I didn't make it to the
SHLB conference last week, but John Harrington from Funds for Learning was kind enough to publish
the slide deck from his presentation. As usual, I skipped to the pictures. On page 10, we learn that in FY 2017, 16% fewer organizations applied for funding than in FY2014.
Why are applicants leaving the program? I think there are 2 main reasons:
- Complexity is increasing. In 2015, they changed the Form 471, which confused people who only filed one form a year, and in 2016, they introduced EPC, which made applying for funding much more difficult.
- Funding is decreasing. For many small applicants, when voice is phased out, the remaining funding opportunity isn't worth the hassle. And some libraries that don't filter were only getting voice funding, so they can't apply.
Which is worse, the increasing complexity or the decreasing funding? Maybe we can get an idea from the graph on page 12. It shows that the number of applicants not using consultants has dropped over 39% from FY 2014 to FY 2017, while the number of applicants using consultants has increased over 8%. I think the only reason that consultants would be getting more clients while the total pool of applicants shrinks is the complexity of the program.
How can we fix this?
I already answered that.
No comments:
Post a Comment