Library Council



[pic]

April 28, 2003

PROPOSAL GUIDELINES

The Library Council of Washington (LCW) is looking for your help in identifying broad priorities and initiatives for the use of federal Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) funds to meet the statewide and regional needs and opportunities of the library community. Please note that this process will not be used to fund grant requests to individual libraries. During this process, both previously funded initiatives that are proposed for continuation and new proposals will be considered.

Ideas for the use of LSTA funding could include statewide initiatives targeted at specific needs, initiatives to take advantage of emerging technology or other opportunities, or initiatives that target a specific segment of the Washington library community. Statewide initiatives could range from technical assistance and training, to the development of services and collaborative efforts, to competitive grant programs. Typically, initiatives are one to four years long. View previous proposals and proposal abstracts from FY1999 to FY2002 at .

Proposals to meet the statewide and regional needs and opportunities of the library community may be developed by any person or group in coordination with a Library Council of Washington sponsor. The Council sponsor will provide insight into the proposal process and information about Washington State Library (WSL) project management procedures. We ask that the person or group with the idea complete the written proposal. Library Council members and State Library staff will not complete the paperwork. The format for the proposal is contained within the next section. If you have questions about the proposal process, or to find a Council sponsor, please feel free to contact your Library Council of Washington representative. Contact information for the Library Council may be found at . You may also contact Jeff Martin, the Washington State Library staff contact for the proposal process, as listed below.

This is a competitive process in the sense that there is no guarantee that any proposal will be awarded funding.

The following dates should be noted for proposals submitted for consideration within the FY2004 LSTA funding cycle:

• May 1, 2003 (tentative date): Statewide initiative proposal process is announced.

• June 13, 2003: Deadline for submitting proposals.

• July 10, 2003: The Library Council of Washington will review and discuss FY2004 proposals on this meeting date.

• July 11, 2003 – August 8, 2003: Additional discussion, refinement, and review of the proposal will take place during this time period.

• September 4, 2003: The Council will finalize its recommendation on this meeting date and forward this recommendation to the State Librarian and the Secretary of State for consideration.

• September 2003: The State Librarian and the Secretary of State, in their role as the governing authority for the Washington State Library, will approve proposals for implementation and allocate funding contingent upon receipt of LSTA funds from the federal government.

• October 1, 2003: Federal fiscal year 2004 begins.

• January 2004 (approximate): Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) Letter of Award for LSTA received at the WSL. Arrival of the Letter of Award allows LSTA funds to become available for disbursement to funded proposals. Expenditure of LSTA FY2004 funding shall not begin until the Letter of Award is received by WSL.

• September 30, 2005: The FY2004 federal LSTA award expires. The project or a phase of the project must be completed by this date.

Please submit proposals by June 13, 2003, to:

Grants Program

Washington State Library

PO Box 42460

Olympia, Washington 98504-2460

Statewide initiatives must meet approved Washington LSTA Five-Year Plan goals and the federal LSTA priorities.

Washington LSTA Five-year Plan goals:

1. Washingtonians will have increased physical and remote electronic access to traditional and digital library resources and services in all areas of the state.

2. Washingtonians will have increased awareness of the library resources and services that are available to them.

3. Washington libraries will provide enhanced and expanded library services, resources, and programs to all segments of their communities.

4. Through consulting, training, and collaboration, Washington libraries will have an increased capacity to effectively serve customers.

Review the Washington LSTA Five-Year Plan 2003 – 2007 at .

Washington’s LSTA Five-Year Plan goals are a subset of the broader federal LSTA priorities listed below.

PROPOSED 2003 LSTA PRIORITIES

1. Expanding services for learning and access to information and educational resources in a variety of formats in all types of libraries for individuals of all ages;

2. Developing library services that provide all users access to information through local, state, regional, national, and international electronic networks;

3. Providing electronic and other linkages among and between all types of libraries;

4. Developing public and private partnerships with other agencies and community-based organizations;

5. Targeting library services to people of diverse geographic, cultural, and socioeconomic backgrounds, to individuals with disabilities, and to people with limited functional literacy or information skills; and

6. Targeting library and information services to persons having difficulty using a library and to underserved urban and rural communities, including children from families with incomes below the poverty level.

Read more about LSTA at .

LIBRARY COUNCIL OF WASHINGTON

PRIORITIES

Many activities potentially fall within the six LSTA priorities and the statewide plan goals. To further differentiate between proposals received, the Library Council of Washington will use the following priorities to review proposals.

Proposals should:

• Provide direct results to library users.

• Increase access to library resources and services in all areas of the State.

• Enhance awareness and public understanding of the value of libraries.

• Use innovative approaches to position libraries for the future.

• Encourage collaboration between public, academic, school, and special libraries, and/or with other agencies and organizations

• Provide critical support, infrastructure, or training needed to deliver library services.

• Promote information literacy to provide the people of Washington greater ability to use library resources and services.

CONTACT INFORMATION

Grants Program

Washington State Library

PO Box 42460

Olympia, Washington 98504-2460

Jeff Martin

360-704-5248

jmartin@secstate.

Anne Yarbrough

360-704-5246

ayarbrough@secstate.

PROPOSAL FORM

The Library Council of Washington is looking for your help in identifying broad priorities and initiatives for the use of federal Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) funds. These funds are used to meet the statewide and regional needs and opportunities of the library community. Please note that this process will not be used to fund grant requests to individual libraries.

|Proposal name |Amount of LSTA funding proposed: |

| | |

|Cooperative Automated Systems |$820,200 for 4 year project |

| | |

Library, group, or person submitting proposal (primary sponsor) Neill Public Library

Library Name, if different

Contact Person Mike Pollastro Title Library Director

Address 210 N. Grand Ave.

City Pullman Zip 99163

Telephone 509-338-3251 Fax 509-334-6051 Email mikep@neill-

Library Council of Washington Sponsor (Name of the Library Council of Washington member who has agreed to sponsor this proposal and act as a liaison if this proposal is awarded funds. Locate contact information for Library Council members:

)Linda Pierce, Gonzaga University. Bruce Ziegman, Fort Vancouver Regional Library also volunteered to sponsor the proposal.

Other Proposal Sponsors (Names of libraries, groups or individuals involved in developing this proposal, acting in support of this proposal, or endorsing the proposal)

Whitman County Library; Latah County Library District (ID); INCOL (Inland Northwest Council of Libraries); Janet Lyon, Director of Pend Oreille County Library; Tamara Georgick, Washington State Library consultant;

Briefly describe the proposal (50 words or less):

Libraries that have shown that they are serious about working cooperatively with other libraries, especially libraries in proximity to each other, will be granted funds on a matching funds basis to develop and implement automated library systems, which include the catalogs of all the participating libraries.

Briefly describe why funding of this proposal is important to the Washington library community (50 words or less):

Library patrons need to have easy and convenient access to all library resources available both locally and statewide. This initiative would facilitate access to the holdings of all cooperative libraries through one search. The libraries will also benefit through reduced maintenance and personnel costs for automated systems.

General Information

Proposal name: Cooperative automated systems (from coversheet)

Which library types are intended as the primary beneficiaries of this proposal? (check all that apply)

X Academic (private and public two-year and four-year academic institutions)

X Public (libraries organized under RCW 27.12)

X School (private and public K-12 schools)

X Special (business and industry, law, medical, other government, tribal, other)

If other, specify:

Scope/geographic coverage of the proposal?

X Statewide

Less than statewide, name the area or region?

(name the region or other identifiable area)

The intended beneficiary of the proposal? (check the primary beneficiary)

Library staff

X Library users or potential library users

A specific group of staff or users, or a potential user group. Specify the target audience(s):

(e.g., children, adults, disadvantaged, remote access library users, unserved community members, reference staff, IT staff, students)

Estimated number of persons served by this proposal? 6,000,000

Check the Washington LSTA Five-Year Plan goal that best represents the primary purpose of the proposal.

X Washingtonians will have increased physical and remote electronic access to traditional and digital library resources and services in all areas of the state.

Washingtonians will have increased awareness of the library resources, and services that are available to them.

Washington libraries will provide enhanced and expanded library services, resources and programs to all segments of their communities.

Through consulting, training, and collaboration, Washington libraries will have an increased capacity to effectively serve customers.

Proposed 2003 LSTA priority addressed by this proposal? (check the priority that most closely supports the proposal)

Expanding services for learning and access to information and educational resources in a variety of formats in all types of libraries for individuals of all ages

Developing library services that provide all users access to information through local, state, regional, national, and international electronic networks

X Providing electronic and other linkages among and between all types of libraries;

Developing public and private partnerships with other agencies and community- based organizations

Targeting library services to people of diverse geographic, cultural, and socioeconomic backgrounds, to individuals with disabilities, and to people with limited functional literacy or information skills

Targeting library and information services to persons having difficulty using a library and to underserved urban and rural communities, including children from families with incomes below the poverty level

This project is intended to provide:

X A direct service to libraries and/or their customers.

A support service for libraries and their staff.

The use of LSTA funds are intended to support:

A short-term project of one to four years that will cease when LSTA funding ends.

X A long-term program that will transition to another funding source after LSTA funding support ceases. The intended long-term funding source for this project is:

____

library budgets____

Anticipated length of time that the proposal will use LSTA funding? 4 years (List number of years; note that most projects are from one year to four years in length.)

Provide a response to each section and bulleted item. Please limit your response to approximately two pages per section, or five to ten pages for the entire proposal. Use the attached forms where indicated.

1. Proposal – What do you want to do and what impact is expected?

• Project description

Provide an overview of the project proposed for funding.A grant cycle for libraries to develop and implement cooperative library systems would be developed for the next four years. The initial year would fund activities of a Steering Committee to investigate the possibilities further and come up with a practical plan for furthering the intent of the project, which is to give citizens of the state maximum ease in accessing and using public library resources locally, regionally, or statewide. The two succeeding years would fund grant proposals on a matching basis based on parameters set up by the Steering Committee. Funding would be targeted towards actual implementation of such systems, not for planning or development of contracts or other agreements between the cooperating libraries. Funding would also be granted to libraries to join existing consortia with shared systems or to create a consortium using an existing system as a base. Likewise, other creative solutions such as connecting existing systems through shared Z39.50 interfaces or other technologies will qualify. Funding can be on a graduated maximum basis depending on the number of libraries involved, for example, $25,000 for one library to join an existing system, $40,000 for 2 libraries creating or joining a consortium, $60,000 for 3 libraries, $75,000 for 4 libraries, $90,000 for 5 or more libraries. Implementation would include the hardware and software needed to operate the systems and the training of library staff to operate the system. It would not include workstations or terminals for the staff or public to access the system except for those needed to run the system directly. Priority will be given to those libraries that already share other library operations. Collaborations with libraries in neighboring states or provinces are encouraged. Annual maintenance of systems will be the responsibility of the cooperating libraries. The fourth, final year would fund the evaluation of the project.

• Desired outcomes

In one or two sentences, describe the outcome and/or impact that is desired. Additional information related to the benefit/impact of the project may be added within the next section on Analysis.Access of all Washingtonians to library information and holdings will be improved by implementing or extending cooperative automated library systems in Washington and neighboring states and provinces.

Analysis – Why do you want to do it?

• Current situation and need

Describe the specific situation as it now exists, the extent of the need and how the project will meet those needs.In spite of the LSTA emphasis on encouraging cooperation between libraries, very few libraries throughout the state have merged their automated systems. In fact, even those few merged library systems primarily include academic libraries, with a rare public library here and there having membership in such a system. Public library patrons are faced with the necessity of using several library catalogs to identify the holdings of the libraries that they use, even though the libraries may be in such close proximity that the patrons often think of them being one and the same.

A major stumbling block in building cooperative systems has been the costs of beginning or the costs of joining such a system. With the continuing de-emphasis of the DYNIX system, which is used by a large number of the public libraries throughout the state, by its owners, those public libraries are facing the need to convert to a new system. This presents a perfect opportunity for those libraries to cooperate and merge their systems. Merged library systems will present further opportunities for libraries to cooperate, including joint library cards and patron databases, and delivery systems between libraries.

Residents of the state will see greatly improved access to the holdings of other libraries than their own, one of the needs expressed in the 2000 survey and forums. Other needs addressed by this project include easy and fast access to information whenever and wherever they need it, access to traditional materials as well as the newest of electronic services and resources, up-to-date technology, remote access to library resources and services at any time of day, broad collection of print and electronic materials, and “urban” level of service in rural areas.

• Benefit/impact

Describe why this project is important to do. How does this project further statewide plans? What benefits might it provide to the population served or to the state as a whole?Patron access to collections of libraries regionally or statewide will be greatly improved and the use of library systems and collections will be enhanced. Patrons would benefit from having one central interface for locating materials and information. This project encourages cooperation of libraries by creating linkages between them and by building partnerships. The project will also result in savings for individual libraries in annual spending for hardware, software and staff time allowing saved funds to be used other purposes.

Currently in some areas librarians and patrons must search multiple databases to locate an item in a small geographic area. For example in the Pullman, Moscow, Whitman County area, just to fill a library ILL request librarians must search 5 local, free databases, before doing a more comprehensive and expensive paid OCLC search. By linking databases this time could be reduced considerably. If patrons locate the materials they want at another regional library they may be willing to drive there to get the item, reducing the expensive ILL service.

Collection development will be greatly enhanced. There would be more of a possibility of specialization and depth in certain areas of the collection and then sharing the resources. For example one library could specialize in business and another in travel and both sets of patrons would benefit by a broader collection. Certain items, such as travel, medical, buisness and legal information need to be updated regularly even if the use is relatively low. The whole region would benefit from well-developed updated collections which, may be too expensive to maintain individually.

Cataloguing would be enhanced. If a title is already owned by one location another library can skip the expensive and time intensive cataloguing of the item by just adding a copy with its location to the database.

Websites could also be developed cooperatively with one link to a common catalog. Libraries would be able to share outreach and educational programs teaching the community to use the libraries’ website and catalog. Any new services, such as the implementation of 24/7 reference service for example could be marketed via the common site.

• Relationship to LSTA

How does this project address the Washington Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) Five-Year Plan? How does it fit in with the six priorities in the LSTA legislation?The Mission Statement of LSTA includes the following: The LSTA program is committed to the principles of universal and equitable public access and collaboration among libraries…

This initiative directly addresses the first priority of LSTA funding, which is for activities using technology for information sharing among libraries, and between libraries and other community services. It also addresses the second priority for programs that make library resources more accessible to urban and rural localities…

A number of the goals in the current LSTA Five-Year Plan for Washington are addressed in this proposed initiative. These include the goal that Washingtonians will have increased physical and remote electronic access to traditional and digital library resources and services in all areas of the state. It directly relates to the purpose of developing library services that provide all users access to information through local, state, regional, national, and international electronic networks. The collaboration between libraries sponsored by this initiative would also address the goal that through consulting, training, and collaboration, Washington libraries will have an increased capacity to effectively serve customers. It, in fact, addresses several of the purposes listed under that goal:

• Expanding services for learning and access to information and educational resources in a variety of formats in all types of libraries for individuals of all ages

• Providing electronic and other linkages among and between all types of libraries

• Developing public and private partnerships with other agencies and community-based organizations

The two other goals of the Five-Year Plan are also addressed by this initiative.

• Risk

The project would not be successful if people either didn't know about the opportunity, didn't care about sharing, or were not able to achieve agreements with others. There needs to be the ability in particular libraries to accept the change of combining systems. The major risk if the project is not funded is the loss of this prime opportunity for sharing resources between libraries. If funded, the risk is that the project will create expectations that require library cooperation and may be susceptible to the whims of the political entities which control the libraries.

An analysis of the types of risks that may adversely affect the proposed project. A level of risk is acceptable if the areas of risk are identified in advance of the project. Is there adequate personnel to handle the project? Is the proposed solution compatible with other solutions? If technology, is it a proven technology which is compatible to existing technology? Are there political risks to this project? This section should be an honest assessment of potential risks which could affect the success of the project.

• Sustainability

This will be a 4-year project and succeeding requests will be based on actual need. The results of the project itself will make it ever easier for libraries to sustain automated systems than the present situation. The costs of maintaining the cooperative systems will be less than what libraries endure for their individual systems. It is quite likely that less staff overall will be needed to operate and maintain the cooperative systems. This is a win-win project for libraries and the citizens of the state. Building on the cooperative efforts engendered in the Statewide Database Licensing Initiative, more libraries will be induced to share their services

LSTA funding is intended as short-term project support, normally not exceeding three to four years in duration. LSTA funding is not intended as ongoing long-term support. Identify the intended length of the project and if long-term, discuss how this project or activity will be sustained after LSTA funding ends?

3. Implementation – How should the project be done?

• Project scope/work plan/ essential tasks

• Form a Steering Committee to meet and draw up parameters of project and RFP.

• Hire (or appoint from WSL staff) a full-time Project Manager the last 2 months of first year.

• Develop guidelines and implement the cooperative library systems program.

• Provide reference/technical assistance on systems and contracts for library staff members.

• Decide which grants to award to whom.

• Assess the progress of grantees and fine-tune the project for the 3rd year.

• Evaluate the success of the program and any further need for funding.

What are the major tasks that will be completed as part of this project? Provide short answers in an outline or bullet format. Detailed descriptions are not needed or desired. If desired, use the attached work plan format, attachment A, to organize the essential tasks and timeline.

• Timeline

Year 1: Steering committee appointed, meets bimonthly to decide on project parameters, staff hired last 2 months of year to get familiar with project and initiate communications with prospective grantees.

Year 2: RFP issued; grants awarded; committee and coordinator get feedback and tune the project for next year.

Year 3: RFP issued; grants awarded; evaluation begins.

Year 4: Evaluation completed first 3 months of year.

A basic timeline for the major steps and activities in the project.

• Project staffing

It is anticipated that a State Library consultant is required to assist in performing project liaison duties and for providing reference and technical assistance to libraries for no more than 2 years, 5 months, hired for the last 2 months of the first year, working through the 2 years of grant funding, and the first 3 months of the final, evaluation year.

What level of staffing is necessary to complete the work? Please plan for Washington State Library staff involvement within the project, either to complete the work or to act as a project liaison. The work could also be completed utilizing a professional services contract or an agreement with another library, agency, or organization. If work through an outside entity is utilized, the Washington State Library is still responsible for the proper use of federal funds. In these cases, a staff person will be assigned to provide oversight and act as liaison to the project.

• Budget

$29,200 the first year; $381,000 each of the next 2 years; $29,000 the fourth and last year.

What is your estimated budget for the project. How will the funds be allocated? Use attachment B, the “budget for FY2003”, to summarize the funding requested in the first year of the project. Use attachment C, the “budget summary for additional project years”, to summarize anticipated needs in other project years.

4. Evaluation – How will you determine if the project was successful?

• Assessment/measurement

Working cooperative systems will be in place and be utilized. If possible, statistics can be provided on accesses to a library catalog by patrons of a partnering library. The fourth year of the project will be an assessment and evaluation of the project by the Steering Committee and the project manager.

How will it be determined if the intended project outcome was achieved? What specific measurement or evaluation tools will be used? Assessment is an integral part of the overall initiative. Assessment methods should be developed and refined as part of the initiative planning process such that meaningful results may be obtained at the conclusion of the initiative. If approved for funding, WSL staff will be available to assist in identifying appropriate assessment tools.

• Deliverables

The end result is that systems will be in place that contain the catalogs of several partnering libraries, thereby expanding access to library collections for citizens of the state.

What is the end result of the initiative? Will a new product or service be produced?

Will training be offered to staff and/or library users? Will grant cycle(s) be used to award sub-grants to successful applicants?

• Dissemination and sharing of project results

It is highly likely that there would be presentations or panel discussions at conferences and articles developed for publication in Alki.

How should the results of the project be shared with the library community? Possible methods include, but are limited to, development of web pages, presentations or panel discussions at conferences, and articles developed for publication in newsletters or library journals.

Attachment A. Work Plan

| |

|WORK PLAN |

|Overview of Tasks That Need to Be Accomplished |Proposed Timeframe for the Completion of Task |Responsible Party for the Completion of Task |

|for Successful Project Implementation | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

| | | |

|(Note that a Washington State Library staff person will be involved in the proposed project either in the | | |

|role of project liaison or in the role of project manager.) | | |

Attachment B. Budget for FY2004

|BUDGET FORM FOR PROJECT/INITIATIVE PROPOSAL |

|USING FISCAL YEAR 2004 FUNDING |

| |

| |

|PROPOSAL: | | |

| |FUNDING | |

|BUDGET CATEGORIES |TOTAL |DESCRIPTION |

|WSL STAFFING | | |

|Salaries and Wages |$9,080 |1 FTE Principal Library Information Specialist last 2 months of year |

|Benefits (Estimate at 25% of salaries and wages if other cost estimates|$2,270 | |

|are not available) | | |

| | | |

|CONTRACTS | | |

|Contracts for Employment or Services | | |

|SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT | | |

|Supplies and Materials | | |

|Communications - Telephone, Mail, etc |$1,500 |Promotional mailings, telephone, etc. |

|Rentals and Leases |$600 |Exhibits and presentations |

|Printing and Copying |$1,000 |Marketing products |

|Training |$750 |Staff or committee training |

|Furnishings and Equipment |$8,000 |Software and equipment |

|TRAVEL COSTS | | |

|Per Diem, Food and Lodging |$2,000 |Staff and committee |

|Air Travel |$2,000 |Staff and committee |

|Auto Mileage (Estimate at $0.345 per mile) |$2,000 |Staff and committee |

|Other Transportation Expenses | | |

|GRANT FUNDING | | |

|Grants (Funds to support grant cycles and awards) | | |

|PROPOSAL TOTAL |$29,200 | |

|Total | | |

Attachment C. Budget Summary for Additional Project Years (If Needed)

|BUDGET SUMMARY FOR PROJECT/INITIATIVE PROPOSAL |

|FISCAL YEAR 2005 (October 1, 2004 through September 30, 2005) |

| |

| |FUNDING | |

|BUDGET CATEGORIES |TOTAL |DESCRIPTION |

|WSL STAFFING COSTS |$70,000 |Salary and benefits for 1 FTE Information Specialist |

|CONTRACTS FOR EMPLOYMENT/SERVICES |0 | |

|SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT |$5,000 |Software and equipment |

|TRAVEL COSTS |$6,000 |Staff and committee |

|GRANT FUNDING |$300,000 | |

|PROPOSAL TOTAL |$381,000 | |

|BUDGET SUMMARY FOR PROJECT/INITIATIVE PROPOSAL |

|FISCAL YEAR 2006 (October 1, 2005 through September 30, 2006) |

| |

| |FUNDING | |

|BUDGET CATEGORIES |TOTAL |DESCRIPTION |

|WSL STAFFING COSTS |$70,000 |Salary and benefits for 1 FTE Information Specialist |

|CONTRACTS FOR EMPLOYMENT/SERVICES | | |

|SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT |$5,000 |Software and equipment |

|TRAVEL COSTS |$6,000 |Staff and committee |

|GRANT FUNDING |$300,000 | |

|PROPOSAL TOTAL |$381,000 | |

|BUDGET SUMMARY FOR PROJECT/INITIATIVE PROPOSAL |

|FISCAL YEAR 2007 (October 1, 2006 through September 30, 2007) |

| |

| |FUNDING | |

|BUDGET CATEGORIES |TOTAL |DESCRIPTION |

|WSL STAFFING COSTS |$24,000 |1 FTE Information Specialist for first 3 months |

|CONTRACTS FOR EMPLOYMENT/SERVICES | | |

|SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT |$2,000 |Software and equipment |

|TRAVEL COSTS |$3,000 |Staff and committee |

|GRANT FUNDING | | |

|PROPOSAL TOTAL |$29,000 | |

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download