education program available to information service personnel. As one step toward fulfillment of its charge to develop plans for meeting national needs, the Commission awarded a contract to the Catholic University's Graduate Department of Library Science and charged the principal investigator, Dean Elizabeth Stone, with the task of providing recommendations for a nationwide program for the continuing education of professional librarians, information specialists, library technicians and library trustees. Dr. Stone and her associates were asked to outline a program that would ensure quality in the educational experience and bring together the efforts and funding of state, regional and national associations.

The results of the study were reviewed for the Commission by Dr. Stone in April 1974, and the full report was received shortly afterwards. The report, entitled "Continuing Library and Information Science Education-A Final Report to the National Commission on Libraries and Information Science," recommends creation of a Continuing Library Education Network and Exchange (CLENE). It would:

Actively encourage widest participation possible by all levels of library and information science personnel.

Involve those being served by the continuing education program in the decision-making process. Establish flexible working relationships between participating individuals and groups-national, regional, state and local.

Provide for the continuing assessment of needs.

Acquire, process, store, retrieve and disseminate information about existing library and information science education programs, resources and services.

Produce and disseminate materials, resources and programs to meet specific high-priority needs of individuals and groups.

Concern itself, through activities and policy statements, with current issues affecting libraries, information science and continuing education.

Maintaining liaison with other professions for the purpose of promoting and exchanging continuing education ideas.

The proposed structure for CLENE focuses on four areas of activity:

1. Needs assessment and problem definition.

2. Information acquisition and coordination.

3. Program and resource development.

4. Communications and delivery.

During fiscal year 1975 the Commission will publish the report and give it wide distribution. The Commission will also call together a group of participants from professional organizations, library and information science education and various levels of library and information science services. The purpose of the conference will be to provide consensus on requirements, develop recommended courses of action, and consider appropriate methods of providing financial support to CLENE.

The Commission's role in the area of continuing library and information science education, as in other areas, has been and will probably continue to be primarily that of a catalyst. By defining and supporting a comprehensive exploratory study, and by helping to bring the appropriate groups together with each other and with the study results, the Commission hopes to stimulate and focus interest and support of the appropriate groups to encourage more cost-effective use of available resources.

ALTERNATIVES FOR

FINANCING THE PUBLIC LIBRARY

The first two reports of this Commission, covering fiscal years 1973 and 1974, have given attention to the problem of adequate financing for public libraries. In the last report the Commission summarized the results of a survey of the current methods of funding used by public libraries and described its plan to gather information on alternatives for future funding. That plan involved a contract to Government Studies and Systems, Inc. (GSS) of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. GSS was asked to provide the Commission with a study of feasible alternatives for the future funding of the public library and its ancillary public information services and to project, in light of modern public goods theory, the financing mechanisms that will be needed to replace those (such as reliance on the local property tax) that may no longer be viable.

The report, completed in the spring of 1974, provides data to show that the current system of funding is inadequate and states that the inequitable distribution of costs among the levels and jurisdictions of government is a prime deterrent to the progressive development of a public library system responsive to the informational, educational and cultural needs of modern society. GSS points out that the public library has not emerged or developed in a political or bureaucratic form typical of other social institutions. It exists largely in an almost randomly-dis

tributed pattern of semi-independent local service agencies and systems. Related by tradition and function to the public education system, the public library is not recognized as an integral part of public education nor is it recognized as a functional service in the mainstream of government. This set of characteristics places a heavy burden on public libraries in terms of attaining enough stable financial support to provide adequate services to all citizens. The public library's deep roots in the community and its strong-based civic support represent two of the institution's principal assets in striving for the funding necessary to develop a viable pattern of services responsive to the full variety of community and individual needs.

Based on figures for the year 1971-72, $814 million was spent for public libraries; this amounts to $4.00 per person per year. Where public library service is exemplary, the costs are $14.00 per capita and the gap between need and the actual expense is evident. Even if the money were available, it would be impossible to replicate instantly for the whole nation the facilities and services found where services are exemplary. But the availability of $8.00 to $10.00 per capita would provide an appropriate planning base for a national program. Total national expenditures would then be in a range of between $1.7 billion and $2.1 billion, based on 1974 population estimates. This would seem to be a realistic national expenditure figure on which to formulate a set of options for funding the public library.

Five options are available for financing public library service:

1. STATUS QUO

(a) Zero funding of the Library Services and Construction Act; complete reliance on revenue sharing, or (b) Continuation of the Library Services and Construction Act at current or reduced levels.

2. RETRENCHMENT OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENTAL FINANCING ROLE

(a) No Federal funds for public libraries and no Federal policy with respect to public library development.

(b) Variable pattern of state and local support depending upon interest and fiscal capacity.

(c) Heavier reliance upon fees, fines and organized voluntary support.

3. FEDERALIZED SYSTEM OF LIBRARIES; 75-90% LEVEL OF SUPPORT

(a) Direct Federal funding according to Federal standards.

(b) Strategic and directed distribution of public library services to achieve uniform coverage.

(c) Coordinated funding and functional planning of public libraries with other library funding programs under ESEA Title II and the Higher Education Act.

(d) Full development and employment of technology to maximize services at lowest cost.

(e) Authority structure related to Library of Congress.

4. DOMINANT STATE FUNDING ROLE

(75-90% LEVEL OF SUPPORT)

(a) Minimal Federal role and funding.

(b) Limited Federal funding geared to interstate fiscal disparities.

(c) Relief of local tax burden for libraries.

(d) Fuller utilization of untapped state tax resources.

5. BALANCED INTERGOVERNMENTAL

FUNDING SYSTEM

FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL

(a) Increased Federal support to meet upgraded library service and development needs.

(b) Revised Library Services and Construction Act to reflect strengthened Federal role and mandate, coordinated Federal-state planning for a national program of public library services.

(c) Increased state support to reflect prime responsibility for public library maintenance and development.

(d) Decreased local support role.

(e) Staged approach over ten-year period to achieve improved balance in intergovernmental funding pattern ending with Federal-20 percent; state-50 percent; and local-30 percent of a progressively elevated national expenditure for improved and expanded public library services.

Of the five options examined, the report recommends the fifth, the proposed balanced and strengthened intergovernmental system, as the one that is both effective and practicable.

The report Alternatives for Financing the Public Library will be available in early 1975 through the Superin

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