Anytime somebody wants to give me money, I say yes.
—Wanda Marget, director of the Fairmont Public Library, Nebraska
You would love to digitize materials in your collection but where do you find the money? Digitization can be expensive and your library may not have funding for these activities as part of your annual budget. This has not stopped many libraries from completing successful projects. Volunteers can perform amazing amounts of work and partnering with institutions can be a great way to reduce costs, but you still need a budget. Grants from state and federal agencies, foundations, individuals, and your community can provide this funding.
Federal and state grants are available to libraries and cultural institutions for digitization programs. The Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) provides a number of grants like the National Leadership Grants for Libraries which can provide funding for research, planning, or national forums. Depending on the type of grant, these competitive awards can be as high as $2 million for projects and research. In 2014 there were 98 applicants for Leadership grants, with 19 grants awarded amounting to $6,969,176 in project grants going to different institutions and over $6 million in matching funding.1 Over $2 million was awarded to 12 planning proposals. These grants are frequently sought by university libraries which make up the majority of projects funded, but institutions, societies, museums, and other educational organization also apply for these grants. (See figure 5.1).
FIGURE 5.1. National Leadership Grants for Libraries Awarded by Institution Type
| Yeari | Total Number of Grants | Universities/Colleges | Public Libraries | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
2010 |
34 |
20 |
3 |
11 |
|
2011 |
40 |
29 |
2 |
9 |
|
2012 |
52 |
22 |
13 |
17 |
|
2013 |
40 |
20 |
9 |
11 |
|
2014 |
36 |
15 |
6 |
15 |
i. Awarded Grants search. National Leadership Grants for Libraries. IMLS. www.imls.gov/recipients/grantsearch.aspx.
These grant amounts can be very large. The public library projects which are funded tend to be collaborations with other institutions and are requested by library consortia, systems, or institutions working with other groups. One reason for this may be the expectation of matching funds or in-kind contributions from the requesting organization. Requests for funding over $250,000 “must provide cost sharing of at least one-half of the total project cost, excluding funds for student support” and “may be supported by your cash outlays; contribution of property and services; and in-kind contributions, such as staff or volunteer time that support project activities.”2 Another reason why these grants tend to go to collaborative projects is because some grants like those for leadership are intended to support a national digital platform or bridge gaps between collections and infrastructure. Currently the National Leadership Grants for Libraries is not supporting the digitization of content but these grants can be used, however, for plans on the preservation of digital files and for technology tools. Individual libraries do obtain these grants but it is not common.
In 2013 the Buffalo and Erie County Public Library system in New York state received over $300,000 for a two-year project to “demonstrate the concept of a ‘digitized commons’ that emphasizes selection and digitization of collections that are tied directly to virtual and physical activities and events that encourage local civic engagement.”3 This grant was the result of years of effort starting with a project to create an inventory of Great Depression and New Deal-era resources in the community. This work led to a $25,000 National Endowment for the Humanities start-up grant in 2009 to show “how digital humanities can help a public library mobilize collections to address the civic purposes central to its mission.”4 Success with previous grants encouraged the library to try for a larger IMLS grant, a process which Anne Conable, the community engagement manager, initially found “absolutely terrifying.”
The process required significant preparation just for writing the grant. Their first attempt at requesting IMLS funds was denied, but the feedback from the reviewer showed them where to strengthen the document. After completely rewriting the proposal it was accepted. Working with a number of partners who contributed in-kind matches Conable managed the grant, working regularly with IMLS staff as the project developed and changed. She found the staff there to be very supportive when new partners were added to the project. As the program progressed the subject expanded from the New Deal to include the Hispanic Heritage Council of Western New York, which had started collecting stories from the Hispanic community.
The most challenging part of this process for Conable was the writing of the grant. This required a comprehensive understanding of the project, the partners, outcomes, and the collection of information such as curriculum vitae for individuals involved. The month before the proposal was due Conable worked on little else. After receiving the funding she spent between 10 and 15 percent of her time documenting, editing the budget, and reporting on progress. The partners, who are under contract with the library, submit periodic invoices and their own documentation which must be managed. Although she has not found this process onerous, it has required regular attention.
The benefits of this grant, beyond the funding, include the support offered by the IMLS staff and the increased visibility and prestige that comes from obtaining this type of grant. With considerable competition involved, being able to show your library obtained one of these large grants is enough to garner attention and a reputation as the type of library which can meet the high standards of the IMLS. Winning this grant has also made the library less timid about trying for larger grants and has encouraged the library to think more creatively about funding opportunities.
For other libraries considering trying for these grants Conable recommends that they plan well in advance of the deadline. You will need to prove your case in the documentation you provide and need to have a clear vision of what will be done, the purpose of the project, who your partners will be, and you need to have a detailed budget. Make sure you will be able to invest the time required to write and manage the grant. If you have received other grants related to the project, these can help show the IMLS reviewers that other organizations have also supported your efforts.
If you work in a tribal library there are IMLS grants which can be used for digital projects. The Native American Library Services: Enhancement Grants are open to “Indian tribes, Alaska native villages, regional corporations, and village corporations [which] are eligible to apply for funding under the Native American Library Services grant program.”5 The Jamestown S’Klallam Tribal Library in Sequim, Washington, has worked to create online content since 1998 when director Leanne Jenkins first realized the potential of using a website to bring collections to tribal members near and far. Using portions of their IMLS Services Grant for scanning services, they were able to start building their digital collection. Wishing to enhance the collection, the library carefully crafted a proposal for an IMLS Enhancement grant in 2007. According to Jenkins, the grant writing required the library to balance “the desire to do everything at once with the realities of what was feasible to do within the time frame and budget.”6 The resulting collection, which was completed in 2009, was called House of Seven Generations and has almost 6,000 items in 27 different collections.
The library received another enhancement grant in 2011 for $150,000 to “generate cultural and educational tools” based on the in-house collections and incorporating the House of Seven Generations.7 With IMLS support the library has continued to add to the collection in a way director Jenkins compares to a wood carver “chipping away at . . . and drawing out the shapes and forms that will tell our stories to the world.”8
The most common digitization grants accessed by libraries are Library Services and Technology Act (LSTA) grants. These funds are distributed through the Institute of Museum and Library Services as part of the Grants to State Library Administrative Agencies (SLAA). This program goes back to 1956 with the passage of the Library Services Act. The original act was intended to “promote the further extension by the several States of public library services to rural areas without such services or with inadequate services.”9 In 1962 the type of library which could receive these funds was expanded beyond rural libraries and was tied to Title II (the section of the Code of Federal Regulations dealing with Grants and Agreements), allowing funding for construction and remodeling. By 1996 the program shifted with emphasis placed on technology, which is the focus of the current LSTA program.
Each SLAA receives a base amount of $680,000 plus an additional amount based upon the population of the state.10 The funds can be used for statewide initiatives or are awarded in a competitive process. These grants are sometimes rebranded, such as TexTreasures, which are LSTA grants administered by the Texas State Library and Archives Commission as part of the TexShare program. TexShare is “a consortium of Texas libraries joining together to share print and electronic materials, purchase online resources, and combine staff expertise.”11
Among the priorities of the LSTA program are to improve services, facilitate access, encourage resource sharing, promote literacy, and ensure preservation. Many of these aspects are included in digitization programs which preserve, improve access, and include elements of resource sharing. Training and professional development for library staff is also supported.
Sue Adams of the Oregon City Library wanted to make her library’s newspapers more accessible since 1995. At that time she noticed that the library regularly received requests from people looking for information in the local newspaper. These requests for obituaries, local events, and history were often lacking a specific date and with indexes for only a few years at their disposal, finding what the users wanted would be very difficult. At first Adams considered adding to the index, thinking “maybe if I spent an hour every day looking through the microfilm I could do it.” As new technologies emerged like CD-ROMs she hoped that a company might provide an index, but it wasn’t until the Oregon Digital Newspaper Program began that there seemed to be a real chance to provide the type of access she knew her patrons wanted. The Digital Newspaper Program was started by the University of Oregon and funded by grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities and Library of Congress, Oregon State Historic Preservation Office and Oregon Heritage Commission, and a Library Services and Technology block grant from the IMLS. The goal of the program was to provide access to a database of keyword-searchable newspapers from 1860 to 1922.
Adams was eager to have Oregon City newspapers included. Never underestimate a single person with a goal and the drive to see a project through. With the support of her director, Adams began working on the grant while stationed at the reference desk because “basically this . . . was the only way we could do it.” In early November 2012 the library learned that the project would be funded in the following year although there was a delay due to the federal government closure. The shutdown caused “some biting of the fingernails” but the library soon received permission to spend. The university handled all the scanning and technical issues but there were reports to write, handouts to develop, and programs to plan around the new collection. Being awarded the grant is just one part of the grant process. The management, promotion, and reports also require considerable time. Sue Adams estimates that she and her director spent between 45 to 50 hours writing the grant and another 50 hours to gather materials, write three quarterly reports, and a final report.
Her time on the reference desk gave Adams insight into the usage of the collection and provided contacts with others inside and outside of the community who supported the goal to digitize the newspapers. One patron from Texas who was using the collection even contributed a letter of support for the grant. More letters of support came as the project progressed and the community was introduced to the new format for an old and popular resource. The grant provided the funding needed to outsource the digitization and metadata creation and allowed a library with an already busy staff to make a significant contribution to the Oregon Digital Newspaper program.
The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has several grants including the National Digital Newspaper Program, which funds large institutions and consortia in each state. These grants fund the digitization of newspapers for inclusion in Chronicling America, which is hosted by the Library of Congress. These grants may be redistributed by the state agencies. There is another grant which is open to public libraries of all sizes.
The Humanities Collections and Reference Resources grant has, from 2000 to 2012, allowed institutions to reformat 80,000 hours of audio and video collections, process or digitize thousands of feet of archival material, and digitize “more than 2.3 million books, manuscripts, photos, maps, drawings, [and] other nonprint materials.”12 The Division of Preservation and Access has made the digital conversion of audio files a priority because the deterioration of magnetic tape and other formats combined with the obsolescence of technology used to access the material “seriously jeopardize their use.”13 These grants are available to public libraries and are competitive. An average of 237 applications are received each year but only 16 percent of them are awarded.14
The grant program from the National Historical Publications and Records Commission has a variety of grants for projects seeking to increase public interaction, facilitate public discovery, and disseminate digital versions of historical records. The Digital Dissemination of Archival Collections grant seeks to “to make historical records of national significance to the United States broadly available by disseminating digital surrogates on the Internet.”15 Although this agency focuses on archives, public libraries have received these grants. The Atlanta-Fulton Public Library System in Atlanta, Georgia, received $58,710 in 2010 to digitize manuscripts “documenting the role of African Americans in educational institutions.”16 Eleven collections were digitized and are available on the website for the Auburn Avenue Research Library on African American Culture and History. If your library has an archive or historic collection it may be worth investigating these grants.
There are other, non-LSTA, state-level grants which may be available to you. The Illinois State Library has a Digital Imaging Grant Program. The funding for this program is a combination of LSTA and state funds from the Office of the Secretary of State/Illinois State Librarian. Grants range from between $5,000 and $100,000 and digital materials are ingested into the Illinois Digital Archive. In 2015 over $400,000 was awarded to 13 organizations including eight public libraries. Awards ranged from $5,521 to the Huntley Area Public Library District in Huntley for the “preservation and digitization of the dairy and agricultural history of Huntley” to $86,919 for the Oak Park Public Library’s project Hacking Hemingway: Cracking the Code to the Vault.17
In New Hampshire the Moose License Plate Conservation Grants provide grants of up to $10,000 to “public institutions with publicly owned documents that are significant to the history of New Hampshire.”18 As the title suggests, these grants are funded by the sale of Moose License Plates. In the 2013/2014 award cycle the Allenstown Public Library received $8,745 for “conservation, microfilm & digitization of 19th century Allenstown poll tax records dated 1860−1889.”19 These items are available in the Allenstown Digital History website.
The main resource for locating federal grants is grants.gov, but information is also available on the NEH and IMLS websites. Check with your state library for LSTA and other grant opportunities. If you are unsure of the LSTA administering agency in your state, check the IMLS State Programs, State Profiles database.
Private foundations are another possible source of funding. These range from small, local nonprofit organizations to large, international foundations like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. Unlike IMLS grants, the requirements for a foundation grant can vary widely. How can you find this type of financial support? Local organizations are an important place to start since they may already be interested in increasing access to your collection. When looking for support outside of your community, foundations will often look to see if your library has received local support. Even small grants provide proof that the people who know your organization trust you enough to help fund your goals. Even if the amount you receive is small, this local support can improve your chances of convincing outside groups to support you.
Local foundations may support your library with funding or equipment. Mary Cronin, former director of the Madison Public Library in New Hampshire, found when seeking funding for equipment that “the local foundations are usually pretty supportive of this sort of project. . . . I had no problem getting funding for software and hard drives, and an audio recorder.” With local foundations you have several advantages which increase your chances of receiving support: foundations tend to give locally and will already have an idea of your goals and mission.
When looking outside of your community, keep in mind that many foundations limit their funding to specific geographical locations. This will narrow down the number of places where you should apply but can also increase your chances of succeeding because these foundations have less competition than organizations which give nationally or internationally. Foundations will also have specific missions and areas of interest they support.
The Georgetown Public Library and eight other libraries were able to obtain a grant for $350,000 from the Gaylord and Dorothy Donnelley Foundation in 2006. This foundation is interested in supporting collections “that illuminate the unique culture, history and heritage” and only accepts applications from the Chicago region or the Lowcountry of South Carolina.20 Both the location (Georgetown is in South Carolina) and the goal of the library worked well with the mission of this foundation. Other grants came from the Belle W. Baruch Foundation of Georgetown, which gives to educational projects and does not accept unsolicited requests, and the Kaminski House Museum.21 The Baruch Foundation and the Kaminski House are nonprofits located in Georgetown and both were already familiar with the library.
In Texas if you do not seek partnerships for digitizing newspapers the opportunities may find you instead. Librarians at the University of North Texas (UNT) in Denton have been working to build a comprehensive database of newspapers by digitizing collections around the state. Ana Krahmer, supervisor for the digital newspaper unit, wrote “for the Portal, we decided to spread the message that we were interested in digitizing all Texas newspaper content, whether it came from a town of 600 people, or whether it represented Fort Worth, Texas, during its cattle boom.”22 The need to preserve state history through digitizing state newspapers led the libraries to take on the role of a preservation and digitization hub. There are libraries throughout Texas with primary source materials which Krahmer hopes to add to the Portal to Texas History, and if libraries do not know of programs’ services she may seek them out.
The University of North Texas has worked closely with libraries to secure funding. According to Krahmer, in some cases, when a library is seeking a grant the “granting foundations will have them contact us.” In one partnership the library has been working with the Tocker Foundation, which supports Texas libraries in communities with populations under 12,000.23 This partnership started when the foundation was unhappy with the amount of materials being digitized through its grants. Krahmer related that in 2007 UNT libraries approached the Tocker Foundation with a proposal to scan materials for libraries that received grants and add those collections to the already established Portal to Texas History. This partnership has been so successful that the foundation works exclusively with the university to support the needs of these libraries.
UNT Libraries work closely with public libraries to help them get Tocker grants and the foundation will often refer libraries to UNT where, Krahmer states, the public libraries can expect assistance “with preparing their applications, . . . creating a budget for the project, developing a map of where their microfilm is held or where their physical newspapers are held.” In some cases a librarian will travel to the institution to pick up material for scanning or to work directly with the staff.
An additional benefit is that the libraries who join the Portal to Texas History have access to detailed usage statistics generated by an in-house program at the University of North Texas Libraries. The program counts the number of items a user has viewed or interacted with for at least thirty minutes, providing helpful information regarding use. With a little or a lot of help libraries in Texas can work with UNT to get their newspapers online.
This partnership has resulted in over 315,000 pages of newspapers available on the Portal with 100,000 being digitized in 2013. The collections “represent(s) eighteen communities from across Texas whose public library directors have applied to receive digitization grant funding to make their newspapers available on the Portal to Texas History.”24 Some other National Digital Newspaper Program libraries may offer assistance to smaller libraries; the Pennsylvania State University Libraries helps smaller institutions by reviewing grant applications and providing technical support. If you are considering digitizing your newspaper collections, contact your state NDNP library regarding possible grant assistance.
Where should you start looking for foundation grants? Start with organizations which already have a relationship with or knowledge of your efforts; this includes your Friends of the Library foundations. If your goals and the mission of the organization are similar there is a good chance they will consider your proposal. There are tools which can help you locate foundations; one is the Foundation Center Directory, a database of foundations around the country. The database allows users to use very specific search criteria to find nonprofits which provide funding to public libraries.
Other organizations and individuals have compiled lists of available grants. Stephanie Gerding and Pam MacKellar, authors of Winning Grants: A How-to-Do-It Manual for Librarians with Mulitimedia Tutorials and Grant Development Tools (2010) maintain a blog with notices for current grant opportunities.
If you can bring an interested donor and a collection together that may be all that is needed to fund your project. In Bangor, Maine, it was the collection which found the donor. Barbara McDade, director of the Bangor Public Library and Joyce Rumery, dean of libraries at the University of Maine, were meeting with Senator Susan Collins at the Public Library. On display for the senator were some samples from a collection of war posters collected by former librarian L. Felix Ranlett during his twenty-six years at the Bangor Public Library. Ranlett was a veteran who had fought and was wounded in the trenches of France during World War I. In 1936 he moved from Boston to Bangor and began working at the public library. During World War II he began to collect the posters distributed by government agencies and businesses. The extensive collection was kept on shelves in an area in the basement known as “the cage” where the posters were rarely seen and were feeling the effects of time.
Later, over coffee, Dean Rumery mentioned the collection to Eugene Daigle, the manager of network and technology services for the Fogler Library at the University of Maine. Daigle was interested in the posters. He knew of some similar online collections (Northwestern University in Illinois has a collection of 338 posters) and was excited to learn that his local public library also had war-related posters. Eugene met with McDade and learned that the materials in “the cage” were far more extensive than he had expected, with over 800 posters from both world wars, making it possibly one of the largest collections of its kind in America. In comparison, the Library of Congress has 119 posters from World War II in the Prints & Photographs Online Catalog. If the Bangor collection was digitized it would be a great resource.
The condition of the collection had been a concern since the 1990s. Some preservation measures had been taken but were limited by staff and budget issues. The posters had been printed at a time when paper drives were required to meet the demand for the military effort. The recycled paper used for many of the posters is acidic, resulting in the paper becoming increasingly brittle over time. Handling can result in breakage. Originally the library focused on preserving the paper and digitization was not considered. The prospect of being able to provide access to digital copies to limit handling and providing assistance to preserve the originals was very tempting.
The collection had considerable meaning for Daigle. He and his wife, Barbara, are veterans. His father had served in the Korean War and his father-in-law was a veteran of World War II. The posters serve as a connection to the past, a reminder of the efforts at home to support the war, and are a visual backdrop of the era. These are images World War II veterans and their families would have been familiar with. Daigle stated that the reason he and his wife wanted to make these posters available was “to allow people born after World War II to look at these artworks and try to get a sense of the conflict and how each and every citizen was asked to contribute to the war effort—to help their sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, and cousins defeat the Axis powers. . . . Every neighborhood was involved in the war effort, and these posters are part of the voice of the people who were part of the final victory in August of 1945.”25 These posters of Red Cross nurses with open arms and angelic expressions, Norman Rockwell’s Lincolnesque figure standing for the freedom of speech and war bonds, children halted in their play while the shadow of a swastika spreads on the grass around them, and men and women in uniform with determined expressions were created to encourage everything from enlistment to recycling cooking fat. Depictions of Nazi book burning and Pearl Harbor were meant to remind people why they were fighting. The posters document the war effort, the home front, and depict patriotism and vigilance. These images also provide examples of propaganda, depictions of women during war, advertising methods, and examples of artistic styles. As a whole the collections provides insight as to what life was like in the United States during both wars.
Daigle and his wife Barbara offered to pay for digitization, which required high-quality photography of the posters. That job fell to Eugene’s brother, James, who is a professional photographer. Because this was the first digitization project for the library, there were technical issues which had to be worked out. Library staff worked with James to create a space where the images could be captured. To photograph the posters without causing any damage he created a special vacuum table to gently hold the paper in place.
Eugene Daigle also donated his time to process the digital images and create multiple files of different sizes. One aspect of their process which was different from other digitized poster collections at that time was the creation of larger image files. Most digital collections of war posters only contain small thumbnail images that don’t allow the user to see the detail or have a sense of the visual impact of the piece. After work Eugene would process the images, creating several file sizes: thumbnails for browsing, a medium size which shows more detail, and larger files for printing reproductions.
Daigle works at the University of Maine library, which was willing to host the digital collection and make it freely accessible. In addition to online access, the public can purchase copies of the posters for $19.95. Posters are printed by the university with the funds going towards the preservation of the original posters, which will be stored in acid-free folders in map cases at the Bangor Public Library.
This improved access has resulted in increased awareness of the library’s collection. As the project progressed Daigle’s father shared the images with other veterans at the Togus Veterans’ Administration hospital and the American Legion. After the collection was made publicly available, the National Park Service requested a digital set of posters for a special ranger program at the World War II Memorial in Washington, DC. Visitors to the Cole Museum in Bangor can see a slide show of all the posters. Interest in the collection has spread beyond the state, with some academic libraries such as Utah State University and Shawnee State University in Ohio including links to the collection among their own resources.
CASE STUDY
FUND-RAISING FOR A NEWSPAPER COLLECTION
In 2008 Library Journal named the Chelsea Public Library in Michigan as the Best Small Library in America. The staff was described as “aggressively responsive” which, with other qualities, led to “victories in fundraising and elections have garnered the money to modernize and double the size of the historic building, add to the staff, and serve the whole community.”26 Chelsea became a city in 2006 and the U.S. Census estimates the 2014 population to be 5,106. The library, however, serves twice this number, with the library district encompassing the surrounding townships of Dexter, Lima, Lyndon, and Sylvan and about 14,000 people.
The library is in a historic hotel left to the city (then town) by Catherine McKune in 1958 specifically for use as a library.27 Eventually the library outgrew the location and needed an expansion, which was added in 2006. The library now houses 66,142 items and in 2008 its circulation was 313,295.28 The majority of the collections are in the newer, ADA-compliant, 18,000-square-foot addition. The older section of the library was renovated through a capital campaign that raised $1.2 million.
If the library staff is “aggressively responsive” the community it serves is equally supportive. When the staff wanted to digitize the library’s newspapers they knew it could be expensive. Emily Meloche, adult services librarian, recalled that “it was one of those projects that we dreamed about doing and when we found out how much it was going to cost we knew we had to get creative with how we could fund it.” The library had received grants in the past for oral histories, but rather than pursue that path they looked for support from a community where many families have lived in the area for 100 years and are deeply invested in the city. The library staff were sure that there would be support because of the strong community interest in local history. The bound volumes in the basement dated back to the late nineteenth century and the rolls of microfilm brought the collection up to the current date. Of those early newspapers Meloche noted that the old newspapers were a wonderful source of information but these large, bound newspapers were brittle and the microfilm, “while it is a wonderful thing to have . . . is still a real pain in the neck to use.” The movement of the images cause some people to become nauseous after using the microfilm for an extended period of time. Although microfilm is a good medium for preservation, the format is not user-friendly when compared to electronic formats. If you are lucky someone may have created an index for a number of years, but the time needed to scroll or maneuver to the correct page and locate the information needed is glacially slow when compared to an electronic, keyword-searchable document. This is what the library wanted to be able to provide to the community. When the library was able to get copyright permission from the owners of the Chelsea Standard up to the 1990s (the newspaper was sold to Heritage in the early 1990s) the library was excited to have the opportunity to digitize the microfilm. When Heritage was contacted regarding copyright, the library was pleasantly surprised to receive permission to digitize up to 2012. The presumed rationale for this was that Heritage sells copies of the photos seen in the newspaper. Digitized copies of the microfilm are not of a quality that would hinder sales of those images.
Changing the manner of access from microfilm with in-library use and specialized viewing equipment to free online access would make the collection far more accessible for the whole library district, especially those in the surrounding townships. Historically the microfilm was used by genealogists and a small number of local historians. These users are willing to spend an extended amount of time to locate marriage announcements and other specific scraps of information. Meloche believed that by putting the paper online and making it searchable for casual users more students and people around the world be able to enjoy the newspaper. For Meloche making the paper available online meant people would have the opportunity to “see world history unfolding through the lens of our local community.”29 The Great Depression, world wars, and events large and small can all be read from the perspective of a Michigan town.
Excited about increasing the accessibility of an already popular resource, the library sought bids for the work “and found a pretty competitive bid of 12 cents a page, but 12 cents a page for 134 years’ worth of newspapers was far more than our local history budget, far more than we would ask our friends for.” Based on the level of interest and the general support of the community, Meloche and others decided to look to the community for the needed funding. The challenge was to find the best way to raise the funds for digitization. In looking at the amount of scanning required, dividing the collection by year was a simple way to break up the extensive newspaper into years for “134 sponsorship opportunities.” It was determined that a sponsorship of $100 per year of the paper would provide enough to have a year’s worth of the paper digitized while keeping the price at a realistic amount for many people to donate. These individual years would also resonate with individuals as birth years or have other personal significance. Instead of looking for a few large donors the library sought to find many people who wanted to be part of the project.
On August 3, 2013, the library held the first-ever fund-raising event called Barn-Bash: Making Hay for the Library. The event was held at Sensoli Liberty Farm, a barbeque dinner was catered, and a local band provided music. The event was successful, which did not surprise Meloche, who grew up in Chelsea and knew how the community would come together for this type of enterprise. What she did find surprising was how swiftly the community embraced this project: “I was shocked at how quickly people came and signed up for years.” By November 2013 nearly 60 percent of the funds needed had been raised.30 The library suggested sponsors could “pick the birth year of someone special, an anniversary, or just a year in history that piques your interest, and make it available to the world.”31
The library is truly grateful to the many people in the community who have sponsored this project. The methods they used to thank these individuals also encourages additional contributions. One simple tool was a sign listing the years with names of donors next to the ones already claimed. This was situated in such a manner that whoever entered the library would have to see the sign. One day a couple entered the library and upon seeing this inquired as to the sign’s meaning. Upon learning more about the goal of the digitization project they adopted two years. A few weeks later they claimed more and eventually sponsored a total of nine years. There were several individuals who sponsored multiple years and then later added to their initial donation. As the project progressed more sponsors claimed years, sometimes with the intention of honoring a family member or friends.
By November 2013 all the newspaper had been scanned, but rather than wait for the fund-raising to be completed the library held a launch party on November 10 “to celebrate it [the collection] with our donors and the community and give them an opportunity to check it.” This gave the sponsors an opportunity to see the results of their contribution and how the collection would be accessed. The event also served to rejuvenate interest in the project. During this event “we had a couple of our long-term donors come and pick out yet another year.” Some donors sponsored six or seven and in one case twelve years’ worth of newspapers.
The next day there were only fifteen unclaimed newspaper years, but the expectation was that these would soon find sponsors. Meloche stated, “I’d be shocked if we have any years left by the end of this year.” The Chelsea Standard published a story on the launch which helped to generate even more interest and the remaining years were soon claimed. Meloche credits the success of the fund-raising to making people “feel important for the donation they made.”32
In addition to the launch Meloche and other library staff gave presentations on the database to small groups and anyone they ran into around the city. In January 2014 Sara Wedell, who at the time was the library’s adult services department head, spoke about the project at the Friends’ annual meeting.33 To show its appreciation the library worked to recognize the donors. The database website includes a list of years and the donors who paid for the digitization. This list has a link in the drop-down menu for the Historic Newspapers and on each search page. The library is also exploring adding a watermark to the first page of each issue of the newspaper which will acknowledge the donor so that users will see the donor name even if users do not access the donor list. The library is serious about making “sure the donors get the credit they deserve because we wouldn’t be here without them.” This strategy of promoting the projects and offering their sincere thanks to those who contributed worked well. By January 2014 the library had 70 percent of the donations needed.34 In March 2015 the library director announced that the project was completed.35
The library is not currently looking for digitization grants but instead will “wait till we have that idea that we think is well worth asking people for money, and then return to the community.” The Chelsea District Library knows it can turn to the community for projects that preserve and highlight local history.
Chapter Synopsis
Federal and state grants can be a great source of funds. Consider the following:
▪ IMLS: Working with another institution will improve your chances of getting these grants.
▪ LSTA: These grants are administered by state agencies or library consortia. Your library has a good chance of obtaining these grants.
▪ NEH: This agency funds newspaper digitization through the National Digital Newspaper Program. Find the agency in your state which administers this grant. The Humanities Collections and Reference Resources grants are also available but are highly competitive.
▪ NHPRC: The National Historical Publications and Records Commission gives grants for the digitization of archival and historic materials.
▪ Check with your state library to learn about any state-level grant opportunities.
▪ There will be paperwork. When considering these grants take into consideration the time needed to write the initial proposal and regular reports.
Foundations and nonprofits are another option for many libraries. To increase your chances of getting these grants:
▪ Start with local organizations.
▪ Look for foundations with similar goals and missions.
▪ Don’t forget your Friends!
▪ Foundations can be found with tools such as the Foundation Center. Check with your state library association for individuals who may maintain a list of foundations which give to libraries.
▪ An interested individual who sees the value of your collection can be of great help. When possible find individuals in the community who are passionate about your collection.
Fund-raising can be a successful strategy for funding your project. When asking your community to fund a project:
▪ Do your research, get quotes, and develop a plan before asking for support.
▪ If possible, break down the amount needed into smaller sponsorships to encourage giving.
▪ Have a deadline for completion.
▪ Use your library newsletter, website, signs, and everything in your public relations tool box to promote the campaign.
▪ Thank your donors and give them credit for their support. Then thank them again!
NOTES
1. “Fast Fact Sheet: National Leadership Grants for Libraries (2014),” Institute of Museum and Library Services website, www.imls.gov/recipients/fast_facts_nlg_for_libraries.aspx.
2. “Instructions for Completing Budget Documents,” Institute of Museum and Library Services website, www.imls.gov/applicants/instructions_for_completing_budget_documents.aspx#costshare;
“National Leadership Grants for Libraries—FY15 Notice of Funding Opportunity,” Institute of Museum and Library Services website, www.imls.gov/applicants/nlg.libraries_nofo_2015.aspx.
3. “National Leadership Grants: September 2012 Grant Announcements,” Institute of Museum and Library Services website, www.imls.gov/news/national_leadership_grant_announcement_2012.aspx.
4. “Re-Collecting the Depression and New Deal as a Civic Resource in Hard Times,” National Endowment for the Humanities, 2010, https://securegrants.neh.gov/PublicQuery/main.aspx?f=1&gn=HD-50901-09.
5. “Native American Library Services: Enhancement Grants,” Institute of Museum and Library Services website, www.imls.gov/applicants/detail.aspx?GrantId=16.
6. Leanne Jenkins, “Chipping Away at It,” UpNext (September 20, 2013), http://blog.imls.gov/?p=4192.
7. “Awarded Grants Results,” Institute of Museum and Library Services website, www.imls.gov/recipients/grantsearch.aspx.
8. Jenkins, “Chipping Away at It.”
9. Library Services Act, Pub. L. No. 597, Chapter 407 (June 19, 1956), www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/STATUTE-70/pdf/STATUTE-70-Pg293.pdf.
10. “Grants to State Library Administrative Agencies,” Institute of Museum and Library Services website, www.imls.gov/programs/.
11. “TexShare Fact Sheet,” Texas State Library and Archives Commission website, https://www.tsl.texas.gov/texshare/fact_sheet_faqs.html.
12. Nadina Gardner, Ralph Canevali, Joel Wurl, and Cathleen Tefft, “Humanities Collections and Reference Resources: An Evaluation 2000−2010” (Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Humanities, 2013), 3, www.neh.gov/files/divisions/preservation/hcrr_evaluation_report_2013_0.pdf.
13. Ibid., 8.
14. Ibid.
15. “Digital Dissemination of Archival Collections,” National Historical Publications and Records Commission website, www.archives.gov/nhprc/announcement/digital.html.
16. “Georgia Grants,” National Historical Publications & Records Commission website, www.archives.gov/nhprc/projects/states-territories/ga.html.
17. “Jesse White Awards over $400,000 in Illinois History–Digital Imaging Grants,” Office of the Secretary of State website (January 7, 2015), www.cyberdriveillinois.com/news/2015/january/150107d1.pdf.
18. “Moose License Plate Conservation Grants 2015/2016,” New Hampshire State Library website, www.nh.gov/nhsl/services/librarians/moose/index.html.
19. “FY 2013/2014 Moose Conservation License Plate Grant Awards,” New Hampshire State Library website, www.nh.gov/nhsl/services/librarians/moose/documents/2013Awardslist.pdf.
20. “Regional Collections,” Gaylord and Dorothy Donnelley Foundation website (2015), http://gddf.org/regional-collections.
21. Julie Warren, “Georgetown Library Seeks Public’s Help to Preserve the Past in the Digital Age,” MyrtleBeach Online (August 14, 2013), www.myrtlebeachonline.com/2013/08/14/3645787/letter-georgetown-library-seeks.html; “Belle W. Baruch Foundation,” Foundation Directory Online.
22. Ana & Phillips Krahmer and Mark Edward, Laying the Groundwork for Newspaper Preservation through Collaboration and Communication: The Texas Digital Newspaper Program (Denton: University of North Texas Libraries Digital Library, 2013), http://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc172339.
23. “General Grant Information,” Tocker Foundation website, www.tocker.org/general-instructions.
24. Krahmer and Phillips, Laying the Groundwork for Newspaper Preservation through Collaboration and Communication, 6.
25. Dale McGarrigle, “Library’s Wartime Poster Collection Now Digitized, Available to Public,” The Weekly (December 15, 2011), http://bangordailynews.com/2011/12/15/the-weekly/librarys-wartime-poster-collection-now-digitized-available-to-public.
26. John N Berry III, “Best Small Library in America 2008: Chelsea District Library—A Michigan Model,” Library Journal (2008), http://lj.libraryjournal.com/awards/best-small-library-in-america-2008-chelsea-district-library-a-michigan-model/.
27. “History of the Chelsea District Library,” Chelsea District Library website, www.chelsea.lib.mi.us/history.
28. “Library Information,” Chelsea District Library website, www.chelsea.lib.mi.us/library.
29. Chelsea District Library Director’s Report (Chelsea, MI: Chelsea Public Library District, October 2013), http://chelseadistrictlibrary.org/sites/default/files/boarddocuments/2013/2013_Director_Reports/director1310.pdf.
30. Chelsea District Library Director’s Report (Chelsea, MI: Chelsea Public Library District, November 2013), http://chelseadistrictlibrary.org/sites/default/files/boarddocuments/2013/2013_Director_Reports/director1311.pdf.
31. Ibid.
32. Jennifer Eberbach, “Chelsea District Library Completes Digital Newspaper Archives Project,” Chelsea Standard (November 22, 2014), http://heritage.com/articles/2014/11/22/chelsea_standard/news/doc546a5506432de212616367.txt?viewmode=fullstory.
33. Chelsea District Library Director’s Report (Chelsea, MI: Chelsea Public Library District, January 2014), http://chelseadistrictlibrary.org/sites/default/files/boarddocuments/2014/2014_Director_Reports/director201401.pdf.
34. Chelsea District Library Board of Trustees, Minutes of Regular Meeting, January 21, 2014, http://chelseadistrictlibrary.org/sites/default/files/boarddocuments/2014/2014_Library_Board_Meeting_Minutes/minutes140121.pdf.
35. Chelsea District Library Director’s Report (Chelsea, MI: Chelsea Public Library District, March 2015), http://chelseadistrictlibrary.org/sites/default/files/boarddocuments/2015/2015_Director_Reports/director201503.pdf.