PIE: Procedures and Implementation, Evolved

Who is on the committee?

It consists of the Deputy Executive Director/Library Operations and 3 Managers of Library Operations.  The 3 Managers currently on the committee are: Julie Ballou, LaVetta Dent, Jana Hausburg.

What aspects will the committee review?

The first topic is programming. Further topics will be considered once the initial topic is fully reviewed.

PIE Committee’s planned outcomes include:

• Written definition and explanation of the expectations of programming at MLS
• Possibly suggestions for a programming policy
• Review and clarification of weighted standards and measurement guidelines
• Written guidelines for MLOs to evaluate direct and indirect costs of programming at the library level
• Measurement tools for determination of those direct and indirect costs in relation to the entire library “pie” of available resources, both in dollars and in available staffing hours
• Measurement tools to determine effectiveness of the program based on audience impacted
• Measurement tools to effectively compare costs vs. effectiveness to ensure best use of library resources.
• Tracking procedures to provide better data for measurement tools

PIE Committee History

• April 2013 – Committee formed and had their first meeting
• May 2013 – Committee members made their first report at the monthly MLO meeting
• May 2013 – Member of the PIE committee met with the Business Office to gather feedback regarding the possibility of changing the RFP form.
• June 2013 – PIE members met with OUT to give them a preview of the new RFP form and gather feedback.
• July 2013 – Implementation of labels, tags, templates or other identifiers that would aide in the gathering of data for use in the measurement tools (RFP 330 redesign)
• August 2013 – PIE members give an overview at LMO meeting of what the committee is doing: looking at ways of coming up with some tools to manage the programming and direct cost aspect of it. 
• August 2013 – MLS Analyst demonstrated the RFP Data Dashboard which gives a current overview of where resources are being allocated at a specific time but currently does not give information on in-direct costs
• September 2013 – Work begins on flow charts to assist managers in programming process: program decision, program planning (library/OUT level), volunteer process, execution & review, checklists
• September 2013 – PIE members propose some frequently used items for addition to the Business Office supply catalog.
• September 2013 – PIE members are asked to serve on the ITR (Incentives to Read) Committee to assist in changes to the Summer Reading program
• November 2013 – Beta PIE group is formed by inviting 4 of the newest managers to help review flowcharts of the decisions on offering a program
• November 2013 – Work begins on two trainings developed to meet expressed needs; one to help staff understand the values and philosophies of the library profession: What Would Marian Do? (WWMD); the other to assist MaC with writing for the online calendar and magazine: BLT: writing with the right ingredients
• January 2014 – PIE and Beta Pie meet with webmaster to brainstorm for an interactive online document to assist librarians in programming
• January 2014 – PIE and Beta Pie gathering feedback on use of flowcharts and checklists; The Manager of Web Development & Support began working on an interactive version of the flowcharts/checklists.(hyperlink)
• February 2014 – First BLT and WWMD training classes are offered

Focus Topic #1 – Programming: MLS History

1. 2001 – Programmer positions added to OUT that were intended to present programs at libraries
2. 2003 – OUT begins compiling manuals to assist and train programmers
3. 2006 – Staffing formula to determine staffing levels based on service points
4. 2007 – A cap of $10,000 on 330 account instituted by LO
   
   1. Intended to manage indirect as well as direct costs
   2. Encourage system-level programming
   3. Encourage managers to monitor more closely the time being spent on all programming activities
5. 2009 – Manager input and agreement on weighted standards that would reflect time and effort spent on each individual standard
6. 2011 – Development of Appraisal Measurement Guidelines which include “In-System Program Guidelines.” This document specifies the goals of MLS programming and includes a list of criteria that should be used to determine whether a program is consistent with the MLS mission and whether the costs are justified.
7. 2012 – Pilot of the library event coordinator position
8. 2013 – The PIE Committee is formed and identifies programming resources as their first topic

The programming resources and procedures implemented thus far have provided a foundation for the management of programming, but there are still stated needs that have not been met, such as:

• a system-wide, consistent understanding of the reasons for and expectations of programming at MLS
• to revisit unintended consequences of the perception that pursuing grants is not worthwhile due to impacts on the 330 account
• to revisit unintended consequences of the perception that the cap on the 330 account does not allow for a sufficient programming budget
• to review concerns over the impact of programming activities on librarian off-desk time
• clear up any mixed messages regarding the role of programming in MLS that may have developed based on past steps taken (as listed above) or the emphasis on programs in info Magazine, the highlights in the Commission packet or kudos at MLO meetings.