Documents  
DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY   
The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation determined eligibility for each participating library considering both the number of low-income patrons that a library branch serves (economic need) and a foundation-defined level of service or number of up-to-date computers (hardware need) provided in a library relative to the number of persons in poverty.
Participating Libraries.doc (32.5k)

Economic need and aging computers were considered as the two primary criteria to determine eligibility. 

Economic Need: Eligible public libraries serve communities where 10% of the total population or more than 3,000 people in each library building service area live in poverty.   Library service areas are defined as a 10-mile radius from the library building in rural areas, a 3-mile radius from the library building in suburban areas and a 1-mile radius from the library building in urban areas.  

The foundation used data from the U.S. 2000 Census to determine poverty levels for each library service area in the state. Libraries on the cusp of being poverty eligible (at least 9% or 2500 people in poverty) were considered further with alternative criteria. Among the alternates, those with free school lunch eligibility (33% or higher) and 2007 unemployment data (greater than or equal to 5%) were also deemed eligible.

Hardware Need: Public libraries that qualified based on economic need next demonstrated that their public access computer and Internet services are aging and vulnerable to becoming obsolete.  Libraries ran a computer inventory using TechAtlas for Libraries to assess their hardware vulnerability.

 

 

 

 

Please click on the link above the print icon to read a list of the library agencies participating in this grant opportunity.

 

 


Contribute to this topic
Do you have an article, presentation, or other content to share on this topic?
You can post it on this topic page. Find out more about submitting documents in the Member Center.
Ratings You must be signed in to rate this item
Average (0 Votes)
Comments