lincolnshire county council libraries cuts consultation report

7/27/2019 Lincolnshire County Council libraries cuts consultation report

1/20

Lincolnshire Libraries Consultation

Summary of report


2/20

Background

- A Library Needs Assessment (LNA) was undertaken by LCC

- LCC's Community Engagement Team prepared an engagement plan,

approved by the library service and the Consultation Institute (tCI),

- In July 2013, Sheffield Hallam University (SHU) were commissioned

to provide independent support, facilitating public events and analysing

and reporting the data


3/20

The 90 day public consultation

Dedicated website and Community Information PacksAn online survey (questionnaire) for adults to completeA hard copy survey (questionnaire) for adults to complete -

available in all libraries and other places around Lincolnshire(30,000 distributed)

Consultation with children and young people (facilitatedsessions)

An online survey (available to download) for children tocomplete - 3,000 distributed

Eight public consultation events held between the 18th and 30thJuly 2013 in venues around Lincolnshire (Hemswell, Louth,Spalding, Sleaford, Lincoln, Grantham, Skegness, andBoston).


4/20

The role of Sheffield Hallam University (SHU)

To manage and facilitate eight consultation events The categorisation of literal questions and structured analysisof responses for online and hard copy surveys (including both

data from the adult survey and children's survey) over 6,000responses and almost 22,000 qualitative comments

Categorisation, analysis and reporting of comments receivedwhich fell outside of the pro-active consultation activities suchas the public survey and the public meetings (650+ letters /emails, 1,300+ petition comments)

Produce an overarching Public Consultation report includinganalysis of all consultation activities (apart from the childrensconsultation) and public responses

Additional guidance was provided to the SHU team from anexpert from Shared Intelligence who has substantialexperience of other library reviews


5/20

The nature of the consultation 'sample'

Over 8,000 contributions / submissions to the consultation 7,095 visits to the libraries consultation webpage 902 downloads of information packs 931 downloads of consultation document

ADULT CONSULTATION CHILDREN / YOUNG PEOPLES CONSULTATION

Survey response rate 5,599 (including over

21,300 comments)

Survey response rate 414

Survey accompanying

communications*

96 * this includes letters / documentation sent with

surveys, comments on the back page of surveys etc.

Consultation events 223 Consultation events 76

Written communications

(via letter / email)

560 Written communications

(via letter / email)

94

Social media comments* 283 'Tweets' * Only those directed at LCC

Petition comments 900 + 432 from

Deepings

Petition comments n/a


6/20

How representative is the

consultation 'sample?

Under 50s under-represented

Students under-represented

Non-users under-represented Males under-represented

Jobseekers - not known


7/20

Key findings

Participant feelings

Strong public feeling - many participants were angry and upset

Many participants found the survey and consultation eventsunsuitable or inadequate ways of communicating their feelings.There was a fundamental disagreement with the proposedcuts to services

There were thousands of communications which highlightedthe value and importance of the library, both to participants as

individuals and also the perceived benefits to the widercommunity There was a widespread sentiment that the function of a libraryamounted to much more than the services referred to in theconsultation (a community hub, social centre)


8/20

Key findings

Participant feelings

The young people (and their parents) who participated in the

childrens consultation also opposed the plans In addition to the LCC-led consultation activity, members of thepublic and councillors developed campaigns and led actionagainst proposals

A number of petitions were submitted and debated at FullCouncil on 13 September 2013. Over 23,000 signatures have

been collected The value of libraries (educational and social), the enjoymentthat they bring, the positive impacts on quality of life andwellbeing, and the quality of current staff and facilities were thekey messages from participants


9/20

Key findings

Perceived impacts

Overall, some 63% stated that the changes to their library

would have a significant effect on them personally, whilst 68%said that the effect on their community would be significant The impacts are perceived as being greater on individuals andcommunities with Tier 2, 3 or 4 facilities. The greatest personalimpact would be felt amongst Tier 4 individuals, whorepresented 379 of the survey sample (7%)

The impacts of the changes to the service were reported to bedamaging to communities, particularly effecting the elderly,children and young people and jobseekers

The impact on rural communities of these proposals wasperceived as greater, or more serious, than impacts on urban

communities


10/20

Key findings

Perceived impacts

The cuts to the library service were viewed as a highly unfair

and short sighted approach that would result in permanentdamage to the county The impact on young people, both now and in the future, wasa key concern

There was concern that community-run libraries may notmaterialise or they may start up but then face difficulties which

may ultimately result in library closures


11/20

Key findings

Feedback on Tiers 1 and 2

4.0

3.2

4.0

3.2

4.3

4.1

3.3

4.1

3.1

4.4

4.2

3.3

4.2

3.1

4.5

4.1

3.2

4.2

3.3

4.3

4.2

3.1

4.3

3.6

4.34.3

3.2

3.9

2.9

4.4

3.7

3.2

3.4

2.9

3.8

1

2

3

4

5

The library should be well-used The library should be located in a

highly populated area

The library should be les s than 30

minutes away by public transport

The library should be in an area or

community that is disadvantaged

Opening hours

Overall Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 CL n/a

Extremely

Important

Very

Important

No

Opinion

Not very

Important

Notat all

important


12/20

Key findings


Access and travel times were a major concern - '30 minutes

travel time' was viewed as unrealistic due to public transportissues and costs. The importance of travel time increased forparticipants in more rural areas (Tier 3 and 4 library users)

The opening hours were indicated to be the most importantcriteria, followed by usage and proximity / access

Disabled participants placed a higher importance to each

factor of the criteria, particularly keeping libraries indisadvantaged areas Tier 1 and Tier 2 feedback was broadly comparable 18% of survey participants chose not to answer this questionfor Tier 1 question and 22% for Tier 2 - primarily because they

disagreed with the criteria (expressed through qualitative data)


13/20

Key findings


25.1%

31.8%27.3%

15.8%

86.3%

6.6%

21.8%

51.4%

49.2%

51.3%

62.5%

8.9%

85.4%

37.2%

23.5%18.9%

21.3% 21.7%

4.8%8.0%

41.0%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Mobile vehicle Community-run library Don't know


14/20

Key findings


No LCC static library / 'leave the service as it is optionParticipants preferred the option of a community run facility(51%) to a mobile vehicle (25%). However there wereconcerns over sustainability, staffing and access

Mobile libraries were viewed as highly valuable by isolatedrural communities. However, would not work for others due tolimitations on space and facilities, access, timings, communityand social opportunities

The perceived impact of losing a 'community hub' due to eithera mobile service or a community library with restricted hourswas a key concern

Tier 4 was viewed as inadequate and insufficient to meet

community needs by participants in all Tiers apart from currentTier 4 users


15/20

Key findings


Participants preferred the option of 66 hour-long stops per

month, particularly current Tier 4 users (77% v 35%), howevergenerally the proposal was deemed inadequate with longertime needed for stops (especially by non-Tier 4 users)

Mobile libraries were described as a 'lifeline' by many currentTier 4 users. Current Tier 4 users expressed a strong desire toretain their services

Access was the primary concern and the difficulty of accessingthe service in specifically allocated windows of time washighlighted by many people


16/20

Key findings


8.2%

14.3%

21.5%

21.1%

70.4%

64.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Tier 3: If your library was taken on by the local community, would you want to be part of a

'steering group' that takes on this opportunity?

Tier 3: If your library was taken on by the local community , would you be interested in

giving your time as a volunteer in your local library?

Yes Possibly No


17/20

Key findings


6.1% 4.6% 5.9% 4.8%7.3%

13.2%

60.7%

57.8% 65.1%

60.6%

71.4% 65.5%59.3%

26.5%

27.6%

29.4% 27.6%

22.2%

23.6%20.6%

4.8%8.0%

2.8% 4.5%1.8%

4.2%

1.9% 2.0% 2.8% 1.5% 1.6% 1.8% 2.6%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


L es s than one hour 1- 3 hours 4- 7 hours 8- 15 hours M ore t han 15 hours


18/20

Key findings

Volunteering

Overall 8% of participants were keen to join a library steeringgroup, the proportion willing to volunteer was 14%

In each case, a further 21% of participants indicated that theymightconsider becoming involved - two thirds of surveyparticipants did not want to become involved

There was a strong sentiment from participants that the timingfor expressing an interest in involvement in a community-runlibrary, or a willingness to volunteer, was too early

More volunteers may come forward in the future


19/20

Key findings

Suggestions

Multi-use / Shared Provision / Growth of the ServiceGrowing the service (including diversification and productdevelopment ideas), shared provision and the multi-use oflibrary buildings More promotion / publicityThere was a perception that more marketing and promotion ofthe library service would be beneficial and that this could havemarket development and market penetration impacts (attractinglapsed and non-users and encouraging greater use of theservice by existing users) Income Generation / Financial IdeasIncluding: hiring out facilities or making charges for specific

services, selling off assets


20/20

Summary

Significant feedback from those motivated to respond -approximately 1% of the population.

We do not have the views of 99% of the population Of the 1%, 81% describe themselves as library users. Within the 1%, there was widespread opposition to theproposals especially from library users.

63% of people who responded felt that the changes wouldhave a significant impact on them, 68% on their community

Tier 1 and 2: Most important: Opening Hours; 30 minutes bypublic transport; well used

Tier 3: Preference for community libraries rather super mobiles Tier 4: widespread support for the current service Volunteering: 8.2% yes, 21.5% possibly

lincolnshire county council libraries cuts consultation report

Documents