12 12 9 (tie)

Exemplary Project: Islands Apart Link Up

For the U.S. Virgin Islands, the digital divide is a literal divide. Isolated from the 

mainland and separated from each other by miles of water, the benefits of the Internet for 

the islands are dramatic. With support from an IMLS LSTA-funded National Leadership 

Grant, the University of the Virgin Islands and its partners are developing a 

comprehensive approach for introducing technology to island libraries. At the same time, 

they are using technology to bring resources to the islands and to share the islands' unique 

cultural materials with the world. http://www.imls.gov/closer/archive/hlt_l0101.htm

IMLS Role: Digitization Initiatives in Individual Institutions 

Respondents were asked to rank the three most important IMLS roles in terms of 

individual institutions. Figure 41 shows the cumulative ranks for the responses. 

Figure 41: Most Important Ways IMLS Can Help Individual Institutions with 

Digitization Initiatives

Technology Survey page 53 
Museums Public

libraries 

Academic 

libraries 

SLAAs

Fund digitization projects 1 1 1 1 

Identify costs, resources required to develop, 

manage, and maintain access to digital resources 2 3 6 5 

Identify other sources of funding 3 2 2 2 

Identify processes involved and best practices 

available 4 5 3 4 

Identify and provide information about model 

digitization projects 5 6 4 3 

Information about the advantages and challenges of 

digitization 6 9 10 13 

Referral information on projects, resources, 

standards, guidelines etc. 7 7 8 6 (tie) 

Set standards for digitization 8 8 9 10 

Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 9 4 5 16 

Help evaluate libraries/museums evaluate 

effectiveness of their digitization projects 10 15 11 (tie) 11 

Help museums/libraries understand and deal with 

intellectual property issues 11 14 11 (tie) 12 

Assist in standards adoption 12 16 13 8 

Lead digital library for education initiative to support 

development of Web portal/site to enable users to 

search museum/library digital resources 

13 11 15 15 

Lead and promote national digitization efforts 14 10 14 9 

Coordinate digitization projects among institutions 15 12 16 17 

Encourage partnerships or consortia to collaborate 

on digitization 16 13 7 6 (tie) 

IMLS does not have a role in digitization efforts 17 17 17 14 

• ‘Provide funding’ and ‘Identify other sources of funding’ were the strongest responses 

among most of the groups.

• ‘Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be’ ranked strongly in both public libraries 

and academic libraries. 

IMLS Role: Digitization Initiatives in the Museum and Library Communities

Respondents were asked to rank the three most important IMLS roles in terms of the 

museum and library communities. Figure 42 shows the cumulative ranks for the 

responses. 

Figure 42: Most Important Ways IMLS Can Help the Museum and Library 

Communities with Digitization Initiatives

Museums Public

libraries 

Academic 

libraries 

SLAAs

Fund digitization projects 1 1 1 1 

Identify processes involved and best practices 

available 2 5 2 6 

Identify costs, resources required to develop, 

manage, and maintain access to digital resources 3 2 4 5 

Technology Survey page 54 
Identify and provide information about model 

digitization projects 4 6 3 2 

Information about the advantages and challenges of 

digitization 5 10 7 12 (tie) 

Identify other sources of funding 6 4 6 3 

Set standards for digitization 7 7 5 12 (tie) 

Referral information on projects, resources, 

standards, guidelines etc. 8 9 10 (tie) 4 

Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 9 3 8 16 

Help evaluate libraries/museums evaluate 

effectiveness of their digitization projects 10 16 15 9 

Help museums/libraries understand and deal with 

intellectual property issues 11 13 12 11 

Lead digital library for education initiative to support 

development of Web portal/site to enable users to 

search museum/library digital resources 

12 (tie) 11 14 15 

Lead and promote national digitization efforts 

12 (tie) 8 13 8 

Encourage partnerships or consortia to collaborate 

on digitization 

14 12 9 7

Coordinate digitization projects among institutions 15 15 16 17 

Assist in standards adoption 16 14 10 (tie) 10 

IMLS does not have a role in digitization efforts 17 17 17 14 

• ‘Fund digitization projects’ was strong across all groups. 

• Possible roles that deal with promoting standards and identifying best practices and 

model projects are also strong. 

• The SLAAs’ perceptions of IMLS’ roles are somewhat different than those of the 

other groups, though there are variations across all the groups. 

Technology Survey page 55 
 

Technology Survey for Libraries and Museums 

OMB #: 3137-0040 

Expiration Date: 01/31/2004 

Instructions 

Purpose of the Survey

This survey is being conducted by The Center for Organizational Excellence (COE) for 

the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). IMLS is a Federal agency that 

provides grants to museums and libraries to improve their operations and services to the 

public. IMLS will use the results of this survey to determine an appropriate role for IMLS 

in supporting technology applications, particularly in the area of digital access to 

information, in providing museum and library services to the public. 

The purpose of this survey is to collect information on technology use, plans, and policies 

of libraries, museums and state library agencies, especially in the area of digitization. 

[Digitization is the process of converting, creating and maintaining books, art works, 

historical documents, photos, journals, etc. in electronic representations so they can be 

viewed via computer and other devices.] 

How the Results will be Used 

The information provided by the survey results will help IMLS shape the focus and thrust 

of the agency’s grant programs and related activities. The published information, which 

should be available in fall of 2001, can be used by museums, libraries and state library 

agencies to understand where they are in the continuum of technology implementation and 

to plan for further technology developments. 

Completing the Survey

This survey is being sent to a national sample of museums, public and academic libraries, 

and to all state library agencies. Therefore, it is extremely important that you do not 

forward this survey to other institutions. The most appropriate person to complete the 

survey will be the one who has an understanding of the status and role of technology 

throughout the museum or library. It is recommended that you review the survey in 

advance, to get a better idea of the kinds of questions being asked and to gather 

information you might need to answer the questions. 

As the audience for this survey is broad, you may encounter questions that you feel are not 

applicable to your institution. Please mark the response “not applicable” in these cases, 

Technology Survey page 56 
and continue on with the questions. This survey will take you 30 minutes or less to 

complete.* 

Technology Survey page 57 
Confidentiality

Your responses will be confidential. This survey is submitted directly to COE for analysis 

and your responses will be combined with responses from other survey respondents. The 

results will be presented in summary form to IMLS. 

If You Need Help 

If you have any questions, please contact Kirstin Austin at (301) 948-1922, ext. 304 or 

Janine Johnson at (301) 948-1922, ext. 318 or send email to kaustin@center4oe.com or 

jjohnson@center4oe.com. 

Please return this completed survey by Friday, June 15, 2001. 

Thank You 

Thank you for taking the time to complete the survey. 

________________ 

* This estimate includes the time needed to review instructions, search existing data sources, 

gather and maintain the data needed, and complete and review the information. If the respondent 

has comments on the burden estimate or other aspects of this survey please send them to the 

Institute of Museum and Library Services, 1100 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Washington D.C. 20506. 

You are not required to respond to this request for information unless it displays a currently valid 

OMB control number. 

Technology Survey page 58 
Background on the Respondent 

Background on Museums 

If you are a museum, complete this section and skip the next section of the 

questions concerning the background of libraries. Then complete the rest of 

the survey starting with the section entitled “Section on the Status of 

Technology.” 

The following questions concern the museum that you represent. 

1. Check the type of museum: 

 Aquarium

 Arboretum or botanical garden 

 Art museum

 Children’s museum

 General museum

 Historic house/site 

 History museum

 Natural history/anthropology 

museum

 Nature center 

 Planetarium

 Science or technology center 

 Zoological park 

 Specialized, distinct subject 

museum

2. If you selected "Specialized, distinct subject museum" in question 1, describe the 

subject of the museum. _____________________________ 

3. What is the size of the museum’s annual budget? (Check one) 

 Less than $250,000 

 $250,000 - $500,000 

 $500,001- $1,000,000 

 $1,000,001 - $2,000,000 

 $2,000,001 - $6,000,000 

 $6,000,001 – $10,000,000 

 Over $10,000,000 

4. In what state is the museum? (Check one) 

 Alabama 

 Alaska 

 Arizona 

 Arkansas 

 California 

 Colorado 

 Connecticut 

 Delaware 

 District of 

Columbia 

 Florida 

 Georgia 

 Hawaii 

 Idaho 

 Illinois 

 Indiana 

 Iowa 

 Kansas 

 Kentucky 

 Louisiana 

 Maine 

 Maryland 

 Massachusetts 

 Michigan 

 Minnesota 

 Mississippi 

 Missouri 

 Montana 

 Nebraska 

 Nevada 

 New 

Hampshire 

 New Jersey 

 New Mexico 

 New York 

 North 

Carolina 

 North Dakota 

 Ohio 

 Oklahoma 

 Oregon 

 Pennsylvania 

 South 

Carolina 

Technology Survey page 59 
 South Dakota 

 Tennessee 

 Texas 

 Utah 

 Vermont 

 Virginia 

 Washington 

 West

Virginia 

 Wisconsin 

 Wyoming 

5. What is your job title? ________________________ 

6. What is the size of the staff at your institution?

Number of Full Time Equivalents, paid ____ 

Number of Full Time Equivalents, volunteer ____ 

Background on Libraries and State Library Agencies 

If you are a library, complete this section and skip the next section of the 

questions concerning the background of museums. Then complete the rest of 

the survey starting with the section entitled “Section on the Status of 

Technology.” 

The following questions concern the library or state library agency you represent. 

1. Check type of library/library agency: 

 Public library (Go to questions 2, 3, and 6) 

 Academic library (Go to questions 2, 4, 5, and 6) 

 State library agency (Go to questions 2, 5, and 6) 

2. In what state is your library or state library agency? (Check one)

 Alabama 

 Alaska 

 Arizona 

 Arkansas 

 California 

 Colorado 

 Connecticut 

 Delaware 

 District of 

Columbia 

 Florida 

 Georgia 

 Hawaii 

 Idaho 

 Illinois 

 Indiana 

 Iowa 

 Kansas 

 Kentucky 

 Louisiana 

 Maine 

 Maryland 

 Massachusetts 

 Michigan 

 Minnesota 

 Mississippi 

 Missouri 

 Montana 

 Nebraska 

 Nevada 

 New 

Hampshire 

 New Jersey 

 New Mexico 

 New York 

 North 

Carolina 

 North Dakota 

 Ohio 

 Oklahoma 

 Oregon 

 Pennsylvania 

 South 

Carolina 

 South Dakota 

 Tennessee 

 Texas 

 Utah 

 Vermont 

 Virginia 

 Washington 

 West

Virginia 

 Wisconsin 

 Wyoming

3. What is the size of the population served by your library? (Check one) 

 Up to 4,999 

 5,000-9,999 

 10,000-24,999 

 25,000-49,999 

 50,000-99,999 

 100,000-249,000 

 250,000-499,000 

 500,000-999,999 

 1 million or more

Technology Survey page 60 
4. Your library is in which type of academic institution? (Check one) 

 Private 2 year college/community 

college 

 Public 2 year college/community 

college 

 Private 4 year college 

 Public 4 year college 

 Private university 

 Public university 

5. Is your library circulating or non-circulating?

❑ primarily circulating 

❑ primarily non-circulating 

❑ not applicable 

6. What is your job title?__________________________________ 

7. What is the size of the staff at your institution?

Number of Full Time Equivalents, paid ____ 

Number of Full Time Equivalents, volunteer ____ 

Technology Survey page 61 
Section on Status of Technology 

What technologies (hardware software) does your institution currently use for its day-today operations? (Check all that apply) 

 Access to the Internet 

 Accounting/payroll software 

 Computerized catalogue of your 

library collection (if any) 

 Database software for collections 

management 

 Database software for 

membership development 

 Desktop computers 

 Desktop publishing software 

 E-mail 

 Extranet 

 Graphics software 

 Intranet 

 Marketing and promotion 

software 

 Network server 

 Notebook (laptop) computers 

 PDAs, i.e., PalmPilot 

 Point of Sale software 

 Standard office software, e.g., 

word processing, spreadsheet 

 Video tours 

 Virtual reality tours 

 Web site 

 Other technology (Please list) 

________________________ 

 None of the above 

What are the current sources of funds for this technology? (Check all that apply) 

 Endowment funds 

 Foundation grants 

 Gifts from donors 

 Grants from other Federal 

agencies, e.g., Dept of Ed, NEH 

 IMLS LSTA State Program and 

National Leadership Grants 

 IMLS Museum National 

Leadership Grants 

 In-kind contributions 

 Matching funds 

 Operating funds 

 State funds 

 City government funds 

 County government funds 

 Other local government funds 

 Other local funds 

 Other (Please list) 

______________________ 

 We have no funding for 

technology 

If your institution does not have technology available to manage its operations, do you 

rely on staff’s personal technology (e.g., home computer, personal e-mail, etc.)?

 No 

 Yes 

 Not applicable 

Technology Survey page 62 
If your institution does not currently use the following technology, which technology does 

it plan to acquire or implement in the next 12 months? (Check all that apply) 

 Access to the Internet 

 Accounting/payroll software 

 Computerized catalogue of your 

library collection (if any) 

 Database software for collections 

management 

 Database software for 

membership development 

 Desktop computers 

 Desktop publishing software 

 E-mail 

 Extranet 

 Graphics software 

 Intranet 

 Marketing and promotion 

software 

 Network server 

 Notebook (laptop) computers 

 PDAs, i.e., PalmPilot 

 Point of Sale software 

 Standard office software, e.g., 

word processing, spreadsheet 

 Video tours 

 Virtual reality tours 

 Web site 

 Other technology (Please list) 

________________________ 

 None of the above 

5. What technology does your institution currently use for programming? 

(Check all that apply) 

 Orientation, introductory and educational information on exhibits is presented via 

onsite computer 

 Orientation, introductory and educational information on exhibits is presented to 

the public via the Web 

 Educational programs are presented via on-site computer 

 Educational programs are presented to the public via the Web 

 We disseminate research findings and publications by our institution’s staff via the 

Web site 

 We provide programs and exhibits on our Web site 

 Other (Please list) __________________ 

 Not applicable 

6. What technology does your institution plan to use for programming in the next 12 

months that it does not currently use? (Check all that apply) 

 Orientation, introductory and educational information on exhibits is presented via 

onsite computer 

 Orientation, introductory and educational information on exhibits is presented to 

the public on-line 

 Educational programs are presented via onsite computer 

 Educational programs are presented to the public on-line 

 We want to disseminate research findings and publications by our institution’s 

staff via the Web site 

 We want to provide programs and exhibits on our Web site 

 Other (Please list) __________________ 

 Not applicable 

Technology Survey page 63 
7. Please indicate your responses to the following statements. If the item is not relevant 

to your institution, please select “not applicable”. Select the appropriate number for 

each statement below. 

1 = Strongly disagree 

2 = Disagree 

3 = Neutral 

4 = Agree 

5 = Strongly agree 

6 = Not applicable 

Technology is useful for your institution’s programming because it: 

Makes programs more interactive 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Provides a richer educational experience for patrons 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Increases the number of people who learn from programs 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Other (Please list) __________________ 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

8. Please indicate your responses to the following statements. If the item is not relevant 

to your institution, please select “not applicable”. Select the appropriate number for 

each statement below. 

1 = Strongly disagree 

2 = Disagree 

3 = Neutral 

4 = Agree 

5 = Strongly agree 

6 = Not applicable 

What hinders the use of technology for your institution’s programming: 

Cost 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Concerns over intellectual property issues 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Lack of staff expertise 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Not appropriate for our collection 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Other (Please list) __________________ 

 1  2  3  4  5  6 

Technology Survey page 64 
Section on Digitization Plans, Practices, and Policies 

1. Digitization is the process of converting, creating, and maintaining books, art works, 

historical documents, photos, journals, etc. in electronic representations so they can be 

viewed via computer and other devices. In the past 12 months, have you been or are 

you currently involved in digitization, for example, current projects, funding, setting 

standards, implementing, etc?

 No (Go to question 2) 

 Yes (Go to question 4) 

2. Do you have digitization-related plans that will be started in the next 12 months, but 

have not started yet?

 No (Go to question 3) 

 Yes (Go to question 4) 

3. Does your institution have future plans beyond 12 months for becoming involved in 

digitization? 

 No 

 Yes 

4. What hinders your efforts at digitization? 

(Rank top 3 from 1 through 3, with 1 representing the most important and 3 

representing the least important.) 

____ Lack of funds to support digitization 

____ Other projects have higher priorities 

____ Do not see a role for our institution in digitization 

____ Do not see the usefulness of digitization for our institution 

____ Digitization might reduce the number of people going to the institution 

____ Lack of available expertise 

____ Concern about costs of preservation and management 

____ Other (Please list) _____________________________________________ 

____ Not applicable 

Technology Survey page 65 
5. What are the primary goals for your institution’s digitizing activities? 

(Rank top 3 from 1 through 3, with 1 representing the most important and 3 

representing the least important.) 

____ Preserve materials of importance or value 

____ Increase access to books, journals, documents and other materials 

____ Increase access to the collections and collections records 

____ Reduce damage to original materials 

____ Provide access to digital collection on a web site 

____ Increase interest in the institution 

____ Save space in the institution 

____ Save cost by eliminating duplication of materials 

____ Encourage the cooperation among institutions to increase the number and variety 

of materials available to patrons 

____ Provide greater information about the institution’s collection s to artists, scholars, 

students teachers, and the public 

____ Present more of the collection than is on display at any one time 

____ Increase access to state services 

____ Support educational programs 

____ Other (Please list) __________________________________________ 

____ Not applicable 

6. What digitization activities or projects are funded by your institution? 

 No activities or projects are currently supported (Go to question 9) 

 Yes (Check all that apply) 

 Funds for digitizing library collections 

 Funds to digitize special collections (like rare books or historical documents) 

 Funds to support cooperative digitizing projects or partnerships 

 Funds to access digital products, e.g., historical collections on-line 

 Funds to support statewide digitizing projects 

 Funds to support inter-state digitizing efforts 

 Other (Please list) ________________________________ 

7. How does your institution undertake its digitization activities? (Check all that apply) 

 A special unit performs these activities 

 New staff was hired to perform these activities 

 Current staff was trained to perform these activities 

 These activities are outsourced 

 Other (Please list) _______________________________________ 

 Not applicable 

Technology Survey page 66 
8. Does your institution cooperate with other organizations to develop digitization 

programs, e.g., partnerships, consortia, etc.?

 No (Go to question 9) 

 Yes—(Check all that apply) 

 State library associations 

 State library agency 

 Academic libraries 

 Individual public libraries 

 Museums 

 State museum associations 

 Consortia 

 Private companies 

 State archives 

 Special libraries 

 Private libraries 

 Historical societies 

 Other state government 

agencies 

 City government agencies 

 County government agencies 

 Other local government 

agencies 

 Federal government agencies 

 Foundations 

 Universities 

 Professional associations 

 Community organizations 

 Other (Please list) 

____________________

9. Does your institution have a role in digitization projects in other libraries, museums or 

institutions, besides your own? 

 Yes (Go to question 10) 

 No (Go to question 11) 

10. What role does your institution have in digitization efforts beyond your institution? 

(Check all that apply) 

 Promote digitizing 

 Coordinating state-wide, regional or consortial digitization activities 

 Identify the materials or collections to be digitized 

 Provide financial support 

 Provide staff or equipment for digitization projects 

 Undertake demonstration projects on digitizing 

 Set policies or standards on digitizing, selecting materials and collections for 

digitizing 

 Provide Best Practices and Guidelines 

 Provide information to local libraries or museums on digitizing, management of 

digital collections 

 Encourage cooperative digitizing projects

 Issue sub-grants for digitization

 Other (Please list) _______________________________ 

 Not applicable 

Technology Survey page 67 
11. Where do you currently obtain funds to support your digitizing efforts? 

(Check all that apply) 

 Endowment funds 

 Foundation grants 

 Gifts from donors 

 Grants from other Federal 

agencies, e.g., Dept of Ed, NEH 

 IMLS LSTA State Program and 

National Leadership Grants 

 IMLS Museum National 

Leadership Grants 

 In-kind contributions 

 Matching funds 

 Operating funds 

 Other local funds 

 State funds 

 City government funds 

 County government funds 

 Other local government funds 

 Other (Please list) 

______________________ 

 We have no funding for 

digitization 

12. Where do you plan to obtain future funds to support your digitizing efforts? 

(Check all that apply) 

 Endowment funds 

 Foundation grants 

 Gifts from donors 

 IMLS LSTA State Program and 

National Leadership Grants 

 IMLS Museum National 

Leadership Grants 

 In-kind contributions 

 Matching funds 

 City government funds 

 County government funds 

 Grants from other Federal 

agencies, e.g., Dept of Ed, NEH 

 Other local government funds 

 Other local funds 

 State funds 

 Other sources (Please list) 

___________________________ 

 We do not plan to seek funding 

for digitizing 

13. Does your institution have digitization policies in place or in development? 

 No 

 Yes, our institution has policies in development for the following: (Check all 

below that apply) 

 Access 

 Best practices 

 Conversion of digital files to 

next generation formats 

 Digital format, e.g., TIFF, 

GIF, PAL 

 Intellectual property issues 

 Materials to be digitized 

 Priorities for digitization 

 Preservation 

 Quality control 

 Standards 

 Evaluation 

 Other (Please list) 

________________________

Technology Survey page 68 
14. Does your institution have digitization policies in place or in place? 

 No 

 Yes, our institution has policies in place on the following: (Check all below that apply) 

 Access 

 Best practices 

 Conversion of digital files to 

next generation formats 

 Digital format, e.g., TIFF, 

GIF, PAL 

 Intellectual property issues 

 Materials to be digitized 

 Priorities for digitization 

 Preservation 

 Quality control 

 Standards 

 Evaluation 

 Other (Please list) 

________________________

Technology Survey page 69 
Section on Digitized Materials and Programs 

1. What materials has your institution selected for digitization? (Check all that apply) 

 Course material 

 Education and training material 

about the collections 

 Films, videotapes 

 Government publications 

 Historical documents/archives 

 Images of artifacts 

 Images of items in the 

collections, e.g. art work, 

furniture, plants, animals 

 Information on the institution 

 Journals 

 Manuscripts 

 Maps 

 Music (recorded sound) 

 Newspapers 

 Photographs 

 Rare books 

 Other books 

 Records about the collection 

 Sheet music 

 Special exhibits 

 Theses and dissertations 

 Other (Please list) 

__________________________ 

 Not applicable 

2. What material is your institution planning on digitizing, but has not done so yet? 

(Check all that apply) 

 Course material 

 Education and training material 

about the collections 

 Films, videotapes 

 Government publications 

 Historical documents/archives 

 Images of artifacts 

 Images of items in the 

collections, e.g. art work, 

furniture, plants, animals 

 Information on the institution 

 Journals 

 Manuscripts 

 Maps 

 Music (recorded sound) 

 Newspapers 

 Photographs 

 Rare books 

 Other books 

 Records about the collection 

 Sheet music 

 Special exhibits 

 Theses and dissertations 

 Other (Please list) 

__________________________ 

 Not applicable 

3. Are your digital products listed with any digital registry? For example, the 

Association for Research Libraries’ Digital Initiatives Database. 

 No 

 Yes (Please list)____________________________________________ 

 Not applicable 

4. Are your digital products listed in your institution’s catalogue? 

 No 

 Yes 

 Not applicable 

Technology Survey page 70 
5. Does your institution allow access to its digital collection by the public? 

 Yes, on the premises on our computer network (LAN) only 

 Some of the collection 

 All of the collection 

 Yes, on the Web 

 Some of the collection 

 All of the collection 

 Yes, through a third party (e.g., AMICO) 

 Some of the collection 

 All of the collection 

 No, we do not provide access to our digital collection 

6. Who can access your institution’s digital materials without a charge for service?

(Choose all that apply) 

 Anyone with Internet access 

 Visitors onsite at the institution 

 The institution’s members (e.g., 

library card holders, museum

members)

 Staff members

 Staff at other institutions (e.g., 

library staff, museum staff) 

 Researchers/scholars 

 Faculty at your institution 

 Teachers not part of your 

institution 

 Current students at affiliated 

institutions 

 Any student 

 Alumni 

 Outside researchers and scholars 

 Other (Please list) 

___________________________ 

 Not applicable 

7. Who do you consider your primary target audience for your institution’s digital 

materials? (Choose the top three target audiences) 

 Anyone with Internet access 

 Visitors onsite at the institution 

 The institution’s members (e.g., 

library card holders, museum

members)

 Staff members

 Staff at other institutions (e.g., 

library staff, museum staff) 

 Researchers/scholars 

 Faculty at your institution 

 Teachers not part of your 

institution 

 Current students at affiliated 

institutions 

 Any student 

 Alumni 

 Outside researchers and scholars 

 Other (Please list) 

___________________________ 

 Not applicable 

Technology Survey page 71 
Edited Draft of final public report 

05/23/02 

72
Section on IMLS Role 

1. Considering the needs of your institution, how should IMLS support implementation 

of appropriate technologies that will best support your museum or library? 

(Rank the top 3 from 1 through 3, with 1 representing the most important and 3 

representing the least important.) 

____ Identify and promote standards and best practices in museum and library 

technology 

____ Assess and report on the status of technology adoption and implementation in 

libraries and museums

____ Identify advantages of implementing them

____ Identify guidelines for the costs and resources required to implement them

____ Inform libraries and museums about cost effective technologies and efficient 

implementation of them

____ Help museums and libraries to evaluate the effectiveness of their technologies 

____ Identify and provide information about model technology implementations 

____ Inform libraries and museums about available and appropriate technologies 

____ Provide funding 

____ Provide information on sources of funding 

____ Other (Please list) _____________________________________________ 

____ Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 

____ IMLS does not have a role in technology implementation 

2. Considering the needs of the entire museum and library community, how can IMLS 

support implementation of appropriate technologies that will best serve the 

community? 

(Rank the top 3 from 1 through 3, with 1 representing the most important and 3 

representing the least important.) 

____ Identify and promote standards and best practices in museum and library 

technology 

____ Assess and report on the status of technology adoption and implementation in 

libraries and museums 

____ Inform us about available and appropriate technologies 

____ Identify advantages of implementing them

____ Identify guidelines for the costs and resources required to implement them

____ Inform us about cost effective technologies and efficient implementation of 

them

____ Help us to evaluate the effectiveness of our technologies 

____ Identify and provide information about model technology implementations 

____ Provide funding 

____ Provide information on sources of funding 

____ Other (Please list) _____________________________________________ 

____ Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 

____ IMLS does not have a role in technology implementation 

Edited Draft of final public report 

05/23/02 

73
3. How should IMLS be involved in digitization initiatives in museums and libraries? 

(Rank the top 5 from 1 through 5, with 1 representing the most important and 5 

representing the least important.) 

____ Inform museums and libraries about the advantages and challenges of 

digitization 

____ Identify and provide information about model digitization projects 

____ Provide referral information on projects, resources, standards, guidelines, etc. 

____ Identify the processes involved and best practices available 

____ Identify the costs and resources required to develop, manage and maintain 

access to digital resources 

____ Help libraries and museums to evaluate the effectiveness of their digitization 

projects 

____ Lead and promote national digitization efforts 

____ Lead a digital library for education initiative to support development of a Web 

portal/Web site to enable users to search museum and library digital resources 

____ Coordinate digitization projects among institutions 

____ Encourage partnerships or consortia to collaborate on digitization 

____ Fund digitization projects 

____ Identify other sources of funding 

____ Set standards for digitization 

____ Assist in standards adoption 

____ Help libraries and museums understand and deal with intellectual property 

issues 

____ Other (Please list) ___________________________ 

____ Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 

____ IMLS does not have a role in digitization efforts 

Edited Draft of final public report 

05/23/02 

74
4. How can IMLS support digitization in your institution? 

(Rank the top 5 from 1 through 5, with 1 representing the most important and 5 

representing the least important.) 

____ Inform us about the advantages and challenges of digitization 

____ Identify and provide information about model digitization projects 

____ Provide referral information on projects, resources, standards, guidelines, etc. 

____ Identify the processes involved and best practices available 

____ Identify the costs and resources required to develop, manage and maintain 

access to digital resources 

____ Help us to evaluate the effectiveness of our digitization projects 

____ Lead and promote national digitization efforts 

____ Lead a digital library for education initiative to support development of a Web 

portal/Web site to enable users to search museum and library digital resources 

____ Coordinate digitization projects among institutions 

____ Encourage partnerships or consortia to collaborate on digitization 

____ Fund digitization projects 

____ Identify other sources of funding 

____ Set standards for digitization 

____ Assist in standards adoption 

____ Help us understand and deal with intellectual property issues 

____ Other (Please list) ___________________________ 

____ Don’t know what IMLS’ role is or should be 

____ IMLS does not have a role in digitization efforts 

Edited Draft of final public report 

05/23/02 

75