The document provides an overview of recent activities by the Federation of Ontario Public Libraries (FOPL). FOPL advocates for public libraries in Ontario and provides services focused on advocacy, marketing, research, and consortia purchasing. Recent activities include advocacy training webinars, research on branding and social media use by Ontario libraries, and planning for a summit on the future of libraries. FOPL is also working to develop standardized impact metrics and measurements to help libraries communicate their value in areas like early literacy, economic impact, and return on investment.

1. FOPL Activities
Stephen Abram, MLA , FOPL Executive Director
AMPLO Report March 7, 2014

2. About the Federation


Provides a single, strong voice for public libraries in Ontario to
enhance library policies and programs.

Services focus on four strategic pillars: advocacy, marketing,
research and consortia purchasing.

Over 215 members representing libraries of all sizes and
geographic regions, and serving 80% of Ontario’s population.

2
A not-for-profit membership association established in 2005.
Our Board of Directors is composed of an equal number of
library board trustees and library chief executives.

3. What is FOPL?

3
Simply put: Ontario’s Public Libraries. Now more than ever
before, they play a critical role in the social, educational,
cultural and economic success of the communities in our
province. Public Libraries are an essential investment in
the future of our communities and are essential drivers of
success in school preparedness, reading readiness,
economic and employment success, and social equity. As
the development of the knowledge economy progresses,
public libraries are a vital link for every resident and every
community to ensure success of all Ontarians, regardless
of location or background.

4. FOPL Membership
 Growing!
 Strong
 Collaboration
 Membership
ethic improving
is not a membership fee but
financial support for research, advocacy, and
4

5. Fundraising
 Culture
Development fund $57K approved
(with OLA) to create sustainable trustee
training over 2 years
 SOLS/OLS-N $25K approved for Phase 1
2020 branding study and campaign
 $15K stats proposal in process
 $300K Sponsorship campaign in planning
stages
5

6. FOPL Talking Points
The Public Library value proposition is strong
and includes (but isn’t limited to):
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
6
Excellent Return on Investment
Strong Economic Development
Great Employment Support
Welcoming New Canadians
Provable Early Literacy Development
Ongoing Support for Formal Education and Homework Help
Serve the whole community equitably
Affordable access to community resources
Access to Government Services and e-government
Questions Deserve Quality Answers
Support Cultural Vitality
Recognized and Valued Leisure Activities for majority of Ontarians

7. What’s the ‘Problem”?
 We
have a very COMPLEX (not complicated)
value proposition
 We have great competencies BUT we need
to up our game on influence, advocacy, and
focus.
 We need the tools and we need to
collaborate on them nimbly and quickly.
7

8. Advocacy Training
 10
8
part series delivered, recorded, archived
and available (over 1000 attendees)
 iSchool MOOC: FOPL sponsored, supported
with research and videos, and planning
(5000)
 Ministry to do webinar on March 19th on Data
results for 2011 and 2012
 Copyright webinar planned for May 27 with
Wanda Noel (immediately after board and
AC hearings)

9. 2020 Branding
 Marketing
Research (Richardson-Jalakas)
 Social Media Census
9

10. Project to develop a brand strategy
for Ontario public libraries
Richardson Jalakas &
associates

11. #1- Census – use of websites
•
•
•

11
29 (i.e. 9%) did NOT have a website;
2/3 (i.e. 19) of those libraries without a website were
identified as First Nation libraries;
3 of the 29 without websites were FOPL members.
(n = 318)
Richardson Jalakas & Associates

12. #1 - Census – Adoption of Social
networking
Tool
Yes
%
Notes
Social Networking:
Facebook
45%
Large urban (including TPL) have adopted
at 100%; Small medium = 85% (55). Of
the non-FOPL libraries, only 24% (29)
used FB.
Twitter
106
33%
Caucus members with T: 1 FN; 1 Franco;
all the Lg Urban (including TPL); 10 North;
6 Rural; 43 Sm-Med.
Blogs
48
15%
Google+
2
0.6%
LinkedIn
12
144
2
0.6%
MySpace
0
Richardson Jalakas & Associates

13. #1 - Census – adoption of media
sharing and other
Tool
Media Sharing:
Yes
%
YouTube
Pinterest
Flickr
Other:
12%
8%
6%
Good Reads
Delicious
Reddit
Tumblr
13
39
25
20
6
4
0
0
Notes
Uptake of media sharing tools was not as
robust as the social networking tools.
Distribution of uptake was spread across
the library types as defined by the FOPL
caucuses.
2%
1%
Richardson Jalakas & Associates

14. Wordcloud from ON Public libraries
website positioning statements
14
Richardson Jalakas & Associates

15. Status





15
Phase 1 – Establishing the Context:
Conduct brand and channel census of public libraries across
Ontario
Review best branding practices in public libraries in North
America
Synthesize research conducted on the impact of public
libraries
The next phase of this project will focus on communicating
some of the findings of this census and research, better
understanding the possible channels and receiving feedback
on the core value proposition.
Richardson Jalakas & Associates

16. OLA’s VIP
 Value
 Impact
/ Influence
 Positioning
 Member
16
Personas (D&J)

17. The Public Library Value Proposition
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
17
Excellent Return on Investment
Strong Economic Development
Great Employment Support
Welcoming New Canadians
Provable Early Literacy Development
Ongoing Support for Formal Education and Homework Help
Serve the whole community equitably
Affordable access to community resources
Access to Government Services and e-government
Questions Deserve Quality Answers
Support Cultural Vitality
Recognized and Valued Leisure Activities for majority of Ontarians
Infrastructure Support (AODA and Buildings)

18. Activities
 Research
on Value (i.e. School Readiness
Study from OISE, Market Probe 2010 report)
 Royal Society Testimony and
Recommendations
 Webinar on Ontario Data Collection 2011-12
 iSchool Symposium: Defining New Metrics
for Library Success (April 22-23, 2014)
http://www.metricsandlibraries.org/
18
 Consulting with
Dr. Robert Molyneux

19. Why Measurements?
19
With nicely crafted visuals libraries could do the following:
1. Communicate effectively with their trustees to get their advice
on strategy as well as support.
2. Communicate budget 'asks' effectively that place the library in
the community value delivery context.
3. Position budget growth (or at least lessen cuts) for community
goal alignment and strategic impact.
4. Explain why technology and community room spaces are as
valuable (maybe more) than books.
5. Position hybrid collection use properly in ‘circulation’.
6. Justify restoration or extension of library hours.
7. Show that your library either performs as well as or better than
others or justify investments to perform to provincial, national or
sectoral norms.

20. Core Statistics (CLA Draft)
1. Service points and visits
2. Reference questions
3. Circulation (of particular item types)
4. Population served
5. E-resource holdings
6. Children’s membership and services
7. Staffing
8. Internet/PAC/WiFi
9. Programming
10. Total operating expenditures
20

21. Core Measurements (FOPL Draft)
21
1. Overall value of a library membership (usage not cardholders)
2. Value of an 'open hour' (new metric unique to MPI TPL study that
aggregates cost + value)
3. Economic impact (vs. ROI) (Households and Population)
4. Per Capita 'Usage" comparison across systems, groups (like small,
medium. large, urban, suburban, rural, remote, FN, etc.), and jurisdictions
(province/state)
5. A 'new' usage algorithm to modernize the old circulation stat and
combine digital and print usage into a standard, comparable metric
6. A metric for technology access tied to the digital/economic divide(s)
7. A standard operational effectiveness metric (Value for Tax Dollars)
8. Average cost per household (taxes are based on household rather than
population and better reflects funding models)
9. A metric for Use of Space (meetings, study, rooms) which was new for
the MPI study and hadn't been done before

22. I have a dream . . .



22
Standard our sector on impact metrics that lend themselves to
the communication, influence, and financial challenges faced
by public libraries to communicate their value in the 21st
Century context.
Build a set of standardized core statistics that build up to these
measurements so we could lead most libraries to start working
with a new program to communicate value (and build on their
strengths in communicating pure 'usage').
Ultimately create a tool such as a specially designed
spreadsheet or dynamic website where you input the numbers
based on the standards and advice from some group (us?!)
that spits out decent data, information and visuals easily on the
other side.

23. Other
 Election
(Doh! It’s happening too fast!)
 Day at Queen’s Park (planning stages)
 AMPLO Inter-ministerial Summit at OLA
Super Conference (Thank you!) Follow Up
 Future of Libraries Summit at the Royal York
May 1-2. http://www.thefutureoflibraries.org
23

24. Thank You
www.fopl.ca
Stephen Abram,
Executive Director
416-395-0746
sabram@fopl.ca

25. Kim Silk and MPI TPL Study

TPL provided all data for the MPI study:
1.
Service points and visits – we looked at branch level and system-wide
Reference questions- we had in-person (real questions and directional), online and phone reference.
Circulation (of particular item types) – we had circulation of e-books and print broken down by age group
Population served – we used city of Toronto population for 2012; we also used a study done by Strategic
Council that found that 72% of Torontonians had used TPL in the past year (2012) which is how we
estimated membership. I was mistaken in my earlier email about gate count; many TPL branches don’t
have a gate to count entries.
E-resource holdings – we had database usage across various products
Children’s membership and services – we didn’t use child cardholders; we did count children’s materials
and programs
Staffing – we had staffing by home location, which indicated that TPL employees spend their salaries
locally
Internet/PAC/WiFi – we has PAC # of sessions and wifi # of sessions. We estimated that an average
session was 1 hour.
Programming – at branch level by program type, # of programs offered. We did not have attendance
which would have been better. Data hole here.
Total operating expenditures – provided by TPL.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
25