On the subject of catchment areas and community profiling list members
may be interested in a USA project hosted under the Florida State
University and supported by the ALA which uses GPS navigation systems. I
became aware of this when compiling a resource list on Meeting User
Needs in Public Libraries for IFLA last year.
The US database includes the locations of America's 16,000 public
libraries, population characteristics from the US Census that best
describe people that use libraries, and library use statistics from the
National Center for Educational Statistics at
http://www.geolib.org/PLGDB.cfm and is bit like Google Earth for public
libraries! Wouldn't that sort of project be useful here in the UK?
The Meeting User Needs resource list is on IFLANET at
http://www.ifla.org/VII/s8/index.htm and is being added to all the time,
therefore anyone with good practices which can be pointed to on the web
please do let me know to be included.
John Lake
Secretary of Section 8 of IFLA Public Libraries Standing Committee and
Division III Libraries Serving the General Public
Librarian
Barbican Library
Silk Street
London
UK
EC2Y 8DS
Tel: + 44 (0) 207 382 7098
Fax + 44 (0) 207 638 2249
email: [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Clarke
Sent: 09 May 2006 10:27
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Potenial Issues for a library
John
thanks for your comments - this certainly illustrates the complexity.
The LLDA/ALM project does not go this far - too much for a small scale,
discrete piece of work, but we will raise the issue with MLA nationally
to see if they will consider something more indepth. At best we can hope
to identify the factors, issues and considerations at this stage.
Potentially data could come from some, all or more than just those
sources you mention.
As to granularity (lovely word), I think it's got to be service point
level. If you take business as a model, when people invest money in a
shop or service in a local area, they often work up a clear model and
business plan, including such issues as demographics, local transport
nodes, parking, environmental issues etc. We should aspire to something
similar - but a model that's tailored to the very specific nature of
library business.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Usher, John [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 06 May 2006 16:07
To: Michael Clarke; [log in to unmask]
Cc: Chung, Steve; Doyle, Rosemary
Subject: RE: [LIS-PUB-LIBS] Potenial Issues for a library
Michael,
But first define the catchment area, especially in an area like London,
with significant cross-border activity. Local authority and school
boundaries are pre-defined - library catchment areas are self-defined by
users, will be affected by things such as transport routes and
availability), and may vary for each of the 'Client Groups' (if such
things actually exist - they are an artificial construct) across space -
and time!
*And* then apply the data for the users, actual or potential, in the
catchment area - and the data is from where? From LMS systems? from
'Community Profiling', carried out by Library staff? from surveys? from
Census data? from (expensive) commercial data like Acorn or Mosaic?
And at what level of granularity? London? sub-regional? Borough?
individual library?
Can we hope that the LLDA/ALM research will begin to address this,
before we begin to apply appropriate formulae to the data?
Regards
JU
John Usher
ICT Development Manager
Islington Library & Cultural Services
020 7527 6920
-----Original Message-----
From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries on behalf of Michael
Clarke
Sent: Thu 20/04/2006 16:16
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc:
Subject: Re: [LIS-PUB-LIBS] Potenial Issues for a library
Gary
certainly this is an issue that we at London Libraries
Development Agency
are interested in. As well as examining potential based on
catchment and
population (your formulae look very useful and well thought out)
I would be
interested in 'added value' as well. This would mean factoring
in:
- comparative stock spend and stock turnover (ie quality of
stock
available)
- local demographics such as ethnicity, population density and
churn,
educational attainment and poverty
- library profile within local authority
all of which may affect usage. We could start to get to a fair
assessment of
an individual library, or library authority's performance
against what can
realistically be expected - the kind of added value approach
that has been
recognised in measuring school performance for some years now.
We'd then be
able to compare like with like, so that for example it might be
fairer to
compare London Borough X with one of the metropolitan boroughs
in terms of
communities served and positioning/budgets, rather than always
assuming that
other London boroughs are the automatic comparitors.
This will be a complex project. MLA London and LLDA are just in
the process
of completing what could be phase 1 - its working title is
Library Facts -
which attempts to get some consistency and read across in
current available
datasets from both within and outside the sector, but it's a
long way short
of added value indicators. We hope to interest MLA nationally in
taking this
further forward.
regards
Michael Clarke
Director
London Libraries Development Agency
35 St Martin's Street
London WC2H 7HP
T: 020 7641 5244
M: 07879 424828
F: 020 7641 5266
E: [log in to unmask]
W: www.llda.org.uk
Find out what's going on in London's libraries -
www.londonlibraries.org.uk
-----Original Message-----
From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of gary nugent
Sent: 20 April 2006 11:38
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [LIS-PUB-LIBS] Potenial Issues for a library
Dear list,
I heard someone mention a while a go (but did not write it down)
the idea of
using a statistical formula for working out a library's your
potential
number of issues per year based on your borrowers. Does anybody
use this or
know the formulae and how valid it's use is?
The context I was looking to use it in is compare our potential
performance
with actual, and looking in more depth when we are told we are
underpeforming and we should increase issues by so many % What
this means
for stock use or how many new borrowers, increase use from
existing
borrowers the target demands.
I can think of a number of variations on formula that would give
you some
interesting figures (but wonder how valid they were as a
statistical
measurement and tool) e.g.
Active borrowers x loan limit x (weeks in year/loan period) =
potential
issues for year
Active borrowers x average loans per user x (weeks in year/loan
period) =
potential issues for year
Catchment area pop x average loans per user x (weeks in
year/loan
period) =
potential issues for year
Other factors to consider would be is it realistic figure given
your lending
stock?
Adult/junior split
% of stock out on loan at any one time to achieve this potential
issues
figure.
Hope you can help
Gary Nugent
Senior Community Librarian
Lincoln Central Library
Free School Lane
Lincoln
LN2 1EZ
Tel: 01522 510800
Fax: 01522 575011
Email:[log in to unmask]
************************************************************************
****
************
This email and any files transmitted with it may contain information
which is privileged and confidential, the disclosure of which is
prohibited by law and intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in
error please note any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
message is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately if
you have received this email by mistake and delete it from your
system.
Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
information can be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late
or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not accept
liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message
which arise as a result of email transmission. If verification is
required please request a hard copy version.
Thank you for your co-operation.
************************************************************************
****
************
-----------------------------------------
THIS E-MAIL AND ANY ATTACHED FILES ARE CONFIDENTIAL AND MAY BE
LEGALLY PRIVILEGED.
If you are not the addressee, any disclosure, reproduction,
copying, distribution or other dissemination or use of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
transmission in error please notify the sender immediately and then
delete this e-mail.
Opinions, advice or facts included in this message are given
without any warranties or intention to enter into a contractual
relationship with the City of London unless specifically indicated
otherwise by agreement, letter or facsimile signed by a City of
London authorised signatory. Any part of this e-mail which is
purely personal in nature is not authorised by the City of London.
All e-mail through the City of London's gateway is potentially the
subject of monitoring. All liability for errors and viruses is
excluded. Please note that in so far as the City of London falls
within the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 or the
Environmental Information Regulations 2004, it may need to disclose
this e-mail.
Website: http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk
|