Library Assessment Committee Grant

Library Assessment Committee Grant Guidelines

The Library Assessment Committee (LAC) advises the Library Administration and the Library Assessment Coordinator on the prioritizing, planning and implementation of assessment activities.  Members may assist the Coordinator in identifying assessment opportunities, designing assessment tools, promoting assessment activities, and fostering a culture of assessment within the Library.  The committee shares in accountability for the success of the assessment program and evaluates its effectiveness in supporting the Library’s mission and strategic directions.

How can you get monetary support from the LAC?

  1. Individuals or teams working on a project can apply for an assessment grant from LAC by submitting a proposal request via email to the Coordinator for Library Assessment, also the chair of LAC.
  2. Proposals are considered on a rolling basis—there is no deadline and monies will be awarded until that year’s funds are depleted.

Funding Priorities

Preference will be given to:

  1. New assessment efforts and/or recipients who have not previously received LAC awards
  2. Proposed assessment projects that work toward achieving one or more strategic principles or directions as identified in the Library’s Strategic Framework 2019-23

Who is eligible to apply?

The grant is available for assessment projects conducted by full-time library employees. Please contact Jen-chien Yu, Chair of the Library Assessment Committee, if you have any questions regarding eligibility.

LAC Grant Application

Proposals must meet the following criteria:

  1. Assessment project must address current assessment needs in the Library and not be purely for research purposes (research funding requests should go to RPC).
  2. Assessment projects to be considered for LAC funding may focus on library services, resources, collections, physical facilities, or staff as a group, but may not assess individual personnel performance.
  3. Assessments may use any appropriate methodology, including, but not limited to, surveys and user studies.
  4. The project must follow human subject research protocols where necessary. Surveys or user studies done purely for internal assessment do not require IRB review; however, LAC encourages applicants to seek IRB review where applicable, so that results may be presented and published.
  5. Assessment projects that use electronic surveys must follow “Policy Governing Electronic Surveys and Questionnaires Directed to Students, Faculty Members, or Staff of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.”

Those receiving LAC assessment grants must:

  1. Complete the funded project within one year of receiving the assessment grant.
  2. Submit a brief narrative report to the LAC following the completion of expenditure of LAC grant funds that details the expenditure of funds and results of the project.
  3. Share findings from the assessment project in a public Library forum (brown-bag, faculty meeting lightning talk, etc.).
  4. Deposit data and documents related to the assessment project in the Library Assessment community in IDEALS. [If project involves human subjects, IRB approval/exemption must be present for data and results to be deposited.]
  5. Acknowledge LAC grant(s) in any public presentation or publication of the results of your project.
  1. Survey costs (e.g., subscription to a survey software program, consultations with Survey Research Lab)
  2. Statistical Programming support for data analysis
  3. Incentives for user study participation (must follow campus guidelines)
  4. Graduate hourly costs for assisting with project implementation and analysis
  1. Travel
  2. Graduate assistantships
  3. Postage, telephone costs, office supplies
  4. Acquisition of materials for the Library collection
  5. Retroactive expenses incurred before the date of the award.


LAC Grant Assessment Rubric

CriteriaEvaluation Indicator
Clear Goal

Project has a clear research question that is reasonably scoped given project staff and resources
Incomplete/Developing/Meet Expectations
Relevance

Focus of project is on Library services, resources, collections, physical facilities, and/or staff as a whole
Incomplete/Developing/Meet Expectations
Impact

Has impact that goes beyond an individual research project: Will immediately provide data and/or measurable feedback for Library activities, staff services, and/or decision making at the level of a unit or higher
Incomplete/Developing/Meet Expectations
Strategic

Project supports one or more Library strategic principles or directions as identified in the Framework for Strategic Action
Incomplete/Developing/Meet Expectations
Applicability

Proposal clearly explains how results of project will be actionable, and/or
Proposal provides a clear plan of action for applying the gathered data and/or analyzed results to Library services, staff, etc.
Incomplete/Developing/Meet Expectations
Follows human subject research protocols, including evidence of a submitted IRB if neededYes/No/Not Applicable
Follows relevant University and University Library policies and proceduresYes/No
Other funding lines are available for this project?Yes/No
Has previously received a grant/award from other funding sources for this project?Yes/No


LAC Grant Review Timeline

ActionTime
Receives a grant proposal and review process starts Count as the submission date
LAC Chair sends it to LAC members With 1 business days (8am – 5pm) from the submission date
LAC members review and send LAC Chair questions for applicantsReview period lasts 4 business days
LAC Chair sends the questions to applicantsLAC Chair can use up to 1 business day to compile members’ questions into one email to be sent to applicants
Applicants address LAC questions and submit final applications or other documents such as questionnaire to LAC ChairApplicants have up to 3 business days to respond, ask LAC for clarification, etc.. Additional time for response can be requested
LAC Chair sends final applications and documents for voteLAC members have up to 2 business days to do final review and vote
LAC Chair tallies the votes and shares with LAC members1 business day
LAC Chair emails decision to applicants. If request funding is approved, emails applicants the banner number and cc. Susan Edwards (BHRSC)1 business day
Review process ends

These guidelines are also available as a PDF file.

 

Past Recipients of the LAC Grant

 Recipient(s)Grant TitleAmountDate
26David Ward, Jessie Maimone, and Simone StoneBring Your Own Book Club Plus Library Assessment$750April 2021
25Emilee MathewsInvestigating User Perceptions of the Architecture Library$4,400February 2021
24David Ward and Tath HaverFirst Year Student Experience with Library Services through Academic Year 2020/2021$2,300February 2021
23Karen HogenboomAssessing the impact of Scholarly Commons Services$450October 2019
22Joshua LynchIllinois Digital Heritage Hub Website Usability Tasks for General Users$200October 2019
21John LaskowskiLibrary Gateway User Study 2019$210October 2019
20Kristen Allen, John Laskowski, and Matthew MaytonIllinois Distributed Museum Website User Study$320March 2019
19David WardUndergraduate Library Space Use Study$2,500October 2018
18George Gottschalk, Stephanie Baker, and Chris MorganAcquisitions Survey of Bibliographer Satisfaction and Understanding of Acquisitions Processes$1,050October 2018
17JaEun Jemma KuGrand Final: Usability Assessment and Deployment Testing of A11yFirst Editor 1.0 toward Library WordPress CMS$2,100September 2018
16Joe LenkartBuilding Long-term Research Relationships: Reference Services for Graduate Students$2,000November 2017
15Megean Osuchowski, Robert Slater, and Daniel MillsLibrary Website Usability Pilot Project$500October 2017
14Dan TracyAssessing Use of eBooks in LIS across Vendors and Other Factors$3,948May 2016
13Harriet Green and Eleanor DicksonDigital Humanities Needs Assessment$577April 2016
12Christie WileyData Needs and Perspectives of Engineering Faculty$1,000April 2016
11David Ward, Joe Lenkart, Ali Krogman, and Erin KerbyImpact of Library Reference Service Use on Patron Research Projects$3,350.40February 2016
10Susan AveryAssessing ESL Student Performance on Concept Maps$500January 2016
9Karen Hoganboom and Beth SheehanData Purchase Program Assessment$445April 2015
8Jemma KuLibrary Building Signage Inventory and its Audit$1,300March 2015
7Lynne Rudasill, Cara Bertram, Susan Braxton Michelle Dewey, Erin Kerby, Megan Mahoney, and David WardUser Satisfaction Survey for Library Hub Reference Services$1,229.60October 2014
6Lisa Hinchliffe, Bill Mischo, and Michael NormanDiscovering User Perspectives on Discovery: A Review of a Decade of User Survey Data$1,031June 2014
5Lisa RomeroCitation Analysis of Scholarly Journals in Communication Studies from 1982-2012: Implications for Library Collection Development$1,600May 2014
4Lynne Rudasill and Mara ThackerInternational and Area Studies Homepage Re-Design$500February 2014
3David Ward, Jen-chien Yu, Jim Hahn, and Jenny EmmanuelUser Experience of Library Space$1,000January 2014
2Magdalena Casper-Shipp and Richard StokesLate Nights at the Library: Popular Time for Course Reserves$180June 2013
1Michael Fleming and Jim DohlePublic Printing Assessment$1,250March 2013