View Project

G2S Project Code: 2016-CT-77652
State: Connecticut
Fiscal Year: 2016

Project Director
Director Name: Christine Angeli
Director Phone: 203-783-3399
Director Email:
General Information
Title: Bridge Stories and 4Questions
State Project Code:
Start Date: 02/01/2017
End Date: 09/30/2017
Abstract: The library's goal was to create a program that would highlight the unique stories of everyday Milford residents, with the hope of building connections between residents, leading to a stronger, more caring, empathetic community. The library's initial plan was to have quarterly story-sharing events where community volunteers would record the stories and take photos of their fellow community members. Stories would be chosen to become posters which would be displayed in the Library and on the library website and social media platforms. All stories would be bound into a book to be kept in the Library’s local history room. After low turnout, the library adapted and simplified its program with the intent of making it more inviting for participants and less time-consuming for library staff to manage.
This program was developed through the CT State Library’s pilot project, EXCITE Transformation for Libraries.

State Goal: Literacies and learning
Budget Information
Improve users' general knowledge and skills.
Community Concerns
Activity Details
Title: Story Collecting
Narrative: The library planned its first story-sharing event to coincide with the One City One Story Community Read kick-off program. Unfortunately, the program was very poorly attended, and while the library had volunteers wanting to record stories, no one volunteered to share their story. During the summer the library advertised the program in-house with displays, on posters around the City, and on its website, but only two people came forward to share stories.

After a second disappointing turnout at a fall story-sharing event, the library decided to make changes to the program to make it less fearful for participants and easier for staff to manage, while staying in the original spirit of the program to build community connections. Instead of asking people to share personal stories, the library will ask their responses to four specific questions. To decrease confusion and give it a fresh start, the library re-named the program 4Questions

Intent: Improve users' general knowledge and skills.

Activity: Instruction
Mode: Program
Format: In-person

Session length (minutes): 45
Number of sessions in program: 1
Average number in attendance per session: 3
Number of times program administered: 2

Partner Information
Organization Type of Partner Organization(s):
Libraries: No
Historical Societies or Organizations: No
Museums: No
Archives: No
Cultural Heritage Organization Multi-type: No
Preschools: No
Schools: No
Adult Education: No
Human Service Organizations: No
Other: No

Legal Type of Partner Organization(s):
Federal Government: No
State Government: No
Local Government (excluding school districts): No
School District: No
Non-Profit: No
Private Sector: No
Tribe/Native Hawaiian Organization: No

Is the activity directed at the library workforce: No
For a targeted group or for the general population: General

Is the activity state-wide: No
Specific Locations: Yes
Address: 57 NEW HAVEN AVE.
State: CT
Zip: 06460
Question 1: I learned something by participating in this library activity.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 1
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 3
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 2: I feel more confident about what I just learned.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 1
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 3
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 3: I intend to apply what I just learned.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 1
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 3
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 4: I am more aware of resources and services provided by the library.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 4
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 5: I am more likely to use other library resources and services.
Strongly Agree: 4
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Project Outcomes
Project Outcomes
List any important outcomes or findings not previously reported:
Reaction and comments on the program were positive but not measurable with use of the required survey questions for LSTA projects. Participants had difficulty with the survey as it queried concrete learning, while this program was more relationship/emotional based. The library received surveys with some blanks and/or question marks in the columns asking about learning. The timing of the program was problematic, as spring and summer months are busiest in terms of programs, and the library was short staffed due to programs and vacation schedules.
Please briefly describe the importance of these outcomes and findings for future program planning:
The library would prefer to use different methods of evaluation for this type of program.
Explain one or two of the most significant lessons learned for others wanting to adopt any facets of this project:
1. In theory, people loved the idea of sharing stories; in practice many felt it too personal or felt their story was not important or unique enough. 2. The timeline of this program was problematic as it coincided with two busy established programming seasons – One City One Story (April/May) and summer reading (June-August). While that time line was imposed by the grant process, it led to a small staff being stretched too thin. When initiating a substantial new program or activity, the timeline, staffing levels and other competing activities need to be evaluated.
Do you anticipate continuing this project after the current reporting period ends:
Do you anticipate any change in level of effort in managing this project:
The library is committed to the 4Questions version of the program through December 2017. At that point, staff will evaluate whether the program will be continued.
Do you anticipate changing the types of activities and objectives addressed by the project:

Was an evaluation conducted for this project:
Was a final written evaluation report produced:
Can the final written evaluation report be shared publicly on the IMLS website:
Was the evaluation conducted by project staff (either SLAA or local library) or by a third-party evaluator:
What data collection tools were used for any report outcomes and outputs:
Did you collect any media for the data:
What types of methods were used to analyze collected data:
How were participants (or items) selected:
What type of research design did you use to compare the value for any reported output or outcome:
Exemplary: No
Exemplary Narrative
Project Tags: EXCITE, community