Guelph Public Library Things we need to know

Guelph Public Library Things we need to know

Guelph Public Library Things we need to know . . . June 7, 2016 Stephen Abram Executive Director, Federation of Ontario Public Libraries Market Measurements: Value, Impact, and Presence The Case of Ontario Public Libraries Stephen Abram, MLS , FOPL Executive Director June 7, 2016 Market Planning Together At our Libraries 2020 Summit we identified: What we didnt know! And what was that? What were our priorities? At our Libraries 2025 Summit we confirmed: 3 Our next set of priorities. Market 3 So we cooperated and pulled our sleeves up . . . 4 Starting in a hole a previous government had cut the provincial library grant by 50% Yuck hand wringing and whining and then we adapted. We convinced the provincial government to invest $18 million in all systems This year we accessed another $10 million in research and innovation grants Market 4 We didnt know enough! What are our numbers longitudinally? What are our proofs of impact? (schools, childrens programs, summer reading, economic, new Canadians, etc. etc.)

5 How do our places need to change? How do we develop staff at scale? What does the public think? What motivates politicians and civil servants? What is our brand and how do we cost-effectively access all Ontarians? Market 5 What did we need? Measurement not just data/statistics The identification of Ontario, National and international core data The identification of core operational measures for libraries The identification of core digital measures for libraries The identification of comparative measures for libraries and appropriate cohort analyses The study of visual representation of library data that informs and influences management and funding bodies The study of what proofs libraries can adopt from their data to prove and communicate the value of the public library in the 21st Century portfolio of services and programs. The delineation of audiences, outputs, and needs to restrict scope creep and overbuilding of the data engine. 6 Market 6 What did FOPL do? Successfully lobbied the Ontario government to make the Ontario Provincial Public Library Data Collection project open data under the provincial policy for the Open Data Initiative. Harvested 1996-2014 PL Data and developed a database of these data resulting in the publishing of many reports and analyses of these data from 2001 through 2014 and the identification of trends, creation of visuals, and communication of these data. These data were published in library size cohorts, North and South, and for First Nations libraries as well as for Ontario as a whole. In 2016 the intent is to make the database available to members for strategic planning use. Authored a FOPL White Paper on the development of benchmarks and a comparative index for Ontario public library systems.

Designed, created and delivered three 2 day symposia in partnership with the iSchool at the University of Toronto and a series of three webinars for FOPL about the use and interpretation of library statistics as well as the creation of new comparative Did the 2015 Market Probe Canada public opinion poll (digital and telephone) of Ontarians and their attitudes about Ontarios public libraries. Stephen is contracted to write a book chapter on these projects and value measures for public libraries in 2016. Stephen has sat on the University of Torontos iSchool Deans Council for over 20 years including advising on the recent development of a Big Data program. 7 Market 7 Selected Highlights of What we Now Know 8 Market 9 Market 9 10 Market 10 11 Market 11 12 Market 12 13 Market 13 14 Market 14 Summary Data for The Decade 1.2 BILLION Circulation

6.0 Billion Budget 542 Million spent on Materials 115 Million spent on Electronic Materials 1.6 Million total Programs 31 Million total Attendance 15 Market 15 Interest in new library service concepts varies, in many cases based on age Likelihood of Using Different Library Services Total Somewhat Likely By Age Very Likely 18-34 A program that allows people to try out the newest tech devices or applications, such as 3D printers or laser cutters Library kiosks located throughout the community where people can check out books, movies or music without having to go to the library itself 19% 36% 55% 15% 35% 50% A personalized online account that gives you recommendations based on your past library activity 15% 35% 49% A cell phone app that allows you to access library services from your mobile phone 16% 29% 44% 55+ 64% 46% 57% 39% 61%

39% 62% 24% 43% 37% An online research service where you could pose questions and 10% get responses from librarians 33% A cell phone app that helps you locate material easily in the 12% library using GPS 27% 39% 54% 19% E-book readers already loaded with the book you want to read 12% 26% 38% 45% 34% 31% 40% 30% 38% 42% 21% Instruction on how to use handheld reading devices and tablets 9% 26% Classes on how to download library e-books to handheld devices 9% 24% A digital media lab where you could create and upload new digital content like your own movies or e-books 7% 24% 44% 35% 33% 31%

Market 16 FOPL Mission 17 Collaborative body offering one loud voice for all Ontario Public Libraries based on agreed cooperative strategies, and priorities and research. Market 17 FOPL Positioning Simply put: Ontarios Public Libraries. Now more than ever before, they play a critical role in the social, educational, cultural and economic success of the communities in our province. Public Libraries are an essential investment in the future of our communities and are essential drivers of success in school preparedness, reading readiness, economic and employment success, and social equity. As the development of the knowledge economy progresses, public libraries are a vital link for every resident and every community to ensure success of all Ontarians, regardless of location or background. 18 Market 18 Can we prove it? CAN WE TELL THE STORY? 19 Market 19 FOPL Talking Points Need Proofs The Public Library value proposition is strong and includes (but isnt limited to): 20 Excellent Return on Investment Strong Economic Development Great Employment Support Welcoming New Canadians Provable Early Literacy Development

Ongoing Support for Formal Education and Homework Help Serve the whole community equitably Affordable access to community resources Access to Government Services and e-government Questions Deserve Quality Answers Support Cultural Vitality Recognized and Valued Leisure Activities for majority of Ontarians Market 20 The Secret? 21 Collaboration, coordination, cooperation All organizations started to work as one. FOPL, SOLS, OLS-North, CULC, OLA (OPLA and OLBA), consortia, etc. We shared the load(s)! Market 21 Marketing Updated a full public opinion poll in 2015 of all Ontario residents Studied successful and unsuccessful campaigns in libraries Did a census of all 304 systems social media and website presences Surveyed CAOs about perceptions and budgets Developing tagline with person-on-the-street interviews 22 Market 22 What Public Libraries Say They Mean - Missions Market 23 Progress: Marketing and Branding Full Ontario inventory of web and social media of ALL public libraries Person-on-the-street interviews to develop provincewide tagline in 2016 Building an Open Media Desk and social media dashboard to entire sector in province Hiring 3-4 part-time journalists to build articles, social media, and video at critical mass Release, release, release

Build a media culture of good not perfect 24 Market 24 Ontario Public Library Usage and Visits at an All Time High! More than 99% of Ontarians live in communities served by a public library and 74% used their library in the past year. Ontario libraries have nearly 31 million volumes in circulation. Thats equivalent to 2.3 books for every Ontarian. In 2014 Ontario public libraries circulated 131 million items. received almost 72 million in-person visits provided 203,964 programs with over 3.3 million attendees served the public through 1,157 library service points (main libraries, library branches, deposit stations and bookmobile stops) Every library branch in the province provides access to electronic information through the Internet. 25 Market 25 26 When FOPL speaks we can point to the fact that we represent nearly all of Ontarios population of library members. This is, indeed, at the riding level. There are few exceptions. Market 26 Building the Case for Influence We must increase our access to government decisionmaking. In 2014/5 FOPL: Submission to the Minister of Finances Pre-budget Consultation 2016 Submitted Cabinet level documents on Ontarios Culture Strategy, Community Hubs, Municipal Act consultations. . . Co-planned and implemented the second annual large scale Library Day at Queens Park Co-planned an all day symposium of over 10 ministries with over 150 civil servants and librarians / trustees Met regularly with our minister and key staff on issues like the OLCF, CDF, Open Data, Ministry Awards, operating grants, OPLW, etc. Contracted for legal opinions on legislative changes 27 Market 27

Selected Key Results 28 1. Libraries are now mentioned in all critical government policy documents 2. 3. Attendance at Programs can exceed 25,000+ for some in a day! 4. We have agreed provincial competencies for all positions and technology infrastructure for professional development 5. We are investing in VIP marketing that is cost-effective and based in research 6. We are focused on community-led strategic planning, investments in advanced technology infrastructure and training 7. We know our numbers, demographics and are investing in R&D for qualitative data 8. We are aligning with government language and priorities OLA coordinates reading programs at the provincial level (TD Summer Reading, First of Trees) Market 28 FEDERATION OF ONTARIO PUBLIC LIBRARIES RESEARCH Prepared for: Federation of Ontario Public Libraries Research Task Force April, 2015 Market Table of Contents Page Executive Summary 3 Background and Methodology 8 Results from the Telephone Survey Use of the Public Library 13 14 Use of Alternative Information Channels 28 Attitudes Toward the Public Library

37 Demographic Profile of Respondents 48 Results from the Online Survey 55 Use of the Public Library 56 Use of Alternative Information Channels 71 Attitudes Toward the Public Library 84 Demographic Profile of Respondents 96 Market 30 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Market Executive Summary Ontarians overall opinions of the public library and the value it contributes to the communities it serves remain very strong. The public librarys position relative to other municipal tax-supported services is consistent with the findings from five years ago, and reactions to positioning statements included in the previous study have actually improved slightly. Reacting to new positioning statements tested this year, most Ontarians acknowledge the public librarys role in advancing literacy, equal opportunity, and quality of life in their communities. The value of certain services (early literacy programs, services to new Canadians, information for the unemployed, training in how to access information online, and being a focal point or meeting place within the community) has increased over the past five years. A majority of Ontario residents feel that if their local library were to close, it would have a major impact on their community (but usually less of an impact on themselves and their family). Market 32 Executive Summary Numbers of library users have stayed relatively consistent, but usage patterns have changed significantly over the past five years.

The proportion of adults not using the public library at all in the previous 12 months has not risen over the last 15 years, in spite of the fact that information has become increasingly available from other sources. Individuals library card ownership has increased since 2010, however there are signs that library usage at a household level may be softening slightly. In-person library visit frequency has not changed since the first year the study was conducted, but 2015 represents the first time that the number of people using the library both online and in-person during the past year has overtaken the number of in-persononly visitors. People appear to be more selective in choosing which library services to take advantage of, as reported usage of many library services is down significantly versus five years ago (wireless network access being the main exception). Market 33 Executive Summary Evolving technology, channel, and media preferences will require the public library to review its strategies and tactics on a regular basis. It has become clear that electronic access is complementing, not replacing, bricks and mortar establishments, implying that duplication of hard copy and electronic materials, as well as increased channel costs, are likely to continue for the foreseeable future. Perhaps equally daunting is the need to ensure compatibility with an ever expanding array of devices being used to access the Internet (and particularly challenging to libraries, the substitution of multi-purpose tablets and smartphones for single-purpose devices like e-readers). Effectively communicating information about new services will be as critical as deciding which to invest in. While still important, traditional library services, such as lending materials and helping people find information, are not increasing in usage or perceived value. Interest in new service concepts is fragmented, meaning hard decisions will need to be made about which to develop and roll out, and for which audiences. New services will need to be publicized as they become available, and in many instances, communications will have to be geared to relevant segments to create sufficient awareness, interest, and take-up. Since email is clearly the preferred method of receiving information about the library, creation of user groups and maintenance of contact lists will likely become critical in order to reach segments of interest and establish an ongoing dialogue with users. Market 34 Executive Summary The future of the public library remains uncertain and must be shaped according to the needs of a new generation of users.

Older people will undoubtedly continue to value the library for its heritage and social value, but those feelings will not automatically be passed down to a younger generation that likely has different views of public institutions, not to mention unique information needs and media habits. Not every library can afford to be all things to all residents of the community it serves, so there may be a need to develop specific capabilities centrally or in selected locations, along with the means of delivering them on a more universal basis. Finally, the library needs to address a challenge that was identified when this study was first conducted and which still remains in 2015 how to convince more people that the public library can be of as much value to them personally as they think it is to others. Market 35 BACKGROUND AND METHODOLOGY Market Research Objectives This represents the fourth wave of a study that has been conducted every five years since 2000. Consistent with past waves, objectives of this years study were to: Understand Ontario residents opinions about the use, role and impact of public libraries, and how those opinions have changed over time; Separate public opinion by level of usage of public libraries (including non-use); and Identify areas of strength and weakness for the public library. Results will be used to: Monitor the status of the library; Formulate strategy to ensure libraries remain a relevant and useful part of the community; Identify priorities for 2015-2017; and Provide input to the creation of a new marketing communication plan. Market 37 Method A dual telephone/online method was used for the 2015 study. The telephone survey replicated the procedures used previously and provides a basis for comparing to past results. The new online survey component establishes a viable baseline for future research, given the technological changes that are impacting not only the public library, but also the research industry. For both survey components, quotas were set by age and gender using Statistics Canada population figures; data is therefore unweighted.

For the purposes of analyzing results, six Ontario regions were defined by postal code, as follows: Northern (P) Metro Toronto (M) Eastern (K) GTA Urban (L within GTA) Southwestern (N) GTA Ex-urban (L outside GTA) Market 38 Method Telephone Survey Component A total of 600 telephone interviews were conducted with Ontario adults from February 26 th to March 16th, 2015. Sampling was conducted such that all Ontario households with a landline had an equal chance of being called. The sample size (600) allows inferences to be made about the total Ontario adult population with a margin of error of +4.0%, at a 95% confidence level. Average length of the telephone survey was 15 minutes. Respondents were given a choice of completing the survey in English (96%) or French (4%). Those who speak other languages were excluded (approximately 7% of households contacted). Online Survey Component A total of 1,102 online surveys were conducted with Ontario adults from March 5 th to March 10th, 2015. Respondents were sourced using Delvinias AskingCanadians online panel. On average, respondents took 13 minutes to complete the online survey. Respondents were given a choice of completing the survey in English (92%) or French (8%). Market 39 Reading the Charts Many of the charts contain profiling information for a key variable, which is indicated by a blue arrow pointing away from it toward a sidebar. In the chart below, the key variable is the percentage of respondents who said they used the public library in the past year (66%). The sidebar shows the same statistic within specific groups. For example, the first category break in the sidebar shows that the percentage who have visited the library among those who are cardholders is 81%, while among non-cardholders it is 25%. 66% Yes

Yes Cardholder 66% Yes 81 68% 66% No 25 Bookstore Use 68% 65% None 53 2015 1-10 times 65 2010 11+ times 75 65% 2005 34% 34% No No 34% 32% Library vs. Bookstore Usage 2000 32% 66% in the total population, but 81% among library cardholders 35% 35% More 97

Same 85 Less 41 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Throughout the report, a red circle or square indicates that a 2015 observation is significantly higher or lower, respectively, than the previous survey. Bold text within sidebars indicates that, for 2015, the bolded subgroups results are significantly higher than one or more of the non-bolded groups results. Market 40 RESULTS FROM THE TELEPHONE SURVEY Market USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Library Cardholders Compared to previous study waves, there has been an increase in the number of Ontarians claiming to be cardholders. The desire to have Internet access, both to and while at the library, may be promoting increased card usage. Interestingly, cardholder incidence does not vary significantly across the different age groupings. In-Person Library Use None 40% 1-10 times 85% 11+ times 96% 73% 68% Yes Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 84% No 72% 68% 65% Yes

65% 65% 65% 2015 2010 2005 26% 2000 Bookstore Use None 1-10 times 11+ times 65% 73% 78% 32% Books Read in Past Year None 47% 1-5 63% 6-15 80% 16+ 84% Library vs Bookstore Usage More 97% Same 88% Less 52% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 84% 70% 52% Children in Home Yes No 78% 70% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 65% 77% 68% Region

North Market East 62% 68% No 32% No Age* 35% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 35% 35% 77% 72% 73% 72% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.1 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Notable for lack of difference. Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 93% No 67% Access Library by Internet Yes 92% No 59% 43 Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library As has been the case since 2005, two-thirds of Ontarians report visiting the library in person within the last year.

In-person use of the library skews to younger age groups and those with higher education, and appears to be more prevalent in Southwest Ontario. Cardholder Yes No 81% 25% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 86% No 64% 66% Books Read in Past Year None 22% 1-5 56% 6-15 78% 16+ 79% 66% Yes 66% 68% Yes Future Importance of Library More 77% Same 66% Less 57% 65% 68% 65% 2015 2010 2005 Bookstore Use None 1-10 times 11+ times 53% 65% 75% 32% 34% No 34% 79% 64% 34%

2000 34% No Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom Age Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 97% Same 85% Less 41% 35% 35% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 73% 71% 66% 61% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 93% No 57% Children in Home Yes No 75% 61% Have Internet Access None 48% Work 66% Home 68% School 77% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 57% 69% 72% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 32% 0%

20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.2 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Market 44 Past Year Public Library In-Person Visit Frequency Despite the increased use of other channels, frequency of visiting the library in person has not changed significantly over the past 15 years. In fact, those who access the library by electronic means are also more apt to report having made a greater number of in-person visits. The percentage of library visitors who visit frequently (over 20 times in the past year) varies quite a bit by region. 26% 27% 26% 28% 21+ times Yes 11 to 20 times Cardholder Yes No Books Read in Past Year None 21% 1-5 8% 6-15 14% 16+ 41% 68% 14% 16% 18% 17% 65% 65% 6 to 10 times 2005 2000 32% 0%

0% 20% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 44% Same 17% Less 5% 35% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 39% No 20% 35% 1 to 5 times Future Importance of Library More 34% Same 25% Less 20% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 35% 21% 9% 2015 2010 18% 19% 16% No 18% 29% 8% 41% 38% 40% 60% 40% 37% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 32% 21% 32% 34%

17% 29% 80% 100% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Access Library by Internet Yes 34% No 16% Q.2 Base: Past-year public library visitors (2000 - 678; 2005 - 712; 2010 - 723; 2015 - 394). Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 39% Market 45 Past Year Use of Public Library by Telephone / Text With this years addition of texting in the question wording, more Ontarians in 2015 indicate they have contacted the library in the past using their phone. The fact that phone access tends to be more prevalent among seniors suggests that voice calls likely still outnumber text messages by a wide margin. 23% 19% 12% 18% Telephone / Text* Telephone = 22% Text = 2% 16% 13% Yes Consult a librarian 7% 11% Gender Male Female 18% 28% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 68% 65% 15% 18% 22%

29% 65% 2015 2010 14% 13% 10% Renew an item 2005 2000 32% No 12%35% 10% 35% 7% Reserve an item 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 4% Enquire / request changes to account 0% 20% 40% 60% Q.4/7 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Wording changed in 2015 from Telephone to Telephone / Text. 80% 100% Market 46 Past Year Use of Public Librarys Website Over the past five years, there has been a significant increase in the number of Ontarians accessing the public library by Internet, as well as in the percentage of those frequently accessing the library that way. Incidence of accessing the library by Internet increases with frequency of in-person visits, suggesting that Internet access is a complement to, not a replacement for, more traditional library usage. Times Accessed Librarys Website in Past Year Any Access of Librarys Website 17%

11 or more times 12% Cardholder Yes No 9% 25% 1 to 10 times In-Person Library Use None 9% 1-10 times 49% 11+ times 75% 22% 28% Bookstore Use None Any 58% Not at all Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 69% Same 57% Less 22% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 30% 47% 50% 28% 45% 66% 63% 0% 53% 12% 20% 40% 60% 80% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes

62% No 36% 100% Q.3 Base: All respondents (2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 75% No 39% Market 47 Past Year Use of Public Library by Internet In addition to the general increase in use of the public library via Internet, more Ontario residents are checking library catalogues online and downloading items. Geographic differences suggest that availability of high speed Internet may be impacting online usage of the library in certain parts of the province. 42% 34% 33% Internet Check catalogue 14% 8% 30% 25% 24% 21% 14% Yes Renew an item 68% 65% 65% 26% 23% Reserve an item 13% Access other materials via library's website 14% 12% 7% 5% 2015

Community Size <30K 30K - <500K 500K+ 29% 38% 49% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 22% 41% 40% 55% 44% 42% 2010 2005 2000 32% No 5% Download an item 14% 35% 35% 10% Manage / make changes to library account 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 5% 4% 2% 2% Consult a librarian by e-mail, chat or IM 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.3/8a

Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Market 48 Specific Types of Electronic Resources Used on Librarys Website In 2015, a modest gain has been made in library users obtaining materials via the librarys website, with fictional E-books rising significantly in popularity. Compared to previous study waves, reported use of E-audiobooks has tended to level off, while accessing of the librarys E-local history or genealogy information has gradually been declining over the past 10 years. E-books fiction Accessed Materials via the Librarys Website 14% Yes 40% 41% 48% 37% 39% E-books non-fiction 34% Digital movies 12% E-audiobooks 59% 30% 27% 2015 7% E-local history or genealogy information 86% No 88% Digital music E-newspapers or journal articles* 93% E-magazines 24% 26% 31% 2010 2005 23%

22% 43% 36% 21% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Q.8a/b Base: All respondents (2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600); those who accessed electronic materials on librarys web page (2005 - 62; 2010 - 134; 2015 - 86). Market *Wording changed in 2015 from E-periodicals, E-newspapers or journal articles. 100% 49 Ways Users Access the Public Library The diagrams below depict all past-year library users according to their reported methods of accessing the library. The proportion of library patrons using all three access methods has also increased over the last five years, while the total percentage visiting the library in person remains extremely high, at 94%. While in-person only visitors constituted the largest group of library users in 2010, they have been outnumbered by combined in-person/Internet users in 2015. 2015 2010 In-Person In-Person 27% 37% 36% 11% Phone 20% 1% 1% 3% Internet Q.2/3/4 Base: Library users (2010 - 757; 2015 - 417). 33% 12%

Phone 13% 1% 1% 2% Internet Market 50 Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media Only 7% of the general public claims to have interacted with the public library through social media in the past year. This figure tends to double among younger adults and those with children in the home (as well as among frequent inperson visitors and those who access the library by Internet). 2015 In-Person Library Use None 3% 1-10 times 7% 11+ times 13% 1% Access Library by Internet Yes 13% No 3% 0% Age Yes No 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 14% 14% 6% 4% Children in Home Yes 13% No 5% Q.4c Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. Market 51 Past Year Use of Public Library by

Other Household Members After rising in 2010, the reported incidence of children using the public library has declined significantly in 2015 (although some of the reason for this could be due to slight wave-over-wave changes in household composition). Family usage of the library increases with education level and is more prevalent among medium and higher income households. Cardholder Yes No 49% 50% 47% 68% 51% Used by Others (net) Yes 65% 26% 31% 27% 24% Children 65% 2015 Spouse/partner Others 0% 8% 8% 7% 9% In-Person Library Use None 24% 1-10 times 58% 11+ times 66% 2010 2005 2000 22% No 23% 19% 17% 55% 31% 32% Bookstore Use

None Any 30% 53% 35% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 63% Same 64% Less 40% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 20% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 62% No 45% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.5a/b Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Access Library by Internet Yes 69% No 34% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 53% 51% 34% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 51% 64% 54% 36% Children in Home Yes No 75%

36% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 40% 52% 62% Income <$35K 28% $35K - <$75K 52% $75K+ 59% Market 52 Total Usage of the Public Library Taking the total population into account and comparing with 2010, the most notable differences in usage are a slight increase in library non-user households and a corresponding decrease in households where the respondent didnt use the library but others in the household did. As was the case five years ago, over three-quarters of Ontario households are using the public library, and the majority of households that are using the library contain more than one user. 2010 2015 No One 24% Respondent Only 27% No One 21% Total Users = 70% Other Household Member(s) Only 7% With Others in Household 42% Q.2/3/4 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Other Household Member(s) Only 10% Respondent

Only 28% Total Users = 69% With Others in Household 41% Market 53 Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library Many of the more traditional reasons for using libraries were less often cited versus five years ago, with only the librarys wireless network generating more traffic. Given that this was a multiple mention question, it may be that todays library users are becoming more selective in determining which library services they choose to use. Total Household (2015) 84% 90% 88% 88% Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials 56% Get information on a topic of personal interest Read or study Access the Internet using library computers 19% 34% 41% 38% 47% Yes 28% 33% 31% 59% 44% 68% 65% 35% 65% 26% 26% Relax or socialize 70% 73% 77% 86%

2015 31% 2010 Use the library's wireless network 17% Access databases / other electronically stored info* Take a child to a program or activity Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session Work assignment or keep up-todate at work School or class assignment 25% 23% 23% 23% 18% 17% 16% 13% 9% 9% 14% 2005 2000 33% No 32% 32% 32% 31% 27% 35% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 21% 21% 24% 10% 16% 16% 18% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.6a/b Base: Those who personally visited the public library (2000 - 678; 2005 - 713; 2010 - 723; 2015 - 394); households where anyone used the public library (2010 - 843; 2015 - 444). *Wording changed in 2015 from Access electronic databases.

25% 18% 21% 27% Market 54 Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library by Frequency of Library Use (Current Year) In 2015, more frequent visits to the library were associated with borrowing materials, gathering information on topics of interest, Internet/wireless/database access, and participation in library programs. 93% Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials 78% 65% Get information on a topic of personal interest 50% 37% 33% Read or study 35% Access the Internet using library computers 24% 31% Relax or socialize 22% 31% Use the library's wireless network 21% 29% Access databases / other electronically stored info 18% 26% Take a child to a program or activity 21% 21% Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session 13% 7%

School or class assignment More than 10 past year in-person visits 12% 1 to 10 past year in-person visits 14% 15% Work assignment or keep up-to-date at work 0% 20% Q.6a Base: Frequent library users (2015 - 161); infrequent users (2015 - 233). 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 55 USE OF ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CHANNELS Market Total Reasons for Not Using the Public Library in the Past Year Availability of information from other sources has become the primary reason for not using the public library, with Internet and bookstore usage strongly linked to this explanation. Those with higher education and higher incomes are also more apt to offer this rationale for non-use. Have Internet Access Yes 57% No 26% 50% 40% Get information from other sources 21% 22% Due to illness / injury / too... 30% 34% 25% 30% 68% Not interested Yes No reason / don't ...

65% 21% 27% 65% 26% 21% Too busy Don't read No 2000 Prefer to buy / share b... 3% 11% 4% 7% Library hours not conven... 3% 4% 2% 2% Library isn't accessible 0% 80% 100% 6% 6% 6% 6% Use library at school or work 0% 20% Have own library / b... 40% 60% 80% 100% 25% Any Books Read in Past Year None 38% 1-5 52%

6-15 66% 16+ 56% 5% 1% 7% 6% 2010 35% 7%35% 10% 3% 20%8% 40% 60% Bookstore Use None 58% 2015 2005 8% 9% 7%32% 12% 6% 4% 5% 2% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 33% 62% 56% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 39% 43% 65% Community Size <30K 35K - <500K 500K+ 40% 41% 62% 4% 1% 0% 20%

Q.9a/b Base: Past-year public library non-users (2000 - 326; 2005 - 389; 2010 - 343; 2015 - 183). Note: Mentions of 3% or more only. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions. 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 57 Experience Using the Library Over 90% of those who havent used the public library in the past year have done so sometime in the past. Relatively few Ontarians who have ever used the public library claim to have had a negative experience when doing so. For the few who did, fines, materials not being available, and unhelpful staff were the main complaints. Ever used the public library Yes (%) No (%) 0% 1% Had a negative experience No (%) 0% 81% 94% Gender Male Female 86% 96% Type of Negative Experience Yes (%) 1% Bookstore Use None Any Materials / books not available I owe penalty fees Staff arent friendly / helpful Its overcrowded Have to pay access fee to services Not enough computers Difficulties with computers / forgot pin # Poor hours Materials / books are damaged / ripped Other 16% 16% 13% 9% 6%

6% 6% 3% 3% 16% Q.9d/e/f Base: Past-year non-users of library (191); All users of library (586); Had a negative library experience (32). New questions in 2015. Market 58 Ways Internet Was Accessed in the Past Year Incidence of having Internet access, in general and in the home, has remained constant during the last five years, with access at work and at school declining somewhat. Over this same time period, wireless access has shown a substantial increase. Respondents under the age of 25 are one of the librarys biggest Internet user groups. Cardholder Yes No 87% 88% Any access In-Person Library Use None 4% 1-10 times 29% 11+ times 38% 83% 83% At home 44% 50% At work 42% 2015 At other places in the community using a smartphone 29% 6% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 32% No 20% 2010 41% At other places in the community using wireless access 23% At your public library At school 23%

26% 17% 21% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 41% No 21% Bookstore Use None Any Q.10 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Change of wording in 2010 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid. 26% 23% 15% Future Importance of Library More 29% Same 23% Less 19% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 38% 23% 23% 17% Children in Home Yes No 19% 30% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 11% 22% 24% 29% 25% 19% 15% 24% Books Read in Past Year None 11% 1-5

20% 6-15 28% 16+ 26% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom Market 59 Use of Internet With the exception of social networking, which has seen a significant increase, the ways in which the Internet is used havent changed much over the last five years. 85% 86% 82% 67% Regular Use of Internet 84% 84% 78% 63% Search for specific information of interest Use e-mail, a chat room or IM 57% 65% To access the news To access social Yes networking sites 75% 78% 75% Age 55% 43% 68% 65% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 42% 65% To stream movies, music or other types of entertainment 2015

2010 2005 42% 2000 To download movies, music or other types of entertainment 73% 72% 56% 40% In-Person Library Use None 78% Any 89% Children in Home Yes No 95% 80% Access Library by Internet Yes 95% No 78% Education High School Univ/college Grad school 64% 93% 98% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 93% No 85% Future Importance of Library More 83% Same 86% Less 91% Income <$35K 62% $35K - <$75K 83% $75K+ 97% Community Size <30K 30K - <500K 500K+ 77%

82% 90% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 80% 87% 74% 88% 93% 88% 32% No 32% 35% To download books or magazines* 35% 16% 18% Library Benefits Top 81% Middle 87% Bottom 91% To create 0% 20% content 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.11 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Change of wording in 2015 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid. Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 97% 95% 91% 71% Market 60 Books Read in the Past Year The vast majority of Ontarians claim to have read one or more books during the past year, with the largest group reading 16 or more.

Older people tend to be more avid readers than the younger age groups. 2015 Any Books Read 85% 16+ books read Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 64% No 38% 40% 6 to 15 books read Library vs Bookstore Usage More 63% Same 39% Less 33% 24% 1 to 5 books read Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 21% 0% 20% In-Person Library Use None 24% 1-10 times 33% 11+ times 70% 40% 60% Q.13f Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. 80% 100% 53% 34% 23% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+

24% 35% 40% 47% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 33% 40% 55% Born in Canada Yes No 38% 49% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 38% 43% 43% 45% 31% 39% Market 61 Format of Books Read in the Past Year Hard copy books remain the most popular format. Those who prefer E-books are more likely to be bookstore users and to have not visited the public library in person in the past year. In-Person Library Use None 20% Any 8% 2015 Mostly in electronic format Library vs Bookstore Usage More 8% Same 8% Less 16% 11% Mostly in hard copy

74% Bookstore Use None Any 5% 12% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ Both equally 0% 10% 6% 11% 13% 14% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.13g Base: Read any books in the past year (2015 - 507). New question in 2015. Education High school Univ/college Grad school Region 9% 10% 21% Market 62 Past Year Bookstore Visit Frequency Bookstore usage has remained quite consistent since 2005. As was the case five years ago, frequent bookstore usage is associated with higher usage of, and support for, the public library system. More than 10 times Cardholder Yes No 26% 25% 27% Yes 34% In-Person Library Use None 19% 1-10 times 24% 11+ times

37% 68% 65% 6 to 10 times 65% 21% 21% 22% 22% 2015 2010 2005 2000 No37% 1 to 5 times None 0% 38% 34% 31% 17% 16% 16% 12% 28% 20% 32% 35% 35% Books Read in Past Year None 6% 1-5 13% 6-15 23% 16+ 42% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 23% Same 32% Less 38% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 32% 22% 25% Education High school

Univ/college Grad school 13% 28% 58% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 16% 24% 34% Community Size <30K 30K - <500K 500K+ 20% 22% 32% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 18% 30% 14% 40% 26% 30% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.14a Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Market 63 Frequency of Visiting Bookstore vs. Library Over half of Ontarios bookstore users say they are using libraries as much or more than bookstores. Those who use bookstores more tend to not only use, but also value, libraries less. 42% Bookstores more Cardholder Yes No 43% In-Person Library Use None 77% 1-10 times 37%

11+ times 7% 26% About the same Future Importance of Library More 31% Same 39% Less 55% 28% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 2015 Don't know 2010 29% Libraries more Age 29% 78% 28% 26% 44% 74% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 33% 52% 42% 39% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 30% 38% 50% Language English French / Other 43% 26% Region North

East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 50% 42% 30% 42% 44% 50% 3% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% Q.14b Base: Past-year bookstore users (2010 - 921, 2015 - 501). 80% 100% Market 64 ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Opinion of Future Importance of Public Libraries At the present time, equal numbers of Ontarians think libraries will become more important and less important as online availability of materials increases, with the largest group predicting that there will be no change. Those who think the library will become more important tend to be either older or younger, have lower incomes, and live in Metro Toronto. 26% 23% 27% 27% More important Cardholder Yes No In-Person Library Use None 17% 1-10 times 27% 11+ times 36% 43% 44% 45% 41% No change

2015 2010 2005 2000 27% 29% 23% 25% Less important 0% 20% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 38% No 22% Access Library by Internet Yes 32% No 21% Bookstore Use None 1-10 times 11+ times 25% 23% 33% Library vs. Bookstore Usage More 32% Same 28% Less 19% 5% 4% 6% 7% Don't know Age 26% 23% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 40% 60% 80% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+

30% 21% 21% 32% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 40% 21% 26% Community Size <30K 30K - <500K 500K+ 24% 21% 30% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 18% 28% 22% 40% 20% 27% 40% 20% 5% 100% Q.15 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). Market 66 Impact of Public Library Closing on Community When asked theoretically about their local library closing, a large majority of respondents said that they would expect there to be a major impact on their community. People in Southwest Ontario and those who use the library to access the Internet were among the groups most apt to feel this way, while young people tended to downplay the severity of the impact. 2015 Cardholder Yes No Major Impact 77% 54% Bookstore Use None

1-10 times 11+ times 66% 69% 78% 71% In-Person Library Use None 54% 1-10 times 75% 11+ times 86% Minor Impact Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 88% No 66% 21% No Impact at all Have Internet Access None 73% Work 68% Home 71% School 69% Library 78% Other 69% 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Q.16a-a Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. 100% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ Region North East Southwest Metro T.O.

GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 56% 73% 69% 77% 60% 66% 78% 72% 72% 72% Access Library by Internet Yes 82% No 63% Market 67 Impact of Public Library Closing on Family Asked to think about the effect their local library closing might have on themselves and their family, less than half felt that the impact would be major. When presented in a personal context, women and Metro Toronto residents stood out along with some of the other groups who also thought the community as a whole would be very negatively impacted. 2015 Cardholder Yes No Major Impact 53% 16% Bookstore Use None 1-10 times 11+ times 38% 40% 84% Gender Male Female 39% 47% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 35% 41% 50% 51% 41%

39% 44% In-Person Library Use None 15% 1-10 times 40% 11+ times 84% Minor Impact Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 75% No 34% 35% Access Library by Internet Yes 62% No 30% No Impact at all 21% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 61% No 42% 0% 20% 40% 60% Q.16a-b Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New question in 2015. 80% 100% Have Internet Access None 44% Work 42% Home 43% Market 68 Benefit of Public Libraries Relative to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services There has been virtually no change over the past five years in how Ontarians view the library relative to other unspecified tax-supported services, with over three times as many respondents still saying the library belongs at the top rather than the bottom of the list. The groups most likely to place the library at the top of the list include older residents, people without Internet access, lower income earners, immigrants and Torontonians.

36% 37% Top of list Cardholder Yes No 25% 22% In-Person Library Use None 21% 1-10 times 34% 11+ times 57% 50% 49% 56% 55% Middle of list 2015 2010 2005 2000 11% 11% 16% 20% Bottom of list 0% Books Read in Past Year None 26% 1-5 26% 6-15 31% 16+ 48% Library vs Bookstore Usage More 54% Same 36% Less 23% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 58% No 29% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 27% 31%

38% 40% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 47% 41% 33% Born in Canada Yes No 34% 45% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 31% 34% 39% 47% 31% 34% Have Internet Access None 48% Any 34% 3% 3% 4% 3% Don't know Age 42% 22% Access Library by Internet Yes 46% No 29% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.16 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).

Future Importance of Libraries More 55% Same 34% Less 20% Market 69 Perceived Value of Library Services In 2015, being a lender of materials is still the role of the library that is most valued by Ontarians, followed by early literacy programs, which is now much more valued than it was five years ago. Several other services have also registered a significant increase in their perceived value but remain in the bottom half of the list. Bottom 6 Ratings (1-6 on a 10-pt. scale) Top 2 Ratings (9-10 on a 10-pt. scale) 9 9 Lender of materials 68 69 13 22 Early literacy programs 60 46 15 13 Reference centre 56 55 14 Provider of support for school projects or homework 54 17 21 Place to study 50 45 20 22 Local history collections 45 42

18 16 Assistance in finding information 45 47 26 35 Services to new Canadians 40 27 31 33 Information for the unemployed 37 30 33 39 Trainer in how to access info online* 31 24 35 44 Focal point or meeting place 31 22 39 Government services through librarybased kiosks 39 Resources for small business and 45 entrepreneurs 46 Q.17 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Wording changed in 2015 from Trainer in how to access information through computers. 28 25 21 18 Market 70 Value of Services by How Library Ranks Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services The chart below presents the average value scores of the different library services according to whether the library was placed at the top, middle or bottom of the list relative to other tax-supported services. The maintaining of local history collections represents the narrowest gap in value perceptions across the three groups. Library at Top of List Library in Middle of List

Library at Bottom of List 10 10 99 88 Mean Score 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 10 0 Q.16/17 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600) Market 71 Past Year Usage of Library Services by Someone in Household After being asked to rate the value of the services the library offers, respondents were then asked to indicate which of the services had been used by someone in their household during the past year. Despite the higher value perceptions measured in this years study, actual usage of most of the services has declined noticeably. 64% Lender of materials 45% Assistance in finding information 36% Reference centre 72% 55% 49% 26% 25% Focal point or meeting place 26% Place to study 35% 25% Help with school projects or homework

19% Local history collections 28% 13% 15% Training in how to access information online* 12% 13% Early literacy programs 9% Government services through librarybased kiosks 7% Information for the unemployed 14% 12% 6% 10% Resources for small business and entrepreneurs 4% 8% Services to new Canadians 0% 20% 40% Q.18 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). *Wording change in 2015 from Training in how to access information through computers. 60% 80% 100% Market 72 Value & Usage Combined For each of the library services, the diagram below plots perceived value (percent giving the service a score of 9 or 10 on the 10-point value scale) along with reported usage. Value perceptions and reported usage are most aligned for being a lender of materials, providing assistance in finding information, and serving as a focal point or meeting place. The widest value/usage gap is for early literacy programs, which was also the case in 2010. Percent Valuing the Service Percent Using the Service

Assistance in Finding Inf ormation 80 Training in How to Access Inf o Online Support Projects or Trainingf orinSchool how to access Homework Early Literacy Progams Assistance in f inding inf ormation 80 inf o online EarlyFocal literacy Pointprograms or Meeting Place 40 Services to new Canadians Focal point or meeting place Services to New Canadians Government Services Kiosks 40 0 Resources f or small business and Resources f or Small Business entrepreneurs Government services through library-based kiosks Inf ormation f or the Unemployed 0 Reference Centre Ref erence centre Q.17/18 Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). Provider of support f or school Lender of Materials Place to Study Local History Collections Inf ormation f or the unemployed Market 73 Information Technology Training that Could Be Offered Responses to an open-ended question in 2015 reveal that nearly one-third of Ontario adults think the public library should offer general computer or Internet skills training. Others, in response to this question, identified who they

thought the most appropriate target audiences for IT training would be. A substantial number of respondents provided no suggestions regarding the type of technical training the library could provide. 2015* 30% Computer / Internet skills Already do a good job 9% For seniors / older people 9% For kids / students How to access library resources 6% 5% Social networking 4% Anything / anything useful 3% Word processing / Excel / PowerPoint 3% Hobbies / special interests 3% Research skills 3% Other 4% Don't know / can't think of anything Q.13b 0% 20% 40% Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). *Change of question wording in 2015 makes comparisons to earlier data invalid. Note: Table contains mentions of 3% or more. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions. 42% 60% 80% 100% Market 74 Believability of Positioning Statements Compared to 2010, there is stronger agreement that the public library is the only affordable place where the average Ontarian can go for information and less disagreement that the public library is the best place for people of all ages to go to pursue lifelong learning.

Bottom 6 Ratings (1-6 on a 10-pt. scale) Top 2 Ratings (9-10 on a 10-pt. scale) 25 28 24 33 Q.19 Base: All respondents (2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). 47 The public library is the only affordable place where the average Ontarian can go for information The public library is the best place for people of all ages to go to pursue lifelong learning 42 39 36 Market 75 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS Market Respondent Age / Gender Quotas placed on age and gender ensured that this years sample resembled that of 2010 on those two dimensions. Respondent Age Gender 12% 12% 12% 12% 18 to 24 48% 68% Yes 25 to 34 48% 65% 16% 16% 19% 19%

Male 37% 65% 2015 2010 37% 2005 38% 40% 38% No 38% 35 to 54 35% 32% 27% 27% 55+ 2000 32% 35% 52% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Average Age 2015: 46 2010: 46 2005: 45 2000: 44 0% 0% Refused 4% 4% 0% 20% 40% 52% 35% 60% 80% Female 63% 63% 100% Q.A/B Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Market 100% 77 Number in Household / Presence of Children in Household Households in the 2015 study were slightly smaller than in the previous two study waves. Number in Household 16% 13% 12% 15% One Presence of Children in Household Any Children 68% Yes 65% 65% 34% 35% 32% 33% Two 2015 12% 13% 18% 16% 5 or younger 2010 2005 6 to 10 15% 15% 15% 15% 11 to 14 11% 14% 11% 13% 2000

32% No 48% 50% 54% 50% Three or more 35% 35% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Average Number 2015: 2.8 2010: 2.9 2005: 2.9 2000: 2.8 3% 2% 2% 2% Refused 0% 20% 40% 35% 40% 36% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.20/21a/b Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). 15 to 17 0% 8% 11% 10% 10% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Market 100% 78 Education / Total Annual Household Income There were no significant differences in education or income levels compared with 2010. Education Total Annual Household Income 28% 25% 29% 35% High School or Less 14% 12% 15% 17% Under $35K 1% 2% 2% 2% Elementary school 68% Yes 27% 24% 27% 32% Some / completed high school $35 < $75K 70% 73% 69% 64% University/ College Some univ/college 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Q.22/24 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600).

100% 35% 35% 22% 21% 2015 2010 2005 0% 20% 32% 35% 35% 25%0% 20% 22% 34% 26% Don't know / refused 10% 11% 8% 7% Post graduate studies No $75K+ 45% 44% 41% 36% 65% 2000 15% 18% 19% 20% Graduated univ/college 65% 27% 31% 29% 36% 40% 40% 60% 80% 100% 60%

80% Market 100% 79 Ontario Region / Community Size Community size was very consistent with the distribution from the 2010 study, but there were slightly more people residing in urban parts of the GTA this year. Ontario Region Community Size 23% 19% 17% 17% GTA Urban 17% 17% Under 30K 22% 23% 27% 23% Southwestern 17% 19% 68% Yes 65% 19% 20% 19% 20% Eastern 16% 17% 17% 19% Metro Toronto 36% 65% 2015 2010 2005 35% 30K < 500K

40% 2000 33% 32% No 35% 11% 12% 12% 13% GTA Ex-urban 9% 8% 8% 8% Northern 0% 20% 48% 35% 48% 500K+ 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 44% 47% 40% 60% 80% 100% Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 - 600). 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 80 Aboriginal Status / Years in Canada / Language Spoken More English-speaking people completed the phone survey compared with the previous studies, and the vast majority

of respondents in 2015 were longtime residents of Canada. Born in Canada Primary Language Spoken at Home Years Lived in Canada Yes More than 10 years No 1% 0% 94% 86% 86% English 6 to 10 years 87% 88% 5% 68% Yes 65% 1% 3 to 5 years 5% French 65% 3% 2015 2010 3% 2005 4% Aboriginal Status 2 years or less 3% 2000 32% No 5% 0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 35% 35% Other 10% 9% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 8% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1% Q.22a/b/c/23 Base: All respondents (2000 - 1007; 2005 - 1102; 2010 - 1100; 2015 600); Respondents who were not born in Canada (111). Born in Canada, Years Lived in Canada and Aboriginal Status are new in 2015. Market 81 Challenges in Using the Library About equal numbers of Ontarians have physical or health conditions that make reading difficult as have conditions that make visiting the library in person a challenge. Have Physical or Health Conditions That make reading difficult or challenging 8% That make visiting a library in person difficult or challenging 7% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.23a Base: All respondents (2015 - 600). New questions in 2015. Market 82 RESULTS FROM THE ONLINE SURVEY Market USE OF THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Characteristics of Closest Public Library Most of those who responded to the web survey live within 5 kilometres of their local library and find it to be an inviting place. Condition of Library Distance from Home Inviting space

56% 5 kilometres or less 70% 6 to 10 kilometres Okay, but could use some improvement 20% 28% 11 to 20 kilometres 5% Cardholder Yes No 75% 61% In-Person Library Use None 62% 1-10 times 71% 11+ times 81% Access Library by Internet Yes 75% No 65% Not pleasant 2% More than 20 kilometres 1% Never been inside library Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 78% 68% 61% Community Size <30K 30K - <500K 500K+ 56% 67% 74% Region North East Market Southwest 64% 66%

66% 13% Dont know 4% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%100% Q.1a/b Base: All respondents (1102). 85 Library Cardholders Internet research panel members were less likely to report having a library card than those surveyed by phone. Certain demographic groups were more likely to be cardholders than others: younger people, women, those with children in the household, people born outside Canada, and those who reside in Metro Toronto or the GTA. In-Person Library Use None 30% 1-10 times 79% 11+ times 99% Books Read in Past Year None 38% 1-5 63% 6-15 76% 16+ 80% 0% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 84% 62% 48% Gender Male Female 63% 72% 1% In-Person Bookstore Use None 51% 1-10 times 71% 11+ times 72% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 75% 69%

67% 65% Yes No Online Book Vendor Use None 59% 1-10 times 71% 11+ times 72% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 89% No 62% Q.1 Base: All respondents (1102). Access Library by Internet Yes 88% No 41% Children in Home Yes No 79% 64% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 55% 67% 81% Born in Canada Yes No 66% 73% Market 86 Past Year In-Person Use of Public Library Despite the lower incidence of cardholders, the percentage of in-person library users was similar to the results of the phone survey. Those living close to a library and in the more densely populated parts of the Toronto area were most apt to report visiting the library in person in the past year. Cardholder Yes No 86% 31%

Books Read in Past Year None 23% 1-5 69% 6-15 79% 16+ 82% 0% 1% In-Person Bookstore Use None 49% 1-10 times 73% 11+ times 75% Yes No Online Book Vendor Use None 58% 1-10 times 75% 11+ times 69% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 97% No 62% Q.2 Base: All respondents (1102). Have Internet Access None 36% Work 70% Home 69% School 75% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 94% No 67% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 86% 66% 34% Children in Home Yes No 82%

65% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 54% 70% 76% Born in Canada Yes No 66% 78% Distance to Closest Public Library <5 km 72% 6-10 km 69% 11+ km 52% Market 87 Past Year Public Library In-Person Visit Frequency Web research panelists reported fewer in-person visits to the library than their phone survey counterparts. Older people and those with lower incomes tended to be the most frequent past-year visitors, as well as those having close proximity to the library. Numbers of visits were very different at both the upper (21+ times) and lower (1 to 5 times) ends of the scale, while in the middle the results were very consistent with the responses obtained by phone. 21+ times 11 to 20 times Cardholder Yes No 16% 19% 2% Books Read in Past Year None 6% 1-5 5% 6-15 13% 16+ 32% 14% Access Library by Phone / Text

Yes 26% No 12% 6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times 0% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom Age 53% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Access Library by Internet 20% Yes 3% No Q.2 Base: Past-year public library visitors (757). Social Media Interaction with 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 3% 13% 16% 22% <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 18% 19% 12% Income 17% Have Internet Access Work 15% Home 16% School 7% Library 23% Other 14% 28% 9% 0%

Distance to Closest Public Library <5 km 18% 6-10 km 13% 11+ km 9% Region North 16% East 12% Southwest 17% Metro T.O. 22% GTA Urban 14% Market GTA Ex-urban 13% 88 Past Year Use of Public Library by Telephone / Text Overall, the proportion of the Ontario adult population accessing the public library by phone or text is comparable to the results from the phone survey; however, with the exception of account requests/changes, web panelists were less likely to indicate the specific types of activities they conducted by phone. Cardholder Yes No Telephone / Text Telephone = 19% Text = 3% 26% 6% Access Library by Internet 30% Yes 6% No 20% In-Person Library Use None 2% 1-10 times 23% 11+ times 39% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 49% No 17% Books Read in Past Year None 2% 1-5 16% 6-15 25% 16+

27% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 9% Consult a librarian 9% Renew an item 28% 17% 6% Age 6% Reserve an item Enquire / request changes to account 5% 0% Q.4/7 Base: All respondents (1102). 20% 40% 60% 80% In-Person Bookstore Use None 12% 1-10 times 22% 11+ times 19% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 20% 15% 23% 18% Online Book Vendor Use None 15% 1-10 times 22% 11+ times 19% Children in Home Yes No

27% 17% 100% Have Internet Access None 9% Work 20% Home 19% School 23% Education High school 13% Univ/college 20% Grad school 21% Market 89 Past Year Use of Public Librarys Website Not surprisingly, there are fewer web panelists than phone respondents who have not made any use of the librarys website in the past year. However, the percentage of frequent users (11 or more times) does not differ significantly across the two survey populations. Any Access of Librarys Website Times Accessed Librarys Website in Past Year Cardholder Yes No 74% 20% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 90% No 53% In-Person Library Use None 13% 1-10 times 69% 11+ times 95% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 74% 53% 23% Books Read in Past Year None 16%

1-5 51% 6-15 66% 16+ 76% Gender Male Female 53% 60% Children in Home Yes No 67% 54% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 41% 57% 66% Born in Canada Yes No 55% 63% 0% 0% 0% 11 or more times 1 to 10 times Not at all Q.3 Base: All respondents (1102). Online Book Vendor Use None 41% 1-10 times 63% 11+ times 64% Have Internet Access None 27% Work 57% Home 56% School 62% Library 85% Other 59% Market 90

Past Year Use of Public Library by Internet Web panel respondents were more apt than phone respondents to report using the librarys website to check catalogues. For all other uses of the website, the percentages generally lined up with those of the telephone interviewees. Internet 57% 35% Check catalogue 29% Reserve an item 26% Renew an item 14% Download an item Access other materials via library's website 12% Manage / make changes to library account 9% Consult a librarian by e-mail, chat or IM 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.3/8a Base: All respondents (1102). Market 91 Specific Types of Electronic Resources Used on Librarys Website More web survey respondents than phone respondents said that they had checked the librarys online catalogue,

downloaded an item or accessed other materials via the librarys website. When this larger base size is taken into account, the proportion of the total population accessing the different electronic media is almost identical for the two populations that were surveyed. E-books fiction Checked the Librarys Online Catalogue, Downloaded an Item, or Accessed Other Materials via the Librarys Website 1% 39% E-books non-fiction 28% Digital movies 15% E-newspapers or journal articles 14% E-magazines 14% 0% E-audiobooks 9% Digital music 8% Yes No E-local history or genealogy information Q.8a/b Base: All respondents (1102); those who checked the librarys online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials on the librarys web page (449). 0% 6% 20% 40% 60% Market 80% 100% 92 Ways Users Access the Public Library

Higher library website usage on the part of panel respondents has made the cross-channel usage diagram below look different from the one produced for telephone respondents. In particular, this diagram shows more combined in-person/Internet users and fewer combined in-person/telephone and in-person-only users. The proportion of library patrons who reported using all three access methods, however, was not significantly impacted by survey method. In-Person 19% 49% 3% Phone 23% 0% 0% 5% Internet Q.2/3/4a/b Base: Library users (804). Market 93 Past Year Public Library Interaction Through Social Media Interacting with the library through social media is only slightly higher for the population surveyed by web versus phone and, once again, skews to the younger part of the population. Cardholder Yes No 1% 11% 4% In-Person Library Use None 2% 1-10 times 11% 11+ times 14% 0% Ye s No Books Read in Past Year None 1% 1-5 8%

6-15 11% 16+ 11% In-Person Bookstore Use None 3% 1-10 times 9% 11+ times 16% Online Book Vendor Use None 3% 1-10 times 11% 11+ times 12% Q.4c Base: All respondents (1102). Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 21% No 5% Have Internet Access None Work Home School Library Other 9% 10% 8% 12% 16% 10% Access Library by Internet 14% Yes 2% No Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 10% 9% 4% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ Children in Home Yes No Market 11% 12%

9% 5% 13% 7% 94 Past Year Use of Public Library by Other Household Members Even though the percentage of respondents reporting that others in their household used the public library resembled the figure reported in the telephone survey, the relationship of those people to the respondent was quite different, with web respondents mentioning spouses/partners more frequently than children. Cardholder Yes No Used by Others (net) 55% 23% 45% In-Person Library Use None 15% 1-10 times 55% 11+ times 70% Spouse/partner Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 27% Books Read in Past Year None 19% 1-5 44% 6-15 54% 16+ 51% Children 19% In-Person Bookstore Use None 29% 1-10 times 49% 11+ times 53% Others 9% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes

65% No 41% 0% Q.5a/b Base: All respondents (1102). 20% 40% 60% 80% 50% 46% 50% 39% Children in Home Yes No 70% 38% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 37% 46% 49% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 100% Access Library by Internet 60% Yes 26% No 58% 43% 19% 25% 44% 50% Region Market North 40% 95 Total Usage of the Public Library

The breakout of library usage at a household level was quite consistent across the two populations surveyed. The only significant difference is fewer web panelists reported that other household members used the library in the past year when they themselves did not. This was at least in part due to the fact that web panelists came from smaller households with fewer children compared with those interviewed by phone. No One 24% Respondent Only 28% Total Users = 73% Other Household Member(s) Only 3% Q.2/3/4a/b Base: All respondents (1102). With Others in Household 45% Market 96 Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library At both an individual and household level, web panelists gave fewer reasons for using the public library than telephone respondents. The ordering of the reasons turned out to be similar except that online respondents placed use of the librarys wireless network higher on the list and relaxing/socializing lower. Total Household Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials 68% Read or study 34% Get information on a topic of personal interest 31% Use the library's wireless network 24% Access the Internet using library computers 22% Access databases / other electronically stored info 20% Relax or socialize

Take a child to a program or activity Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session Work assignment or keep up-todate at work School or class assignment 15% 14% 12% 75% 41% 33% 28% 28% 23% 19% 19% 14% 10% 16% 9% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.6a/b Base: Those who personally visited the public library (757); households where anyone used the public library (808). Market 97 Reasons for Personally Using the Public Library by Frequency of Library Use Based on responses to the online survey, frequent in-person visitors to the library made more use of all library services than those who didnt visit as frequently, and in most cases, the differences were significant. 90% Borrow books, CDs, DVDs or other materials 58% 46% Get information on a topic of personal interest 24% 43% Read or study 31% 32%

Use the library's wireless network 20% 31% Access databases / other electronically stored info 15% 30% Access the Internet using library computers 19% 22% Attend a lecture, program, meeting or training session 8% 21% Relax or socialize 12% 18% Take a child to a program or activity 12% School or class assignment 11% 9% Work assignment or keep up-to-date at work 11% 10% 0% More than 10 past year in-person visits 1 to 10 past year in-person visits 20% Q.6a Base: Frequent library users (225); infrequent users (532). 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 98 USE OF ALTERNATIVE INFORMATION CHANNELS Market

Total Reasons for Not Using the Public Library in the Past Year For web respondents, the most frequently cited reason for not using the public library was that they were simply not interested, whereas phone survey participants were more apt to say they get information from other sources. Lack of interest is high among those with lower incomes and those who dont read books. Not interested 43% Get information from other sources Books Read in Past Year None 54% 1-5 39% 6-15 36% 16+ 36% 28% Prefer to buy / share books 18% Too busy 16% Don't read 12% Library services / materials aren't suitable / satisfactory Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 29% 42% 54% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 60% 37% 45% Community Size <30K 30K - <500K 500K+ 23% 48% 45% Region North East

Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 21% 39% 56% 39% 56% 16% 6% Library isn't accessible 5% Have own library / books 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.9a/b Base: Past-year public library non-users (298). Note: Mentions of 3% or more only. May total more than 100%, due to multiple mentions. Market 100 Experience Using the Library Similar percentages of library non-users from the telephone and web surveys said they had ever used the public library, but the proportion of all past and current users who had a negative experience was twice as high for the online group. For web survey takers, the most common complaint had to do with unfriendly or unhelpful library staff. Ever used the public library Yes (%) No (%) 0% In-Person Bookstore Use None 80% 1-10 times 95% 11+ times 89% 1% Yes (%) No (%) 0% Children in Home Yes

No <$35K 73% $35K - <$75K 88% $75K+ 96% Staff arent friendly / helpful Materials / books not available Its noisy / people are disruptive Terrible return system / books returned but still fined late fees Difficulties with computers / forgot pin # Materials / books are damaged / ripped Poor security Difficulty getting card I owe penalty fees Its overcrowded Fine / fees are too high Rooms aren't available Other Q.9d/e/f Base: Past-year non-users of library (298); All users of library (1070); Had a negative library experience (112). 97% 88% Income Library Benefits Born in Canada Top 88% Negative Experience Yes Middle Type of 93% No Bottom 82% Had a negative experience 1% Books Read in Past Year None 85% 1-5 95% 6-15 89% 16+ 89% Market 92% 78% 21% 14% 14% 13% 6% 6% 4% 3%

2% 2% 2% 2% 12% 101 Ways Internet Was Accessed in the Past Year As might be expected, web panel members are more likely than phone respondents to have Internet access at home or at work. They are no more likely, however, to access the Internet at other places around the community, including the library. As was the case with the phone survey, those under the age of 25 form one of the librarys biggest Internet user groups. Any access 99% At home 59% At other places in the community using wireless access 43% At other places in the community using a smartphone 40% At school Q.10 Base: All respondents (1102). 32% 6% 96% At work At your public library Cardholder Yes No 24% 15% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% In-Person Library Use None 2% 1-10 times 28% 11+ times 48% Books Read in Past Year None 6% 1-5 25% 6-15 27% 16+

29% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 43% No 20% Access Library by Internet 36% Yes 8% No Social Media Interaction with Library Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 34% 22% 7% Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 39% 29% 25% 16% Children in Home Yes No 34% 21% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 18% 24% 28% Region North East Southwest Market Metro T.O. 18% 21% 19% 25% 102 Use of Internet

Not surprisingly, pretty well all web respondents are regular users of the Internet. Compared with telephone respondents who regularly use the Internet, web responders are more likely to access the news and use e-mail/chat/IM, but are less likely to stream or download items or create content. Regular Use of Internet 99% Search for specific information of interest 86% Use e-mail, a chat room or IM 84% To access the news 73% Age To access social networking sites To stream movies, music or other types of entertainment 56% 24% To download books or magazines Age 23% 18-24 25-34 35-54 6% 55+ Q.10/11 Base: All respondents (1102). 70% 69% 58% 43% 33% To download movies, music or other types of entertainment To create content 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 15% 6% 5% 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 103 Books Read in the Past Year

Web panelists tended to read fewer books in the past year than those who responded to the survey by phone, but the proportion of non-readers was consistent across the two populations. Women and those over the age of 55 are among the heaviest readers of books. Cardholder Yes No Any Books Read 31% 17% 86% In-Person Library Use None 15% 1-10 times 22% 11+ times 56% 16+ books read In-Person Bookstore Use None 13% 1-10 times 25% 11+ times 58% Online Book Vendor Use None 18% 1-10 times 25% 11+ times 53% 28% 1 to 5 books read Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 36% No 24% 31% 0% Q.13f Base: All respondents (1102). 20% 40% 38% 23% 11% Gender Male Female 20% 33% 18-24

25-34 35-54 55+ 18% 18% 22% 38% Age 27% 6 to 15 books read Library Benefits -u Top Middle Bottom 60% 80% 100% Have Internet Access Work 25% Home 27% School 22% Library 32% Other 26% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 24% 24% 38% Born in Canada Yes No 28% 22% Language English French Other 27% 32% 7% Market 104 Format of Books Read in the Past Year

Those who completed the online survey were somewhat more inclined to read books in electronic format than those who completed the phone survey. E-book usage was more common in Metro Toronto and urban portions of the GTA. Mostly in electronic format In-Person Library Use None 24% 1-10 times 15% 11+ times 13% Language English French Other In-Person Bookstore Use None 24% 1-10 times 16% 11+ times 11% Region 17% 8% 22% 17% Mostly in hard copy Both equally 0% Q.13g Base: Read any books in the past year (946). 66% North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 12% 12% 16% 21% 19% 12% Online Book Vendor Use None 11% 1-10 times 18% 11+ times 21% 18% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Market 105 Past Year Bookstore In-Person Visit Frequency In the web survey, in-person bookstore use was a separate question from online use of book vendors, making comparisons to the telephone survey results invalid. Web panelists between the ages of 25 and 34 and those whose preferred language is not English or French appear to visit bricks and mortar bookstores less often than other segments of the population. More than 10 times 6 to 10 times In-Person Library Use None 9% 1-10 times 11% 11+ times 16% 12% Books Read in Past Year None 1% 1-5 5% 6-15 11% 16+ 25% 18% 1 to 5 times 51% Online Book Vendor Use None 5% 1-10 times 9% 11+ times 36% Social Media Interaction with Library Yes 21% No 11% None 0% Q.14c Base: All respondents (1102). Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 13% 7% 12% 13% Language

English French Other 12% 12% 4% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 18% 15% 10% 13% 7% 16% 19% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 106 Past Year Online Book Vendor Visit Frequency The percentage of web panelists visiting book vendors online more than 10 times in the last year is similar to the percentage visiting physical bookstores the same number of times, but at the other end of the scale, there are more people not visiting online book vendors at all. Those with higher education and incomes were more apt to be frequent online book vendor users. More than 10 times 14% Books Read in Past Year None 5% 1-5 6% 6-15 15% 16+ 28% 14% In-Person Bookstore Use None 9% 1-10 times 10% 11+ times 44% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 8% 13% 22% Income

6 to 10 times 1 to 5 times None 0% Q.14d Base: All respondents (1102). <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 14% 12% 18% Born in Canada Yes No 15% 10% Language English French Other 14% 24% 6% 41% 31% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban 16% 19% 12% 15% 12% 10% Market 107 Frequency of Visiting Online Book Vendor vs. Bookstore Comparing individuals answers to the previous two questions, nearly one-quarter of those surveyed indicated that they used online book vendors more frequently than actually going to a bookstore, while almost one-third indicated the opposite. Those who use online book vendors more include French-speaking Ontarians. Books Read in Past Year None 13%

1-5 18% 6-15 26% 16+ 28% 0% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 13% 21% 33% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ In-Person Bookstore Use None 38% 1-10 times 19% 11+ times 12% 0% 0% Online vendor more About the same Bookstores more Access Library by Internet 25% Yes 19% No Language English French Other 21% 18% 28% 21% 37% 20% Region North East Southwest Metro T.O. GTA Urban GTA Ex-urban Q.14c/d Base: All respondents (1102). Market 22% 27% 23%

24% 20% 9% 108 Library vs. Bookstore Usage, In-Person and Online Comparisons of individuals reported frequency of using the library and bookstores in-person and online were made and are presented in the chart below. With regard to in-person usage, the largest group of respondents reported using the library and bookstores about equally, while for online usage, use of bookstores exclusively predominated. Interestingly, more people access both bookstores only and libraries only online as opposed to in-person (but in both cases, exclusive use of one over the other is much greater for bookstores than libraries). In-Person Usage Online Usage 30 26% 25% 25 21% 21% 19% 20 15% 15 10 18% 13% 12% 10% 10% 9% 5 0 Library only Q.2/3/14c/d Base: All respondents (1102). Library more Both equally Bookstore more Bookstore only Neither Market

109 Accessing Library Resources Electronically Desktop or laptop computers remain the most common devices for accessing the public library electronically, with smartphones and tablets also having been used by approximately one-quarter to one-third of online users, respectively. One-third of those who have not used an e-reader to access library resources actually own such a device, but of that group, fewer than one-third have ever attempted to use their e-reader to download books from the library. Devices Used to Access Resources from the Library A desktop or laptop computer 88% A tablet E-reader ownership (among those who have not used an e-reader to access library resources) 35% 22% A smartphone 1% An e-reader Ever tried to download public library e-books using an e-reader 0% 0% 11% Yes No An iPod or MP3 player 0% 1% Yes No 4% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q.8c/d/e

Base: Those who checked the librarys online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials on the librarys web page (449); Respondents who did not use an e-reader to access resources from the library (1054); Those who own an e-reader but did not use it to access resources from the library (349). Market 110 Familiarity and Use of New Electronic Channels Relatively few of those who use the library to access electronic materials said they were familiar with the different electronic channels or services some libraries offer. Zinio and Hoopla were most familiar to online library users, with the latter being accessed more through the library than elsewhere. Familiar with Channel Zinio Hoopla AskON Accessed via Library Account Accessed Elsewhere 7% 9% 9% 2% 3% 3% 27% 22% 15% Indieflix 13% 1% 2% Freegal 13% 4% 2% 0% 20% 40%

60% 80% 100% Q.8f Base: Those who checked the librarys online catalogue, downloaded an item, or accessed other electronic materials on the librarys web page (449). Market 111 ATTITUDES TOWARD THE PUBLIC LIBRARY Market Impact of Public Library Closing on Community Web panelists were not quite as concerned as telephone survey respondents about the impact a potential library closing would have on their community; still almost two-thirds thought that the impact would be major. Those predicting the biggest impact were located in certain areas, namely Northern Ontario, Southwest Ontario and non-urban parts of the GTA. Major Impact Cardholder Yes No 71% 50% In-Person Library Use None 1-10 times 11+ times 46% 67% 86% Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom 85% 59% 29% 64% Minor Impact 29% No Impact at all 0% Q.16a-b Base: All respondents (1102). 40% 60% 80%

100% Male Female 60% 68% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 51% 62% 62% 72% Books Read in Past Year None 36% 1-5 57% 6-15 74% 16+ 76% Age In-Person Bookstore Use None 51% 1-10 times 66% 11+ times 76% Children in Home Yes No 70% 62% Education High school Univ/college Grad school 63% 62% 73% Community Size <30K 30K - <500K 500K+ 75% 70% 60% 7% 20% Gender Have Internet Access

Work Home School Library Other 64% 65% 59% 77% 68% Access Library by Internet 73% Yes Market 113 Impact of Public Library Closing on Family Online survey participants were more apt to think closing of their local library would have a minor rather than a major impact on their family, whereas the opposite was true for those surveyed by phone. Cardholder Yes No Major Impact In-Person Library Use None 1-10 times 11+ times 32% 45% 5% 3% 32% 79% Books Read in Past Year None 4% 1-5 21% 6-15 39% 16+ 53% Minor Impact Library Benefits Top Middle Bottom Gender No Impact at all 0% Q.16a-a Base: All respondents (1102). Access Library by Phone / Text Yes

62% No 25% 23% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Have Internet Access Work Home School Library Other 30% 32% 29% 53% 31% Male Female 29% 35% 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ 21% 25% 35% 36% Age 45% In-Person Bookstore Use None 21% 1-10 times 34% 11+ times 42% 63% 20% 2% Children in Home Yes No 41% 30% Education High school Univ/college

Grad school 29% 31% 41% Income <$35K $35K - <$75K $75K+ 23% 33% 30% Market 114 Benefit of Public Libraries Relative to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services Where respondents placed the benefits the library delivers relative to other tax-supported services was very similar for the two populations surveyed. Consistent with the findings from the telephone survey, people under the age of 35 were less likely to appreciate the benefits of the public library compared to other municipal services. Top of list 33% Middle of list Cardholder Yes No 40% 15% In-Person Library Use None 1-10 times 11+ times 15% 31% 64% 56% Books Read in Past Year None 19% 1-5 23% 6 -15 36% 16+ 47% Bottom of list In-Person Bookstore Use None 29% 1-10 times 32% 11+ times 40%

11% 0% Q.16 Base: All respondents (1102). 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Have Internet Access Work Home School Library Other 30% 33% 23% 46% 32% Access Library by Internet 43% Yes 19% No Age 18-24 25-34 35-54 55+ Education High school Univ/college Grad school 22% 26% 34% 38% 35% 30% 43% Access Library by Phone / Text Yes 47% No 29% Market 115 Perceived Value of Library Services Except for a couple of items near the bottom of the list, web panelists did not value the different services the library provides as highly as phone survey respondents did. The biggest difference of opinion between the two groups was with respect to early literacy programs.

Bottom 6 Ratings (1-6 on a 10-pt. scale) Top 2 Ratings (9-10 on a 10-pt. scale) 21 27 26 Lender of materials Provider of support for school projects or homework Reference centre 53 41 40 27 Place to study 40 30 Early literacy programs 39 33 Local history collections 37 29 Assistance in finding information 35 40 Services to new Canadians 30 38 Information for the unemployed 28 Government services through library26 based kiosks Trainer in how to access info 43 23 online 45 Q.17 Base: All respondents (1102). 45 Focal point or meeting place

22 47 Resources for small business and entrepreneurs 21 Market 116 Value of Services by How Library Ranks Compared to Other Municipal Tax-Supported Services This chart (which shows the average value scores of the different library offerings according to where the library was placed relative to other tax-supported services) resembles the chart generated for those interviewed by phone, except all lines on this chart appear lower on the scale, and the line in the middle is not quite as close to the top line as it was for the phone survey. 10.0 Library at Top of List Library in Middle of List Library at Bottom of List 10 9.0 9 8.0 Mean Score 8 7.0 7 6.0 6 5.0 5 4.0 4 3.0 3 2.0 2 1 1.0 0 0.0 Q.16/17 Base: All respondents (1102). Market 117 Past Year Usage of Library Services by Someone in Household As was the case with value perceptions, web panelists claimed that they and others in their households have made less use of most of the services compared to those surveyed by phone. The biggest gap in usage for the two populations was recorded for getting assistance in finding information. 55% Lender of materials 23%

Reference centre Assistance in finding information 20% Place to study 20% Help with school projects or homework 16% Focal point or meeting place 15% 10% Local history collections Training in how to access information online 6% Information for the unemployed 6% Early literacy programs 5% Government services through librarybased kiosks Resources for small business and entrepreneurs 5% 4% 3% Services to new Canadians 0% Q.18 Base: All respondents (1102). 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 118 Value & Usage Combined The chart below, which plots percent of web respondents giving each service a 9 or 10 on the 10-point value scale along with the percent of households using the service in the past year, is very similar to the corresponding chart for the phone survey. The biggest difference between this pattern and the corresponding one for those surveyed by phone is that, for phone respondents, there was no gap between value and usage when it came to assistance in finding information. Percent Valuing the Service

Percent Using the Service Assistance in Finding Inf ormation 80 Training in How to Access Inf o Online Support f or School Projects or Early Literacy Programs Assistance in f inding inf ormation 80 Training inHomework how to access inf o online Focal Point or Meeting Place Early literacy programs 40 Services to new Canadians Focal point or meeting place Services to New Canadians Government Services Kiosks 40 0 Resources f or small business andBusiness Resources f or Small entrepreneurs Government services Inf ormation f or the Unemployed through library-based kiosks 0 Ref erence Centre Ref erence centre Q.17/18 Base: All respondents (1102). Provider of support f or school Lender of Materials Place to Study Local History Collections Inf ormation f or the unemployed Market 119 Relative Value of Services to Users and Non-Users

The chart below depicts relative value of each service, according to whether or not a household member used that service in the last year. The centre point of the x and y axes have been designed to represent the mid-point of user and non-user ratings, respectively, and the dotted line indicates points at which the relative value to users and nonusers would be the same. Lying furthest from the equal relative value line, services to new Canadians and support for school projects / homework are of higher relative value to non-users of these services than users of them, while the opposite is true for resources for small business and use of the library as a meeting place. Value to Non-Users of Each Service 7.4 7.2 7.0 6.8 6.6 6.4 6.2 7.3 Q.17 Base: All respondents (1102). 7.5 7.7 7.9 8.1 8.3 Value to Users of Each Service 8.5 8.7 8.9 Market 120 The Likelihood of Using Library Services Online survey participants were asked their likelihood of using some new services libraries are either offering or thinking of offering in the future. Interest in these concepts varied, in many cases based on age. There were very few suggestions made for other services over and above those shown. Total Somewhat Likely Very Likely By Age 18-34 A program that allows people to try out the newest tech devices or applications, such as 3D printers or laser cutters 19%

Library kiosks located throughout the community where people can check out books, movies or music without having to go to the library itself 15% A personalized online account that gives you recommendations based on your past library activity 15% A cell phone app that allows you to access library services from your mobile phone 16% An online research service where you could pose questions and get responses from librarians A cell phone app that helps you locate material easily in the library using GPS E-book readers already loaded with the book you want to read Instruction on how to use handheld reading devices and tablets 55% 35% 50% 64% 46% 57% 39% Other Services Library Should Provide 10% 12% 12% 9% Classes on how to download library e-books to handheld devices 9% A digital media lab where you could create and upload new digital content like your own movies or e-books 7% Q.13c/d Base: All respondents (1102). 36% 55+ 35% 49% 29% 44%

33% 27% 26% 26% 24% 24% 44% 39% 38% 35% 33% 31% 61% 39% 62% 24% 43% 54% 45% 31% 37% 19% 34% 40% 30% 38% 42% 21% More selection of materials / updated materials 2% Computer / Internet skills / technical devices 2% For kids / students 2%

Educational courses / lectures / seminars / community events 2% Hobbies / special interests 2% Quiet space / reading / sitting areas 1% More online services, i.e. card renewals / book / material reserving 1% They do a good job 7% Other 16% No comments / suggestions 65% Market 121 Best Way to Inform about Whats Going On at the Library Panel members were asked to identify the best ways to inform them about whats going on at their local public library. Email, articles in the local paper, and information posted on the librarys website received the greatest numbers of mentions, in general, with younger people also favouring social media. By Age 18-34 66% Email 51% Articles in the local paper 45% Information on the library's website 55+ 59% 73% 40% 63% 36% 48% Social media

35% 46% 22% Notices at the library 34% 31% 34% 28% 32% 20% 32% 21% 12% 6% 12% Notices in community centres or other public places 30% Inserts with your tax bill or other local government mailings 26% 19% Notices in schools Talks/presentations to community groups 0% Q.13e Base: All respondents (1102). 8% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 122 Believability of Positioning Statements Four of the positioning statements tested with online respondents garnered stronger agreement than the rest. There was least support for libraries providing information that would help people better understand political issues. % Strongly Agree Public libraries are important because they promote literacy and a love of reading

56% By providing free access to materials and resources, the public library plays an important role in giving everyone a chance to succeed 54% 50% Having a public library improves the quality of life in a community 46% Public libraries are welcoming, friendly places The public library is the only affordable place where the average Ontarian can go for information 34% Public libraries provide many services people would have a hard time finding elsewhere 32% The public library provides valuable resources to increase health literacy within the communities it serves 31% The public library is the best place for people of all ages to go to pursue lifelong learning 30% Public libraries have done a good job of keeping up with new technologies 29% The public library serves as an important meeting place and focal point within the community 28% The public library is continually expanding the services it offers 26% It is very easy to find whatever you are looking for at the public library 26% Now that information is available from so many different sources, people need public libraries more than ever By providing access to information from a wide variety of sources, public libraries promote an understanding of political issues 0% Q.19 Base: All respondents (1102). 25% 19% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Market 100% 123 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF RESPONDENTS Market Respondent Age / Gender Since quotas were placed on age and gender, these numbers exactly match those from the telephone survey. Respondent Age 18 to 24 Gender 12% Male 25 to 34 48% 16% 35 to 54 38% Female 55+ 35% 0% 20% Q.A/B Base: All respondents (1102). 40% 52% Average Age 46 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Market

100% 125 Number in Household / Presence of Children in Household Compared to the phone survey, there were significantly fewer households with three or more people and households with any children (especially under the age of 15). Number in Household Presence of Children in Household 22% Any Children One 18% Two 40% Three or more 5 or younger 8% 6 to 10 8% 11 to 14 6% 15 to 17 8% 41% Average Number 2.6 0% 20% Q.20/21a/b Base: All respondents (1102). 40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Market 100% 126 Education / Total Annual Household Income In contrast to the telephone survey, the web panel was comprised of fewer people who only completed elementary or high school and more who went further in college or university, but the differences in reported household income were not as dramatic. Education High School or Less Total Annual Household Income 12% Under $35K Elementary school 9% 1% Some / completed high school 11% $35 < $75K University/ College 30% 71% Some univ/college $75K+ 18% Graduated univ/college 39% 53% Refused Post graduate studies 21% 16% 0% Q.22/24 Base: All respondents (1102). 20%

40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Market 100% 127 Ontario Region / Community Size Web survey respondents were more likely than phone respondents to come from Metro Toronto and urban parts of the GTA, and less likely to come from Ex-urban GTA, and Southwestern and Northern Ontario. These differences also caused community size to skew larger. Ontario Region GTA Urban Community Size 29% Under 30K Metro Toronto 9% 22% Eastern 20% 30K < 500K Southwestern 26% 16% GTA Ex-urban 8% 500K+ Northern 64% 5% 0% Base: All respondents (1102). 20%

40% 60% 80% 100% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Market 128 Aboriginal Status / Years in Canada / Language Spoken More web panelists than phone respondents were foreign born and have lived in Canada for fewer years. The web panel also contained more members of French-speaking households, but fewer individuals claiming Aboriginal status. Born in Canada Primary Language Spoken at Home Years Lived in Canada Yes More than 10 years 80% No English 88% 0% 1% 6 to 10 years 3 to 5 years 10% 8% French 7% Other 5% Aboriginal Status 2 years or less 0%

2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Yes No 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 1% Q.22a/b/c/23 Base: All respondents (1102); Respondents who were not born in Canada (259). Market 129 Challenges in Using the Library Fewer web panelists than telephone respondents had challenges that made reading difficult. The difference between the two populations was not as significant with regard to having difficulties visiting the library in person. Have Physical or Health Conditions That make reading difficult or challenging 4% That make visiting a library in person difficult or challenging 5% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Q23a Base: All respondents (1102). Market 130 The Federation would like to thank the Ontario Ministry of Tourism and Culture for the historical data Market

Recently Viewed Presentations

  • ASA Template Training - National Institutes of Health

    ASA Template Training - National Institutes of Health

    Add Drip Pan. Renovate OR Suite, Bldg. 10, 2nd Floor (A/E Services) A/E Design & Post Design Services. Modify Duct Work. POR for Space Assessment, DSS. CRADA Changes and Office Area. Process Development Lab in Bldg. 40. 01PCL0040. Additional Changes...
  • Chapter 10 Chemical Bonding Theories - Oneonta

    Chapter 10 Chemical Bonding Theories - Oneonta

    Bonding in Allene Bonding in Benzene Conformations vs. Isomers Isomers: Molecules with same formula but different structure Conformers: Different temporary shapes of the same molecule Bond Rotations CAN happen around single bonds Cannot happen around double bonds Cis-Trans Isomerization When...
  • ACEs ACEs everywhere and no one seemed to care. ACEs ACEs ...

    ACEs ACEs everywhere and no one seemed to care. ACEs ACEs ...

    Park and Burgess realized that ecological and economic factors were converted into a social organization by the traditions and aspirations of city dwellers. In their efforts to achieve objectivity, these sociologists never lost sight of the values that propel human...
  • Computer Security - UniTrento

    Computer Security - UniTrento

    Motivation. 70% of urban population will live in cities by 2050. Current energy supply affected by: Blackouts. Power overloads. High costs. Upcoming challenges:
  • ADHESIVE small bowel obstruction - San Diego Hospital, Healthcare

    ADHESIVE small bowel obstruction - San Diego Hospital, Healthcare

    Small bowel obstruction (SBO) Mechanical obstruction of the small bowel preventing free passage of intraluminal material. May be due to: Bowel wall inflammation, edema or tumor. Intraluminal obstruction (bezoar, gallstone, foreign body) Extrinsic compression (adhesion, hernia, tumor, volvulus)
  • Blackleg Resistance Durability - Australian Oilseeds

    Blackleg Resistance Durability - Australian Oilseeds

    Blackleg spores are all genetically different. When you grow a new resistant canola variety there are already blackleg spores that can attack your variety. When you grow the same variety year after year you select blackleg spores that can attack...
  • Presentazione standard di PowerPoint

    Presentazione standard di PowerPoint

    LA VECCHIA Carlo Vitantonio Battista. ... FANELLI Margherita. BARI. Dipartimento "Interdisciplinare di Medicina (DIM)" GIGLI BERZOLARI Francesca. PAVIA. SANITA' PUBBLICA, MEDICINA SPERIMENTALE E FORENSE (PUBLIC HEALTH, EXPERIMENTAL AND FORENSIC MEDICINE)
  • aspirin and clopidogrel resistance - Cardiologie francophone

    aspirin and clopidogrel resistance - Cardiologie francophone

    Platelets function is measured in vitro by light transmission aggregometry This method is considered the gold standard Disadvantages: Limited reproducibility Complex sample preparation Cannot be routinely performed WHAT ARE THE ALTERNATIVES TO LIGHT TRANSMISSION AGGREGOMETRY? Rapid Platelet Function Assay Plateletworks...