Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-02-17; City Council; 17508; Museum & Library Svcs Institute grant applicationAB# 17,508 MTG. 0211 7/04 DEPT. Library I TITLE: APPLICATION FOR A GRANT FROM THE INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM AND LIBRARY SERVICES RECOMMENDED ACTION: Adopt Resolution No. 2004-051 authorizing the Carlsbad City Library to apply for a grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). ITEM EXPLANATION: The City of Carlsbad began to measure its performance in achieving desired outcomes in 1999. The City’s goal is to create and maintain a measurement system to identify the key outcomes of City services, including the City’s library system. Within the library profession a keen interest in outcome measurement has also developed. At the Federal level, the Institute of Museum and Library Services has fostered research through its National Leadership Grants for Libraries Program. The IMLS encourages strong proposals for research in library science and for demonstration projects to test potential solutions to problems. The questions this project will attempt to answer are: What IS the value of the public library? What performance measures should a library be collecting and communicating to decision makers and other stakeholders? The purpose of this project is to obtain the reaction of decision makers about the utility of the Balanced Scorecard concept and to work with a number of libraries to develop a process to create the scorecard and choose the most appropriate set of performance measures for each specific library. Project Information will be disseminated primarily through the production of the “Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook. ” In addition to the Carlsbad City Library, three other public libraries will participate: The Cerritos Library, The Newport Beach Public Library and The San Diego County Public Law Library. The Director of the Carlsbad City Library will serve as the Project Administrator. FISCAL IMPACT: The budget for this grant proposal is $236,705, and will be disbursed from IMLS on a quarterly basis. These funds will be used for supplies for each participating library, travel for the Project director and the Project Administrator, and consultant fees for the Project Director. No cash match is required. The match will be in-kind based on the staff hours devoted to the project by the participating libraries. Those hours represent $31 7,861 total ($1 55,079: Carlsbad’s portion) of in-kind contribution over the two-year life of the grant. PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. l7 508 EXHIBITS: I. Resolution No. 2004-051 D , roving the application for a grant from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. Grant application packet for the Institute of Museum and Library Services. 2. DEPARTMENT CONTACT: CLIFF LANGE, 602-201 0 clans@ci.carlsbad.ca.us 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 EXHIBIT # 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2004-051 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE APPLICATION FOR A GRANT FROM THE INSTITUTE OF MUSEUM AND LIBRARY SERVICES. WHEREAS, the City of Carlsbad desires to use outcome measures to measure its performance; and WHEREAS, the Carlsbad City Library desires to develop a balanced scorecard approach to outcome measures to measure its performance; and WHEREAS, the Institute of Museum and Library Services offers the opportunity to financially support research for the development of outcome measures for public libraries; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct. 2. That the Library Director is authorized to apply for a grant in the amount of $236,705 from the Institute of Museum and Library Services. 3. That the City Manager or his designee is authorized to sign all necessary documents. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, at a regular meeting held on the 17th day of February , 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Council Members Lewis, Fi NOES: None ABSENT: None ‘M &277 r . WOOD, City Clerk (SEY 2004 UMLS National Leadership Gram Face Sheet Application Fom OMB NO. 3137-0035 CFDA No. 45.312 1. Applicant Organization 2. Institutional Mailing Address 3. City 4. State 5. Zip Code 6. Web Address rar$ DUNS Number 073333932 8. Name of Pmjece Dwr/Prinupd Investigtora Mr. [7 Ms Q Dr. 9. Business Phone of Project Director 10. Project Director Mailing Address 11. City 12. State 13. Zip Code 14. Fax Number of Project Director 15. E-mail Address of Project Director 16. Name and Title of Authorizing OEcial 17. Business Phone ofAuthorizing Official 18. Sponsoring institution if applicable (e+, munidpdty, state, or university) Carlsbad City Library 1775 Dove Lane Carlsbad CA 92009-4048 Cliff Langce 7hn m7 - min 1775 Dove Lane Car lsbad CA 97009 - 4048 760 602-7942 clange@ci.carlsbad.ca.us Frank Mannen. Asst Citv moPr 760 434-2823 check if this entity will manage fLn& if an award is made. Name and address: City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Ave Carlsbad CA 92008 19. Is the applicant organization university controlled? [7 yes @no 20. For museum applicants, non-Meral operating budget for the most recently completed fisca year $ 21.Proje=Ti& Proposal to Create a Library Scorecard to Communicate the Value of the Public 22MOUNT REQUESTED $ 236 E! Library 23. Amount of Matching Funds $472,940 - 24. Grant Period 25. In the space below, include names of any organizations that are official partners of the project. The Cerritos Library The Newport Beach Public Library The San Diego County Public Law Library CONTINUE TO ITEM 26 ON PAGE 5.4 4 I Application Form 2004 IMLS National Lpackrship Grants 26. Check governing control of applicant (select one) 0 State 0 County 0 Private Non-Profit Q Municipd 0 Tribal Government 0 Other, please specif) 27. Check Type of Organization (select one) OAcademic Library 0 Institution of Higher Education 0 Library association 0 Museum library I3 Public library 0 Research library/archives School library or school district applying on behalf of a school library or libraries 0 Special library 0 State library agency 0 State museum agency 0 Other, please speciG Arboretum CIAquarium OArt museum 0 Botanic garden 0 Children’s/youth museum 13 General museum* Historic housekite 0 History museum Natural history museum 0 Nature center Museum organization Planetarium 0 Science/technology museum 0 Specialized** 0200 28. Employer identification numberltax ID number 95-6004793 29 Check Type of Project (select one) FOP Libraries: For Museums: 0 Continuing Education and Training eE3 Research and Demonstration 0 Preservation or Digitization Cl Museums Online Museums in the Community Professional Practices For Library and Museum Collaborations: 0 Library and Museum Collaborations *A museum with collections representing two or more disciplines equally (e.g., art and history). ** A museum with collections limited to one narrowly defined discipline (e.g., textiles, stamps, maritime, ethnic group). I Proposal to Create a Library Scorecard to Communicate the Value of the Public Library Using Outcome-based Performance Measures Submitted to The Institute of Museum and Library Services For a National Leadership Grants for Libraries Program Research and Demonstration Grant Submitted by The Carlsbad City Library In Partnership with: The Cerritos Library The Newport Beach Public Library The San Diego County Public Law Library January 30,2004 I Abstract Need: For the past several years, considerable attention has been focused on developing outcome-based measures of library services. Yet, despite all of these projects, frustration persists among Public Library Directors, Library Board members, members of City Councils and other library decision makers. What IS the value of the public library3 What performance measures should a library be collecting and communicating to decision makers and other stakeholders? The purpose of this project is to obtain the reaction of decision makers about the utility of the Balanced Scorecard concept and to work with a number of libraries to develop a process to create the scorecard arld choose the most appropriate set of performance measures for each specific library. The development of a Library Scorecard continues the IMLS focus on outcome-based evaluation. Project Objectives: The objectives of this project are to: Assess the resources required for a library to create and implement a Library Scorecard Discover some of the reasons why some citizens do not use the library Determine if there are unique problems that occur as the size of the library increases during the process to create a Library Scorecard Assess the utility of the Library Scorecard for the library director and other members of the library management team as they seek to communicate the value of the public library Assess the utility of the Library Scorecard from the perspective of the library’s stakeholders (library decision makers, library patrons, and other interested individuals) Create a workbook that would document the process to create a Library Scorecard. Project Activities: The activities of the project will include: Working with staff of each library to develop a Library Scorecard that reflects the vision and strategies of the library. Share a draft of the Library Scorecard with library stakeholders to obtain their reactions and fine-tune the scorecard. Produce a Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook. Test the Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook in twenty-four (24) small, medium and large public libraries across the US. Evaluate the utility of the Library Scorecard among library directors, library staff members and stakeholders. Project Leaders: Dr. Cliff Lange, Director of the Carlsbad City Library, will be the Project Manager and handle administrative oversight of the project. Joe Matthews, Project Director, will be responsible for assisting each library in developing their own Library Scorecard as well as producing the planned workbook pertaining to the development of a Library Scorecard. Anticipated Results: It is anticipated that library stakeholders will have a better sense of the direction and accomplishments of the public library and will welcome the use of the Library Scorecard. Evaluation: Surveys will be conducted of library staff and stakeholders to determine their views of the value of a Library Scorecard. Dissemination. Project information will be disseminated primarily through the production of the Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook. This workbook will provide a recommended process for any library to develop a Library Scorecard as well as document any lessons learned as a result of this project. It is anticipated that this workbook will be made available for downloading from a Web site as well as published so that it can be distributed widely. It is also anticipated that some of the library directors and the consultant will prepare papers for submittal to library and information science journals and speak at library conferences about the utility of a Library Scorecard. Sustainability. Ultimately, the interest in and the adoption of a Library Scorecard will indicate the sustainability of this proposed project. I 1 Introduction Librarians, managers, library boards, and city council’s have always found it difficult to assess what are the tangible and intangible benefits that arise from a public library but the pressure is on to do so. When a public library is established it is provided with a set of resources. Those resources are organized, directed and transformed into a set of capabilifes to provide a range of services. These capabilities are then utilized. And once utilized, the service provided has the potential for a positive, beneficial impact or effed on the individual and/or society. Feedback can and often is employed by the library to make adjustments in service offerings. For example, service levels may decline as utilization increases; feedback can be used to make adjustments by increasing resources so that service levels are improved. The feedback is facilitated through the use of performance measures. A General Evaluation Model Resources-b Capability + Utilization Impact or Effect Input Process output Outcomes Outcomes Meaqures Measures Measures for the for Individual Society The input measures associated with the resources br inputs that have been allocated to the library. These input measures are also the easiest to quantify and gather, Librarians will often speak of their annual budget, number of professional staff, size of the collection and so forth. Process measures are focused on the activities that transform resources into services offered by the library and as such are internally directed. Process measures are reflected in an analysis that will quantify the cost or time to perform a specific task or activity. Process measures are ultimately about efficiency which answers the question “Are we doing things right?” Output measures are used to indicate the degree to which the library and its services are being utilized. More often than not, output measures are simply counts to indicate volume of activity. For example, annual circulation, number of people entering the library, number of reference questions answered and so forth are all output measures. Historically, use of output measures was regarded as measures of goodness - after all, the library’s collection and its services were being used, often intensively so! Therefore, the public library was doing “good.” Outcome measures indicate the impact or effects of the library and its information serbices on the individual. The outcomes on the individuals then have a cumulative impact on society itself. Outcome measures are the most difficult to assess. Outcomes ultimately address the issue of effectiveness. And effectiveness answers the question: Are we doing the right things?” Outcome measures center on the impact of the library on the individual and indirectly on society itself. Libraries have traditionally collected and reported a plethora of performance measures, typically input, process and output measures, to their local jurisdictions and to state library’s. During the last few years, several projects have been funded to explore the possibilities of identifying the outcomes that arise from the use of a public library. I 2 Glen Holt used four methodologies to assess the financial benefits from use of a public library and found the benefit-to-cost ration was 4: 1 to 10: 1. The approach taken by the St. Louis Public Library requires a large sample size and a telephone survey to identify some of the benefits, which most libraries are not able to replicate due to the high costs to obtain this information. Charles McClure and John Carlo Bertat conducted a study in 1998, hich identified the uses, benefits and impacts of public libraries in Pennsylvania. Their study suggested that there were direct and indirect economic benefits that arise from the use of a public library. The Bibliographic Center for Research in Denver, Colorado, in cooperation with others, received an IMLS grant to develop new tools for outcomebased evaluation of public libraries -- this is the Counting on Results (COR) project. The intent of the COR project was to build upon the Public Library Association’s Planning for Results model, which has thirteen service responses, e.g., Basic Literacy, Business and Career Information, Library as Place (Commons), General Information, Information Literacy and Local History and Genealogy. A short postcard survey was used to obtain information about what public library services people use and why. The COR project identified the reasons why a library patron visits the library. However, the results of the COR project must be interpreted so that a decision maker wilt understand the significance of the information. Even then, knowing that about 3/4ths of people are seeking materials to read for pleasure or that about half of the library patrons learned more about a skill, hobby or other personal interest does not really mmmunicate the value of the library. To the north, a report - Dividends: The Value of Public Librades in Canada -was prepared to demonstrate the positive economic and social impact on the community and nation. This study attempted to identify the vital role that public libraries play in Canada and noted that reductions in funding for libraries would adversely impact publishers, suppliers, retailers and local businesses. In England, a study examined book borrowing and information seeking in an attempt to iUentify how public libraries dntribute to social inclusion (see Economic Value of Public Libraries, 2000). Similar to the approach used at the St. Louis Public Library, this study asked patrons to estimate the price the would be willing to pay to buy the books, CDs or other materials they borrowed or used. Interestingly, most patrons were bnly willing to pay about $1 per item. In Florida, a major study was conducted to determine the economic impacts and benefits from taxpayer investment in public libraries. Benefits were divided into two groups: direct (e.g., borrowing of materials, using financial publications to better manage an individual’s assets) and indirect (e.g., enhance professional skills, learn to use a computer and the Internet). This study, conducted by Charles McClure and others, found that the economic impacts and benefits received from public libraries are numerous, varied, and complex. In short, it is a difficult task to measure economic benefits individually but possible to prepare reasonable estimates in aggregate. Yet, despite all of these projects, frustration persists among Public Library Directors, Library Board members, and members of City Councils. What IS the value of the public library, what performance measures should a library collect and report, and how can this information be best communicated to decision makers and other stakeholders? Project Design The purpose of this project is to build upon the results of the above projects and develop an approach to effectively communicate the value of a public library that will be easy for public libraries of all sizes to use. 3 Most importantly, this approach must be one that will be recognized by library board members, City Councils, County Board of Supervisors, and other over-sight boards as effectively communicating the value of the public library. The Balanced Scorecard Faced with a plethora of measures, the scorecard approach provides a framework for concentrating on a small number of carefully selected measures that provide a comprehensive picture of the library's performance. The scorecard is based on answering four basic questions: * How do customers see the public library? (Customer perspective) * What must the library excel at? (Internal perspective) * Can the library continue to improve and create value? (Innovation and learning perspective) * How does the public library look to shareholders (Financial perspective) Answering these qllestions together lets you see "whether improvements in one area may have been achieved at the expense of another". Using this approach means that you can consider disparate elements of the competitive agenda such as becoming more customer orientated, shortening response times, improving collection quality, emphasizing teamwork, and developing new services. Viewing a variety of performance indicators that are focused on the four perspectives assists management in gaining a broader perspective. The library does not just pursue circulation, or customer satisfaction or expenditure on fiction in isolation. Rather, the scorecard provides the vehicle to allow the management team and library staff members to see hsw their actions are reflected in the performance indicators. Targets are formulated for each measure in each of the areas (3-5 measures in each area). Customer perspective (users) Customer concerns tend to fall into four categories: time, quality, performance and service, and cost. A variety of customer-focused measures can be employed, including customer satisfaction (although use of customer satisfaction surveys must be used cautiously in a library setting due to their positively skewed results). Internal perspective Managers need to focus on these critical internal operations that enable them to meet satisfy customer needs. This part of the scorecard looks at the processes and competencies a public library must excel, For example, technological capability; introduction of new ideas, monitoring/evaluation mechanisms might be addressed. Innovation and learning perspective This looks at the library's ability to grow, learn, develop and introduce new services. It focuses on measures such as introduction of new services; infrastructure and the skills of library staff members. Financial perspective In the non-profit, governmental arena of a public library, financial measures such as profitability are not relevant. But the library can, and must, demonstrate that it makes effective use of the funding that is provided. 4 Financial Perspective Customer Perspective Internal Perspective 1 The Balanced Scorecard The assumption is that the innomfive perspecfive (dealing with infrastructure and the quality of staff) will create a more efficient operation (infernal perspective). The combination of staff, infrastructure and internal operations will lead to products and services that will be more appealing to customers. The customers are then going to purchase more products and services leading to better financial results (financial perspective). Since traditional measurement systems sprung from the finance function, the performance measurement Systems have a control bias. That is, traditional performance measurement systems specify the particular actions they want employees to take and then measure to see whether the employees have in fact taken those actions. In that way, the systems try to control behavior. The Balanced Scorecarxi, on the other hand puts strategy and vision, not control, at the center. It establishes goals but assumes that people will adopt whatever behavior and take whatever actions are necessary to help achieve those goals. ' The Balanced Scorecard provides a useful framework that provides the focal point when a library is trying to draw up performance measures for the library. The scorecard is based on the understanding that no single measure can focus attention on critical areas of library service. The choice of performance measures to be used by a library will be determined by the strategies chosen by the library in terms of what services to provide to its customers. Thus, even though a number of libraries could be using the Library Scorecard as a vehicle to communicate with its decision makers about the value of the library, the specific performance measures included in each balanced scorecard would likely differ and could range from input, output to outcome-based measures. The purpose of this project is to obtain the reaction of decision makers about the utility of the Balanced Scorecard concept and to work with a number of libraries to develop a process to create the scorecard and choose the most appropriate set of measures for each specific library. Project Objectives 5 The objectives of this project are to: 0 Assess the resources required for a library to create and implement a Library Scorecard Create a workbook that would document the process to create, implement and maintain a Library Scorecard that can be shared with other libraries 0 Test the utility and effectiveness of the workbook by having 24 public libraries, of various size, create their own scorecards using the workbook. Based on the comments and observations from these libraries, revise the workbook as a final project deliverable. Determine if there are unique problems that occur in creating a Library Scorecard as the size of the library increases Assess the utility of the Library Scorecard for the library director, library staff members, and other stakeholders (library decision makers, library patrons, and other interested individuals) 0 Establish a 7 member Project National Advisory Board to provide oversight for the project. Each activity would be completed at each library and would require the cooperation and assistance of each library. A Library Scorecard team would be created at each library composed of 5-8 staff members. The consultant would act as a resource person and meeting facilitator as each team works to develop their library’s scorecard. Goal 1: Activity 1 : Activity 2: Activity 3: Activity 4: Activity 5: Activity 6: Activity 7: Activity 8: Activity 9: Create a Library Scorecard Introduction to the concept of a Balanced Scorecard. A I-day workshop to introduce and review the Balanced Scorecard and the process used to create a scorecard. Identify the strategies used by the library. A 2 day workshop that would use the library’s Mission Statement and Vision Statement, to identify the strategies being used by the library as well as identify the critical success factors for each strategy. Identify the cause-and-effect relationships of the critical success factors for each strategy. A 2-day workshop is used to identify the cause-and-effect relationships of the critical success factors for each strategy. Develop a list of performance measures. A 2-day workshop to identify a list of possible measures for each strategy that potentially would be used for one of the perspectives in the Library Scorecard. These performance measures would include input, process, output and outcome measures, including those developed by the Counting on Results project. Decide on a final list of performance measures. A 2-day workshop is used to decide on a final list of performance measures. Criteria that would be used to judge the utility of a possible performance measures might include: a leading or lagging indicator? An input, process, output and outcome measure? Is it collected now? Can data for the measure be easily gathered? Develop a series of cascading Library Scorecards (for larger libraries). Larger libraries may want to develop a series of Library Scorecards for their branches and/or other units. This would entail a 2-day workshop. Decide on targets. A 2-day workshop is used to decide on targets (goals for improvement) for each measure. The library may also decide to implement a specific action plan in order to achieve the goals. Share the draft of the Library Scorecard with stakeholders (Library Boards, City Councils, City Manager, Board of Supervisors), employees and citizens to obtain their reactions. Once the reactions have been obtained, it will be necessary to incorporate any concerns in a final revision of the Library Scorecard. A 2-day workshop allows the library to incorporate any concerns that may be needed. Decide on a format for sharing the Library Scorecard. The Library Scorecard will need to be presented to a wide range of individuals and stakeholders. Presenting the scorecard in a brochure or small report are options that will need to be finalized. Typically the data for 6 the performance indicators are gathered on a quarterly basis and shared. A I-day meeting is used. Monitor the process. Identify any problems that may occur, as the Library Scorecard is prepared in each library over a 1 year time period. A quarterly review meeting with all Library Directors participating in the project is planned. The consultant would meet with each participating library up to 5 days each quarter (after the first 6 months). Activity IO: Goal 2: Activity 1: A draft of Developing a Library Scomcard Workbook would be prepared by the twelfth month Activity 2: The Developing a Library Scorncard Workbook would by made available to 24 small, medium Activity 3: The comments and concerns of these libraries would be incorporated into a final version of Produce the Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook. of the project. j and large public libraries that would agree to use the workbook and develop a library Scorecard. the Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook. Goal 3: Determine if larger libraries confront any unique problems when developing their Library Scorecard. If any special problems are encountered, they will be identified and documented in the planned workbook. Goal 4: Query each library director and other Library Scorecard team members of their observations concerning the strengths and limitations of the scorecard approach. Their observations will be noted and included in the workbook. Two surveys will be conducted. Goal 5: Assess the utility of the Library Scorecard from the perspective of the library's stakeholders. A series d interviews would be conducted with library board members, city managers, members of City Councils and the Board of Supervisors. In addition, a survey would be sent to other stakeholders to obtain their reactions. The results of the interviews and survey would be included in the planned workbook. Management Plan Staff of Carlsbad City Library and the City of Carisbad Finance Department will handle the disbursement of funds and the administrative procedures related to accounting mechanisms. Dr. Cliff Lange, Director of the Carlsbad City Library, will handle administrative oversight of the project. Joe Matthews, Project Director, will be responsible for assisting each library to develop their own Library Scorecard, preparation of the planned workbook (draft and final version), production of interim (every 6 months) reports and the project final report. A National Advisory Board, composed of 7 public library directors, would meet at each ALA Conference to review progress and offer suggestions. Budget The largest portion of the budget is for the consultant and compensates each of the participating libraries for some of the direct costs that they will incur when conducting surveys of users. Details regarding allocation of personnel time and other expenses are provided in the budget notes. Each of the participating libraries will contribute the salaries for those involved in the process to develop the Library Scorecard, meeting rooms, etc. These contributions represent 69.6% of the project budget. \3 I Personnel 7 Dr. Cliff Lange, Director of the Carlsbad City Library, will serve as Project Administrator. Dr. Lange received his PhD from the University of Wisconsin - Madison. In addition to being a library director, Dr. Lange has served as a State Librarian, worked as a librarian in a variety of positions, and taught in a library school. The consultant who will be working on this project is Joe Matthews. Joe is an experienced consultant and is knowledgeable about performance measures. He recently completed a book about performance measurement and the potential use of the Balanced Scorecard in public libraries (Measuring for Results, 2003, Libraries Unlimited). Joe is an independent consultant who has written extensively in the areas of management, performance measures and technology. He participated in a major research project concerning the use of online catalogs sponsored by the Council on Library Resources. Joe has written several books and numerous articles pertaining to libraries, performance measurement, library automation and information retrieval. He holds an MBA degree from the University of California, Irvine. He is an adjunct faculty member at San Jose State University’s School of Library and Information Science. Resumes for Dr. Lange and Mr. Matthews have been appended to this proposal. Project Evatuation The project evaluation will be a continuous in that the participating library directors and other staff members wit1 be asked to critique the process of devetoping a Library Scorecard at each step in the process. Their comments and observations will be documented and included in the Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook as it is being written. Near the end of the project, library decision makers (members of library boards, City Councils, Board of supervisors) will be asked to complete a brief survey asking their views of the utility of the Library Scorecard. In addition, a series of interviews will be conducted with library decision makers to better understand their views and concerns about an effective way to communicate the value of the public library and the utility of the Library Scorecard. Dissemination Project information will be disseminated primarily through the production of the Developing a Library Scorecard Work600k. This workbook will provide a recommended process for any library to develop a Library Scorecard. The workbook will also document any lessons learned as a result of this project. It is anticipated that this workbook will be made available on a Web site so that it can be downloaded as well as published commercially so that it can be distributed widely. Several articles will be submitted to library and information science journals for publication including a major library publication (Library Journal, American Libraries, etc.). It is likely that one or more of the library directors and/or the consultant would be asked to make presentations at both national and state library association conferences. Further, each library would prominently feature their Library Scorecard on their library’s Web site. Press releases will be prepared to inform the media about the availability of the Library Scorecard on the library’s Web site. 8 Sustainability Ultimately, the success of the Library Scorecard will be determined by how quickly and how widespread other public libraries adopt the use of the scorecard. The adoption rate will be influenced by the ready availability of the Develaping a Library Scorecard Workbook and the published articles describing the process to create a Library Scorecard. + Q) 5 Q, 5 K 0 c 0 II .. Ln .c) 0 P) .tr n 2004 IMLS Nationai Leaderskip Grants Project Budget Form SECTION 2: SUMMARY BUDGET rn Application Form The Carlsbad City Library Name of Applicant Organization IMPORTANT! READ INSTRUCTIONS ON PAGES 3.8-3.10 BEFORE PROCEEDING. DIRECT COSTS IMLS SALARIES &WAGES FRINGE BENEFITS CONSULTANT FEFS 2o9.500 TRAVEL 13,205 MATFNALS, SUPPLIES & EQUIPMENT 14,000 SERVICES OTHER $ 236,705 TOTAL DIRECT COSTS INdlRECT COSTS' $ 'You may r ueSt indirect costs &om IMLS ody on the3reu project costs quested &om LMLS. AMOUNT OF CASH-MATCH AMOUNT OF IN-KIND CONT~IBUTIONS Applicant Partner(s) $129.232 $260.125 28.847 57.736 (if applicable) $ 155,079 $ 317,861 $ $ Total $389.357 83.583 209,500 -- 13,205 14,000 $ TOTAL PROJECT C6STS $-- $ $ $ 155,079 $ 317,861 (INSTITUTIONAL COST-SHARING), INCLUDING INDIRECT COSTS TOTAL AMOUNT OF MATCH (CASH & IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS) Smclln $ 236,705 AMOUNT REQUESTED FROM IMLS, INCLUDING INDIRECT COSTS PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL PROJECT COSTS REQUESTED FROM IMLS 33.3 % (MAY NOT EXCEED 50% IF REQUEST EXCEEDS 5250,000 - RESEARCH PROJECTS EXCEPTED, SEE COST SHARING ON PAGE 1.7) Have you received or requested hnds for any of these project activities from another federal agency? (Please check one) 0 Yes 4 No If yes, name of agency Date of application or award Amount requested or received $ Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET Year 1 - Budget Period from 10 I 011 04 to 09 I30 I05 Name of Applicant Organization: Carlsbad City Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) Namerile No. Method of Cost IMLS Computation 1. Cliff Lange, Director 26 $61 4day 2. Geoff Armour, Asst Director 26 -day 3. Heather Piuuto, Prin. Librarian 26 3Wday 4. Chris HoR, Prin. Librarian 26 339lday 5. Dawn Tucker, Mgmt Assistant 26 273day 6. Callie Ahrens, Sr. Librarian 26 2Wday 7. Suzanne Smithson, Sr. Librarian 26 268lday 8. Penny Thompson, Sr. Circ Sup. 26 247lday 9. Lynda Jones, Sr. Librarian 26 31 8lday TOTAL SALARIES & WAGES Applicant Partner $1 5,964 12,870 7,956 8,814 7,150 6,968 6,422 8,268 $81,952 7,540 SALARIES AND WAGES (TEMPORARY STAFF HIRED FOR PROJECT) Namerriile No. Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Computation TOTAL SALARIES OF TEMPORARY STAFF FRINGE BFNEFITS Rate Salary Base IMLS 1. Cliff Lgnge Q 20% 2. Geoff Armour Q 20% 3. Heather Piuuto Q 20% 4. Chris Holt Q 20% 5. Dawn Tucker Q 20% 6. Callie Ahrens (9 20% 7. Suzanne Smithson Q 20% 8. Penny Thompson @ 20% 9. Lynda Jones Q 20% $1 5,964 12,870 7,956 8,814 7.1 50 7,540 6,968 6,422 8,268 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS Applicant Partner $3,193 2,574 1,591 1,763 1,430 1,508 1,394 1,284 1,654 $16,391 CONSULTANT FEES NameRitle Of Consultant Rate of compensation Number of Days IMLS Applicant Partner (Daily) On Project Joe Matthews $500lday 200 days $1 00,Ooo TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE $1 00,000 Marketing Support Systems TRAVEL FROMRO PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner NUMBER OF: SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION Lib meetings 26 $ 95 $95 IM LS travel 4,000 4,000 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $4,095 MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Item Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Computation Printing, copying supplies Estimate $3,500 TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT $3,500 Total $1 5,964 12,870 7,958 8,814 7,150 7,540 6,968 6,422 8,268 $81,952 Total Total $3,193 2,574 1,591 1,763 1,430 1,508 1,394 1,284 1,654 $16,391 Total $1 00,Ooo $100,000 Totd $ 95 4, OOo $4,095 Total $3,500 $3,500 SERVICES Item OTHER Item Project Budget Form SECTION 1 : DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year I - Carlsbad City Library Method of Cost Computation TOTAL COST OF SERVICES Method of Cost Computation IMLS Applicant Partner Total IMLS Applicant Partner Total The Cenitos Library " The Newport Beach Public Library The San Diego County Public Law Library * See attached Detailed Budgets $ 4,829 4,449 4,069 TOTAL OTHER COSTS $1 7,416 $ 45,963 $ 50,792 79,662 84,111 73,306 77,375 $238,643 $256,059 TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $120,942 $98,343 $198,931 $418,216 I INDIRECT COSTS Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET Year 2 - Budget Period from 10 I 011 05 to 09 I 30 I 06 Name of Applicant Organization: Carlsbad City Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) Namerriile No. Method of Cost Computation 1. Cliff Lange, Director 15 $61 4day 2 Geoff Armour, Asst .Director 15 -day 3. Heather F)izzuto, Prin. Librarian 15 =day 4. Chris Hob, Prin. Librarian 15 -day 5. Dawn Tucker, hlgmt Assistant 15 275/day 6. Callie Ahrefis, Sr. Librarian 15 2Wday 7. Suzanne Smithson, Sr. Librarian 15 268fday 8. Penny Thompson, Sr. Circ Sup. 15 247lday 9. Lynda Jones, Sr. Librarian 15 31 Wday TOTAL SALARIES 8 WAGES IMLS Applicant Partner $9,210 7,425 4,590 5,085 4,125 4,350 4,020 3,705 4,770 $47,280 SALARIES AND WAGES (TEMPORARY STAFF HIRED FOR PROJECT) Name/Tiile No. Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Computation TOTAL SALARIES FOR TEMPORARY STAFF FRINGE BENEFITS Rate Salary Base IMLS Applicant Partner 1. Cliff Lange Q 20% 2. Geoff Armour @ 20% 3. heather Pizzuto @ 20% 4. Chris Hob 0 20% 5. Dawn Tucker Q 20% 6. Callie Ahrens Q 20% 7. Suzanne Smithson Q 20% 8. Penny Thompson Q 20% 9. Lynda Jones Q 20% $9,210 7,425 4,690 5,085 4,125 4,350 4,020 3,705 4,770 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $1,842 1,485 91 8 1.01 7 825 870 804 741 954 $9,456 CONSULTANT FEES Namerriile Of Consultant Rate of Compensation Number of Days IMLS Applicant Partner (Daily) On Project Joe Matthews, $500/day 21 5 days $1 09,500 TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE $109,500 TRAVEL FROM/TO PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Lib meetings 20 $ 73 $ 73 IMLS travel 4,000 4,000 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $4,073 NUMBER OF: SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Item Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Computation TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Total $9,210 7,425 4,590 5,085 4,125 4,350 4,020 3,705 4,770 $47,280 Total Total $1,842 1,485 91 8 1,Ol f 825 870 804 741 954 $9,456 Total $1 09,500 $109,500 Total $ 73 4,000 $4,073 Total SERVICES Item OTHER Item Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year 2 - Carlsbad City Library Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL COST OF SERVICES Corn putat ion Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Total Computation The Cerritos Library * The Newport Beach Public Library The San Diego County Public Law Library = See attached Detailed Budgets TOTAL OTHER COSTS $1,022 730 438 $2,867 $35,260 $36,382 61,499 62,229 22,071 22,509 $159,392 $1 62,359 TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $1 15,763 $56,736 $1 18,830 $291,429 INDlRECf COSTS I Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET Year 1 - Budget Period from 10 I 011 04 to 09 I30 105 Name of Applicant Organization: The Cerritos Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) Namerie No. Method of Cost IMLS 1. April Aguinaga 26 $2Wday 2. Don Buckley 26 231lday 3. Jeanny Chan 26 1 Wday 4. Marie FUKOWS 26 mday 5. Rita Hill 26 1 41 /day 6. Cynthia Thompson 26 224day 7. Holly Tornren 26 =day Computation TOTAL SALARIES & WAGES Applicant Partner $5,304 6,006 4,940 5,304 3,666 5,824 2,496 $ 33,534 SALARIES AND WAGES (TEMPORARY STAFF HIRED FOR PROJECT) Name/Tiile None FRINGE BENEFITS Rate 1.80% 2. 80% 3. 80% 4.80% 5. 80% 6.25% 7.25% CONSULTANT FEES No. Method of Cost Computation Salary Ease $5,304 0,006 4,940 5,304 3,666 5,824 2,496 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS IMLS Appticant Partner IMLS Applicant Partner $2,334 2,843 2,174 2,334 1,613 932 399 $ 12,429 Narne/Tiile Of Rate of Compensation Number of Days IMLS Consultant (Daily) On Project TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE TRAVEL NUMBER OF: SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION FROM/TO PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Lib meetings 26 $1,329 $1,329 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $1,329 MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Itern Method of Cost IMLS Computation Printing, copying supplies Estimate $3,500 $3,500 TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Applicant Partner Applicant Partner Applicant Partner Total $5,304 6,006 4,940 5,304 3,666 5,824 2,496 $ 33,534 Total Total $2,334 2,643 2,174 2,334 1,613 932 399 $ 12,429 Total Total $1,329 $1,329 Total $3,500 $3,500 SERVICES Item Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year 1 - The Cerritos Library Method of Cost Cornputation TOTAL COST OF SERVICES IMLS Applicant Partner Total Total IMLS Applicant Partner OTHER 'Item Method of Cost Computation TOTAL OTHER COSTS TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $4.829 $45,963 $50,792 INDIRECT COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS CHARGED TO Project Budget Form SECTION I: DETAILED BUDGET Year 2 - Budget Period from 10 I 011 05 to 09 I30 I 06 Name of Applicant Organization: The Cerritos Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) Namerile No. Methodofcost IMLS 1. April Aguinaga 20 $204/day 2. Don Buckley 20 231Jday 3. Jeanny Chan 20 190lday 4. Marie Furrows 20 2Wday 5. Rita Hill 20 Mllday 6. Cynthia Thompson 20 224day 7. Holly Tomren 20 =day Computation TOTAL SALARIES & WAGES Applicant Partner $4,080 3,696 3,800 4,080 2,820 4,480 1 ,m $25,800 SALARIES AND WAGES (TEMPORARY STAFF HIRED FOR PROJECT) Name/Tiile None FRINGE BENEFITS Rate I. 44% 2. 44% 3.44% 4. 44% 5.44% 6.16% 7.16% NO Methodofcost Computation Salary Base $4,080 4,620 3,800 4,080 2,820 4,480 1,920 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS IMLS Applicant Total Total $4,080 3,696 3,800 4,080 2,820 4,480 1,920 $25,800 IMLS Applicant Partner Total $1,795 $1,795 2,033 2,033 1,672 1,872 1,795 1,295 1,241 1,241 71 7 71 7 307 307 $ 9,560 $ 9,560 CONSULTANT FEES Namerile Of Rate of Compensation Number of Days IMLS Applicant Partner Total Consultant (Daily) On Project TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE TRAVEL FROM0 PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total NUMBER OF: SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION Lib meetings 20 $1,022 $1,022 $1,022 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $1,022 $1,022 MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Item Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Total Computation TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT SERVICES Item OTHER Item Project Budget Form SECTION I: DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year 2 - The Cemtos Library Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Computation TOTAL COST OF SERVICES Method of Cost Computation TOTAL OTHER COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total Total TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $1,022 $35,360 $36,382 INDIRECT COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS CHARGED TO I Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET Year 1 - Budget Period from 10 loll 04 to 09 I30 I05 Name of Applicant Organization: The Newport Beach Public Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) NameTile No. Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Computation . I. Haidee Barker 26 $242fday 2. Tim Heatherton 26 2Wday 3. Debbie Walker 26 3Wday 4. Youth Services Sup. 26 26llday 5. Branch Services Sup. 26 261lday 6. Susie Lamb 26 3Wday 7. Melissa Kelly 26 3Wday 8. Susan Warren 26 369lday TOTAL SALARIES & WAGES Partner $8,292 7,384 7,930 6,786 6,786 9,490 9,594 9,694 $ 63,856 SALARIES AND WAGES (TEMPORARY STAFF HIRED FOR PROJECT) Namenitle None FRINGE BENEFITS Rate 1.27% 2.27% 3.27% 4.27% 5.27% 6.23% 7. 23% 8.23% NO. Method of Cost Computation Salary Base $6,292 7,384 7,930 6,786 6,786 9,490 9,594 9,594 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS Total $8,292 7,384 7,930 6,786 6,786 9,400 9,594 9,594 $ 63,856 IMLS Applicant Partner Total IMLS Applicant Partner $1,699 1,922 2,062 1,764 1,764 2,183 2,207 2,207 $ 15,806 Total $1,699 1,922 2,062 1,764 1,764 2,183 2,207 2,207 $ 15,806 CONSULTANT FEES Namerriile Of Rate of Compensation Number of Days tMLS Applicant Partner Total Consultant (Daily) On Project TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE TRAVEL FROM/TO PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total NUMBER OF: SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION Lib meetings 26 $949 $949 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $949 $949 $949 MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Item Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Total Computation Printing, copying supplies Estimate $3,500 TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 SERVICES Item OTHER Item Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year 1 - The Newport Beach Public Library Method of Cost Computation TOTAL COST OF SERVICES Method of Cost Computation TOTAL OTHER COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner IMLS Applicant Partner Total Total TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $4,449 $79,662 $84,111 INDIRECT COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS CHARGED TO Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET Year 2 - Budget Period from IO I Oil 05 to 09 I30 I06 Name of Applicant Organization: The Newport Beach Public Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) Namerile No. MethodofCost IMLS I. Haidee Barker 26 $24Zday 2. Tim Heatherton 26 284lday 3. Debbie Walker 26 3Wday 4. Youth Services Sup. 26 261lday 5. Branch Services Sup. 26 261 /day 6. Susie Lamb 26 365lday 7. Melissa Kelly 26 369lday 8. Susan Warren 26 369lday Computation TOTAL SALARIES & WAGES Applicant Partner $4,840 5,680 6,100 5,220 5,220 7.300 7,380 7,380 $49,120 SALARIES AND WAGES UEMPORARY STAFF HIRED FOR PROJECT) Namerile None FRINGE BENEFITS Rate 1.27% 2.27% 3.27% 4.27% 5.27% 6. 23% 7. 23% 8. 23% CONSULTANT FEES Nd. Method of Cost Computation Salary Base $4,640 5,680 6,100 5,220 5,220 7,300 7,380 7,380 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS IMLS Applicant Tial IMLS Applicant Partner NamelTile Of Rate of Compensation Number of Days IMLS Consultant (Daily) On Project TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE TRAVEL FROM/TO PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Lib meetings 20 $730 $730 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $730 NUMBER OF< SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Item Method of Cost IMLS Computation $1,699 1,922 2,062 1,764 1,764 2.183 2.207 2.207 $ 12,379 Applicant Partner Applicant Partner Applicant Partner Total $4,840 5,680 6,100 5,220 5,220 7,300 7,380 7,380 $49,120 Total $1,699 1,922 2,062 1,764 1,764 2,183 2,207 2,207 $ 12,379 Total Total $730 $730 Total TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT SEkVICES Rem OTHER Item Project Budget Form SECTION 1 : DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year 2 - The Newport Beach Public Library Method of Cost Computation TOTAL COST OF SERWCES Method of Cost Computation TOTAL OTHER COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner IMLS Applicant Partner Total Total TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $730 $61,499 $62,229 1 I I INDIRECT COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS CHARGED TO Project Budget Form SECTION I: DETAILED BUDGET Year 1 - Budget Period from 1 O/ 011 04 to 09 I30 IO5 Name of Applicant Organization: San Diego County Public Law Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) Namerriile No. Method of Cost 1. Library Director 26 $642lday 2. Deputy Director 26" 482lday 3. Asst Dir for Public Services 26" 263lday 4. Ass= Dir for Tech Services 26" 352lday 5. Asst Dir for Branch Services 26' 321 lday 6. Asst Dir for Finance 26" 32Qlday 7. Executive Asst 26' 185lday Computation TOTAL SALARIES & WAGES IMLS Applicant Partner $17,134 12,896 7,254 9,308 8,892 8,476 4,550 $ 68,510 Total $1 7,134 12,896 7,254 9,308 8,892 8,476 4,550 $ 68,510 SALARIES AND WAGES flEhnPOFWRY STAFF HlRED FOR PROJECT) Computation None Namerriile No. Method of Cost lMLS Applicant Partner Totdl FRINGE BENEFITS Rate Salary Base IMLS Applicant Partner Total 1.7% 2. 7% 3. 7% 4. 7% 5. 7% 6. 7% 7. 7% $17,134 12,896 7,254 9,398 8,892 8,476 4,550 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS $1,199 903 508 652 622 593 31 9 $4,796 11,199 903 508 652 622 593 31 9 $4,796 CONSULTANT FEES Namemile Of Rate of Compensation Number of Days IMLS Applicant Partner Total Consultant (Daily) On Project TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE TRAVEL FROM/TO PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total NUMBER OF: SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION Lib meetings 26 $569 $569 $569 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $569 $569 MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Item Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Total Computation Printing, copying supplies Estimate $3,500 TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT $3,500 $3,500 $3,500 SERVICES Item OTHER Item Project Budget Form SECTION 1: DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year 1 - San Diego County Public Law Library Method of Cost Computation TOTAL COST OF SERVICES Method of Cost Computation IMLS Applicant Partner Total IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL OTHER COSTS TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $4,069 $7,3306 $77,375 INDIRECT COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS CHARGED TO Project Budget Form SECTION I: DETAILED BUDGET Year2- BudgetPeriodfrom 10101105 to 09130106 Name of Applicant Organization: San Diego County Public Law Library SALARIES AND WAGES (PERMANENT STAFF) Nametl'iile No. MethodofCost IMLS 1. Library Director 15 $642lday 2. Deputy Director 15" 482lday 3. Asst Dir for Public Services 15" 263lday 4. Assoc Dir for Tech Services 15" 3521day 5. Asst Dir for Branch Services 15" 321lday 6. Asst Dir for Finance 15" 320lday 7. Executive Asst 15" t Wday Computation TOTAL SALARIES &WAGES Applicant Partner $9,885 7,440 4,185 5,370 5,130 4,890 2,625 $19,305 SALARIES AND WAGES UEMPORARY STAFF HIRED FOR PROJECT) Nametl'iile None FRINGE BENEFITS Rate 1.7% 2. 7% 3. 7% 4. 7% 5. 7% 6. 7% 7. 7% CONSULTANT FEES Nd. MethodofCost Computation Salary Base $9,885 7,440 4,185 5,370 5,130 4,890 2,625 TOTAL FRINGE BENEFITS IMLS Applicant TGal IMLS Applicant Partner Namefriile Of Rate of compensation Number of Days IMLS Consultant (Daily) On Project TOTAL CONSULTANT FEE TRAVEL NUMBER OF: SUBSISTENCE TRANSPORTATION FROM/TO PERSON DAYS COSTS COSTS IMLS Lib meetings 20 $438 $438 TOTAL TRAVEL COSTS $438 MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT Item Method of Cost IMLS Computation b 692 521 293 375 359 342 184 $ 2,766 Applicant Partner Applicant Partner Applicant Partner Total $9.885 7,440 4,185 5,370 5.130 4,890 2,625 $19,305 Total $692 521 293 375 359 342 184 $ 2,766 Total Total $438 $438 Total TOTAL MATERIALS, SUPPLIES AND EQUIPMENT SERVICES Item Project Budget Form SECTION 1 : DETAILED BUDGET CONTINUED Year 2 - Spll Dlego Comty hbUc Law Library Method of Cost IMLS Applicant Partner Computation TOTAL COST OF SERVICES Total Total IMLS Applicant Partner OTHER Item Method of Cost Computation TOTAL OTHER COSTS TOTAL DIRECT PROJECT COSTS $438 $22,071 $22,509 INDIRECT COSTS IMLS Applicant Partner Total TOTAL INDIRECT COSTS CHARGED TO Proposal to Create a Library Scorecard to Communicate the Value of the Public Library Using Outcome-based Performance Measures Project Budget Justification The Carlsbad City Library (CCL) is requesting a grant in the amount of $241,451 firom the Institute of Museum and Library Services for a project involving five public libraries in the counties of Orange and San Diego, California The participating libmies will match the request with $553,2 14. The individuals identified for each participating library in the Detailed Budget will be members of the team who will develop a Library Scorecard for their respective library. Dr. Cliff Lange, Director of the Carlsbad City Library, will be the Project Director and the City of Carlsbad will be the fiscal agent. The project will hire Joseph R Matthews as a consultant who will assist each participating library in developing a Library Scorecard as well as assessing the impact of the scorecitrds from the Perspective of the stakeholders. Mr. Matthews will als6 be responsible for producing the project’s final report and a workbook that would document the process to create, implement and maintain a Library Scorecard that can be shared with other libraries. Time estimates for each goals and activity is shown on the following page. Supplies & Materials: Each library will receive $3,500 to use to produce customer surveys of the library. For example, some libraries are planning on distributing surveys that were developed by the Counting on Results project. Travel: Travel monies will be used to pay the consultant for automobile expenses associated with travel tolfmm each library for the various meetings. Monies for lMLS meetings have been included. The library directors expect to pay their own expenses to professional conferences to make presentations about the planned project. N ORGANIZATIONAL PROFILE The Carlsbad City Library strives to provide all members of the community with convenient access to a variety of high quality services, programs and materials that support the quest for knowledge and he enjoyment of reading. The Carlsbad City Library, located in the northwest portion of San Diego County, California, serves the 83,500 residents of the City of Carlsbad, as well as users from surrounding Communities. The City Library provides access to a collection of 276,000 volumes and provides a wide range of services including children’s, reference, audio-visual and literacy. The City Library is a department of the City of Carlsbad. Dr. Cliff Lange, Library Director, is assuming responsibaty for the management of the project. The Cerritos Libraqy Cerritos opened its new 85,000 square foot “The Expience Library” on March 16,2002. This library provides a collection of 300,000 volumes, 200 computer workstations and seating with 1,200 ports for laptops. Located some 25 miles southeast from Los Angles, the population of Cerritos is 58% Asia~, 21% Caucasian, 10% Hispanic and 7% African American. The liirary places great emphasis on customer service and an integrated learning experience. The Newport Beach Public Library The city of Newport Beach is located on the coast of the Pacific Ocean and its 25 square miles houses a population of some 75,000 inhabitants (the population is higher in the summer vacation months). A 54,000 square foot central library and 3 branches are quite active and its staff provides a range of seMws for children, young adults, adults and seniors. San Diego County Public Law Library The San Diego County public Law Library has been providing information for San Diego citizens since 189 1. With the advent of the Internet, our mission has expanded to making legal information easy to find and affordable for all California citizens. In addition to our four bricks and mortar locations throughout Sm Diego County, this Web site provides online access to our automted catalog, our acclaimed Research Guides, our popular links to other important (and usually free) legal research web sites, as well as access to online, live reference librarians 24 hours per day, 7 days per week. The Library serves all of our residents of San Diego County with a collection of 262,000 volumes. Partnership Statement 1. Application Organization: The Carlsbad City Library Other partner members: The Cerritos Library The Newport Beach Public Library The San Diego County Public Law Library The San Diego Public Library 2. Each library will: Create and implement a Library Scorecard for their respective library. Ensure that the staff members identified in the budget will participate in a series of workshops to develop the scorecard for their library. Provide meeting space for the workshops. Ensure the participation of selected staffto complete a survey regarding the utility of the scorecard. Assist in the distribution of surveys and scheduling of interviews with library decision makers. Review and critique drafts of the planned Developing a Library Scorecard Workbook. Develop a Library Scorecard for the next three years. 3. We, the undersigned institutions, agree to all the following: We will carry out the activities described above and in the Application Narrative; We will use the finds we receive from IMLS in accordance with applicable Federal laws and regulations; and We assure that our facilities and programs comply with applicable Federal requirements. Date Partnership Statement (Continued) &i$&MA/AmAy Partner Organization (Type of Print) "7SWAS&S, D/.dDk d/;/a*/d t/ Name OfAuthorizing Oflcial (7'ypeJof Print) Date ' id *am. Nams OfAuthorizing ODcia - Signature OfAuthorizing Oficial / C#/PRLcS f2 .&G& Name OfAuthorizing Oflcial (Type of Print) ad2z /a 4 Date Date Clifford E. Lange Resume Education B.S. 1959, University of Wiscon~in - Oshkosh M.S.L.S. 1960, University of Wisconsin - Madison (Library Services Act Scholar) PbD. 1972, University of Wisconsin - Madison (Higher Education Act Fellow) Professional Experience 1960- 1962, Extension Department Head, Oshkosh Public Library, Oshkosh, Wisconsin 1962, Assistant Director, Jervis Library, Rome, New York 1962- 1963, Reference Department Head, Oshkosh Public Library, Oshkosh, Wisconsin 1963-1 966, Director, Eau Claire Public Library, Eau Claire, Wisconsin 1966- 1968, Assistant Director, Lake County Public Library, GrifEth, Indiana 1968- 1971 (Ph.D. program, Madison, Wisconsin) 1971 - 1973, Assistant Professor, School of Library Science, University of Iowa, Iowa city, Iowa 1973-1 975, Director, Wauwatosa Public Library, Wauwatosa, Wisconsin 1975- 1978, Assistant Professor, School of Library Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California 1978- 1982, State Librarian, New Mexico State Library, Santa Fe, New Mexico 1982-to present, Director, Carlsbad City Library, Carlsbad, California Professional Associations American Library Association, 1959-to present Wisconsin Library Association, 1960- 1966; 1968- 1971 ; and 1973- 1975 Indiana Library Association, 1966-1968 Iowa Library Association, 1971 - 1973 California Library Association, 1975- 1978 and 1982-to present New Mexico Library Association, 1978-1982 Joseph R Matthews 5421 Kipling Lane Carlsbad, CA 92008 Joe@ JoeMatt hews. Org 760 930-9223 Consulting Experience Joe is a knowledgeable and experienced consultant. He has assisted numerous libraries and local governments in a wide variety of projects including: 0 Prepare information technology plans 0 Assess the value and performance of services offered in libraries Prepare strategic plans for library services Prepare long range plans for a consortium of lirbaries Assess the effectiveness and efficiency of information technology departments in libraries and local governments Select and implement automated library information systems. Matthews & Associates was one of five orgeations to receive hding fgr a large study of the online catalog fhded by the Council on Library Resources (theother organizations included the Library of Congress, OCLC, University of Cdiorna and the Research Libraries Group). Joe was also a research associate with the Public Policy Research Organization at theuniversity of California, Irvine which received a large multi-million dollar grant to study the use of computers in local governments. Work Experience Joe has worked for several library software vendors andhas held positions in sales, marketing, product development and product support. Published Works Measuring for Success: The Dimensions of Public Library Eflectiveness. Westport, CN: Libraires Unlimited, 2003. The Bottom Line: Measuring the Value of the Special Library or Information Center. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited, 2002. Thomas Kochtanek and Joseph R. Matthews. Library Information Systems. Englewood, CO: Libraries Unlimited. 2002. --- and Mary Helen Gillespie. Service Providers: ASPS, ISPs, MSPs and WSPs. A Wiley Tech Brief New York: Wiley and Sons, 2002. Internet Outsourcing Using an Application Service Provider: A How-To-Do-It Manual for Librarians. New York: Neal-Schuman, 2001. Be Impact of Online Catalogs. Editor. New York Neal-Schuman, 1986. Public Access to Online Catalogs: A Planning Gui& for Managers. Znd Edition. New York: Neal-Schuman, 1985. Using Online Catalogs: A Natiomvide Survey. A Report of a Study Sponsored by the Council on Library Resources. Edited by Joseph R. Matthews, Gary S. Lawrence and Douglas K. Ferguson. New York: Neal-Schuman, 1983. A Rea&r on Choosing an Automated Library System. Ed. Chicago: American Library Association, 1983. Public Access to Online Catalogs: A Planning Guide for Managers. Weston, CT: Online, Inc., 1982. Choosing an Automated Library System: A Planning Guide. Chicago: American Library Association, 1980. Research in Planning and Management of Computer-Based Information Systems in Local Government, Volume 2. A Review of the Research, in Computers and Local Government. Kenneth L. Kraemer and John L. King (Eds.). New York: Praeger, 1977. He has had a number of articles published in Library Jouml, American Libraries, Information Technology and Libraries, Library HiTech, Library Trends, Library Technology Reports, Online, Infomation Outlook, and Datamation. Education MBA University of California, Irvine BS (Business Administration) California State University, Long Beach Professional Activities Active member of the American Library Association, and the American Society for Information Science. Mr. Matthews is an accomplished communicator and has conducted numerous seminars and workshops on technology and technology planning. 2004 IMLS National Leadership Grants IMLS Assurances C E RTI F I CAT1 0 N OF AUTHORIZING OFFICIAL The IMLS is required to obtain fom all applicants CertiJications regandingfederal &bt statw, dibannent and suspension, non-dascrimination, and a drug-fie workphe. Appli- cana reqwsting more than $IOO,OOO in grantfindc must ah0 cero$ regarding Lobbying activities and may be required to submit a “Didosure of Lobbying Activities” (Stanhrd Form LLL). Some applicants will be requiwd to cera$! that they will comply with other fihl statutes that pertain ta their particukar sinration. These requitnnents are incorpo- rated in thehurances Strstement b8h. Review the Statement andsigrt the certi5cation form. qyou receive a grant, you must comply with these requiremena. (The applicant ovganizationj anthorizing oficial shoukisip thefollowing cert$ca- $on after all other parts ofthe application firm have been completed) I have examined this applicafion, and I hereby certify on behaof the applicant 1) the information provided is true and correct; and 2) all requirements for a complete 2004 IMLS application have been fulfilled; and 3) the applicant is providing and will comply with the applicable certifications regarding federal debt status, debarment and suspension, nondiscrimination, drug-bee workplace, and lobbying activities as set forth in the Assurances statement below. irganization that Should my organization receive a grant, the organization and I will comply with Jl grant terms and conditions, all requirements of the IMLS Grants Regulations (45 2FR Part 1 180 et seq.), all statutes outlined below, and all other applicable federal I Signature of Authorizing Official Frank men, Ass’t City Manager Name and Title of Authorizing Official (printed or typed) rMLS &p&ations are availkbk upon request. ASS U RANC E S STATE ME N T By signing the application form, the authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, assures and certifies that, should a grant be awarded, it will comply with the statutes outlined below and all related IMLS regulations. These assurances are given in connection with any and all financial assistance &om IMLS after the date this form is signed, but may include payments after this date for financial assistance approved prior to this date. These assurances shall obligate the applicant for the period during which the federal financial assistance is extended. The applicant recognizes and agrees that any such assistance will be extended in reliance on the representations and agreements made in these assurances, and that the United States government has the right to seek judicial enforcement of these assurances, which are binding on the applicant, its successors, transferees, and assignees, and on the authorized official whose signature appears on the application form. 2004 IMLS National Leadmhip Grana la Application Form FINANCIAL, ADMINlsmmvE, AND LEGAL ACC0UNTABILI”Y FEDERAL DEBT STATUS DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION NON- DlSCRlMlNAllON I. CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED OF ALL APPLICANTS The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant has legal authority to apply for federal assistance and the institutional, managerial, and financial capability (including hnds sacient to pay the non-federal share of project costs) to ensure proper planning, management, and completion of the project described in this application. The authorizing official, oh behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant will cause to be performed the required financial and compliance audits in accordance with the Single Audit Act Amendments of 1996 (31 U.S.C. § 7501 et seq.) and OMB Circular No. A-133, “Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit Organizations.” The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant will comply with the provisions of OMB Circular No. A-1 10, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Other Agreements with Institutions of Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations.” The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that the applicant is not delinquent in the repayment of any federal debt. The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies to the best of his or are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from covered transactions by any federal her knowledge and belief that the applicant and its principals: department or agency; have not within a three-year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (federal, state or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction, or in connection with a violation of federal or state antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, thefi, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of records, makings false statements, or receiving stolen propeq; are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (federal, state or local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (b) of this certification; and have not within a three-year period preceding this applicatiodproposal had one or more public transactions (federal, state or local) terminated for cause or default. The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant will comply with the following nondiscrimination statutes and their implementing regulations: (a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 2000 et seq.), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin; (b) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 5 701 et seq.), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability; Application Fom m 2004 IMLS National Leadenhip Grana (c) Title JX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. §§ 1681-83, 1685-86), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex in education programs; and (d) the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. 8 GlOl et seq.), which prohibits discrimination or1 the basis of age. (A) The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant will or will continue to provide a drug-hee workplace by (a) publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful man&cture, distribution, dispensing, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee’s workplace and speclf)ing the action that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition; (b) establishmg an ongoing drug-free awareness program to inform employees about: DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE ACT OF 1988 (1) the dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; (2) the grantee’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; (3) any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance (4) the penalties that may be imposed on employees for drug abuse programs; and violations occurring in the workplace; (c) making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by (d) notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph (a) that, as a paragraph (4; condition of employment under the grant, the employee will (1) abide by the terms of the statement; and (2) not@ the employer in writing of his or her conviction for a violation of a criminal drug statute occurring in the workplace not later than five calendar days her such conviction; (e) notifying the agency in wtlting within ten (10) calendar days her receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2) horn an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. Employers of convicted employees must provide notice, including position title, to every grant officer on whose grant activity the convicted employee was working, unless the federal agency has designated a central point for the receipt of such notices. Notices shall include the identification number(s) of each &ected grant; (4 taking one of the following actions within thirty (30) days of receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2) with respect to any employee who is so convicted: (1) taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination consistent with the requirements of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 5 70 1 et seq.); or assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a federal, state, or local health, law or other appropriate agency; and (g) making a good kith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), and (0. (2) requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse (B) The applicant shall either idenufy the site(s) for the performance of work done in connection with the project in the application material or shall keep this information on fde in its ofice so that it is available for federal inspection. The street address, city, county, state, and zip code should be provided whenever possible. 2004 IMLS National Lcadprship Grana Application Form CERTIFICATION REGARD I N 0 LgBBYlNG ACTIVITIES (APPLIES TO APPLICANTS REQUESTING FUNDS IN EXCESS OF $100,000) The authorizing official certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief that: (a) no federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the authorizing oficial, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of a federal contract, the making of a federal grant, the making of a federal loan, the entering into of a cooperative agreement, or the extension, continuation, rend, amendment, or modification of a federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. (b) if any funds other than appropriated federal funds have been paid or will be paid to any person (other than a regularly employed officer or employee of the applicant) for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this federal contract, grant, loan or cooperative agreement, the aurhorizing official shall request, complete, and submit Standard Form EL, “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities,” in accordance with its instructibns. (c) the authorizing official shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certifjr and disclose accordingly. J The authorizing official, on behalf of‘the apphcant, certses that it will comply E E A with all applicable requirements of all other federal laws, executive orders, regulations, and policies governing the program. CERTIFICAT’oN kl. CERTIFICATIONS REQUIRED OF SOMi APPLICANTS The following certifications are required if applicable to the project for which an application is being submitted. Applicants should be aware that additional federal certifications, not listed below, might apply to a particular project. - suBAGRaMENcs Applicants who plan to use awards to fund subgrants, contracts and subcontracts should be aware that they must receive the following certifications from applicants to grant programs and those who bid on contracts: (I) certification of compliance with the nondiscrimination statutes from institutional (2) cer&cation regarding debarment and suspension from applicants to grant programs applicants and contractors, and (regardless of the amount requested) and from potential contraaors and subcontractors who will receive $loO,O00 or more in grant hds. Applicants are also required to include without modification the following wording in solicitations for all grant proposals and for contracts that are expected to equal or exceed $100,000: (a) The prospective lower tier participant certifies, by submission of this proposal, that neither it nor its principals are presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any federal department or agency. (b) Where the prospective lower tier participant is unable to certie to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. Application Am m 2004 IMLS National Lednhip Grants NATIVE AMERICAN HUMAN REMAINS AND ASSOCIATE D FUNERARY OBJECTS HISTORIC PROPERTIES - E"MNTAL PROTECTIONS The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant will comply with the provisions of the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (25 U.S.C. 9 3001 et seq.), which applies to any organization that controls or pmesses Native American human remains and associated funerary objects, and which receives federal funding, even for a purpose unrelated to the Act. The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant will assist the awarding agency in assuring compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. 5 4700, Executive Order (E.O.) 11593, and the Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974 (16 U.S.C. 5 467 et seq.). The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the project will comply with environmental standards, including the following: i&itution of environmental quality control&easures un&r the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9 4321 et seq.) and Executive Order (E.O.) 115 14; notification of violating facilities pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 11738; protection of wetlands pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 1 1990, as amended by Executive Order (E.O.) 12608; evaluation of flood hazards in floodplains in accordance with Executive Order (E.O.) 11988, as amended. assurance of project consistency with the approved State management program developed under the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 9 1451 et seq.); and conformity of federal actions to State (Clean Air) Implementation Plans under section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5 7401 et seq.); protection of underground sources of drinking water under the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9 300f et seq.); and protection of endangered species under the Endangered Species Act of 1773, as amended (16 U.S.C. 59 1531-1543). The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the project will comply with the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 1968, as amended (16 U.S.C. 91271 et seq.) related to protecting components or potential components of the national wild and scenic rivers system. The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the applicant will comply with the flood insurance requirements of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1773, as amended (42 U.S.C. 9 4001 et seq.), which requires recipients in a special flood hazard area to participate in the program and to purchase flood insurance if the total cost of insurable construction and acquisition is $10,000 or more. The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the project will comply with 45 C.F.R Part 46 regarding the protection of human subjects involved in research, development and related activities supported by this award of assistance. 2004 IMLS National Leaders& Grants Application Forms The authorizing official, on behalf of the applicant, certifies that the project will E E A comply with the Laboratory Animal Weke Act of 1966, as amended (7 U.S.C. 5 2131 et seq.) pertaining to the care, handling, and treatment of warm blooded animals held for research, teaching, or other activities supported by this award of assistance. " A A ' ANIMAL SUBJECTS Forfirtber information on these cert$cationr, con- IMLS at 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, N?T Room 510, Wmbinpn, DC 20506or call (202) 606-8536 1. Type of Federal Action: 2. Status of Federal Action: a.Contract a. Bid/offer/application c. Cooperative agreement 0 c. Post-award 0 d.Loan e. Loanguarantee f. Loan insurance b. Grant b. Initial award Io Prime CI Subawardee Tier 0 ifknown: Congressional District, ifknown: 5lSt 6. Federal DepartmenVAgency: Institute of Museum and Library Services 8. Federal Action Number, ifknown: 3. Report Type: a. ~nitiial fiing b. Material clmnge For Material Change Only Year: Qiiarter: Date of last report: 10. a. Name and Address of Lobbying Entity (iyindividual. last name, first name. MI): 4. Name and Address of Reporting Entity: Packard Government Affairs 220 West Grand Avenue Escondido, California 92025 5. If Reporting Entity in No. 4. is Subawardee, Enter Name and Address of prime: Congressional District, ifknown: 7. Federal Program NameDescription: National Leadership Grants for 9. Award Amount, ifknown: &&wIflMme= $342,625 10. b. Individuals Performing Services (including address if dirferent from No. 1O.a.) (last name, first name, MI): 11. $ 108,000 Actual Planned 12. Form, of Payment (check all that apply): Amount of Payment (check all that applyl: 611 a. Cash 0 b. In-kind; specify: nature: value: 13. Type of Payment (check all that applyi. a a. Retainer b. One-time fee 0 c. Commission d. Contingent fee e.Deferred 0 f. Other; specify: General lobbying activities on City's behalf/interests. (attach Continuation Sheet( 15. Continuation Sheet(s) SF-LLL-A attached: 16. Information requested through this form is authorized by Title 31 U.S.C. section 1352. This disclosure of lobbying activities is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed by the tier above when this transaction was made or entered into. This disclosure is required pursuant to 31 U.S.C. 1352. This information will be reported to the Congress semiannually and will be available for public inspection. Any person who fails to file the required disclosure shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. 0 Yes SF-LLL-A if necessay) No Signature Print Name: Title: Telephone No.: Date: Federal Use Only Authorized for Local Reproduction Standard Form - LLL (Rev. 11/24/98) -