FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE
September 13, 2006
Press Contacts
202-653-4632
Eileen Maxwell, emaxwell@imls.gov
Mamie Bittner, mbittner@imls.gov
Institute of Museum and Library Services Receives
Comments on
Plan to Consolidate Library Programs
Washington, DC--The Institute
of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) today released a
summary of comments on its draft plan for consolidating
the functions of the National Commission on Libraries
and Information Science (NCLIS) and the public and state
library surveys of the National Center for Education Statistics
(NCES). The plan, which would go into effect in fiscal
year 2008, results from President Bush’s fiscal
year 2007 budget request. The draft
plan (PDF, 75KB) was developed in consultation with
key stakeholders including the Federal-State Cooperative
System and State Library Administrative Agency survey
steering committees, the Chief Officers of State Library
Agencies, national library service organizations, and
IMLS’s federal partners.
In response to its public request for input
on August 2, 2006, the Institute received 25 comments.
The majority were received from national library and museum
associations (including the steering committees) and state
librarians. Comments were also received from interested
members of the library community. The Institute also received
a response from NCLIS.
“We are grateful to everyone who participated
in this process,” said IMLS Director Anne-Imelda
M. Radice. “The quality and thoughtfulness of the
comments received are a testament to the importance of
library data collection and information policy. These
comments will help inform the development of a final plan
that will be part of the President’s FY 2008 budget
request for the Institute of Museum and Library Services.”
Summary:
Policy
Commenters called for a strong federal voice to address
library and information policy issues and inform the government’s
domestic and international policy decisions. Commenters
were in favor of legislative language amending the Museum
and Library Services Act to ensure that the Institute’s
role would include advising the President and Congress
on library-related information policy issues. Some commenters
recommended that the plan articulate how the agency would
develop an advisory structure that would inform its policy
agenda. Some highlighted the need to include special constituencies,
such as older adults, and types of libraries, such as
special libraries. Commenters noted the need for frequent
policy reports informed by relevant and timely data.
Surveys
The value of the data collections was repeatedly underscored.
The respondents urged the Institute to maintain the highest
standards of statistical integrity. Respondents appreciated
the continued relationship with the U. S. Census Bureau.
Commenters also expressed support for continuation of
the voluntary federal-state cooperative and steering committee
systems that have evolved over a long period and the annual
training conference. Commenters valued a transparent and
responsive process to add and delete data elements.
The timeliness of the release of data was
an issue of concern. Some respondents recommended strategies
to streamline the process to enable quicker turnaround,
such as an open source statistics database. Some suggested
fast-track surveys and sample surveys.
Commenters expressed enthusiasm for new
product development as well as better marketing of existing
products. Respondents expressed interest in continuing
to have access to the data sets and historical documents
associated with the library survey program, and in the
enhancement of the functionality and design of Web sites.
Overall
Commenters expressed keen interest in seeing that the
Institute receives the budget, resources and legislative
authority necessary to fully engage in data collection
and policy activities. Commenters strongly supported the
development of an organizational structure that would
ensure that these activities were carried out at the highest
possible level by expert staff.
Overall, commenters felt that combining
data collection, policy, and grant making in one agency
would result in stronger federal support for library data
collection and information policy. A few cautioned that
the consolidation would compromise the independence of
each function. One fear was that grant awards would be
tied to participation in data collection activities.
The agency was also encouraged to address
the need for museum data collection as described in its
report, “Museum Data Collection Report and Analysis,”
May 2005.
Commenters applauded the Institute for
the transparency of its process and for the inclusion
of a wide-ranging constituency in the consultation process.
In general, respondents seemed satisfied with the plan
as a road map for the transition, but some expressed an
interest in seeing a more detailed plan.
“IMLS is committed to providing information
about the process, to serving its constituencies, and
to ensuring a smooth and seamless transition,” Radice
added. “The Institute will continue to meet with
key stakeholders during the transition process and implementation
and looks forward to its new and enhanced role in advancing
library and information policy and serving the American
public.”
|
