Libraries and Information Centers, Librarians and Technicians Win FLICC
The Federal Library and Information
Center Committee (FLICC) announced the winners of its national awards
for federal librarianship at the 19th Annual FLICC Forum on Federal Information
Policies on March 19 at the Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. The
awards recognized the many innovative ways that federal libraries, librarians
and library technicians fulfill the information demands of government,
business, scholarly communities and the American public.
The award winners and their
supervisors were honored at a ceremony preceding the annual Forum. General
Donald L. Scott, Deputy Librarian of Congress, presented an award to each
winner, who then made a few remarks. The winners names will also
remain on permanent display in the FLICC offices at the Library of Congress.
Federal libraries and staff
throughout the United States and abroad competed in three award categories
for the fourth annual FLICC Awards. The winners efforts are presented
2001 Federal Library/Information
Center of the Year
The National Defense University
Library was recognized for its high level of customer service, the
development of outstanding collections in support of the universitys
mission, and its extraordinary reference services. In 2001, the library
began offering distance learning students digital library access, digitized
the personal papers of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and increased the librarys
visibility through exhibits, tours and lectures, as well as high quality
on-site and remote services.
2001 Federal Librarian of
An abundance of highly qualified
librarians with outstanding, innovative and sustained achievements in
2001 resulted in a tie for this category:
Pamela Dawes, Director,
Haskell Library, Haskell Indian Nations University, Lawrence, Kansas,
was recognized for conscientious and enthusiastic leadership in expanding
and improving library services to the Haskell Indian Nations University.
In 2001, she acquired supplemental funding grants and donated resources
for the library that total more than $90,000. She initiated an aggressive
acquisition program that increased holdings by 700 titles and created
an American Indian language tapes collection. Her commitment to excellence
increased the Haskell Librarys usage by 21 percent last year, and
her advocacy efforts have led to enhanced accessibility for patrons with
Lynne C. Tobin, Chief,
Reference Library, National Imagery and Mapping Agency, Bethesda, Md.,
was recognized for her active and innovative leadership in expanding a
small reference collection into a full-fledged branch of the National
Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) reference library. In 2001, she directed
the retrospective conversion of legacy textual materials and loaded them
into NIMAs new Voyager ILS. Her efforts have improved access via
employees workstations to texts and maps that are currently cataloged
following MARC standards. The bibliographic instruction program and training
materials she initiated are now recognized by the NIMA College.
2001 Federal Library Technician
of the Year
Leslie Yeakley, Library
Technician, DTIC Technical Library, Defense Technical Information Center,
Fort Belvoir, Va., was recognized for her proactive work ethic exemplified
by her consistent enthusiasm, initiative, tenacity and resourcefulness.
In 2001, she served as the only DTIC library staff member for several
months while at the same time testing software to map COSATI-format bibliographic
records to the MARC format. She is also recognized for balancing her excellent
technical competencies with a strong personal commitment to providing
customer service. Patricia E. Tellman, Library Technician, Base Library,
Naval Air Station, Fort Worth, Texas, received an honorable mention.
Information on the 2002 Award
program will be announced later this summer. For the latest information
on the awards, interested parties may refer to the FLICC Web site, http://www.loc.gov/flicc/wg/wg-award.html,
where information regarding the 2002 nomination packet will be posted
on the Whats New section as soon as it becomes available.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Everyones talking about
recruiting new information professionals to replace the vast numbers of
aging librarians who will be retiring during the next decadeeven
Laura Bush! (See http://www.imls.gov/whatsnew/current/011002-1.htm.)
A few months ago when the First Lady announced that the Bush Administration
would be recommending a $10 million initiative in 2003 to recruit a new
generation of librarians, the FLICC Executive Board had already begun
discussing the issue of recruitment for federal library jobsand
the FLICC Personnel Working Group had already begun considering activities
they could undertake to support individual agency efforts.
During the past month, FLICCs
FEDLIB listserv was host to a rich two-week email exchange among library
managers, library school students, topped-out library technicians and
mid-career librarians with diverse and in some cases strongly-felt perspectives
on federal opportunities for professional information work. Issues included:
The inconsistency and inaccessibility of job postings on agency Web sites;
the need to advance federal library technicians into professional positions;
the lack of awareness at library schools (even our two DC-area MLIS programs)
about federal library openings; the apparent dearth of mid-level opportunities
for mid-career librarians from other sectors who are interested in federal
jobs; and the confusion and ineffectiveness of the federal selection process
in the rare instance when a potential applicant locates an appropriate
Some suggestions proposed
in the listserv discussion were: promoting use by federal library recruiters
of effective Web sites such as monster.com, the SLA Web site, or the FedWorld
Search for a Federal Job site; FLICCs making direct
contact with library schools to improve their awareness of federal opportunities;
work with OPM to improve the searchability of their site by library words
as well as government series numbers; and presentations by federal librarians
at library association job fairs or other conference venues.
Some other ideas the working
group is considering are: federal library (government-wide) internships
under the Student Career Experience Program and/or the Student Educational
Employment Program (5 CFR 213.3202); exhibiting for federal libraries
at library association conferences; providing a pathfinder
to federal jobs on the FLICC Web site that can be easily promoted to all
library schools; and developing an appealing brochure that would give
an overview of federal libraries and examples of federal library jobs
that could be broadcast to interest library professionals in a federal
The FLICC Personnel Working Group will be exploring many of these options
and others over the next several months. If you have additional ideasor
would like to participate on the working groupcontact me at email@example.com,
or contact Working Group Chair Tad Downing (GPO) at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Send your ideas to the FEDLIB discussion listserv. (If you are not on
the FEDLIB listserv, go to http://lcweb.loc.gov/flicc/listsrvs.html#fedlib
for instructions to sign up.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Forum Looks at Homeland Security
In the wake of the September
11, 2001 terrorist attacks, many government agencies changed Web sites,
FOIA practices, physical premises access, and perhaps even their publishing
practices, to improve information security. The 19th Annual FLICC Forum
on Federal Information Policies focused on the impact of these changes
with its program, Homeland Security: Impact of Policy Changes on
Government Information Access, on March 19, 2002 at the Library
Following the Fourth Annual
FLICC Awards Program, Winston Tabb, Associate Librarian of Congress, began
by asking the audience to consider what the Forum focus might have been
if not for the events of September 11.
Early last fall we
were discussing the National Book Festival, 24/7 reference, and digital
preservation. Within minutes of the attacks, familiar terms like security,
access, privacy, safety, preservation, freedom took on renewed and deeper
meanings, said Tabb.
Looking at how federal libraries
have been affected, Tabb noted in addition to the USA Patriot Act which
may, in the interest of national security, modify some of the privacy
protections that have limited use of personal information collected by
the government, government leaders have supported greater scrutiny
in the releasing of government information to the public, while acknowledging
that information sharing WITHIN the government, among the various agencies,
is of vital importance to the national security.
Before introducing the Executive
Keynote Speaker, Viet Dinh, Assistant Attorney General for the Office
of Legal Policy at the Department of Justice, Tabb concluded his remarks
by posing the pertinent question of the day: How should federal libraries
and information centers respond to these changes while continuing to fulfill
their mission to provide quality information for the government and from
Information Is the Key
Addressing the crowd of federal
librarians and other information specialists, Dinh said, The overriding
objective of the Justice Department is to prevent terrorist attacks, and
those of you in this room are our critical partners in this effort. Information
is the key to the prevention of terrorist attacks. You must help educate
the citizenry by disseminating the true policies of our government. It
is critical that citizens be fully engaged in the war on terrorism.
Dinh acknowledged the balancing
act between privacy and national security. Within the framework
of the Constitution, how can we prevent terrorism? he asked. Dinh
said he believes the answer lies in having a comprehensive plan to exchange
information that not only protects the nations core values as articulated
in the Constitution, but also provides law enforcement with the tools
it needs to combat terrorism.
This issue was addressed
by Congress in the USA Patriot Act of 2001 (P.L.107-56), which the president
signed into law in October. The purpose of the legislation, which, according
to Dinh, was enacted in record time, is to enhance law enforcement
investigatory tools in order to deter and punish terrorist acts in the
United States and around the world.
The act relaxed the
legal barriers that prevent information sharing between the criminal side
and the intelligence side [of an investigation], said Dinh. Information
cannot just be gathered and lay dormant. It must be shared with the proper
defense personnel. The president has said that this is a long-term war,
and all hands must be on deck. In that case, the left hand must know what
the right hand is doing, and that includes the state and local law enforcement
agencies that are on the front line.
Dinh also stressed the need
to update the laws to reflect the latest technologies. The laws
governing criminal surveillance were developed in 1968 in an era of rotary
phones and analog technology, noted Dinh. According to Dinh, Congress
recently addressed this by updating existing laws so that cable companies
are treated like telephone companies, thereby making them subject to Title
II wiretapping laws.
We seek to deliver
to Americans freedom from fear, but we must protect that freedom through
the law, said Dinh. We have a common set of values that are
under attack. But if we lose these values [in the process of crafting
security policy] the terrorists will have won.
Prior to assuming his current
position in the Justice Department, Dinh was a professor of law and deputy
director of Asian law and policy studies at the Georgetown University
Law Center. A graduate of Harvard Law School, Dinh served as a law clerk
to Judge Laurence H. Silberman of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
Circuit and to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day OConnor. He
also served as associate special counsel to the U.S. Senate Whitewater
Committee and special counsel to Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N. Mex.) for the
impeachment trial of President Clinton.
Executive Branch Looks for
The morning panel on Agency
Initiatives featured Patrice McDermott, Assistant Director, Office of
Government Relations, American Library Association; Nancy Blair, Chief
Librarian, U.S. Geological Survey Library and U.S. Geological Survey Security
Task Force; and W. Russell Neuman, Senior Policy Analyst, Technology Division,
Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office of the President.
McDermott, formerly of OMB
Watch, launched into her presentation by saying, Living in interesting
times can be a blessing or a curse and at the moment I only see the curse.Congress
and the judiciary suppressed their doubts and somewhat better judgement
and passed the USA Patriot Act in a mad rush, said McDermott.
While McDermott was encouraged
that not all agencies have taken material down from their Web sites and
that only one item had been withdrawn from federal depository libraries,
she said, The sky may be sagging badly in a few places, but it is
not falling. We need to parse out our response carefully and thoughtfully.
After a review of several
examples regarding how abruptly access to information changed after last
September, she warned the audience that powerful industry forces
have been trying for years to prevent public access to regulatory information
they submit to agencies because it usually shows them in a bad light.
The regulatory agencies were among the very first to take information
McDermott asked federal libraries
to remember that the public trusts government to protect its best interests,
but should hold it accountable as well. Who watches the watchers?
Whose interests are being protected when information is withheld from
The really scary part
is that we dont know how much information has been removed. This
stems from the vast amount of information available. If we had good inventories
of Web sites, we would know what had been removed. But we do not have
inventories of the information so we do not know if agencies have not
cataloged what is removed or preserved it, said McDermott. She voiced
further concern that there is no dialog going on, no real discussion.
How do we weigh the risks about everyone not knowing about vulnerability
and hazards, and how do we weigh the interests of science and the public.
Clearly there is not going to be an advanced notice in the Federal
Register that a document is going to be taken down, said McDermott.
McDermott concluded that
the events of September 11 have caused us to revisit some of our
assumptions about openness and easy accessibility of government information.
We need to hold our principles firmly in hand as we do that revisiting.
Blair updated the audience
about her agency and the press coverage it received soon after the attacks
of September 11, 2001. A single USGS publication received more attention
than any other government Web site or report which was withdrawn. It was
a U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) CD-ROM entitled Source Area Characteristics
of Large Public Surface-Water Supplies in the Conterminous United States:
An Information Resource for Source-Water Assessment, 1999, said
Blair. The U.S. Geological Survey is a small agency not used to
receiving media attention except when there are earthquakes or volcanic
When our CD-ROM title
was removed from depository, the information content was not destroyed.
We will not attempt to retrieve widely distributed documents, but now
the process of releasing new scientific information or updating old releases
will take into consideration new directives relating to security concerns,
In early October, USGS set
up an Operations Center for Homeland Security Activities to respond to
the large number of inquiries that were received and a committee to develop
guidelines for the scientific teams to evaluate releases of science information
in the light of security concerns. This committee developed an internal
guidance document entitled USGS Product Access and Distribution
Guidance, which was released in December 2001. The guidance document
outlines who evaluates the sensitivity of a particular publication, it
established procedures for recalling publications, and states that documents
already in wide distribution would not be recalled.
Blair ended her remarks by
saying, Government employees need to walk a line between security
requirements and freedom of access to information. The USGS has developed
guidelines that combine concerns for both. It is in the nations
best interest that the USGS continue to be a source of the natural science
information necessary for research and decision-making purposes while
responding to the heightened concerns for public safety.
Representing the administrtions
point of view, Neuman said it was time for two slogans and then for two
memos. He reminded the audience of the World War II adage silence
means security and its corresponding phrase loose lips sink
ships. He then asked attendees to think about the current slogan
Information wants to be free.
I want to ask you to
think about the character of information during the Second World War and
the issue of the war on terrorism that characterizes the new world of
today, said Neuman. The irony of comparing silence means
security and information needs to be free is important
for us as we struggle with the balancing act of policies and procedures.
Then Neuman returned to the
two memos. He reported that a memo will soon circulate from the Presidents
Chief of Staff, Andrew Card, dealing with the specific issue of information
related to weapons of mass destruction. The memo is intended to remind
agencies of existing authority and policy already in place. It is
much like the attorney generals memo (on FOIA) which traditionally
is a reiteration of the new administrations respect for the principles
of the FOIA process and a reminder that the exceptions to FOIA relate
to case law, said Neuman.
According to Neuman, the
second memo, expected in May, will address the more difficult and
nuanced subject of critical infrastructure protection. Here we need to
address existing policy to see if is adequate to meet the needs of security.
Information Sharing Vs.
The afternoon session of
the forum began with a congressional keynote address delivered by Rep.
Thomas M. Davis III (R-VA). He began his remarks by affirming that information
sharing among government agencies and between the public and private sectors
is a critical element in the war against terrorism.
Representative Davis then
voiced his concerns about federal information security in an era of cyber
terrorism. Citing the results of a recent survey by the House Subcommittee
on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental Relations,
Davis reported that 16 out of 24 federal agencies received a grade of
F in the area of information security.
is our greatest vulnerability, said Davis. As a result of
the information revolution and the ever-evolving technologies that support
information collection, our vulnerability has grown exponentially. These
terrorist groups may be fundamentalists, who are anti-information and
anti-globalization, but they do understand our networks and inter-connectivity,
and they are developing technologies to destroy them. The next attack
is not likely to be by air. The amount of damage that can be done to our
critical infrastructure outweighs that done on September 11.
Compounding the problem,
according to Davis, is the fact that federal information security suffers
from a lack of coordinated management. All the information was out
there [prior to September 11], but no one was talking to anyone else,
said Davis, referring to the Immigration and Naturalization Service and
other agencies. It is a hodgepodge of turf wars, he said.
In my opinion there is no framework for a coordinated effort.
To combat the problem, Davis
has introduced several pieces of legislation. The most recent, the Federal
Information Security Management Act (H.R. 3844), would strengthen federal
government information security; one provision would require information
security risk management standards. Introduced by Davis on March 5, and
co-sponsored by Rep. Stephen Horn (R-Calif.), the legislation would require
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to make standards for information
technology security compulsory among federal agencies. It would require
risk assessments, periodic reviews, and security awareness training for
The federal government
must first put its own house in order, said Davis. We cant
afford to delay.
Davis believes that, given
its importance, the responsibility for coordinating federal information
security should be a function housed within the Executive Office of the
President. Toward this end, he introduced a bill several years ago that
would have created a federal chief information officer position, reporting
directly to the president. However, Davis has no immediate plans to reintroduce
the bill, given the recent establishment of an associate director of information
technology and electronic government in OMB.
Davis also feels strongly
that there must be a coordinated effort between the public and private
sectors to combat electronic terrorism. The private sector controls
about 90 percent of our telecommunications systems, noted Davis.
The government is responsible for national security and law enforcement.
The two must engage in a responsible, candid dialog. Without the cooperation
of the private sector, we are hopelessly vulnerable.
To further communication
between the government and private sector, Davis introduced the Cyber
Security Information Act (H.R. 2435) on July 10, 2001, two months before
the terrorist attacks. The bill would encourage the secure disclosure
and protected exchange of information about cyber security problems, solutions,
test practices and test results, and related matters in connection with
critical infrastructure protection.
Davis hopes the legislation
will go forward, but acknowledges that it will be an uphill battle.
There are barriers
to information sharing, such as antitrust laws, said Davis. At
the moment, private industry has every incentive not to disclose any information.
According to Davis, private
industry must be given the assurance they need to share information with
the federal government in much the same way as they did to address the
Y2K computer problem.
This is not about the
public knowing [what private companies are doing], but about the government
knowing, said Davis. Referring to the implications of the legislation,
Davis said, Everything is a trade-off. Lets not let the perfect
be the enemy of the very good.
Interagency Efforts Are
Following Davis, the afternoon
panel explored accomplishments in and future prospects for interagency
information sharing, including what systems and standards are needed to
improve security while aiding information flow among government units.
Panelists June Daniels, Senior Systems Analyst, Foreign Affairs Systems
Integration Program, Department of State; Kurt Molholm, Administrator,
Defense Technical Information Center; and Francis Buckley, Superintendent
of Documents, Government Printing Office, discussed techniques agencies
use to back up and secure sensitive information to ensure its integrity
Daniels began by describing
the State Department as the department of diplomacy...so we guard
our tongues at all levels. She then reported on the Overseas Presence
Interagency Collaboration/KM System she has been part of developing and
which was accelerated by the events of September 11.
Our project started
in a tragedy, just like the September 11 events. Ours was the coordinated
embassy bombings in August 1998, said Daniels. She said the agencys
accountability review board developed a set of findings which it sent
to the Overseas Presence Advisory panel. This report looked at how the
agency did business overseas and how it could be done better with reduced
The panel made several recommendations
regarding facility, right sizing, security, and information technology
(IT). The IT recommendations included applying knowledge management in
overseas posts, using Internet and Internet-like technology to support
interagency collaboration, developing a common, interoperable IT platform
among agencies at posts, and establishing mechanisms to provide public
access to the services of the foreign affairs community.
We need to be able
to work togetherall the agency presences overseas. The panel found
that the lack of a common infrastructure made information exchange difficult,
said Daniels. She added that September 11 has made us restrict information
sharing with the public but it has created a boon for sharing information
Her project will begin as
a pilot program developed by integrators from commercial, off-the-shelf-software.
It will include advanced search capabilities, Internet services, common
directories, email, individual and post Web pages. She said the project
was not about the technology but about cultural change. Knowledge
management and knowledge sharing is a cultural change at State. We need
to get people to know that sharing information is real power and can help
get work done.
Buckley, who administers
the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) and GPO Access, opened his
remarks with a quotation from the eighteenth-century author and lexicographer,
Samuel Johnson: Integrity without knowledge is weak and useless,
and knowledge without integrity is dangerous and dreadful.
Buckley said, Without
free access to knowledge, the integrity of our nation and its citizens
would be weak and useless indeed. However, recent events have
demonstrated just how dangerous and dreadful that same knowledge
can be when it is not coupled with integrity.
He outlined the continuing
challenge for GPO as one that required it to be as inclusive as possible,
to identify public interest materials produced through GPO or agency publishing
channels, to provide bibliographic control for the materials, and to provide
the publications to depository libraries for public access. Post
9-11 that mission has not changed, but agency sensitivity to what should
be distributed to the public is heightening. There are no specific guidelines
or criteria to determine what non-classified information the agency has
published, or may publish in the future, in tangible or online formats,
should be withheld from the public as administrative or official use only
in the interest of national security, said Buckley.
Molholm set the stage for
his remarks with a brief description of the Defense Technical Information
Center (DTIC) as the central repository for defense acquisition, scientific
and technical information for bona fide users. He said DTIC maintains
the Defense Departments science and technology databases, and other
databases of interest, providing controlled access to information products
and networks. It also administers Information Analysis Centers, provides
support and services to Defense Technical Libraries and the Office of
the Secretary of Defense.
Its role as the operator
for the Defense Certification and Registration Services is part of its
concept of operations. DTIC is DoDs front door to information
resources through the Internet, its door to controlled information resources
through its Intranets, and its content repository and information processor,
The registration process
is what makes the release and dissemination process work efficiently.
Molholm said, By establishing an agreement before the fact on what
information can be provided and establish accountability and authority
for release speeds the release process. In addition, each technical
document receives a distribution statement that limits its distribution.
For electronic resources,
DTIC has also established the Lightweight Data Access Protocol (LDAP)
and set up a Web-based registration system for users. This system
allows us to provide access to limited access Web sties and reduce the
burden on system administrators, said Molholm. Because DTIC
and others share the LDAP single-user database, content owners can manage
user groups while users have just one password to access diverse Web sites.
In direct response to the
events of last September, DTIC initiated additional collection building
by acquiring documents on homeland defense and topics related to the war
on terrorism. Staff members also began physically searching and prioritizing
older documents for digitizing. We have also been answering many
questions for areas such as sensor technology and chemical and biological
defense. The queries have come from all over including other federal agencies,
state and local governments and foreign countries, said Molholm.
DTIC has also launched its
Defend America and Current Focus Web sites via
secured Web servers accessible only to authorized users. Both offer authoritative
information resources screened by subject matter experts and encrypted
for transmission. Current Focus has reduced thousands of unscreened
materials to a selected few links and documents to provide users specialized
information support service, said Molholm.
Molholm reported that there
are already over 800 registered users for Current Focus. Eighty percent
of our users are from .mil and .gov servers. Homeland security and thermobaric
warfare are among the most frequently requested parts of the site.
Forum Finale Stresses Privacy
Peter Swire, Visiting Professor
of Law, The George Washington University Law School, offered a finale
for the Forum with a look at Changes in Privacy Policies in the
Interest of National Security. He began with an overview of his
background that included being Clintons Chief Counselor for Privacy
in 1999 and 2000 and then moved onto a review of the laws regarding privacy
beginning in 1970.
The first wave of privacy
activity was in response to the rise of the mainframe computer,
said Swire. The Fair Credit Report Act and the Privacy Act of the
1970s were designed to develop fair information practices of notice, choice,
access, security, and accountability. The second wave of activity
resulted from having mainframe capabilities on a laptop or desktop computer
along with the development of the Internet. Data transfers are now
free, instant and global. How do we respond to more databases and more
transfers? asked Swire.
The Clinton Administration
developed legal protections for children, and for medical and financial
data. They used self-regulation as a path to progress, watching 88 percent
of commercial Web sites developing privacy policies. We wanted the
government to be a model; so we worked with every agency to develop privacy
policies as well and to prevent the government from storing cookies on
users systems, said Swire.
Swire then gave a detailed
review of the history and current status of wiretapping and surveillance
laws. While the Clinton Administration had proposed updating these laws
for the Internet age, complete with a 15-agency working group discussing
related issues, The USA Patriot Act made sweeping changes in response
to the events of September 11.
Introduced less than a week
after the attacks, the new laws included nationwide trap and trace
laws that made one court order effective nationwide. Swire was concerned
about the implications of these changes and posed several tough questions.
If you receive an order from a judge in Idaho late at night, how
would you challenge that? How much would such an order cover if a suspect
used a public library? Would anyone in the library be covered?
Swire also took a look at
the new laws that allowed law enforcement to surf behind an
Internet user. The previous low limited an Internet service provider (ISP)
to monitoring its own system and giving evidence of a previous attack.
But it did not allow and ISP to invite law enforcement in to catch burglars.
The new laws allow the FBI to ask an ISP to invite it in and then
camp at the ISP permanently, said Swire. I am concerned that
there was never a hearing on this matter in Congress. It also has no time
limit and no reporting requirement.
After 9/11 there is
a greater focus on cyber security. Hackers are no longer cute, said
Swire. Cyber security and the need to protect critical infrastructure
have led to greater tolerance for surveillance. Many people believe
this is justified by greater risks, said Swire. But Swire said security
and privacy can work together. Good security protects information
against unauthorized use, accounting becomes more obviously desirable,
and a security system upgrade can be an upgrade for other requirements,
like privacy, as well.
Swire called the USA Patriot
Act a work in progress. Imagine an architecture that meets legitimate
security needs and also respects privacy. Better data handling often results
in both. He said the homework was to get engaged, to study
the pros and cons of the new provisions. He called for hearings
that look at both new forms of accountability and how to stop potential
We need accountability
to ensure that the new powers are used wisely. Lets get to work
on that, said Swire.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Board Member
Clara M. Smith Dies
Clara M. Smith, Librarian
Supervisor at the Department of Transportation, and new member of the
FLICC Executive Board (FEB), died April 4, 2002.
Smith was born in Flint,
Michigan, the fourth of nine children. She earned her bachelors
degree in European History from Eastern Michigan University in Ypsilanti,
Michigan and her masters degree in library science from the University
of Michigan. She also earned a Ph.D. in Law from the University of Toledo
in Toledo, Ohio.
In 1986, Smith began her
library career as an Assistant Librarian at Howard University. She joined
the federal library community through the Department of Transportation
in 1992. During her tenure at Transportation, she earned a Special Achievement
Award and a Superior Achievement Award.
She was very active at the
Tenth Street Baptist Church where she was a member of the New Members
Club, the Budget Committee and the Prison Ministry. She taught Sunday
School, the Mid-Week School of the Bible, and was an instructor for the
New Member Discipleship Training.
Smith leaves seven siblings,
Curtis of Memphis, Tennessee; Shirley Moore of Flint, Michigan; Joyce
Porter of Lansing, Michigan; Patricia Smith of Swartz Creek, Michigan;
Tommie Jr. of Lafayette, Louisiana; Tyrone of Fenton, Michigan; Alfred
of Flint, Michigan; thirteen nieces and nephews and a host of other relatives
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Calling All Federal Librarians:
FLICC Working Groups Need Volunteers
you want to add your perspective to the federal library and information
you want to contribute your experience to solve federal information
you have ideas and opinions to share with colleagues?
Joining a FLICC working group
means you can influence the future of federal librarianship. Even if you
work outside the Washington, D.C. area, you can still participate fully
electronically and telephonically. There are many vital issues that need
your input to maintain the quality and professional performance of federal
libraries. You can help!
Tackle Recruitment Issues
The FLICC Personnel Working
Group is initiating an effort to improve federal library recruitment.
They have already identified a number of ideas, including exploring library
school internships, sending FLICC representatives to visit library schools,
expanding general federal recruitment representation at national library
conferences, and creating a Web pathfinder on federal library
jobs on the FLICC Web site.
If you would like to work
on these ideas or have your own ideas on how to attract well-qualified
librarians to the federal sector, please send email to Tad Downing, the
Personnel Working Group Chair, at email@example.com.
Expand Professional Horizons
After an exciting focus group
session at the December FLICC quarterly meeting, the Education Working
Group is developing new programming for federal librarians and technicians.
The top rated topics all embraced business skills for librarians, including
- strategic planning/business
- communication skillsnetworking/advocacy/politicking/schmoozing
- program promotion/ marketing/highlighting
- management of change
and quantitative measurements/benchmarking
- end-user training/remote
With so many programs and
activities anticipated, there are opportunities for both regional and
national members interested in helping FLICC to create an outstanding
educational program. To add your talents to this working group, please
send email to Sandy Morton Schwalb, the working group chair, at Sschwalb@DTIC.MIL.
To learn more about all the
FLICC working groups, visit the FLICC Web site at http://lcweb.loc.gov/flicc/mmabout.html
or call Anna Bohlin in the FLICC Publications and Education office at
TABLE OF CONTENTS
The FLICC Newsletter
is published by the Federal Library and Information Center Committee.
Suggestions of areas for Federal Library and Information Center Committee
attention or items appropriate for inclusion in the FLICC Newsletter
should be sent to:
Federal Library and Information Center Committee
Library of Congress
101 independence Ave., SE, Adams Bldg., Room 217
Washington, DC 20540-4935
FLICC Executive Director's
Phone: (202) 707-4800
Fax: (202) 707-4818
FEDLINK Fiscal Operations
Phone: (202) 707-4900
Fax: (202) 707-4999
Susan M. Tarr
Gail Fineberg and Audrey Fischer
The Federal Library and Information
Center Committee was established in 1965 to foster excellence in federal
library and information services through inter agency cooperation and
to provide guidance and direction for the Federal Library and Information
TABLE OF CONTENTS
to FLICC Home Page
Library of Congress
Library of Congress Help
June 4, 2002