Archived decisions

1. Name of Proposer:

Recreation & Heritage PRC (Cllr Chegwyn leading)

2. Subject of Review:

Library & Information Services

3. Objective of Review:

The following Terms of Reference were agreed at the PRC to include:

· To examine the existing use of resources and value for money in the Library & Information Service, paying particular attention to overheads and the cost of books and other materials

· To undertake a preliminary evaluation of the benefits of the Discovery Centre programme and its impact on existing Library users

The outcomes should be:

· To consider and make recommendations to the PRC and Executive member on ways of improving the service

· To identify resource implications of any such recommendations

· To take into account the views expressed by members of the public

4. Type of scrutiny*:

Policy Development / Policy Review

Please comment on the following:

5. What caused you to suggest this topic ?

There is a fair amount of public and press interest in this topic, evidenced by articles in the Hampshire Chronicle and emails from residents and lobby groups

6. What do you hope the outcome of the review would be?

· That the public who have interest in this area will know that their views have been heard and taken into account

· That the Library & Information Service has visibly reviewed its purpose and long term goals, including its role in encouraging reading and use of books.

· That any areas for improvement in the Library & Information Service, its strategies and value for money which have been identified have been followed up with constructive and costed recommendations for change.

7. What evidence do you have that this review is necessary?

Some people continue to be vocal about it their dissatisfaction and belief that their issues have not been reasonably considered (see above - 5) .

Other Councils have chosen different approaches - so there is scope for a range of strategies and it is important to keep an open mind and see if any are particularly successful and worth considering

Despite early evidence that number of users of Discovery Centres has increased the downward trend of book lending continues; following a national pattern. It seems important to review the cause for this especially in the 25 - 55 age groups as if library use drops off at 25 (over 55s being current users from the previous library approach) then there are serious issues for the long term future which need to be explored. An estimation of the magnitude of decreased book lending over the long term needs to be investigated, in terms of the availability of cheaper paper back books, the wider use of the web and similar factors."

8. Please give any reasons you have for why it is good timing for this review

There is continued and high profile investment into the Discovery Centre approach which is fuelling the fire in some people's minds. It seems important to undertake a robust review of the range of strategies being put into place in this area to ensure that people have been heard and feel that they have been heard whilst there is still time for some elements of current strategy to be reconsidered.

It is also timely in that there should be some initial information about the success of the Discovery centres that are already up and running which needs to be looked at in planning the best approach for future developments. Any exploration of this needs to be done with a wide range of witnesses / evidence to achieve balanced perspective.

9. Who are the key stakeholders in this area and to what extent do each of them agree that this area needs reviewing?

· Current & previous Library Users (different age groups) - those vocal welcome the review

· Potential Library / Discovery Centre Users - unknown but an important group

· Frontline Staff : unknown although anecdotal evidence that some would welcome ( surveying this group would potentially be sensitive)

· R&H / Library & Information Service Managers: have agreed

10. To what extent would the people of Hampshire be at risk if this area is not improved?

Negligible risk to people BUT potential well-being issue if vulnerable group needs are not met or not perceived to be met.

11. To what extent would the reputation, services or efficiency of HCC be at risk if there is no improvement in this area ?

There is a potential reputation issue for the County Council if people feel they have not been listened to and services they value are being discontinued or sidelined. This is currently being reinforced by some press coverage.

It will be important that not only those who have found a voice for their views are heard but that as wide and objective an evidence base as possible is used to either challenge or reinforce current approaches and support Hampshire's desired reputation as an authority which values all views.

Please add any information you have about the following:

12. Please give details of any previous or planned reviews of this topic area that you know of.

There was a previous Library Review but it was only a single afternoon session and there is no record of any follow-up on recommendations made to `look further' into some areas with a key witness.

13. Are there any imminent changes locally or nationally which are likely to have impact on this area?

Continued roll out of the Discovery Centre approach

14. What is the financial significance of this review area? (Delete as necessary)

Limited to one Department Yes

Minimal in comparison to whole HCC Budget Yes

Potentially significant in relation to Departmental Budget Yes

Please note any estimate of financial impact to any of the above: tbc

15. Any further information about potential scope of the review

1. There seems to be a recurring issue about questioning and clarifying the purpose of the Library & Information Service in relation to books, reading and the promotion of literacy. Different beliefs and understandings of this possibly underlie the dissatisfaction voiced by some of the public about the falling numbers of books in Libraries and consequent questions about the book fund and management & lending of books within the Discovery Centre approach.

Many of these fundamental also link firmly into changing cultures and practices around access to information and reading generally and seem to include:

· Perceived decline in book use among young people (need some evidence)

· Potential impact of the above on literacy (need some evidence)

· The lack of book borrowing from Libraries of the 25 - 55 year age group: what is behind this and to what extent is it a problem?

· What is the long term strategy of the Library & Information Services and what is the role of books within it?

· Access to book borrowing for diverse groups such as rural communities / elderly people/ children etc which brings in questions about :

_ Best use of the mobile Library Service

_ The positioning, opening hours and best use of Library buildings

· How cost effective Library book lending provision is (maybe some benchmarking for us against other Authorities but also other methods that may be available for promoting reading etc

All these questions and issues above need to be explored, making best use of research evidence and information available. The review must also take into account other approaches which have bee used elsewhere to confront any of these issues and their success or other wise learned from

2. Review and learning from the Discover centres already open should also assist in questions linked to the above such as:

· What are the trends with book lending as opposed to other facility usage (and with different user groups)

· The comparative weighting of numbers of people using the overall facility versus those using key functions (e.g. are we measuring the numbers of people using the café as being just as important as the number of people borrowing books of accessing information / It etc?)

Please add any additional comments / information you want put forward in support of this proposal:

As previously mentioned, in order to be successful the Inquiry needs to tap the wide range of customers, potential customers an views that are in existence. As part of this some of the already identified groups who will want to participate include:

· Libri - local group led by national Chairman Desmond Clark

· Tim Coates

· MLA (Museums & Library Association)

· Winchester Residents Association (Rosemary Conway et al)

· Articles form Hampshire Chronicle - Rachell Mascell(?)

· Gosport group

· Other residents who have expressed interest

· Other useful sources of evidence / information:

o Other Local Authorities (eg.. West Sussex, Kent, Dorset, Lancashire, Surrey)

o LSPs

o There is likely to be a fair amount of existing national trend data available which we need to tap as well as perceptions and trend data we already have from our own residents - tapping existing resources will need to be a priority before creating new methods of enquiry where there may be gaps.

o

Identifying how to include those we do not yet know about or are not able to name will be one of the first major challenges of the Inquiry

Scrutiny Officers to do any additional research necessary to complete this section:

16. Freshness of subject

Not fresh but not resolved and a public commitment has been made to this process at the PRC prior to the changes in the Scrutiny function

17. Recent or imminent similar reviews

A short select committee style process was carried out nearly two years ago - see above

18. Fit with Corporate priorities

Potential links with Maximising Wellbeing

19. Risk Issues

No substantial risks

20. Financial management issues

Not significant in overall HCC budget but financial issues should be included in this review (i.e. changes in cost and income of Libraries etc)

21. Estimated size of review

Large as requires public and expert participation and use of wide range of data and national research - also needs to be visibly robust. Likely to take 6 - 8 months in all

22. Suggested method (& size of group) with rationale

Method:

Recommend a full select committee approach enabling written evidence submission, consideration of different types of evidence and then witness sessions based on the findings of written evidence. Need a wide variety of stakeholder participation as outlined above.

Size of Group:

Suggest a maximum of 12 people(minimum 8) in a proportionate group. Previous PRC members are being canvassed as to ability to participate

23. Suggested scope of Review

As recommended in 3 & 15 above

24. Possible Success Criteria

Outcomes achieved plus public perceive the process has been robust.

Name of Scrutiny Officer: Share D'All (will be picked up by Emma Gordon)