Abstract
The objective of this study was to identify whether the internal microgrant program at the University of Houston Libraries provided a suitable return on investment. This study identified three criteria for assessing return on investment from library microgrants: engagement, continuation, and professional impact. The results indicated that compared to costs for other library outreach programs and events, the amount for the microgrant program is not excessive. However, it resulted in significant participation and impact, with many continuing positive outcomes. Internal microgrant programs offered a positive return on investment for the University of Houston Libraries during the period reviewed. This study will help with the decision-making process of other libraries looking to fund similar programs. It also has implications for assessment in libraries with similar existing programs.
References
Aabø, S. (2009). Libraries and return on investment (ROI): A meta-analysis. New Library World, 110(7/8), 311-324.
Barry, J. (2005). Supporting faculty/librarian collaboration in the development of Internet resources. Internet Reference Services Quarterly, 10(2), 101-105.
Bodycomb, A., & Del Baglivo, M. (2012). Using an automated tool to calculate return on investment and cost benefit figures for resources: The health sciences and human services library experience. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 100(2), 127.
Harless, D. W., & Allen, F. R. (1999). Using the contingent valuation method to measure patron benefits of reference desk service in an academic library. College & Research Libraries, 60(1), 56-69.
Herring, D. N. (2014). A purposeful collaboration: Using a library course enhancement grant program to enrich ESL instruction. The Reference Librarian, 55(2), 128-143.
Imholz, S., & Arns, J. W. (2007). Worth their weight: An assessment of the evolving field of library evaluation. Public Library Quarterly, 26(3-4), 31-48.
Jemison, K., Poletti, E. D., Schneider, J., Clark, N., & Stone, R. D. (2009). Measuring return on investment in VA libraries. Journal of Hospital Librarianship, 9(4), 379-390.
Kingma, B., & McClure, K. (2015). Lib-value: Values, outcomes, and return on investment of academic libraries, phase III: ROI of the Syracuse University Library. College & Research Libraries, 76(1), 63-80.
Matthews, J. R. (2010). What’s the return on ROI? The benefits and challenges of calculating your library’s return on investment. Library Leadership & Management, 25(1).
Meyers-Martin, C., & Borchard, L. (2015). The finals stretch: Exams week library outreach surveyed. Reference Services Review, 43(4), 510-532.
Mezick, E. M. (2007). Return on investment: Libraries and student retention. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(5), 561-566.
Miller, J. (2014). A method for evaluating library liaison activities in small academic libraries. Journal of Library Administration, 54(6), 483-500.
Pan, D., Wiersma, G., & Fong, Y. (2011). Towards demonstrating value: Measuring the contributions of library collections to university research and teaching goals. Proceedings of the 2011 Association of College and Research Libraries Conference, Philadelphia, PA. p.459-465. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/sites/ala.org.acrl/files/content/conferences/confsandpreconfs/national/2011/papers/towards_demonstratin.pdf
Rhoden, M., & Crumbley, M. (2013). An evaluation of current outreach services at Calvert library and its future outlook. Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 4, 379-386.
Tenopir, C. (2010). Measuring the value of the academic library: Return on investment and other value measures. The Serials Librarian, 58(1-4), 39-48.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and the initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).