tendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. The Commission will review the recommendations of the study for possible integration into the National Program now being developed.

RESOURCE AND BIBLIOGRAPHIC SUPPORT
FOR A NATIONWIDE LIBRARY PROGRAM

The continuing interest of the Commission in resource and bibliographic centers as components of a national network led to a feasibility study contract given last year to the Westat Corporation of Maryland. Westat was asked to provide the conceptual design of the bibliographic and the resource centers to define both their scope and content, to give an approximation of developmental and operating costs and to offer some guidance regarding their management. The Westat report called individual access to needed information resources the foremost goal of the library community and went on to add that this goal provides the foundation for national planning of information services. While there may once have been a time when a library could aspire to self-sufficiency in providing for its clientele, that condition is no longer possible even for the largest libraries in the country. Resource sharing is now essential.

Foremost among the nationwide goals of the library and information science community is the access to needed information resources for all persons in all locations in the United States. The perceived right of individuals to such access provides the foundation for national information planning.

In even the largest libraries, the hope of adequately supplying its identified user groups has been constrained by simultaneous inflation of both cost and quantity of materials. While future technological developments may well make possible on-line retrieval of library materials at local terminals or the speedy remote publication of materials upon demand, present-day economics dictate solutions that do not depend on high technology.

A basis for these solutions exists in a concept of interlibrary loan expanded to resource sharing-cooperative activity supported by an organizational structure and coordination developed at the national level. Rational development of a nationwide program for resource sharing requires:

1. Cooperative collection development. A full range of materials must be collected and stored somewhere, if access is to be provided.

2. Bibliographic access to materials. A requisite of resource sharing is a standard bibliographic record, util

ized consistently. If needed information is to be obtained, it must be made possible:

(a) to know that the information exists in recorded form;

(b) to know which collection holds the needed item; and

(c) to locate the item within a designated collection. 3. Channels of communications. Methods of, and channels for, communication must be structured to ensure access by all libraries to shared resources at a reasonable cost.

4. Delivery of materials. Identified and located materials must be made physically available.

5. Compensation to lending libraries. Lending libraries should receive compensation for making their resources available.

6. Education in concepts and use of the program. Librarians must be educated to operate the new systems, and potential users must be made aware of the program and its services.

Recognizing these requirements, the Westat study recommends:

1. That a National Library Network comprised of three coordinated systems be established within the Federal Government:

(a) A Resource System to provide guaranteed access to needed materials.

(b) A Bibliographic System to provide a unique authoritative bibliographic description for each item held in guaranteed access, as well as the locations of such materials.

(c) A Communications System to provide rapid exchange of bibliographic information and requests for data and services

2. That the Library of Congress, through its MARC Project, should provide the comprehensive authoritative bibliographic coverage required in a manner responsive to needs of the total national information community and that it be designated as library-of-last-resort within the resource chain and as coordinator for international information exchange.

3. That operational responsibility for the network should rest largely at four Regional Library Support Centers. 4. That development at the regional centers should include organization of delivery zones to provide rapid access to needed materials available at that level.

5. That individual states should designate the state li brary, or other identified library or agency, as state coordinator for library support services and should ensure adequate responsive channels and facilities for local libraries or library systems.

6. That individual libraries should play a participatory role, sharing both their material and human resources by serving as system components.

The Commission has received the full report and will review its conclusions and recommendations for possible integration into the National Program. Many important questions must be answered before some of the ideas in the report can be translated into concrete and effective information activities.

REGIONAL HEARINGS

Two public regional hearings were held this year by the Commission: one in Boston on October 3, 1973, for six New England States, and the other in San Antonio on April 24, 1974, for seven Southwestern States.

There are two main purposes of the regional hearings One is to receive statements about the needs for and status of library and information services in the region from citizens who use those services and from the professional, government officials and others who offer them. The other major purpose is to provide an opportunity for the same individuals to comment on the Commission's current activities. The hearings thus help to assure that Commission activities and programs are directed toward real needs and are appropriately responsive to them.

Witnesses from New England and the Southwest presented sharply contrasting, pictures of library and information service conditions and needs within the regions. In some areas librarians and information scientists are concerned about selecting the most efficient, most economic technological ways of handling the increasing amounts of information being produced every year around the world in order that those researchers and businessmen, students and other citizens who need a part of it can locate what they want and receive it quickly enough to be useful to them. Practically next door are librarians whose primary concerns are that budgetary cutbacks of a few thousand dollars will eliminate basic bookmobile services to citizens who have no other means of receiving information or film programs that have been attracting young minority members into the library, or new encyclopedias needed so badly to update the reference collection.

In some states, usually those with strong state leadership and adequate financial support, libraries are joining together in networks that offer members access to remote collections, consultant services, training programs and materials and services for people with special needs, such as the handicapped and the institutionalized. For example, in Massachusetts different kinds of libraries have joined together to make their varied resources available to anyone who needs them; innovative audio-visual programs enhance school curricula and the state has funded a program to supplement college library collections. On the other hand, some states spend relatively small sums for library service and spread that thinly, with little provided to the state agency for coordination. In those cases, good service is left to the efforts and dedication of individual library workers and trustees. Special services in these states are all but impossible. For example, no one in New Hampshire lives more than one hour away from a public library; only 13 of 250 public libraries have professionally trained staff. Twenty-one counties in Texas have no library service at all. Arkansans share a collection totalling one book per person. Only two libraries in Maine meet accepted American Library Association standards.

This picture of library conditions in America that was conveyed in the hearings was nearly always accompanied by a plea for continuation of Federal categorical grants. Witnesses documented the growth in the collections and services of their libraries that was paid for with the Library Services and Construction Act funds. Many witnesses cited cuts in service that would have to be made if these funds are discontinued. Only a very few libraries had received any revenue sharing funds. In response to these pleas, the factual basis of which was corroborated by its own investigation of revenue sharing around the country, the Commission included in its proposed National Program a clear recommendation for continuation of categorical grants for library development.

Regional library cooperative efforts in both New England (New England Board of Higher Education) and the Southwest (Southern Regional Education Board Library) were described at the hearings by representatives of their regional library organizations. Unlike most regional groups, the New England Library Board is undergirded by an interstate compact. Witnesses elsewhere reported that the lack of this kind of legal base hampers other interstate organizations, because neither their membership nor their financial support is stable under voluntary agreements. Several witnesses voiced their fears of regional control over some functions of their institutions and

of a possible reduction in financial support for services to the majority of users in favor of mechanized systems designed to satisfy the needs of only a few. In contrast, there were those who felt that certain percentages of state and Federal funds should be especially designated for systems and networks, that these networks should have standards for participation, and that they should provide training for local librarians to use the service. In between were a variety of variant views.

A similar range of views was apparent among witnesses who offered reactions to the Commission's first draft of a National Program for Library and Information Services, which had been distributed to participants prior to each hearing. Some witnesses criticized it as "unhumanistic," asserting that it emphasized mechanical networks and ignored the needs of divergent groups who together make up a large part of the citizenry; i.e., children, youth, minorities, the institutionalized, the aged, Indians, ethnic groups, the geographically remote, and so on. Others approved the strong networking approach as appropriate to an interstate level of activity but cautioned the Commission about monolithic systems that may tend to overwhelm their component parts. A national network, they said, should be a framework for varying levels of cooperating groups and should develop incrementally. The component elements could well operate differently from one another. However, standards for performance and equipment should be established to provide guidelines for development.

Two witnesses told of the difficulties encountered by the National Library of Medicine as it sought to extend its information network to practicing physicians. Specialists reviewed the state of telecommunications and computer technology, and indicated that in the decade ahead economic considerations, more than technical considerations, will hinder expansion of the information-handling industry. Successful networking will be dependent on satisfactory settlement of the copyright issue. Suggestions were made that information brokers might be necessary between the user expressing his needs in his way and the language and procedures required by the index, data base or telecomminications system that holds the answer. All who addressed the issue agreed that both librarians and patrons will have to be the objects of widespread public relations and training programs, so that they can and will use to advantage the benefits of large information systems. A noted divergence of opinion was concerned with the use of a national information network. How many people need it? Are their needs now unmet or partly satisfied