NATIONAL MEASUREMENT TOOLS FOR PUBLIC LIBRARIES
Library statistics are a useful tool to determine staffing levels, collection status, trends and a way to measure
our library compared to libraries of similar sizes. Two national tools are Hennen’s American Public Library
Ratings (HAPLR) and the Library Journal Index of Public Library Service (LJ index), which represents two
efforts that examines multiple indicators. The Institute of Museums and Library Services gathers the raw
data HAPLR and LJ index uses, usually two years out of date.
HAPLR uses both input and output measures. Examples of input measures include how much a library
spends on materials, staff, or number of items per capita. Output measures is really about the library usage,
such as circulation, visits or how much a collection is used. Some of the ratings are weighted more than
others (i.e. visits per capita gets a rating of 3 while number of periodical receives a rating of 1). This index
compares libraries by percentiles, which is a value on a scale that indicates the percent of a distribution that
is equal to it or below it. For example, a score at the 95th percentile is equal to or better than 95 percent of
the scores.
The LJ index scores are based on four per capita service outputs: library visits, circulation, program
attendance, and public internet computer use. Some professionals prefer output measures because they
measure results achieved. The system awards 5-star, 4-star, and 3-star designations rather than library
ranks, due to recognized imprecision of the library statistical data. The LJ Index measures how the levels of
services a library provides compares with other libraries. Creators of the LJ Index stress the fact that it does
not measure service quality, operational excellence, library effectiveness, nor the degree to which a library
meets existing community information needs. Only one library in Washington state achieved any stars,
Lopez Island.
The Wyoming State Library compared the two indexes and here are their comments:
1. Peer library groups: HAPLR groups libraries for comparison by population level; LJ by operating budget.
Either method can place disparate libraries in the same group.
2. Busyness vs. “Goodness”: The two are not necessarily equal, but the library data that is available
nationally measures activity rather than impact.
3. Legal service area vs. actual patrons: Both indexes rely on per capita measures using the library’s legal
service area population. Patrons, however, will go to the closest library that will have them regardless of
legal boundaries.
4. Libraries that don’t report can’t play: If a library fails to report one data element that either HAPLR or LJ
uses to calculate scores, that library is not included in the rankings.
Later, in the same Wyoming State Library analysis of the indexes, “both HAPLR and LJ Index use service
measures that focus on high volume – circulation, visits, etc. Since HAPLR has so many budget-related
measures, it is difficult to get a high score without large operating expenditures”.
What to do with the data? Some libraries use the information to identify areas to concentrate on to improve
their scores. Others might concentrate on improving the accuracy of their reports. Many use the data to
increase public awareness and aid with financial support.
Attached is a full HAPLR report which includes:
 A comparison of all the cities in Washington as well as a comparison of the LJ index percentile. When
you examine Puyallup’s percentile, note that the previous year’s score was 92%
 A graph of our scores that illustrates our percentiles
 A comparison of Puyallup with other libraries of a similar size in the nation
 A comparison of Puyallup with other libraries of a similar size in Washington
In addition, I am including
 LJ index as a spreadsheet comprised only of Washington libraries of various sizes
 Public Library Data service statistical report, based on 2007 numbers