View Project

G2S Project Code: 2018-GA-81606
State: Georgia
Fiscal Year: 2018
Grantee
Georgia Public Library Service

Project Director
Director Name: Emily Almond
Director Phone: 404 235-7141
Director Email: ealmond@georgialibraries.org
General Information
Title: IT Support – Internal and External
State Project Code: GA0023-2015
Start Date: 10/01/2017
End Date: 09/30/2019
Abstract: We provide IT support both internally for GPLS and externally for Georgia’s public libraries. During the physical move of GPLS offices, the IT team was called on to provide packing, inventory, technology storage, moving support, and onsite technology configuration and setup in the new office space. In the interim, we supported GPLS staff as everyone worked remotely. As a result, many of our project deadlines were extended.



We provide internal desktop support, email, web hosting and maintenance of a file server as well as information security. Externally, support takes the form of Google Chrome and GSuite hosting, enrollment and management, Google for Work for library staff, content creation and management of galibtech.georgialibraries.org, a clearinghouse for use by all libraries, and supporting libraries in their quest for additional funding support

State Goal: Support for Libraries
Budget Information
LSTA
MATCH-State
MATCH-Other
Total
$543,526.34
$107,165.00
$0.00
$650,691.34
Intent(s)
Improve library's physical and technology infrastructure.
Library Infrastructure & Capacity
Systems & Technologies
Activities
Activity Details
Title: GSuite for Libraries
Narrative:

The Google for Work Project continued, wherein we are migrating Georgia’s libraries from their currently hosted email solutions to the GSuite cloud application. The new suite of products available include:

o   Gmail

o   Hangouts

o   Calendar

o   GoogleSites

o   GoogleDrive cloud storage

o   GoogleKeep

o   Google productivity suite

§ Docs

§ Sheets

§ Slides

§ Forms

§ Sites

·        Continued to host Google Apps Academy site, including materials and documentation for Georgia libraries:

o   Learn all about Google applications

o   Devices

o   Training Videos

o   FAQs

o   Security Checklist

o   Migration Manuals

Migrating Georgia’s libraries to GSuite takes, on average 4 weeks at a time, 4 systems at a time. The majority of that time is training and communications. Progress thus far:

o  1,775 statewide accounts

o  412 mailing lists

o  54 domains migrated

o  4 domains in progress at a pace of 1/week and 4/month

·        12 applications in the productivity suite

·        Continuous GSuite training sessions

·        60 pages of material on Apps Academy

o  Traffic:

§  904 users

§  1,615 sessions

§  4,799 pageviews

§  25% returning users


GSuite for Libraries

·        Survey results from library systems migrated:

o  What communications did you see about us “Going Google?” (Check all that apply)

§  83.6% -Emails from GPLS

§  58.4% -Emails from Directors

§  56% - Emailsfrom IT

§  36.2% -Meeting / Discussion with my manager

§  17.2% - Demo/ Q& A session

§  0.7% - I did not see any of the above

 

o  Did you view any of the recorded training that was offered on G-Suite?

§  63.5% - Yes

§  34% - No

§  2.5% - I wasn't aware that training was offered

o  Did you have access to enough documentation on how to use G-Suite?

§  95% - Yes

§  2.5% - No

§  2.5% - Wasn't aware that there was documentation available

o  Did you feel that you had enough support from GPLS on“go-live” day?

§  97.4% - Yes

§  2.6% - No

 

 

Google for Work Project/GPLS

·        55 GPLS staff enrolled in the Google for Work productivity suite

·        13 applications available

·        Unlimited cloud storage utilizing Google Drive

·        As a result of adoption, reduced reliance on external contractors for support

·        In process of evaluating phasing out other productivity tools currently in use by agency


Intent: Improve library's physical and technology infrastructure.

Activity: Content
Mode: Other
Format: Digital
Other: Support for Google for Work


Quantity


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


Beneficiaries
Is the activity directed at the library workforce: Yes
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: Yes
Specific Locations: No
Library Types
Public Libraries: 408
Academic Libraries: 0
SLAA: 0
Consortia: 0
Special Libraries: 0
School Libraries: 0
Other: 0
Question 1: I am satisfied that the resource is meeting library needs.
Strongly Agree: 1
Agree: 2
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 2: Applying the resource will help improve library services to the public.
Strongly Agree: 1
Agree: 2
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Activity Details
Title: IT Help Desk and Support
Narrative:

The goal is to provide staffed Help Desk for library technology support and PINES support; provide software development, system administration and IT statewide training; supply the necessary IT expertise to assist local library systems with technological issues.

To support the network infrastructure and day to day Information Technology support of GLASS and GDC. 

 


·        GPLS IT  - 593 Help Desk Tickets:

·        Number of locationsdirectly supported: 3 (GPLS, GLASS & GDC)

·        Number of GPLSoffices served: 3

·        GPLS Internal - 278

·        External to Libraries- 315


Intent: Improve library's physical and technology infrastructure.

Activity: Content
Mode: Other
Format: Combined physical & digital
Other: IT support


Quantity


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


Beneficiaries
Is the activity directed at the library workforce: Yes
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: Yes
Specific Locations: No
Library Types
Public Libraries: 408
Academic Libraries: 0
SLAA: 0
Consortia: 0
Special Libraries: 0
School Libraries: 0
Other: 0
Question 1: I am satisfied that the resource is meeting library needs.
Strongly Agree: 1
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 2: Applying the resource will help improve library services to the public.
Strongly Agree: 1
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Activity Details
Title: galibtech.org
Narrative:

The IT team continues to update the galibtech site, utilizing Google Sites. Itbegan as an  information clearinghouse for IT administrators in Georgia’s public libraries. It remains a resource for use by IT professionals from our libraries to share experiences and ideas and to explore opportunities made possible by emerging technologies.

Our goal for the re-architecture was to keep it simple: landing pages for each major project, clear menu items and straightforward navigation throughout. The traffic numbers reflect a healthy flow of information to our libraries.

·        135 new pages on site

·        11,988 unique pageviews:

o  Broadband – 1,312

o  Cloud Computing – 579

o  Emerging Tech – 2,424

o  LibTech Fund – 2,724

o  LIFT Program - 602


Intent: Improve library's physical and technology infrastructure.

Activity: Content
Mode: Creation
Format: Digital


Quantity
Number of items digitized: 0
Number of items digitized and available to the public: 0
Number of physical items: 0
Number of open-source applications/software/systems: 0
Number of proprietary applications/software/systems: 0
Number of learning resources (e.g. toolkits, guides): 11
Number of plans/frameworks: 0


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


Beneficiaries
Is the activity directed at the library workforce: Yes
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: Yes
Specific Locations: No
Library Types
Public Libraries: 408
Academic Libraries: 0
SLAA: 0
Consortia: 0
Special Libraries: 0
School Libraries: 0
Other: 0
Question 1: I am satisfied that the resource is meeting library needs.
Strongly Agree: 2
Agree: 1
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 2: Applying the resource will help improve library services to the public.
Strongly Agree: 2
Agree: 1
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Activity Details
Title: Google Chrome Management
Narrative:

Continuing Phase II of project continuing the use of Google Chrome Boxes and Chrome Books for public access machines and for mobile labs in libraries. The goal is to continue to promote and support the continuing use of Google Chrome Boxes and Chrome Books as public access machines and for mobile labs in libraries., resulting in 44 library systems adopting Chrome machines for public use.


·        (8) Chrome training sessions conducted and (5) webpages of Chrome documentation updated.

·        For cost of less than $170 per machine, utilizing the Google Chrome box with the Google apps environment, there is the potential to replace the following list of individual software licenses for which libraries currently pay:

o  Microsoft Office

o  Deep Freeze

o  Email

o  Time management

o  Survey Monkey

o  Webex

o  Chat

·        44 library systems are currently deploying over 2,658 Google Chrome boxes, Chrome books and tablets, bringing the number of computers in Georgia’s libraries to 9,500+.

Types of Operating Systems deployed:

o   Computer lab machines for adult use

o   Computer lab machines for teen use

o   Computer lab machines for children’s use

o   OPAC’s

o   OPAC’s for children’s use

o   Genealogy stations

o   Digital signage

o   General Information stations

o   Loaner devices

o   Mobile programming kits

o   Testing/Training stations


Intent: Improve library's physical and technology infrastructure.

Activity: Instruction
Mode: Presentation/performance
Format: Virtual
Other: support for Chrome Boxes for public access machines in libraries


Quantity
Presentation/performance length (minutes): 90
Number of presentations/performances administered: 8
Average number in attendance per session: 50


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


Beneficiaries
Is the activity directed at the library workforce: Yes
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: Yes
Specific Locations: No
Library Types
Public Libraries: 408
Academic Libraries: 0
SLAA: 0
Consortia: 0
Special Libraries: 0
School Libraries: 0
Other: 0
Activity Details
Title: LibTech Fund Management
Narrative:
Lib Tech Fund management allows libraries to properly plan for and leverage the allocation of state funds, specifically for public access computer replacement and computing infrastructure. We are interpreting this as broadly as possible to allow maximum flexibility to address diverse needs of the libraries while staying true to state legislative intent. Libraries are strongly urged to use these funds for equipment that will be used by the public, or for equipment that will provide critical infrastructure for network access and public computing.

LibTech Fund Management

·        $2,192,162 in state funds

·        62 library systems receiving an allocation of the funds

o  Network Hardware: $76,807

o  Public Access Computing: $2,115,355

·        Number of Items

o  Total items: 5,288

o  Network Hardware: 679

o  Public Access Computing: 4,609

·        # of help desk tickets

o  Total tickets: 388

o  Customers helped: 122

o  Responses: 1,453



Intent: Improve library's physical and technology infrastructure.

Activity: Planning & Evaluation
Mode: Prospective
Format: In-house


Quantity
Number of evaluations and/or plans funded: 62
Number of funded evaluation and/or plans completed: 62


Partner Information
Organization Type of Partner Organization(s):
Libraries: Yes
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


Beneficiaries
Is the activity directed at the library workforce: Yes
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: Yes
Specific Locations: No
Library Types
Public Libraries: 408
Academic Libraries: 0
SLAA: 0
Consortia: 0
Special Libraries: 0
School Libraries: 0
Other: 0
Question 1: I believe the planning and evaluation addresses library needs.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 2: I am satisfied with the extent to which the plan or evaluation addresses library needs.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 3: I believe the information from the plan or evaluation will be applied to address library needs.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Activity Details
Title: LIFT - Library Initiatives for Funding Technology
Narrative:

·        GPLS launched a new program called LIFT - Library Initiatives for Funding Technology that focuses on assisting public libraries with finding funding opportunities for technology. Support is provided through staff assistance and/or a self-service clearinghouse of resources. Libraries can choose as little or more help as they need, much like the E-Rate program. The website will be updated frequently as the program grows.


·    The LibTech Fund program changes resulted in restrictions placed on allowable items. GPLS IT staff worked with libraries to either change purchasing plans, offset rejected items, or to reimburse libraries for the amounts not covered by the funds.

As a result of the restrictions, we launched anew program called LIFT: Library Initiatives for Funding Technology. In our first year, we provided application support for (7) library systems as part of a pilot program, and the Cherokee Regional Library was awarded an IMLS APP Grant for $39,992.


  • # of libraries with whom we collaborated - 12 
  • # of libraries provided application support - 7
    • Proposal review - 2
    • Application process/requirements - 5
  • Grants awarded - 1 
  • Grant-related initiatives on which we collaborated - 2
  • # of help desk tickets, responses, etc. 
    • Total tickets - 14
    • Customers helped - 29
    • Responses - 188
  • # of trainings/presentations/webinars
    • Presentations - 3
    • Webinars - 1
  • # of webpages on galibtech.org - 6 (all new)



Intent: Improve library's physical and technology infrastructure.

Activity: Planning & Evaluation
Mode: Prospective
Format: In-house


Quantity
Number of evaluations and/or plans funded: 1
Number of funded evaluation and/or plans completed: 0


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


Beneficiaries
Is the activity directed at the library workforce: Yes
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: Yes
Specific Locations: No
Library Types
Public Libraries: 408
Academic Libraries: 0
SLAA: 0
Consortia: 0
Special Libraries: 0
School Libraries: 0
Other: 0
Question 1: I believe the planning and evaluation addresses library needs.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 2: I am satisfied with the extent to which the plan or evaluation addresses library needs.
Strongly Agree: 0
Agree: 0
Neither Agree nor Disagree: 0
Disagree: 0
Strongly Disagree: 0
Non-Response: 0
Question 3: I believe the information from the plan or evaluation will be applied to address library needs.
Strongly Agree: 0
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:
• The LibTech Fund program manager managed a technology grant totaling $2,192,162, distributed among 62 library systems and 402 library branches. The emphasis shifted from Makerspace technology to networking hardware and public access machines. The total of public access computers in Georgia is now 9,500+. • The move to Google Sites has made content management much more seamless, facilitating the addition of new content and updating/deleting outdated materials.
Please briefly describe the importance of these outcomes and findings for future program planning:
A convergence in library technology in Georgia has led to a considerable increase in technology and Makerspace build outs in libraries. Between the LIBTECH funding, the immersive Technology Boot Camp and the Tech Loaner Kits, we have provided Georgia’s libraries opportunities to learn, experience and fund the emerging technology landscape across the state.
Explain one or two of the most significant lessons learned for others wanting to adopt any facets of this project:
• As each stage of Chrome books and boxes rolls out, we are more convinced each time that cloud computing is the most efficient and scalable solution for public access computing in libraries. • The Google Apps Academy traffic was significantly increased from last year. As the majority of library systems were migrated over to GSuite, they were directed to the site for training and reference materials, and came to trust it as a source for both. If it wasn’t for the Apps Academy, we don’t think it would be possible for (1) full-time administrator to tackle a project of this size.
Do you anticipate continuing this project after the current reporting period ends:
No
Do you anticipate any change in level of effort in managing this project:
No
Explain:

Do you anticipate changing the types of activities and objectives addressed by the project:
No
Explain:

Was an evaluation conducted for this project:
No
Was a final written evaluation report produced:
No
Can the final written evaluation report be shared publicly on the IMLS website:
No
Was the evaluation conducted by project staff (either SLAA or local library) or by a third-party evaluator:
Third-Party
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:
Other:
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: Emerging technologies; Cloud Computing; Public Access Computing