View Project

G2S Project Code: 2020-TX-85673
State: Texas
Fiscal Year: 2020
Grantee
EULESS PUBLIC LIBRARY

Project Director
Director Name: Sherry Knight
Director Phone: (817) 685-1482
Director Email: sknight@eulesstx.gov
General Information
Title: Sensory Inclusivity at the Euless Public Library
State Project Code: SPP-21002
Start Date: 09/01/2020
End Date: 08/31/2021
Abstract: The Euless Public Library expanded services by creating a sensory inclusive space and offering sensory inclusive programming and materials to its patrons of all ages and abilities. With guidance from professionals in the Hurst-Euless-Bedford (HEB) ISD Special Education Department and a designation of sensory inclusivity from a nationally known organization, Kulture City, the library was able to be more inclusive.

The library purchased approved supplies and underwent training with Kulture City as planned. Sensory inclusive programming and material circulation began in the fourth quarter of the grant period. 
State Goal: Goal 2: Access to resources and services to meet community and personal goals.
Budget Information
LSTA
MATCH-State
MATCH-Other
Total
$20,434.45
$0.00
$0.00
$20,434.45
Intent(s)
Improve users’ ability to obtain and/or use information resources.
Personal/Family health & wellness
Activities
Activity Details
Title: Sensory Inclusive Programming
Narrative: Euless Public Library created a sensory inclusive space and offered sensory inclusive programming and materials to its patrons of all ages and abilities. There are currently only a handful of library spaces that are designated as sensory inclusive in the North Texas area, none of which serve the population of Euless directly. Euless Public Library (22 staff members) received guidance from professionals in the HEB ISD Special Education Department and a designation of sensory inclusivity from a nationally known organization, Kulture City.

From the library:
On June 7, we held a Grand Opening for the MakerSpace with 27 in attendance.  Due to a high level of COVID cases in the area, only local dignitaries and representatives from the media were invited to the ceremony.  Since that time, we have provided 421 people with tours of the space (individuals as well as small groups like scout troops, sewing/quilting clubs, and homeschooling families).  A total of 301 users have been counted in the MakerSpace, many of them returning multiple times to work on their projects over a number of days.
Intent: Improve users’ ability to obtain and/or use information resources.

Activity: Instruction
Mode: Presentation/performance
Format: Combined in-person & virtual


Quantity
Presentation/performance length (minutes): 1
Number of presentations/performances administered: 1
Average number in attendance per session: 301


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: No
For a targeted group or for the general population: General


Locale
Is the activity state-wide: No
Specific Locations: Yes
Name: EULESS PUBLIC LIBRARY
Address: 201 N ECTOR DR
City: EULESS
State: TX
Zip: 76039
Project Outcomes
Project Outcomes
List any important outcomes or findings not previously reported:
From the Library: Library staff has increased knowledge and awareness of sensory issues, the effect of them on patrons and their behavior, and how to interact and assist sensory-sensitive patrons in an empathetic and effective way. Awareness has been increased among library stakeholders and city administration about the need for inclusive resources and programming, especially the understanding that sensory inclusivity extends beyond individuals with Autism to those experiencing Dementia, Sensory Processing Disorder, PTSD, and a myriad of other diagnoses and conditions.
Please briefly describe the importance of these outcomes and findings for future program planning:
From the Library: Sensory programming and inclusivity have become big issues in the library community with sessions presented at major state and national conferences and articles being written in top library publications such as Library Journal. The success of these programs nationally and locally speaks to the need for more sensory inclusive programming in libraries. Sensory issues are a component of other diagnoses such as PTSD. Sensory items can also be used by those experiencing non-sensory related issues such as dementia, and anxiety disorders and by the general public. This further widens the impact of the project for us and speaks to the need for sensory inclusive spaces and materials both for its intended audience as well as the general population.
Explain one or two of the most significant lessons learned for others wanting to adopt any facets of this project:
From the Library: We are still early in the implementation phase due to COVID and our recent remodel however we have had some anecdotal success in creating awareness and shifting the library culture to be more generally inclusive of those experiencing sensory disorders. General takeaway is that even if you do not see an obvious need for sensory inclusivity programming, the need does exist and will help to create a more welcoming space for all.
Do you anticipate continuing this project after the current reporting period ends:
Yes
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: Sensory, Inclusion, disabilities