Libraries like no others: evaluating the performance and progress of joint use libraries.

ABSTRACT

The published and research literature on joint use libraries relates mostly to school community libraries, which are normally combinations of high school and public libraries. That literature often still emphasizes the susceptibility of joint use libraries to dysfunctionality or even failures, although the record of successful combinations is improving because of informed planning and consideration of the requirements for success. Evaluation of joint use library performance and progress is one requirement that is still given little attention in planning and formal agreements. The uniqueness of most joint use libraries also militates against general evaluation criteria and benchmarking. Difficulties in a joint use library, therefore, tend to be unrecognized by its institutional partners until there is a crisis.

Continuous self-evaluation and a commitment to transparent periodic external evaluation will minimize these difficulties and foster joint use library synergies. A joint use library evaluation methodology is outlined. The methodology is focused on internal ongoing formative evaluation using critical success factors. This should be complemented by external five-to-seven-year reviews commencing within three years of a library's establishment.

INTRODUCTION

Worldwide there is an increasing interest in governments at all levels in collaboration between different agencies and the most effective outcomes of taxpayer investment in them. Joint use libraries can, properly planned, implemented, and evaluated, represent an optimal example of such collaboration (Amey, 1987, pp. 52-63).

The published and research literature on joint use libraries relates mostly to school-housed public libraries, or school-community libraries. This is also reflected in the writers' definition of a joint use library, derived from several sources, as one in which two or more distinct library services providers, usually a school and a public library, serve their client groups in the same building, based on an agreement that specifies the relationship between the providers.

Joint use libraries, usually combining a public library with an educational institution library on the site of the educational institution, have existed for nearly a century (Amey 1979, pp. 1-6). During the last forty years, in particular, lessons have been learned about how to ensure their success. One of those lessons is the value of openly and adequately evaluating the performance and progress of the joint use library.

Joint use library variations now include libraries for two or more educational institutions, research institutions, government agencies, and even business corporations. Although the most common type of joint use library is the school-housed public library, a less frequent but increasing variation of the concept is the public library housed in a community college or university. Some of these libraries may involve three or more partners, for example, a combined school, college, and public library. In that sense they are more than "dual use" libraries. There are also now wide variations in the size and complexity of joint use libraries, from a very small rural primary school--housed public library serving only 200 people, to the $177.5 million, 475,000 square feet King Library opened in 2003 and named for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. This initiative between the city of San Jose and San Jose State University in California has been described as "A library like no other."

Since 1990 there have been other major joint university-public libraries developed in Australia, Finland, Latvia, Sweden, and the United States (Bundy, 2003, pp. 135-137). The evaluation issues and proposals raised in this article focus on school community libraries. However, they apply to all types and sizes of joint use libraries.

ADVANTAGES OF JOINT USE LIBRARIES

Experience in joint use libraries, and comparison of them with separate public and other services, suggests a number of advantages against which their evaluation should proceed. A major claimed advantage, and thus an evaluation focus, is the synergy of a joint use service--the whole being greater than the sum of the parts.

The other claimed advantages are economic, social, and educational. Never claimed, however, are the possible political and career profiling advantages to institutions and individuals initiating joint use libraries. Despite its long history, the concept is still often seen as innovative. Joint use libraries should

* represent efficient use of public money: staff costs may be shared between authorities; buildings and facilities may be provided more cost effectively; resource acquisitions may be coordinated to provide savings; operating costs will be minimized and shared;

* provide a greater quantity and higher quality of collections, services, and facilities than is possible with separate services and smaller budgets;

* provide access to more staff than in separate services;

* allow extended opening hours;

* be convenient to users in providing all services on one site;

* permit the collection in one place of archival and local history material of interest to the whole community;

* allow more flexibility in providing and obtaining resources and making innovations;

* provide access to more than one system for support services, for example, professional development;

* promote greater community interaction by providing a community focal point;

* provide greater access to information on community services;

* increase the community's awareness and understanding of current educational practice;

* promote information literacy development and lifelong learning;

* encourage the development of a positive attitude in students toward school;

* provide more avenues for promotion of library services;

* bring different community groups together on the governing board;

* provide a social justice outcome for smaller communities that could not support separate services;

* enhance social capital through increased community engagement.

PLANNING SUCCESS FACTORS

Experience has shown that the main success factors for joint use libraries are the following:

* A formal agreement endorsed by all cooperating authorities

* The agreement should include the essential items but not attempt to cover all policy issues; the agreement should provide for a mediation process and dissolution of the joint use library with at least one year's notice

* The level of service provided should be equal to, or better than, that which could be provided in separate facilities

* System-wide support is essential, for example, for staffing, professional development, and advice and financial support

* A governing board or committee should participate in the establishment of the service; it should develop ongoing broad policy for its operation and endorse goals and budget priorities

* A profile must be established for each joint use library to define the community to be served

* Provision should be made for the projected growth of the community Choice of site is critical; if the site is predetermined and not ideal, extra effort will be needed

* Very good signage is necessary, in the neighborhood and on-site

* Opening hours should meet the needs of the whole community

*…