Aaron the Librarian

As alluded to in previous posts, the ALA Office for Information Technology Policy has released a magnum opus, the Public Library Connectivity Project: Findings and Recommendations, (153 pages long, 57 pages of report and 96 pages of appendicies) which was commissioned by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (I hope this will help guide their future library funding efforts). The report builds upon the findings of the Public Libraries & the Internet Reports (PLIP) and numerous site visits, interviews, and questionnaires conducted over the course of this project.

Grab a beverage, this summary/teaser is long enough to warrant it.  If you plan on digging through the full report, you may want to order in some sustenance, too!
Spoiler alert!
Highlights from the Public Library Connectivity Project: Findings and Recommendations below the fold…

Overview:

“The issue for most libraries has moved from one of getting connected to an even more difficult one of maintaining and improving the quality of service.”(p1) “The challenges stem both from lack of availability and affordability of high-speed connections and, on the other side of the equation, from the continually growing demands of Web sites and Internet-based services and applications for ever-greater bandwidth.”(p2)

• Libraries Are Challenged to Keep Up With Demand
• Cost of high-speed connectivity (phat pipes)
• Lack of availability of phat pipes
• the low and steadily-dropping relative quality/speed of broadband in the U.S. compared to other nations
• “…libraries can indeed take steps to improve their connectivity needs substantially. In some states, libraries may even be in a particularly advantageous position to play a leadership role in this broader policy debate by pushing high-speed connectivity out to unserved or underserved regions.”
• Libraries Serve Increasingly Critical Roles in the Knowledge Society
• Providers of general access
• Economic Development
• E-Government
• Emergency Response
• Wireless Access
• but, wait, that’s not all (sorry, no Ginsu knives)
• Rapid Evolution of the Internet Requires Increasing Bandwidth
• New uses
• Growing complexity
• Multimedia
• Two-way interactions
• Issues of High-speed Connectivity Are Increasing
• What is broadband, and how fast is fast?
• “[bandwidth] capacity planning for libraries is a very difficult and problematic process”
• “[complexity of] procurement of library telecommunications requires sophisticated expertise”
• What are technologically neutral policies and the “gold standard”?

“In terms of pure theoretical capacity and in the long-term, optical fiber seems to be the “gold standard.” A single fiber to a library could potentially provide connectivity of up to a billion bits per second (bbps) even with existing technology. But, in the shorter term, many technologies could potentially offer substantially improved connectivity.”(p7)

Analysis:“When librarians were asked what kinds of library functions used the most bandwidth, they mentioned many services. This answer needs to be compared with what they would offer if they had more bandwidth. At least one library is offering each of these services but not all libraries offer all of them.”(p10)

• For what do libraries use their bandwidth?

• General Internet use
• Training
• Library operations
• Access to resources and services
• E-Government and economic development
• Providing wireless access

• What would you do with more bandwidth if you had it?

• “more of the same”
• “what I can’t do now”
• “Faster services to enhance the Internet experience for staff and the public.”
• “Patrons being allowed to do what they want to do”
• “Do everything we can’t do now without being kicked off.”
• “live, real time, interactive training”
• Desktop training, virtual schools, online meetings, and more online homework help for students
• Broadcast programs of local authors reading their books
• Many services in the list below are already offered by many libraries, but many libraries still cannot provide these services due to lack of affordable bandwidth (I almost didn’t list these because many of these have been available from my public libraries for years)
• an integrated phone system
• better online circulation systems
• the ability to do federated searches of all available library resources, regardless of format
• customized Web interface based on electronic profiling of patrons
• automatic notification of books or programs based on user profiles
• patron initiated ILL
• VOIP
• Web-cams
• ability to do podcasts of multi-media, broadcast programs of local authors reading their books, story times and online book clubs
• opportunity to engage patrons with user feedback on blogs and wikis about books and movies they like

• Is your bandwidth sufficient?

• “In all the focus groups, only one librarian claimed sufficient bandwidth, although admitting that the library’s network slowed down in the afternoon.”
• From PLIP: “45.5% of public library branches indicate that their connection speeds are inadequate to meet user demands some or all the time.”
• Ways libraries are addressing connectivity “slowness”
• Limiting use and/or services
• Quality of Service technologies (packet prioritization)
• Buying more bandwidth

• What do you consider sufficient bandwidth?

• Responses included
• ”As much as you can afford”
• “The more we have, the more they want and the more we need”
• “When you click, it happens”
• “Insufficient bandwidth is determined by the number of irritated patrons”
• “More than we have”
• “…general opinion was that the absolute lowest would be 1.5 mbps (identified as a T1 by the focus groups) and that this must be scalable to higher bandwidth. Anything less than a 1.5 mbps would need to be increased almost immediately.”(p17)

• How do you arrive at that amount?

• Responses included
• “We look at the growth of use in the past and increase in an order of magnitude.”
• More structured planning for bandwidth is done at some state-wide networks
• PLIP suggests bandwidth speeds for certain applications
• Streaming video ~1MBPS download
• Video Teleconferencing ~6MBPS download
• There is a desire for a calculable metric for benchmarking which includes
• service population
• library visits
• bandwidth saturation percentages
• number of public access PCs with Net access
• desired or provided services’ bandwidth requirements

• What is your vision for your library’s connectivity?

• No individual library interviewed had an existing vision of connectivity
• Some library networks appear to have developed after a vision was articulated at a state level
• “There is an issue of folks not visioning what to do with capacity. We know there is content out there, but some may not know how to connect, may not know what to do with connectivity.”

• What are the barriers to getting more bandwidth?

• economic
• industry reticence
• planning and training
• political
• geography

• Who provides you with assistance in analyzing your needs and getting your library more bandwidth?

• “Wherever I can find it.”
• State and Regional networks (where present)
• State Libraries
• State Government employees
• Regulators
• Legislatures
• Subsidized broadband deployment
• State-wide telecommunications contracts
• Telecommunications Industry
• Telephone companies (residential and business customers)
• DSL (300kbps - 1.5 Mbps)
• T-1 (1.5 Mbps)
• Cable companies (mostly residential customers)
• Cable “modem” (1Mbps - 5Mbps, upgradable to 10Mbps soon)
• Alternative technologies
• WiMax
• Satellite
• Cellular / PCS
• Municipal energy companies

Findings:

• There are nine general findings
1. Every state is different
2. There are viable models
3. Collaboration and aggregation works
4. The need for higher bandwidth is exploding
5. The minimum threshold for broadband deployment should be 1.5 mbps for every library
6. There is a need for more training and support
7. There is a lack of awareness of the roles of libraries
8. There is a need for planning
9. There are multiple funding options

Options Considered but Not Recommended:

• A macro approach cannot be recommended that treats all libraries the same
• Treating each library as an individual entity
• A state network or a regional network (not always the best solution in all cases)

One Possible Model:

• A Collaborative Planning Process Model (See Appendicies D & E for successful examples)
• Leadership
• Vision
• Inclusivity and Partnerships
• Advocacy for the Vision
• Demonstration Models
• Aggregation of demand and services
• Technical Plan for Implementation and Support
• Training Librarians on the New Technology
• Champion at the State, Regional, or Local Governmental Level
• Funding
• State Library Plays a Role

Interventions Recommended:

“[T]he OITP study team received many interesting suggestions both formally and informally for possible interventions, both from the Gates Foundation and from other parties.”(p50)

• Connectivity sustainability grants
• Planning grants
• Training
• Consulting services
• Policy assessment and advocacy
• PR and general advocacy
• Create a national library network
• Continue state assessment visits
• National “fiber to the library” initiative
• Internet2 leading edge project

Current Initiatives:

• Telecommunications Advocacy Pre-conference (ALA Annual)
• Amendments to the Agriculture Reauthorization Bill
• FCC proceedings
• E-rate simplification
• Discussions with Internet2
• Discussions with CTI in California
• State Web analyses

Assessment and Recommendations:

• Characteristics of a Successful Intervention
• Integrated
• Highly flexible
• Substantive and sustained
• Sustainable
• Recommended Strategy (see p56)
• Pilot program
• National support structure
• Ancillary projects
• Demonstration Project
• National Training Program
• Develop national public and political support

Conclusion:

In summary, the investigation of library connectivity showed that:

• The need is great. Most libraries are struggling to keep up with growing demands for bandwidth
• The importance is profound. Libraries are increasingly asked to provide vital Internet-based services to their constituents and are the sole or principal source of access. Furthermore, these services are consuming ever more bandwidth
• The problem is extraordinarily complex and systemic.

Increasing and sustaining the leading edge in bandwidth access plunges libraries into a much broader social debate about broadband deployment and requires that they deal with a broad range of stakeholders and policy makers with whom they have had little formal contact in the past.  Therefore, it is vitally important to the library community and the public that depends on them that the Foundation and/or some other change agent become significantly involved in addressing this issue and do so in a way that will help develop the long term capacity of the library community to obtain and sustain adequate bandwidth. The evidence from this investigation suggests that the library community is aware of the seriousness of the problem and is, for the most part, ready to act if provided the appropriate leadership and support.(p57)

Obviously, I elided over a great many details which would help make the picture clearer.  If you saw anything in the summary that tweaked your interest, I encourage you to read the full report.