PLS Administrative Council Agenda

PLS/PLP Offices

2471 Flores Street, Suite 204 San Mateo, CA 94403

Thursday, November 7, 2013

3:00 p.m. 1. Adoption of Agenda (Action Item) Harding

2. Minutes of October 3, 2013 (Action Item) Harding Attachment 1

3. Old Business

A. PLAN Report (Oral) Schultz

B. Approval of the Purchase of the Innovative Interfaces Sierra Schultz Attachment 2

Services Platform and Implementation costs in the amount of $229,150 to be funded through the use of PLS reserves (Action item)

C. Measure A Summer Reading Initiative Despain

4. Reports

A. System Chair’s Report Harding

B. System Administration Report Crowe/Jackson 5. Public Comment – (Individuals are allowed three minutes, groups in attendance five minutes. It is system

policy to refer matters raised in this forum to staff for further investigation or action if appropriate. The Brown Act prohibits the Administrative Council from discussing or acting on any matter not agendized pursuant to state law.

6. Agenda-Building and Date for Next Meeting

7. Announcements

Next meeting: Thursday, February 6, 2014

P 1

PLS Administrative Council Minutes

PLS/PLP Offices

2471 Flores Street, Suite 204 San Mateo, CA 94403

Thursday, October 3, 2013

2:00 p.m.

Council: Staff: Pat Harding, BPL Linda Crowe, PLS/PLP Michael Lambert, SMCL Terry Jackson, PLS/PLP Valerie Sommer, SSFPL Donna Truong, PLS/PLP Ben Ocon, SMPL Monica Schultz, PLAN Jenny Davis, RCPL John Boggs, PLAN Chela Anderson, DCPL John Alita, SBPL Others: Susan Holmer, MPL Carol Stults, SMPL Carine Risley, SMCL Pat Harding chaired the meeting with a call to order at 2:05 p.m. 1. Adoption of Agenda: The agenda was adopted as distributed. (M/S Alita/Lambert)

2. August 1, 2013 Minutes: The minutes of the August 1, 2013 meeting were approved.

(M/S Sommer/Alita)

3. Old Business A. PLAN Report: Monica Schultz reviewed her report (Attachment 2) and updated the Council on

PLAN projects. BiblioCommons had its soft launch on September 30th. Monica will provide biweekly reports to Information Services and will also copy the Council. Issues with network speed are being resolved today through a patch to alleviate the network congestion as much as possible. A packet shaper solution has been ordered and should be installed in two to three weeks to block illegal traffic currently saturating the bandwidth. Boopsie has been delayed two weeks due to personnel changes on their end. Pat Harding advised that the Network Project Chart on page 5 should have BPL at 20 not 10 mbps. Monica called out the information listed under Phase III of the Network Project during which all PCs will be converted to dynamic IP addresses.

B. Innovative Interfaces Sierra Services Platform: Monica Schultz summarized the report she had distributed via email yesterday to the Council. There was general consensus that this was the right direction for PLS and that the reengineered flexibility that Sierra provides will be very valuable. This is viewed as a long-term solution and not a stop-gap measure, given the ILS marketplace environment, the enhancements with BiblioCommons, and the experience with Open Source to date. Staff will come back with a specific quote for Sierra, Decision Center, and the soon-to-be offered mobile solution for Ipads as well as funding recommendations and a timeframe.

C. Measure A Summer Reading Initiative: Carine Risley of SMCL gave a status update on the

Measure A Summer Reading Initiative. The Board of Supervisors has approved $328,000 for FY

P 2

2013-14 and set aside $206,300 for FY 2014-15. Carine shared an overview of the work effort to date, including exploring the Summer Learning approach model and the efforts to find a sponsor for the Summer Lunch Program. Carine advised the group to view the public dashboard now available on the County’s website. The Council was encouraged to email Anne-Marie Despain or Carine with feedback or questions. This will be an agenda item at the next PLS Council meeting.

4. New Business A. Hold Fees Discussion: The Council discussed the hold fee and agreed to take a philosophical

approach in informing themselves, staff, and those they report to as to the rationale behind the hold fee and the barriers to service and access. There was general acknowledgement that the hold fee represents revenue for the jurisdictions (Attachment 3), but access to printed and physical materials is becoming increasingly important as a larger percentage of budgets are allocated to electronic resources. The electronic resources do not require a hold fee. The total cost this fiscal year for delivery is $458,000 with PLS members paying $368,000 and CLSA $90,000. The Council agreed to approach this by producing a white paper on the subject and to see if this could be discussed in the nine jurisdictions to see if it would be feasible to eliminate the hold fee in July 2014 or July 2015. There was support for a fee for holds “not picked up” and perhaps a lower limit on the number of holds a patron could place. A Task Force was formed and charged with developing the white paper and looking at any mitigations that would help to support the elimination of hold fees. The Task Force is comprised of: a to-be-named representative from San Mateo County; Jenny Davis, Redwood City; Ben Ocon, San Mateo City; Chela Anderson, Daly City; and John Boggs, PLAN.

5. Reports A. System Chair’s Report: None

B. System Administration Report: Linda Crowe informed the group that the space vacated by WIC

had been rented. The CENIC report has been written and will be submitted soon by the State Library to the State Department of Finance with the goal of getting funding for broadband for libraries across California into next year’s State budget.

6. Public Comment: No public comment.

7. Agenda Items for the Next Meeting: The Council agreed to hold the next meeting on Thursday,

November 7th from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. and cancel the December 5th meeting. The chief agenda items will be:

Actions necessary to move forward with Sierra Measure A Summer Reading Initiative

8. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 3:45 p.m.

P 3

 

1 

  

    

 

Executive Summary:  

PLAN scheduled three Sierra demos:  two live demos on September 25 and a WebEx demo on 

September 26. The WebEx demo was recorded, and it’s still available for viewing.  Information can be 

found on the front page of FIDO.  The demos consisted of the new ILS “Sierra” and a new module 

“Decision Center.”  This report is focused on Sierra, but I have attached information about Decision 

Center since it may be beneficial to directors when allocating funds for library materials or gathering 

reports on specifics in circulation.  The price quote is extremely low if PLS moves to Sierra.  

 

Sierra is the newest Integrated Library System from Innovative Interfaces. The system was first 

announced at the Innovative Users Group Conference in April, 2011. It is designed as the alternative to 

the aging Millennium. 

 

Last summer there was a sign‐up period that gave an incentive discount to early adopters.  PLS is not an 

early adopter; however, the price quoted for PLS is close to the early adopter’s price.  Pricing will 

increase in 2014, and conversations of price increases have already begun in the company.  

 

The big question is “What’s new in Sierra and why move to Sierra?” First, from the staff’s perspective 

and from the patron’s perspective, Sierra is not going to look and behave a whole lot differently than 

Millennium. Although there are some differences, Sierra represents more of a reengineering of the 

system code and underlying database than the workflows, business logic, functionality and user 

interface. The WebPAC will look exactly the same.  This is not an issue for PLS since we are moving to 

BiblioCommons.  The Sierra Desktop Application is similar enough that it will be easy for library staff to 

learn and start using without much training.  III’s mantra all along has been that 100% of Millennium 

functionality will be in Sierra from day one.  Sacramento Public is assisting PLAN with confirmation and 

other answers to questions since they were early adopters of Sierra.  

 

The primary benefit is that Sierra will give PLS more room for future growth and enhancement 

compared to Millennium.  Millennium was built on top of III’s first ILS, Innopac, which used data access 

and storage technology that was unique to that system. As the technology has aged, it has become more 

and more difficult to change and enhance. But Sierra is based on industry standards using Postgre‐SQL.  

This allows read access to the database, giving staff the opportunity to interact with the database, 

including building local extensions and automating numerous manual tasks currently handled by library 

staff and PLAN such as waiving fees, old holds reports, lists or items in transit too long, etc.  Automating 

is limitless once there is read access to the database.  

 

 

 

To:    PLS Administrative Council From:    Monica M. Schultz – IT Director 

Subject:    Sierra Demo Update ‐ Revised Date:    October 2013 

P 4

 

2 

 

Sierra has opened up possibilities that were huge challenges in Millennium, such as but not limited to: 

 

1. No more need for multiple logins 

Sierra streamlines the login/authorization system. Millennium used a two‐tiered system, which 

meant that each user needed to know two sets of usernames and passwords. In Sierra, 

everyone has one username and password. By moving to Sierra, we will not require as many 

licenses. 

2. “All ports in use” problems should be alleviated 

When Millennium gets busy, we sometimes run into “all ports in use” and people can’t log in 

until someone else logs out.  In Millennium, each Create Lists job takes up a port while it’s 

running, and having multiple modules open simultaneously takes up multiple ports. Faster 

Create Lists and no more separate modules should make “all ports in use” a thing of the past. 

3. No more need to load separate modules to do your work 

In Millennium we have separate modules for circulation, cataloging, acquisitions, 

administration, etc. Certain functions are only available in particular modules. Sierra lets you 

access any/every function from within the same application. We can also set up “workflows” in 

Sierra that let the user see only the functions in use. 

4. No more transaction file 

Database transactions are processed completely differently in Sierra than they were in 

Millennium. This removes one point of failure that could cause Millennium to crash. It also 

means that staff can run global updates and record loads any time without worrying that it will 

slow down the system for everyone else. 

5. Create Lists jobs run quickly 

Create Lists has been revamped and uses SQL queries in Sierra, which means that your Create 

Lists jobs will run very quickly. No more running a list and leaving to go to lunch to let it finish. 

6. Mobile Staff Client 

Innovative is currently developing a mobile staff client that will provide all the circulation 

capabilities available on the regular staff client. This will allow staff to have circulation 

capabilities on any mobile device. The module will be ready by Q3 of 2014, and there will be an 

additional charge for the module. The price has not yet been announced.  

 

In conclusion, given the mission‐critical nature of reliance on the ILS, it is in our best interest to be 

operational on the most current technology. The underlying structure of our Millennium system, while 

still vital and actively supported, is over 25 years old. The Sierra system is based on new technologies 

that will position the library for future growth.  Sierra is a platform on which we can build for the future 

so that the libraries can take advantage of ongoing Innovative‐supported and local‐development efforts. 

The reengineering of the backend of the ILS will eliminate all the manual tasks for library staff and PLAN 

staff. The cost for migrating to the new ILS and the small‐to‐no‐learning curve of Sierra make it even 

more attractive to move.  

 

Note: Additional information on references will be provided during the meeting.  

 

 

P 5

 

3 

Sierra Project Cost   

Project Budget:  

 

Sierra and Decision Center 

Sierra ILS   $125,000.00 

Training (WebEx only) $650 per 3 hour training  $1400.00 

Decision Center  $29,750.00 

Hardware   $25,000 

Project Management  $48,000.00 

Total: $229,150.00 

 

 

 

Ongoing Cost  

Note: The maintenance cost will be the same as what we are paying for Millennium; I have added an additional 

5000.00 per year for the servers.  Sierra requires two servers, one for the database and one for the application. 

 

 

Sierra and Decision Center 

Sierra ILS   $100,280 

Server Replacement  $5,000.00 

Decision Center  $29,750.00 

Total: $135,030.00 

 

 

 

P 6

Your Comprehensive Collection Management SolutionToday’s libraries need more than circulation statistics to deliver top-notch service. Decision Center takes you beyond the numbers by providing valuable action steps that make library service and operations simply better.

Key Features•Daily updates•No data offloading •Sierra/Millennium integration•Hosted by Innovative Interfaces

Decision Center is a comprehensive collection management solution that provides timely and focused action recommendations for budgeting, selection, weeding, floating, shelving allocation, and more. Decision Center helps libraries match supply and demand to deliver optimized service. By accessing current and complete data—including circulation, holds, transits, patrons, acquisitions, and more—Decision Center provides courses of action that help your library create customer-driven collections while streamlining collection management workflows.

Other products have a narrow view and only show a “snapshot” of data, leaving out the rest of the picture. Only Decision Center utilizes Dynamic Library Intelligence™, which examines comprehensive data and your preferences through time, to make automated recommendations never before available to library staff. What counts for today’s libraries? Achieving the best possible service and streamlining workflow in a challenging environment.

Decision Center makes it happen!

Decision Center...•Shows where to weed or expand

collections to align supply with demand

•Provides guidance for effective spending and staffing

•Streamlines item availability for faster service

•Utilizes library-selected thresholds and strategic targets

•Offers a complete suite of statistical reporting tools

Highlights - Public Libraries

•Increase collection usage at the lowest cost possible

•Manage floating collections effectively

Highlights - Academic Libraries

•Manage deselection projects efficiently

•Simplify collection statistics reporting

Only Decision Center leverages current and complete ILS data. Other products only show a “snapshot”of data, leaving outthe rest of the picture.

5850 Shellmound Way | Emeryville, CA 94608 | 510.655.6200 | email: sales@iii.com | www.iii.com

Available Now!

P 7

Decision Center radically improves collection management to match library collections with patron demand, streamline selection, improve service, and more!

Decision Center also provides recommendations for budgeting, weeding, floating collections, and shelving allocation. To find out more of why Decision Center is the most sophisticated and powerful collection management tool on the market email sales@iii.com.

5850 Shellmound Way | Emeryville, CA 94608 | 510.655.6200 | email: sales@iii.com | www.iii.com

Displays analytics at the title level

Shows how library supply matches patron demand over time

Illustrates how long each item takes to reach the user

P 8

 

1 

  

    

 

Executive Summary:  

PLS has received responses from four libraries out of ten who have migrated from III to the Sierra ILS 

with feedback on their experience with the move to Sierra.  This will allow PLS to be prepared for 

challenges we may face as well as what to expect from Innovative when challenges or bugs are 

encountered.  

 

References:  

1. Sacramento Public Library – Single System  

2. Northern Waters Library Service ‐ Consortium of 27 public libraries and 1 school 

3. MARINet – Consortium 

4. Indianhead Federated Library System  ‐ Consortium 49 sites 

 

All library systems were early adopters or development partners, which means they encountered what 

could be experienced as they assisted with discovering bugs. The systems were asked the same 

questions so we could easily compare their experience.  

 

1. When did you migrate?  

Library systems who responded migrated between October 2011 and November 2012, making 

them all early adopters and/or development partners. 

 

2. Was there a lot of staff training required? 

All library systems reported that training was not a challenge; since Sierra is so similar to 

Millennium, the learning curve was almost nonexistent.  A few libraries created short how‐to 

videos demonstrating how to perform a task in Sierra, but the videos were not highly utilized. 

 

3. What challenges did you encounter during the migration process?  

This was the same for all libraries; they found challenges with local PCs. Either the PCs were too 

old or minor configurations had to be made to the local PCs. These issues were identified 

immediately and fixed within a week or two.  

 

Specs for workstations are attached; PLAN foresees issues with very old PCs and will work with 

the local IT group to get an accurate number of PCs that may be affected.  

 

Another challenge the libraries faced were bugs in the system; but they expressed 

understanding as they migrated, expecting to encounter bugs since they were all early 

adopters. All bugs have been resolved, and there are no outstanding issues as of November 

2013. 

To:    PLS Administrative Council From:    Monica M. Schultz – IT Director 

Subject:    Sierra References Date:    November2013 

 

2 

 

 

 

 

4. Are there any bugs that have not been resolved? 

Some sites have a few open calls with minor issues, but all major bugs have been resolved. 

 

5. What can you do now that you were not able to do before?  

This response was very similar across the board; the greatest feature is to have read access to 

the database. Everyone claims this has opened up new possibilities and allowed access to 

queries and lists they were not able to get before. One system was finally able to provide 

specific reports to their board that Millennium would not allow.  

 

Another popular feature is a single login; this allows staff to sign in once to use any module the 

administrator has given them access to. This also lowers the cost of licenses and minimizes the 

workload on user administration. 

 

6. If you knew then what you know now, what would you do differently? 

All systems felt the migration would have been a lot smoother if they had not been early 

adopters and instead let other systems migrate and encounter the growing pains first so they 

would not have had to deal with software bugs. Since November 2012, all the software bugs 

have been resolved, and the respondents claim libraries migrating now will have an easier time.  

 

 

 

System (PC) Recommendations for Sierra

The workstation recommendations listed here are neither "optimum" nor "minimum" requirements. These recommendations are intended to guide a typical library in realistic workstation selection, and describe a reasonably modern workstation that libraries using a typical three year or four year replacement cycle will already own.

The recommendations also allow for the continued use of older workstations. Sierra applications can work on slower processors than those listed in the system recommendations section; however, staff can expect reduced performance and may be unable to operate other applications while using Sierra.

Processor

An Intel Pentium 4, Pentium D, Xeon, Core or similar processor running at 3 Ghz or faster (2 Ghz or faster for the Core 2 Duo), or an equivalent processor such as the AMD Athlon 64, Opteron 64, or Turion processors with comparable performance. Note: Sierra applications can work on slower processors, but performance will be affected.

RAM

1 GB (recommended)

Note: If you plan to run other applications on the workstation in addition to Sierra, you should consider adding additional RAM for optimal performance. Newer operating system versions such as Windows Vista require more memory then earlier versions such as Windows XP, so your library should consider additional memory when using newer operating system versions.

Free disk space 500 MB (recommended)

Sound card For audible system warnings and notices

Peripherals A mouse or other pointing device

Resolution 800 x 600 or better (1024 x 768 or better recommended for Sierra Acquisitions displays)

Browsers Innovative recommends using a modern browser capable of supporting current Web standards.

Supported Operating Systems

Windows Windows ® 2000 (service pack 2 or later), Windows ® ME, Windows ® XP, Windows ® Vista (Business or Home), or Windows ® 7 (all editions)

 

Linux Linux

Mac

64-bit, Intel-based (Core 2 Duo) with Mac OS X 10.5.2 or later (Leopard), 10.6 (Snow Leopard), or OS X Lion

Workstations on 10.5.2 or later will need to download the Java for Mac OS X 10.5 Update 1 or higher, as appropriate.

Network Access

Sierra workstations require network access to your Sierra server.

With average sized patron records, one Sierra Circulation requires a minimum of 10 KBPS to process one transaction every second. Thus, a dedicated 56 KBPS line can handle no more than five Sierra Circulation stations. This is a good rule of thumb for the other Sierra applications as well.

 

Peninsula Library System

11/1/2013Product Code Description305G-4 Teleforms - four telphone lines, 9 messages318-4 Telephone Renewal System - four phone lines310J-UNLTD Unlimited license for Self-check Interface101-M Unlimited Web OPAC user licenses; 350 staff users102-M Unlimited Data License308S-M Millennium Offline Circulation107 Authority Control Option200 WebPAC Pro105F-M Scoping for Millennium sites107D Automatic Authorities Processing122A Resequence attached records by location122B Synchronize bibliographic locations125C Table of Contents Display and Indexing Software105-K Advanced Searching160-SPA Spanish Web OPAC Menus160-CHIT Chinese (Traditional) Web OPAC Menus160-TBD Additional Language Web OPAC Menu - TBD100-M Millennium Reports100-MD Millennium Cataloging104 File Transfer Software110N OCLC Interactive Via the Network201-AM Millennium Web Access Management201-AM/URL URL checker201AMB WebBridge201C-2 Z39.50 Client / Client Broadcast / Server201w Web OPAC204 OPAC Export300-M Millennium Circulation303 Reserve Book Room module304 Inventory Control Module305A Circ Notices via E-Mail Option313M Consortium Management Extensions314 Collection Agency Interface317 Homebound Module317-URL-I Patron API (URL)326 Ecommerce 400-M Millennium Acquisitions (11 units total)408C Electronic Ordering (EDIFACT) via FTS format409 Extended Approval Plan Interface410 Electronic Serials Invoicing506A Electronic claiming of serial issues508 SISAC Checkin202A Community Information Database option106 Review files for 1,875,000 records319F Floating Collections124 Additional SCAT Table416 Quick Click Ordering (with Baker and Taylor)415 EDIFACT Invoicing323 Held Item Delivery201WS Spell Check201WSSPA Spell Check for Spanish Dictionary108-CJK Chinese/Japanese/Korean indexing/normalization103E Enterprise Backup API 325 Online Patron Registration310I-UND Item Status API118FP-WS Fines Payment Web Services

Link Plus Redwood City Public Library & San Mateo County Library

Innovative Interfaces, Inc.

Page 1 of 4

 

 

TO:    Peninsula Library System Administrative Council 

FROM:   Anne‐Marie Despain, Director of Library Services 

    Carine Risley, Library Services Manager 

DATE:    October 7, 2013 RE:   Recommendations for Measure A Funds to Support Summer 2014 Learning 

Programs 

 

BACKGROUND 

The Measure A half‐cent sales tax designed to support general County services and functions was 

approved by voters in November 2012. Following public testimony and several workshops to 

discuss spending priorities, the County Board of Supervisors adopted the FY 2013‐14 Budget and 

allocated a total of $328,300 in Measure A funds to support Library Summer Learning Programs. 

An amount totaling $206,300 was also set aside for FY 2014‐15. Measure A funds will be utilized to 

support the redesign and improvement of summer programs offered by the public libraries in the 

Peninsula Library System and supplement the current investment of over $300,000 for summer 

reading programs currently provided by PLS member libraries. 

 

San Mateo County is home to approximately 160,000 children and youth under the age of 18. 

Despite declining state and local funding, libraries continue to partner with our cities, schools and 

community organizations to make an impact on children and their families, building critical literacy 

skills to prepare young children for school and life success. 

Studies have shown that children can lose an average of two months of instruction during the 

summer months, or roughly 22% of what they learned during the school year.  

By the end of fifth grade, low‐income children are approximately 2‐1/2 years behind their more 

affluent peers, primarily because of summer learning loss. Some researchers believe that summer 

learning losses are the main cause of the widening achievement gaps between low‐income 

minority and white middle‐class students in the United States. 

At present, only 19,000 or 12% of all county children and teens are participating in library summer 

reading programs and of those only an average of 44% are completing the program. Current 

Summer Reading Programs will be critically evaluated, combined into one cohesive effort and 

improved based on current research to: (1) increase summer learning participation and 

completion rates with a focus on children who likely suffer from summer learning loss; (2) advance 

literacy and academic performance by engaging children, teens and families in reading and 

Page 2 of 4

 

enrichment activities; and (3) increase library use. Over the next year, time will be spent assessing 

current programs, and planning and developing a new customer‐focused summer reading 

program, which will be launched in June 2014.  

PURPOSE  To address summer learning loss among children and teens in San Mateo County, PLS has 

proposed to redesign and enhance the existing summer reading program and pilot the program in 

communities with low performing schools during the summer of 2014, evaluating the pilot and 

then modifying the program as needed prior to rolling it out Countywide in 2015. The new reading 

program will focus on the following goals and action steps: 

1. Increase summer reading participation and completion rates 

Update and develop a compelling reading program that addresses low participation and 

completion rates 

Expand outreach to children and parents in communities with low performing schools 

Create an appealing campaign and expand marketing using innovative and effective methods 

Develop an interactive online option that engages children and families, tracks reading 

progress, and sends program updates 

 

2. Advance literacy and academic performance by engaging children, teens and families in reading 

and enrichment activities 

Implement updated, evidence based summer enrichment programs with a focus on children 

who likely suffer from summer reading loss 

Provide incentivized parent/family education workshops regarding the importance of reading 

Elevate the program to a more critical level through the endorsement or requirement of 

schools 

Expand summer volunteer/mentoring programs such as the Reader Leader program where 

teens are paired with young children to help improve reading 

 

3. Increase library use 

Increase the collection of summer reading books at all locations and on the bookmobile 

Create and circulate a collections of digital summer reading materials and devices 

RECOMMENDATION 

Proposed Summer Learning Pilot Summer 2014: 

1. Develop, coordinate and expand evidence based programs, outreach, and enrichment 

activities focusing on at risk communities served by school districts below 52% for 3rd grade 

reading proficiency. The maximum recommended number of school districts to include in the 

Summer 2014 pilot are: 

Page 3 of 4

 

School District  % at 2012 STAR 3rd Grade Reading Proficiency 

% of un‐served, eligible Head Start preschoolers 

Lead Agency 

Bayshore  28%  See Jefferson  DCPL 

Brisbane  47%  See Jefferson  SMCL 

Cabrillo  40%  72%  SMCL 

La Honda/Pescadero  25%  0  SMCL 

Ravenswood  32%  37%  SMCL 

Redwood City  42%  48%  RCPL 

San Bruno Park  51%  77%  SBL 

Jefferson  51%  69%  DCPL 

 

2. Provide weekday summer lunches and enriching experiences in 5 or more libraries, located in 

the geographic areas of school districts below 52% STAR 3rd grade reading proficiency. 

 

3. Solicit community engagement to develop an interactive summer learning app that engages 

children and families (http://www.lapl.org/appathon). 

 

4. Create an appealing campaign, develop multi‐lingual summer learning marketing materials, 

and expand marketing using innovative and effective methods. 

Proposed Budget: 

Measure A Funding  2014 

Marketing/PR and Incentives  $50,000 

Extra Library Staffing  $50,000 

Programs, Events and Collections  $218,300 

Online App Development  $10,000 

Total  $328,300 

 

Proposed Timeline: 

 

October‐November 2013: Identify strengths of existing programs and establish best practices from national research 

December 2013: Summer Learning Task force begins weekly meetings 

January 2014: Goals and first Quarterly update is due and posted to the County’s Measure A dashboard 

January‐May 2014: Plan and develop the 2014 Summer Learning Program, including enrichment programs, website/app and other online presence, collection purchasing and reading lists, training, evaluation development, quality improvement measures and marketing materials  

June 2014: Launch new Summer Learning Program and PR Campaign 

June‐September 2014: Track results and performance measures 

Page 4 of 4

 

October‐December 2014: Assess the impact of the program and report out 

January‐May 2015: Make changes to the program based on the results and evaluation of the 2014 Summer Learning Program 

June 2015: Launch the 2015 Summer Learning Program and PR Campaign 

June‐September 2015: Track results and performance measures 

October‐December 2015: Assess the impact of the program and report out  REPORTING PROGRESS 

 

The library reading program initiative will increase summer learning program participation to 30% 

and completion rates to 60% by September 2015. 

 

Results will be tracked to assess the impact of the program, and quarterly updates will be posted 

by the County to keep the Board of Supervisors and public informed of the progress. Ultimately 

these efforts will decrease summer learning loss and increase children’s access to books and 

interest in learning. 

 2013 

(expected) 2014  2015 

Number of Participating Students 

19,000  32,000  48,000 

Percent of Total County Students 

12%  20%  30% 

Program Completion Rates 

44%  50%  60% 

Notes from Summer Reading ‐ Brainstorming from SMCL and PLS Children’s Librarians 

September/October 2013 

 

Context 

We started the discussion with a broad conversation about what Summer Reading can involve, what it has 

historically involved, and what elements we believe are key to any summer reading program.  

 

We believe that Summer Reading Programs prevent learning loss over the summer break, promote the 

pleasure of reading and choice in reading, help develop the habit of reading, and introduce families to the 

resources of the public library. As such, a Summer Reading Program should at its core include: 

Choice in reading selection 

A gift of a book 

Encouragement of the habit of reading 

 

Research shows that the most effective SRP’s have five things: 

Fewer restrictions in program design 

Stated goals and objectives 

A marketing strategy 

Evaluation methods 

Trained children’s specialists 

 

Possible draft goal: 

The San Mateo County Summer Reading Program encourages the greatest number of children, ages 0‐17, to 

read for pleasure and information over the summer towards preventing learning loss, developing a lifelong 

love of learning and creating an engaged citizenry. 

 

Objectives might include: 

Increased participation to ___% 

Increased circulation of children’s materials in library collections 

 

Next Steps 

In order to make the big impact demanded by the Measure A funds, we believe, as children’s librarians, that 

we need: 

Dedicated staff devoted entirely to SRC – see Multnomah County for inspiration. They have increased 

participation to 74% through having staff devoted to year‐round development of relationships with 

community partners including the school district and 500+ early childhood centers. We also looked 

closely at Multnomah County’s highly successful SRP to see which elements we might adopt. 

A county‐wide program so residents in ANY jurisdiction complete the same SRP. Buy‐in from all PLS 

players. 

Both paper and an online SRP component allowing readers to track their progress and connect users 

to the many resources of the library. 

Connections with the big players in the county especially sports and pop culture figures, and the large 

private employers. Visits by San Francisco Giants as prize once a library/school/district has 

accomplished reading goal? Are there local celebrities? 

Connections with local cultural institutions. We want to think big. Would it be possible, for example, 

to hold a “Summer Reading Festival/party” at AT&T Park similar to the Bay Area Science Festival and 

open the park especially for SRP participants? 

Volunteers devoted to projects. Many local companies allow employees to spend paid time 

volunteering for non‐profits. Local tech companies should be a mine of talent for publicity especially. 

 

Redesign Ideas 

Incentives both individual and collective. Possibly competition between schools, school districts or 

geographic areas. Incentives for parents for helping a child participate. 

Possible philanthropic goal, e.g. if children meet reading goal, $$$ will be donated to Heifer 

International. 

To handle the huge increase in participation, the SRP needs to be extremely simple, almost do‐it‐

yourself. 

Build a program around series reading? Gift a child the first book in a series to start him/her off. 

SRP should be promoted out of the library, but also participated in without library visits. Maybe a 

kiosk at Target where families start and finish but also learn about library resources? 

Fee waiving/amnesty all summer? 

Little Free Libraries contest. Build one, adopt one, post all over the county and include SRP materials? 

 

Promotions 

Go where people “pay, play and pray”. Develop partnerships with Target, Starbucks, Trader Joe’s, 

Safeway, Park and Rec departments, local churches, McDonalds (tray liners idea), Home Depot, 

SamTrans, and food banks. Look for ways to allow children to sign up and complete the SRP entirely 

at a non‐library location while building in ways for families to learn more about the resources of the 

library. 

Partnerships with business in San Mateo County could help us get electronic signs on highway 101 

Everything should be advertised as “FREE”! 

 

Things to Avoid 

Turning all required school reading into automatic participation in the SRP. Students have many 

negative associations with required summer reading and we would like their library associations to 

be positive. 

Counting all kids (and recounting those who attend library program after program) to reach numbers 

without making real change in outcomes. 

Limited/restricted staff cooperation. Unless all PLS staff is entirely onboard, continuity will be lost 

and confusion will follow. 

 

Budget 

Dedicated staff and perhaps a consultant to get this change spearheaded 

Beef up library collections and promote those in the schools?  

Yard signs and other promotional ideas 

Incentives for schools/school districts that participate, e.g. the school with the highest number of 

finishers wins a collection of fine non‐fiction, meeting Common Core standard 

Published on Los Angeles Public Library (http://www.lapl.org)

Home > App-A-Thon

App-A-ThonCreate an App for the Los Angeles Public Library!

Prizes! Karma! Pizza! Librarians! Literate Angelenos!

What: LAPL App-a-thon Why: To create a summer reading program app for the library Who: Coders and library fans ages 16 and up When: Saturday, October 26, 8 am to 11 pm

Registration/welcome/guidelines: 8 am to 9 am• Coding: 9:00 am to 8:00 pm• Presentations: 8:00 pm to 9:30 pm• Judging: 9:30 pm to 10:00 pm• Awards: 10:00 pm to 11 pm•

Where: Central Library - 630 W. 5th Street, Los Angeles, 90071.

How (aka The Rules):

First come, first code! Limit 30 people.1.Work individually or in teams. Maximum of 5 people in a team.2.Participants must bring their own equipment.3.Each individual/team will be asked to create a mobile or web application that can be used on a tablet or smartphone device. All coding for the app must occur during the App-a-thon. The app does not need to be completed/perfected during the App-a-thon; however, the individuals/teams must be able to present/demonstrate the app to the extent that it can be judged according to the award criteria.

4.

Each app will be judged according to these three criteria - Summer Reading Goals; Technical Workability; and Originality & Appeal (Awesomeness). A more detailed breakdown and explanation of these criteria will be made available to participants on the day of the App-a-thon.

5.

Every participant must sign an agreement (coming soon) giving LAPL the rights to any developed apps.

6.

Participants under age 18 must have a parent or guardian sign the agreement and a waiver between 8 am and 9 am on the day of the App-a-thon.

7.

Prizes! First prize - $1000; 2nd prize - $500; 3rd prize - $250

Food! We’ll keep you fed, watered, and well-caffeinated.

To pre-register or to send us questions and comments, please fill out the form below.

Contact InfoFirst Name *

Page 1 of 2App-A-Thon

11/7/2013http://www.lapl.org/print/appathon