Public Library System Redesign Project Update & Discussion Christina Jones, Altoona Public Library, Consulting and CE Workgroup Corey Baumann, South Central Library System, Madison, Delivery Workgroup Sherry Machones, Northern Waters Library System, Ashland, Consulting and CE Workgroup Ben Miller, Resources for Libraries and Lifelong Learning, DPI, Madison, Ill and ILS Workgroup Melissa McLimans, WiLS, Project Manager

Project Update Stay up to date Participate Overview of Phase 3 Website (plsr.info) blog, calendar, videos, etc. Participate Contact forms, survey panel Overview of Phase 3

Timeline

What are Topic Teams?

Refining and Defining Consulting and Continuing Education The aim of this topic team was to determine the boundaries of training and consulting with other service areas, especially technology and ILS. Examples: Technology workgroup is responsible for providing training to library staff for using and troubleshooting the basic software and hardware that the technology service area will provide to library staff to do their jobs.

Refining and Defining Consulting and Continuing Education - Members Shawn Brommer, South Central Library System, Consulting and Continuing Education Workgroup Laurie Freund, Bridges Library System, Consulting and Continuing Education Workgroup Heidi Oliverson South Central Library System, ILL/ILS Workgroup Emily Passey, Shorewood Public Library, Technology Workgroup Gerard Saylor, L.D. Fargo Public Library (Lake Mills), Collections Workgroup Tessa Michaelson Schmidt, Division for Libraries and Technology, DPI Liaison from Consulting and Continuing Education Workgroup

Defining the Help Center This team will make a recommendation about how library community members can most efficiently and effectively get the help they need by considering an online portal and help desk possibilities after reviewing what other states are doing, what exists in Wisconsin currently, and the articulated needs and desires of workgroups. Budget, staffing, and points of contact will all be considered by this group.

Defining the Help Center - Members Wyatt Ditzler, Beloit Public Library, Collections Workgroup Christina Jones, Altoona Public Library, Consulting and Continuing Education Workgroup Jill Lininger Oak Creek Public Library, Consulting and Continuing Education Workgroup Jim Novy, Lakeshores Library System, ILS/ILL Workgroup Wendy Rawson, Fitchburg Public Library, Technology Workgroup Terrie Howe, Division for Libraries and Technology, DPI Liaison

Defining the Help Center - Process Review of online help centers and web portals from other agencies in Wisconsin, and other state library portals including Minnesota, Iowa and Nebraska Review of survey results from PLSR Survey Panel regarding what respondents would want from a help center, previous experiences, and comfort level of seeking help in different situations Compiled final report with recommendations to workgroups

Defining the Help Center - Report Highlights One central online location for help Help Center is central, but help may be regional It should make excellent service more equitable across the state Trusted information and answers are critical Concerns & questions Workgroup determinations

Resource Sharing This team will work to bring cohesiveness to the models proposed by the workgroups involved in resource sharing, particularly ILL, ILS, Delivery, and Electronic Resources. They will address overlaps, lack of clarity of responsibilities, and best practices for workflows that interrelate.

Resource Sharing - Members Jon Mark Bolthouse, Fond du Lac Public Library, Technology Workgroup Charles Clemence, Winding Rivers Library System, Delivery Workgroup Marc Gartler, Madison Public Library, Technology Workgroup Brian Hannemann, Milwaukee Public Library, ILL/ILS Workgroup Mellanie Mercier, Bridges Library System, Collections Workgroup Joy Pohlman, UW-Madison General Library System, ILL/ILS Workgroup Martha Berninger, Resources for Libraries and Lifelong Learning, DPI Liaison Ben Miller, Resources for Libraries and Lifelong Learning, DPI Liaison

Resource Sharing - Process

Resource Sharing - Report Highlights Greater resource sharing in the state will achieve significant efficiencies. The patron experience is paramount. Structures must be flexible to allow future developments. Local control and standards must be dealt with.

Regions Many of the service areas and workgroups have spent time re-thinking regions of service. This topic team will define the information needed to determine regions, share what workgroups already have discussed, and answer the following questions: do we need to get to one set of regions for all services? How close are the region overlays? How can regions help facilitate communication and connection between libraries? What does it mean to get feedback? And how do we do it well politically? Based on the information gathered, the team will develop recommended regions of service.

Regions - Members Corey Baumann, South Central Library System, Delivery Workgroup Jennifer Chamberlain, UW Colleges, Consulting and Continuing Education Workgroup Gus Falkenberg, Indianhead Federated Library System, Technology Workgroup Elisabeth Kaune, Milwaukee Public Library, Collections Workgroup Susan Lee, Madison Public Library, Resource Libraries Workgroup Sherry Machones, Northern Waters Library System Service, Consulting and Continuing Education Workgroup Mike Sheehan, Northern Waters Library, ILL/ILS Workgroup John DeBacher, Division for Libraries and Technology, DPI Liaison from Chapter 43 Workgroup

Regions - Process We looked at 20-30 maps from all types of organizations in Wisconsin. Trying to come to a consensus was impossible. Workgroup models differ in geographic requirements. Workgroups are at different stages of planning. The Delivery Workgroup needs defined regions. The Regions Topic Team determined that any regional design would impact the Delivery Model the most.

Regions - Report Highlights The Regions Topic Team has yielded to the Delivery Workgroup to establish a draft map of hub locations. The Delivery Workgroup will meet to evaluate regional boundaries and further develop their model. Later, Service Workgroups may determine that the delivery service map is something that: Is compatible to their service needs, either fully or partially Is not at all compatible or necessary to achieve workgroup objectives

Draft Delivery Map Primary Hub Locations (7) Satellite Service Locations (4) Distance-based Population Density-based

Questions?