CH.2-: P 37 X pl.Z pennState UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation http://archive.org/details/surveyofpatenttOObrow Survey of Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries 1991/92 Methodology and Data Part 2 of 2 Prepared by: William H. Brown Office of Electronic Information Products and Services James A. Arshem Center for Patent and Trademark Information Services September, 1993 U.S. PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE. WASHINGTON. DC 20231 TABLE OF CONTENTS page INTRODUCTION 1 1. PTDL PROFILE 3 2. SERVICE PROFILE 5 3. USER PROFILE 7 LIST OF EXHIBITS 1 . Letter of Introduction and Survey Intent 2. PTDL Profile Survey Questionnaire 3. Service Profile Survey Forms 4. User Profile Survey Questionnaires 5. Frequency Distribution of Survey Data PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY (153 pages) SERVICE PROFILE SURVEY (5 pages) PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS (28 pages) PATENT SURVEY DATA ( 1 1 pages) TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS ( 1 5 pages) TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA ( 1 pages) INTRODUCTION In 1991/92 the Patent and Trademark Depository Library Program (PTDLP) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) conducted a survey of Patent and Trademark Depository Library (PTDL) institutions, services, and patrons. The major findings of this survey are summarized in Part 1 of this report, while analytical procedures and detailed, frequency distributions of variables included in the survey are presented in Part 2 . The 1991/92 survey was designed by the PTDLP office and consisted of three major parts: Part A — PTDL Institutional Profile — was designed to obtain physical and administrative information about each PTDL. Library representatives were asked to provide information on the physical size and content of their patent and trademark document collections, the type and quantity of equipment, the number and type of staff, the cost of providing patent and trademark services, plus an evaluation of services, materials, and support provided to PTDLs by the PTDLP office. Part B — Service Profile — was designed to obtain information on the volume of reference and service assistance that PTDL staff provided to patent and trademark patrons. PTDL staff recorded the date and time of each request for patent, trademark, or other service assistance, and whether the request was made in-person or via telephone. Part C — User Profile — was designed to ascertain the information needs of the patrons, the resources they used to meet these needs, their success in obtaining the information, plus past and future use of the PTDL facility. Separate, one-page questionnaires were developed for patent or trademark patrons, who were asked to complete the questionnaire each time they used patent or trademark materials. Prior to conducting the survey, representatives reviewed draft survey forms and were offered the opportunity to make a commitment to participate in all or part(s) of the survey (See Exhibit 1) . Representatives from all PTDLs scheduled themselves to specific periods of time to conduct the survey and to return the completed questionnaires. For various reasons, including shortage (or decrease) of staff, not all PTDLs were able to participate in all parts of the survey. Forty-eight (48) PTDLs participated in Part A of the survey (Institutional Profile) ; 43 PTDLs participated in Part B (Service Profile) ; and 43 PTDLs participated in Part C (User Profile) of the survey. All survey questionnaires and data collection forms were developed by the PTDLP office and delivered to PTDLs, along with instructions for their use and for reporting the results. Data were received from the PTDLs between August 1991 and May 1992, then processed and analyzed by the Office of Electronic Information Products and Services (OEIPS) , beginning in October 1992. Data base construction and analysis were performed on a personal computer, using SPSS* for Windows Release 5. PTDLP office staff and OEIPS staff met several times during data processing and analysis to discuss preliminary findings and to resolve data issues. Pertinent information that relates to the processing and analysis of data from the institutional, service, and patron surveys is presented in Sections 1, 2, and 3, followed by appropriate exhibits. The final and largest exhibit consists of the frequency distributions of all variables that were included in all three surveys. The summary findings presented in Part 1 of this report are based on these frequency distributions, plus additional multivariate crosstabulations, although these crosstabulations are not included in this report. 1. PTDL PROFILE The PTDL Profile survey consisted of a 23-page questionnaire that focused on a variety of physical and administrative characteristics of each PTDL. (See Exhibit 2) . The questionnaire was distributed in August, 1991. Representatives were asked to return completed questionnaires by August 30, 1991; however, some libraries returned survey forms as late as February, 1992, and supplemental data were received through May, 1992. Complete or nearly complete survey forms were received from 4 2 PTDLs and another 6 PTDLs submitted Section IX data only (Evaluation of Training and Consciousness-raising Events) . In most cases, the data provided by the PTDL representatives were processed as they appeared on the survey forms. There were few data issues that needed to be resolved during the analysis of the PTDL Profile data and consisted of the following items. Response Rate — Nearly 3 PTDLs did not respond to the survey. Since information about these PTDLs was not available, no attempt was made to extrapolate survey findings presented in Part 1 to all PTDLs. Space Committed to Patent and Trademark Services — Total space was not indicated on a few forms, so the total was calculated, based on information provided on component parts. Equipment Used by Patent and Trademark Patrons/Staff — Total pieces of equipment, based on the sum of patron and staff equipment, was not calculated, since no clear distinction was made between patron and staff equipment. In many cases, it was apparent the same pieces of equipment were being counted as both patron and staff equipment. Costs — Some PTDLs identified atypical or one-time expenses (e.g., start-up costs) with information on average annual expenses. These items were excluded from the tabulation of average annual expenses, but were separately noted. 2. SERVICE PROFILE The Service Profile survey was designed to measure the volume and type of assistance the PTDLs provide to their patrons. The survey involved the enumeration of each instance when assistance was provided. Tally sheets provided by the PTDLP office allowed library staff to record three attributes of each type of assistance provided: the type of assistance (patent reference, trademark reference, or directional assistance), the method of assistance (in- person or telephone) , plus the date and time the assistance was provided. The PTDLP office also provided summary sheets so that PTDL staff could aggregate tally sheet counts from one or more days of data collection; Summary Sheet A was for aggregation of daily tallies and Summary Sheet B was for aggregation of weekly tallies. (See Exhibit 3) . Some libraries returned summary sheets and tally sheets, while others returned only the summary sheets. Wherever possible, data base construction reflected the information reported on the individual tally sheets. For most of the PTDLs that returned only the summary sheets, information on the method of request (in-person versus telephone) was not available, since there was no provision on the summary forms to record this information. 1 PTDL representatives were asked to collect data for three, two-week periods and representatives were allowed to schedule their own data collection periods. Data collection began in September, 1991, and ended in May, 1992. Forty- five (45) PTDLs participated in the Service Profile survey. Staff at each PTDL tallied the date, time, number, type, and method of assistance provided to patrons for approximately 3 days. During that time, PTDL staff recorded a total of 42,258 requests for reference assistance and 23,379 requests for directional assistance. However, the method of assistance (in-person or telephone) could be determined for only 24,767 of these total requests. The date of each request was included in the Service Profile survey data base. Dates were then recoded into day of week (Sunday through Saturday) , so that a distribution of service by day of week could be profiled. 'Some PTDLs that submitted only summary sheets did, however, provide separate breakouts of in-person versus telephone requests. 3. USER PROFILE The User Profile survey, although smaller in size and scope than either the PTDL Profile or Service Profile surveys, required considerably more involved data processing and analysis. The User Profile survey questionnaire focused on the collection of information about the patrons, their patent and trademark information needs, the resources they use to meet those needs, and their success in obtaining that information. Separate, one-page questionnaires were developed for patent users and for trademark users, although the same types of questions were asked on both data collection forms. In addition, PTDL representatives were given the option of aggregating data from individual questionnaires onto Summary Sheets; separate Summary Sheets were provided for patent users and for trademark users. (See Exhibit 4) . PTDL representatives were asked to collect data for three, two-week periods and representatives were allowed to schedule their own data collection periods. Data collection began in August, 1991, and ended in February, 1992. Forty- three (43) PTDLs participated in the Service Profile survey — 27 returned individual User Profile survey forms (some of these PTDLs may also have returned Summary Sheets) ; 14 PTDLs returned Summary Sheets only; and 2 PTDLs submitted individual User Profile survey forms for one data collection period and only Summary Sheets for the remaining data collection periods. For those PTDLs that submitted both User Profile survey forms and Summary Sheets, data base construction reflected the information provided on the individual User Profile survey forms. Data from 1,414 individual patent User Profile survey forms were entered into a data base referred to as "Patent Survey Data"; data from 259 individual trademark User Profile survey forms were entered into a data base referred to as "Trademark Survey Data". (See Exhibit 5). Data from the individual User Profile survey forms were reviewed for accuracy and infrequent editing of the data was required. For the most part, data were entered into the data base as they appeared on the survey forms, including instances when the respondent indicated "don't know" although only "yes/no" responses could have been checked. Editing consisted primarily of ensuring, for example, that respondents did not identify as "other" any research tool that was listed as one of the possible response categories. Data from the Summary Sheets were then entered into data bases referred to as "Patent Summary Sheets" and "Trademark Summary Sheets". (See Exhibit 5). The major issue involved with the processing of these survey data focused on the 4 5 patent and 4 5 trademark Summary Sheets that were submitted. There was no provision on the Summary Sheets for recording the number of individual questionnaires that were used to compile the aggregated data. Thus, it was not possible to determine the number of patent and trademark patrons included in the survey, or, for example, the proportion of patent patrons who were attorneys. An estimate of the number of patrons represented on the Summary Sheets was derived by estimating the number of patrons represented on each Summary Sheet, then summing the individual estimates. This procedure consisted of the following steps: 1. Estimate the minimum number of respondents that must have been represented on each summary sheet. This was done by summing the responses to each of the five variables with dichotomous response categories, then selecting the largest summation to represent the minimum number of patrons represented on the Summary Sheet. 2 The five dichotomous variables included: place of residence (inside or outside the service area) ; place of work (inside or outside the service area) ; prior use of the PTDL (yes or no) ; success in obtaining the information (yes or no) ; and future use of the PTDL (yes or no) . For example, the Summary Sheet may show 20 'yes' responses and 10 'no' responses to the questionnaire item, "Have you used patent materials at this library before?" This would indicate at least 30 respondents were represented on that Summary Sheet. 2. Sum the minimum estimated number of patrons represented on each patent and trademark Summary Sheet. This resulted in a minimum estimate of 1,93 3 patent users and 286 trademark users. 3. Calculate and compare the response rate for each variable in the two patent (and trademark) data bases. The response rate for a variable based on "Patent Summary Sheet" data and 1,93 3 estimated respondents should be similar to the response rate for the same variable based on "Patent Survey Data" and 1,414 actual respondents. If response rates are different, then either the estimated number of respondents on the Summary Sheets is incorrect, or there are data related problems. 2 The other variables were multiple choice questions and respondents were allowed to select all that applied. Consequently, the summation of responses to multiple choice questionnaire items could far exceed the number of patrons. Response rates between variables in the two patent (and trademark) data bases compared favorably, for the most part. For example, 1,400 of the actual 1,414 actual patrons responded to the questionnaire item on occupation (99 percent response rate) and 152 patrons described themselves as a "Corporate representative" (10.9 percent of 1,400). Assuming a response rate of 99 percent, then 1,914 of the estimated 1,933 patrons probably responded to this questionnaire item on occupation. The number of "Corporate representative" responses in the "Patent Summary Sheet" data base was 193, or 10.1 percent of 1,914. For most variables, the results were within a few percentage points of each other, with two notable exceptions. First, the response rate associated with the questionnaire item on the purpose for using patent materials (prior patent search) was 64 percent from the "Patents Survey Data" data base, but only 44 percent from the "Patent Summary Data" data base. This discrepancy was traced to the fact that one PTDL that submitted only Summary Sheets did not aggregate responses to this questionnaire item, resulting in an undercount. The second discrepancy involved the use of patent microfilm. While the response rate from the "Patent Survey Data" data base was 35 percent, the response rate from the "Patent Summary Data" data base was 55 percent. This discrepancy was traced to the fact that some PTDLs used earlier versions of the survey form that did not include microfilm as one of the research tools that patrons could indicate they had used. Some patrons had listed microfilm as an "other" research tool that was used and this error was caught during data processing. However, it remains that microfilm usage is most likely under-reported in this survey. Thus, the estimated total number of patent patrons who participated in the Patent Profile survey was 3,347 patrons (1,414 actual and 1,933 estimated); the estimated total number of trademark patrons who participated in the Trademark Profile survey was 545 patrons (259 actual and 286 estimated) . The final step in the processing of the patent and trademark User Profile survey data was to consolidate results from the two patent and two trademark data bases. For every variable, it was necessary to first calculate the combined number of responses. Then, a consolidated number of respondents to that questionnaire item was calculated, based on the actual number of patent (or trademark) patrons who responded to the questionnaire item, plus an estimated 1,933 patent (2 59 trademark) patrons, adjusted by the known response rate to each questionnaire item. EXHIBIT 1 LETTER OF INTRODUCTION AND SURVEY INTENT UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office ASSISTANT! SECRETARY AND COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS Washington, D.C. 20231 MEMO RAND UM DATE TO FROM SUBJECT tfpV July 10, 1991 PTDL Representatives Carole A. Shores, Director Office of Patent Depository Library Programs Survey of Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries — Introduction On a regular basis, the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) needs current information on the kinds and amounts of usage of the Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries (PTDLs). These data are needed for numerous reasons such as the following: Prospective PTDLs want to know levels of staffing, materials, and equipment which may be required to become fully and effectively operational. U.S. government and international agencies are interested in the levels of dissemination of technical information contained in patents and the utilization of trademark information. Justifications are required for continuing levels of financial support for the PTDLP, especially now that the PTO is a cost- recoverable agency. • Such information will be helpful to: the PTDLs — their staff and administrators; the OPDLP and PTO administrators; and all in developing short- and long-range planning, budget and staffing request justifications. Two formalized surveys of PDLs have been conducted. The first followed Conference I in May, 1977, with the report dated July 5, 1977. The 14 page questionnaire solicited information about patent collections, types of clients, volume and costs of services, sufficiency of reference tools, and training requirements. The second survey occurred during the Three-Month Trial Data Collection Effort from January 1 through March 31, 1978, with the Executive Summary dated October, 1978. During this effort, each patent patron was asked about patent-related services used. The report quantified file usage, clients served, and services offered. -2- The results of these formalized surveys have been used since as "profiles" of the commitment of PTDLs to providing patent and trademark services, of those services provided, and of the patrons receiving those services. Some of this information has been extrapolated to indicate "a minimum of..." type data. In addition certain PTDLs have been called upon to provide current "average" data or to provide validity to old data. Since 1978, not only has the size of the PTDL network tripled, the libraries now serve trademark information users as well as patent users. Therefore, it is time to discard old data and gather new, accurate information. In short, a new data collection is very important and critical to the future of the PTDL Program. We need your cooperation on this survey effort. The goal is to collect only essential information which will meet the requirements of specific inquiries and which will present a valid picture of the amount of services and the resources necessary to provide those services in PTDLs. We would like as many PTDLs as possible to participate in as much of the survey as possible. We certainly hope you will do your usual best effort for us. As presented in draft format during Conference XIV ( and mailed to non- represented PTDLs after the Conference) there are three parts to the survey: • Part A — PTDL Profile: Requests institutional information and an evaluation of services, materials, and support provided to PTDLs by the OPDLP. Part B — Service Profile: Provides a means for PTDL staff to tally patent and trademark reference and service assistance provided to patrons. Part C — User Profile: Provides a means for the PTDL patrons to provide a profile of themselves and the services they used. We would like all PTDLs to participate in all parts of this survey effort. You are asked to indicate your intent to participate in any or all parts of the survey on the attached Survey Intent form. We recognize that Part B (in which staff use tally sheets) and Part C (in which patrons fill out forms) are particularly demanding of staff time and effort. The best time to collect such information is when you are most busy. Some PTDLs have seasonal busy times and some do not. For these reasons, we ask that you select three two- week periods of time of your choice anytime from now to Friday, January 31, 1992, to conduct the Reference and Service Survey (Part B ) and the Patents/Trademarks Users Survey ( Part C ) . -3- We prefer that the time(s) selected be in, and be reported as, three two-week blocks. We also prefer that the Reference and Service Survey (Part B) and the Patents/Trademarks User Survey (Part C) be conducted concurrently in each of the three two- week periods. However, if you wish, the six-weeks' total may run consecutively. We hope some PTDLs will select a shake down two-week block early in the fall. Under special circumstances, a PTDL may conduct these surveys in other "week configurations". Please complete and return the Survey Intent form enclosed by Friday, July 26, 1991, using the postage-free mailing envelope enclosed. From the information on the returned form, we can prepare and send the materials you will need. If you have any questions or concerns about this or any part of the PTDL survey effort, please call Jim Arshem on the toll-free line, 800 435-7735. Thank you for your efforts on this survey and your continuing dedication to the Program. Your cooperation will be greatly appreciated. Enclosures: Survey Intent form Postage- free return envelope Salt Lake City, UT Patent and Trademark Depository Library Survey Intent Date: Name of person returning this form: t^ x ,o Telephone number of person returning this form: I. Part A— PTDL Profile A. Our intent is: 1. to participate in Part A of the PTDL Survey. 2. not to participate in Part A of the PTDL Survey (and skip to II. below). B. Our goal is to return Part A of the PTDL Survey to the Office of Patent Depository Programs by , but no later than Friday, August 30, 1991. II. Part B — Service Profile. A. Our intent is: 1. to participate in Part B of the PTDL Survey. 2. not to participate in Part B of the PTDL Survey (and skip to III. below). B. Our goal is to conduct the Reference and Service Survey (Part B) during the following three two-week periods: Period one: Sunday, through Saturday, . Please return all materials for this part of the survey within two weeks of the last date above. Period two: Sunday, through Saturday, . Please return all materials for this part of the survey within two weeks of the last date above. Period three: Sunday, through Saturday, . Please return all materials for this part of the survey within two weeks of the last date above. -2- III. Part C — User Profile. A. Our intent is: 1. to participate in Part C of the PTDL Survey. 2. not to participate in Part C of the PTDL Survey (and return this form). B. Our goal is to conduct the User Survey (Part C) during the following three two-week periods [which ideally should be the same as in II. above]: Period one: Sunday, through Saturday, . Please return all materials for this part of the survey within two weeks of the last date above. Period two: Sunday, through Saturday, . Please return all materials for this part of the survey within two weeks of the last date above. Period three: Sunday, through Saturday, . Please return all materials for this part of the survey within two weeks of the last date above. Please return this form by Friday, July 26, 1991, with a postage- free envelope to: PTDLP Survey Carole A. Shores, Director Office of PDL Programs Crystal Mall 2, Room 306 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Washington, DC 20231 Thank you. EXHIBIT 2 PTDL PROFILE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ( UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office ASSISTANT SECRETARY AND COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS Washington. DC. 20231 MEMORANDUM DATE TO FROM SUBJECT August 7, 1991 PTDL Representatives Cardie A. Shores, Director Office of Patent Depository Library Programs Survey of Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries-- Part A Enclosed is Part A of the Survey of PTDLs to be completed and returned, using the postage- free mailing envelope enclosed, by Friday, August 30, 1991. A few sections of the Survey enclosed here look different from the draft of Part A distributed during Conference XIV. The format is essentially the same with some additional information requested. Other changes were made in an effort to make the data gathering and reporting easier for you. We appreciate the effort that many of you have already expended using the draft copy. We hope it will not be too much of an inconvenience to transfer that information to this improved Part A of the Survey. If you have any questions or concerns about this or any of the other parts of the Survey of PTDLs, please call Jim Arshem on the toll-free line, 800 435-7735. Note that you will have an opportunity to indicate the time expended in completing this part of the survey. Thank you for your continuing support of the PTDL Program. Best wishes on completing the Survey. We really appreciate your spirit of cooperation! Enclosures: Survey Part A — PTDL Profile Postage- free Self -addressed Envelope f v Salt Lake City, UT \y\ ^ Survey of U^"^ Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries Part A--PTDL Profile Date: Name of person completing this survey: Telephone number of person completing this survey: I. Institutional Information A. Number of hours PER YEAR PTDL is open to the public: 1. For in-person use of patent and trademark collections/materials : hours per year 2. For in-person patent and trademark reference service: hours per year 3. For -telephone patent and trademark reference service: hours per year B. Space committed to patent and trademark services: 1. Floor space for patent and trademark equipment (microform readers/reader printers, computers, photocopy machines, file cabinets, and access for same ) : square feet 2. Floor space for patent and trademark materials (book stacks, microform cabinets, and aisles or access for same ) : square feet 3. Floor space for seating for patron use of [near to] patent and trademark materials (reading tables, index tables, microform readers and reader printers, chairs, and access for same): square feet Floor space for staff associated with providing patent and trademark reference assistance (desks, reference desks, chairs, and access for same): square feet -2- 5. Total floor space associated with providing patent and trademark services (may be more than sum of the square feet in 1, 2, 3, and 4 above): square feet C. Equipment used by patent and trademark PATRONS: Equipment How many pieces of equipment are used by PATRONS for patent and trademark purposes...? Total Number of Pieces of Equipment About All of the Time About 3/4 of the Time About 1/2 of the Time About 1/4 of the Time 1. Computer Work Station. Z Computer/ CD-ROM Work Station. 1 Microfilm Reader Printer. 4. Microfilm Reader. 5. Microfiche Reader. 6. Microfiche Reader Printer. 7. Photocopy Machine. a Color Photocopy Machine. 9. Telefacsimile Machine. Totals -3- D. Equipment used by patent and trademark STAFF: Equipment How many pieces of equipment are used by STAFF for patent and trademark purposes...? Total Number of Pieces of Equipment About All of the Time About 3/4 of the Time About 1/2 of the Time About 1/4 of the Time 1. Computer Work Station. Z Computer/CD-ROM Work Station. 3. Microfilm Reader Printer. 4. Microfilm Reader. 5. Microfiche Reader. 6. Microfiche Reader Printer. 7. Photocopy Machine. a Color Photocopy Machine. 9. Telefacsimile Machine. 10. Fiche-to-fiche Duplicator. Totals ( Seating 1. Number of reading tables, index tables and chairs generally used by patent and trademark patrons: tables, chairs ( -4- Number of individual carrels and chairs generally- used by patent and trademark patrons: carrels; chairs F. Linear feet of shelving committed to patent and trademark materials: linear feet G. Estimate of number of patent and trademark monographic titles/editions in catalog: titles/editions H. Estimate of number of patent and trademark serial titles in catalog: titles II. Costs Personnel costs associated with providing patent and trademark services: Please use the following work sheet to quantify certain information: Please follow the numbered instructions below corresponding to the columns of the Work Sheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members. if you want to leave the calculations to be completed by OPDLP, please provide the minimum information for columns/ instructions [1], [2], [3], [5], [7], [8], [9], and [10]. Note: If, for a position, 12-month salary information is not available (and cells in columns [2] and [3] are blank) because the position is paid "hourly", record that hourly information (including benefits, if any) in the cell in column [6]. OR Use the work sheet following the numbered instructions (see the SAMPLE Work Sheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members, complete the calculations twice to make sure they are correct, and transfer the "Total" information back to the appropriate category below the work sheet (please keep your work sheets in case we find that we need clarification). en ■o 2 i- ■o c co c o CO Q. O) c ■o > o Q. v> o> -Q E en o E 3= 3 8 CO £ CO o 3 8 O $ * ■o 8 C o CO ■o -a Q> © .Q ha E CO 3 CO CO .2 e co 0> CO c S CO E 8 & Q. a— I 5 T7> CO fi c 1 1 E to -5 c -e£ ¥ •55 -42 5 £ CO % o CD 1 £ c5 is. i c .2 to 8. & © IB ig ■5 8. f 2 s a e | i = e ^. CO, © ^ ° g il i 8 ^ = §3 Iff 8 1 s 58 "8 "*= CD «» — 52 cd S E 2 i £ 8 5 .£ §£. * Hi 1|8 ■s.s a 1 8-1 * _ E ~ n I ? -2 i 8-1 hi ill S S a. © a E 5S8 11 .£ w = © 81 H §>: il I" 5 f| 1 1 I* t> 5 | CD S £C il P 2 uj 8 CD s il 8 I * f|2 «= a i .2 © i a. o ■£ "5 < ss 8§ i f f . 5 8* o l. 5 m | E £ to 3 la ^ I 5 o 55 J=: S ^ o, s 2 S If 2 8|| s!l © -32 © if* 8 3 S ■5 2 i 3 Sft .2 11 = -«1 3 :& > ■a cE| |«; © _ .2 £81 •Bll g.9- S-g 8 $ as lis CD 8 C £ 5 3 g, P* s5 15 v, £2. Is I i 8.8 « .s 111 II II I 8 vi 8 fi o -a £ = ■ 5 o e c= Zlllf I 5 CD CD _ 8 -g ?-5 S cd c ca c c -^ <2 cd c W "55 E cd is i Q hill 2j_ - : i ? a ^ a 5 1 5 III 1 !! §^111 1 c to ci «s cu s. 1 1 1 1 § 1 ■o .s S cc - ^ 1*18-1 _ — 1 J * § « 11 ill ** 5 3 •= 3 - g,aj -O Q.CD 5 c P - O in rj k | °- jg 1 1 -g O 5. E E ^ O e a S 8 1 1 ■» 1 5 » « 1 "J 1 •- 2 1 c s E I s £ 1 1 - g * S lifflll C Y Q> CD — » Q. tr •B c s § P e 8 uj 2 ai.fc 8 S f 1 «8 £ M £ -« .S 2 ja cd II 11 si E* SI .5 CD li II s s ^£ CD <£. li I! E ■£ 3 -S2 If it p co s i c\T c/i ^ C IS" 2a >»^ 5- II cT8 ^ ^£ . 5 -o J ill lia 1,5 -o & © 8 © 5 • £ E* S 1 fl 3*1 ■ 5*J5 8if g of o g 8 11 1! fs E UJ a> >- T3 _ to g .9 x W = S o 2 B g ^ *► 3> to o o co 57 ^ c % c4 a. 2 « 2 4?£ 2 B 5 O) c T3 '> o 1— Q. s.?ll 9S § 2. g p s — 1 s i sjli z 13 ft ft "si 1J £ CO 3 S Is. II 22. 5 "2 % s a> X 11 ^ "**■ ^ !« 4= TO >» >_ 3 O X "O C TO *I *0 ^ ^ x r 2 fc ^ «""*" ft J* .2 a 8 TO 5 £g S3 5^ \4 %a TO ^iiif ^w CO c o c TO i -a 1 ^1 IP k 1s o ^ t -= ,« o o ^ •8 -E a Q ^ r\t ^ O a« J 1 ci ^» V a> O cvj tS stf u* 1 CO o B 8Sf! i s £ r* C< UJ —I a. 2 Si 55 i s 2 Q- ^ CG U gen o s i §8 ^J d Cost Per YEAR of Providing Patent and Trademark Assistance as... [13] Maintenance of Materials, Etc. [6] x [7] x [10] > , -Q CL o o co o o o CO J* 88? z ii* 1 1 11* 1 E o 2 c 1 8 = a ii sis | 3^ 1 ilr I li (A ® = o Q- «£• S sa "5 3 CO c o OL 8 8 Z £<2 1 -7- s Providin 11 !5T a> iS is ■5 ha -O E o ■l|i|«* TO CO Bjf* 3 O X c C W 'O « .92 CD CO c a> e IB 1 ■sis 8±& a> Q_ o OCNJ «Q_ CO c E:li| j_ ♦ -8- II. Costs (Continued) A. Personnel costs... (Continued): Use Most recent 12-month period of record ( or calendar year or fiscal year). 1. Total number of permanent staff (on salary or hourly wage) who work with, or are trained to work with, providing patent and trademark reference, non-reference, and maintenance services to the public (corresponds to the sum (Total) of staff or positions enumerated in column [1] of the Worksheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members... above ) : permanent staff members 2 . Total number of temporary staff ( student assistants, contract workers, other staff on hourly wage) who work with, or are trained to work with, providing patent and trademark reference, non- reference, and maintenance services to the public (corresponds to the number of positions enumerated in column [1] for which there are no entries in the cells of columns [2] and [3] , but there is Hourly "Wage" information in the cell in column [6] of the Work Sheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members... above ) : temporary staff members Total hours per day permanent and temporary staff provide patent and trademark assistance to the public: a. Total number of hours PER DAY staff are associated with providing patent and trademark reference assistance to the public (corresponds to the sum [Total] of the numbers in the cells (to the nearest quarter hour) in column [ 8 ] of the Work Sheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members... table above ) : hours per day -9- b. Total number of hours PER DAY staff are associated with providing patent and trademark non-reference assistance (corresponds to the sum [Total] of the numbers in the cells (to the nearest quarter hour) in column [9] of the Work Sheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members- table above ) : hours per day- Total number of hours PER DAY staff are associated with maintaining patent and trademark materials, hardware, CD-ROM products, and APS System (corresponds to the sum [Total] of the numbers in the cells (to the nearest quarter hour) in column [10] of the Work Sheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members- table above ) : hours per day Total staff salary costs ( include benefits ) per year in providing patent and trademark reference assistance (corresponds to the sum [Total] of the numbers in the cells in column [11] of the Worksheet for Permanent Salaried and Hourly Staff Members... table above ) : $ per year 5. Total staff salary costs (include benefits) per year in providing patent and trademark non- reference assistance ( corresponds to the sum [Total] of the numbers in the cells in column [12] of the Work Sheet for Permanent and Hourly Staff Members... table above ) : $ per year 6. Staff salary costs (include benefits) associated with tasks such as maintaining patent and trademark equipment, processing patent and trademark materials, installing patent and trademark CD-ROM software, which may be performed by professional or non-professional PTDL staff or non-PTDL staff ( such as cataloging staff or computer staff) (corresponds to the sum [Total] of the numbers in the cells in column [13] of the Work Sheet for Permanent and Hourly Staff Members... table above ) : $ per year -10- B. Overhead Costs Many institutions have determined an "overhead cost" which represents certain operating expenses, including such things as the costs of utilities, landscaping, postage, insurance, telephone system, and others; but excluding such things as personnel costs. Overhead costs are often expressed as a percentage cost applied to certain other costs. If your institution has an overhead cost as a percentage cost, it is: % In the remainder of the cost part of this survey you will be asked to report certain costs associated with providing patent and trademark services. Please indicate those costs to which overhead costs apply, by marking the associated box "H overhead costs apply". C. Patent and Trademark Related (P&TR) Equipment ( purchased or rented ) : 1. P&TR Library equipment (reader printers, vertical files, furniture): $ per year LJ overhead costs apply ♦ P&TA Telecommunication equipment (hardware, rental ) : $ per year 3. P&TA Maintenance of equipment, service contracts: $ per year U overhead costs apply nt, $ per year LJ overhead costs apply D. P&TR Supplies (pencils, computer paper, etc.): $ per year D overhead costs apply E. P&TR Travel (to PTDLP Conference, regional training ) : $ per year LJ overhead costs apply -11- F. P&TR Serial! G. P&TR Monographs: per year LJ overhead costs apply per year LJ overhead costs apply P&TR Memberships: P&TR Statutory Fee: per year LJ overhead costs apply $ 50.00 per year LJ overhead costs apply P&TR Space: K. P&TR Programs (special events, celebrations, exhibits, programs, Project XL, etc.): P&TR Training (facilities, speakers , luncheons , equipment rental, etc., not included above ) : P&TR Other expenses (specify): per year LJ overhead costs apply per year LJ overhead costs apply per year LJ overhead costs apply per year LJ overhead costs apply Subtotal of annual costs associated with patent and trademark related services (total of II. A. 4-6 and II. C through II.M. ): per year -12- III. Volunteers A. Number of volunteers who work with, or are trained to work with, patent and trademark patrons providing reference and non-reference services to the public: volunteers B. Hours per year volunteers provide patent and trademark assistance to the public: 1 . Number of hours PER YEAR volunteers are associated with providing patent and trademark reference assistance to the public: hours per year Number of hours PER YEAR volunteers are associated with providing patent and trademark non-reference assistance: hours per year 3. Number of hours PER YEAR volunteers are associated with Maintaining patent and trademark materials, hardware, and CD-ROM products: hours per year IV. Training A. Staff training associated with providing patent and trademark services: 1 . Number of formal patent and trademark staff training person hours per year RECEIVED by PTDL staff from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (include attendance at PTDL Conference, Accessing Patent and Trademark Information (APTI) Seminars, workshops, Interagency Depository Seminars) [if a staff member attended the PTDL Conference XIV for 40 hours and back at the PTDL each of 5 staff members attended an eight-hour PTDLP APTI Seminar ( for 40 staff training person hours ) , there would be 80 hours of formal staff training person hours received (incidental assistance at the reference desk to a colleague is not considered formal training)] : PTO provided staff training person hours RECEIVED per year -13- 2. Number of formal patent and trademark PTDL staff training person hours per year GIVEN by PTDL staff to other PTDL staff [if a staff member provided 5 hours of formal training to each of 4 other staff members, 20 staff training person hours were given] : PTDL staff training person hours GIVEN per year 3. Number of formal patent and trademark volunteer- training person hours per year GIVEN by PTDL staff to PTDL volunteers: volunteer training person hours GIVEN per year B. Public Training: Number of formal patent and trademark training events presented for patrons during the most recent 12 months (or calendar year or fiscal year): patron training events per year 2. Number of formal patron training person hours given during this year period [if one event for 20 patrons took 1/2 hour ( 10 patron training person hours ) and another for 5 patrons took 2 hours ( 10 patron training person hours ) , then these events total 20 patron training person hours] : patron training person hours per year -14- V. Photocopying, Printing, and Telef axing Use «ost recent 12-aonth period of record (or calendar year or fiscal year) . A. Self-service photocopying, printing, and telef axing: 1 . From patent and trademark (not distinguished) PAPER originals: 2. From patent and trademark (not distinguished) MICROFORM originals: OR 3. 4. From patent and trademark paper and microform originals (not distinguished ) : From patent and trademark ELECTRONIC RESOURCES: a. Produced on dot matrix printer(s): b. Produced on laser printer(s): 5. Other copying, such as color or telefaxing (specify) : pages per year pages per year pages per year sheets per year sheets per year sheets per year B. -15- Staff or Volunteer Produced Photocopying: 1. From Paper: OR 3. From patent paper originals: pages b. OR c. From trademark paper originals: patents pages From patent and trademark paper originals (not distinguished): From Microform: a. From patent microform originals: From trademark microform originals: OR c. From patent and trademark microform originals (not distinguished ) : From patent and trademark paper and microform originals (not distinguished ) : trademarks pages documents pages patents pages trademarks pages documents pages documents per year per year per year per year per year per year per year per year per year per year per year per year per year per year -16- 4. Other copying, such as color (specify): sheets per year 5. In V.B.I, through V.B.4 above, the percentage of staff produced photocopying use for the following: a. Patron pickup at the PTDL: b. Mailing to patron: 1). Inside "service area": % 2). OR Outside "service area": % 3). Without distinction: Telefacsimile for patron: % c. 1). Inside "service area": % 2). OR Outside "service area": % 3). Without distinction: % d. Interlibrary Loan: % e. Othe r (specify) 100 % = = % 6. In V.B.I through V.B.4 above, percentage of staff produced photocopying which receives special or rush handling: -17- VI . Income A. By statute, ordinance or other reason, is this institution restricted from charging for such things as service, photocopies, and materials provided? □ l_J Yes LJ no For patent and Trademark services or purposes, use the most recent 12-month period of record (or calendar year or fiscal year) for: 1. Revenue from self-service photocopying: $ per year 2. Revenue from staff or volunteer produced photocopying: $ per year 3. Revenue from telefacsimile services: $ per year 4. Other revenue such as gifts or grants (specify): per year -18- VII. Evaluation of Electronic Products Provided to PTDLs Using the following table, and in this order: A. First, please check the box which best reflects your perception of the importance or need of the electronic products provided to PTDLs by the OPDLP; B. Second, please RANK (in the last column) EACH item in order of importance from 1 to 8, with 1 being most highly ranked and 8 being least: Electronic Products Provided to PTDLs Strongly Agree/ Need Agree/ Need Disagree/ Don't Need Strongly Disagree/ Don't Need Don't Know or Not Applicable R A N K 1. Subscription to CASSIS/BIB CD- ROM. Z Subscription to CASSIS/CLSF CD-ROM. 3. Subscription to ASIST CD-ROM. 4. Subscription to T®ADEMARKS CD-ROMs. 5. Subscription to U.S. Patent Image CD-ROMs. 6. Subscription to Japanese Abstracts CD-ROMs. 7. Subscription to PraCTis CD-ROM. 8. Automated Patent System (APS) deployment to PTDLs. -19- VIII. Evaluation of Materials and Tools Provided to PTDLs Using the following table, and in this order: A. First, please check the box which best reflects your perception of the importance or need of the materials and tools provided to PTDLs by the OPDLP; B. Second, please RANK (in the last column) EACH item in order of importance from 1 to 8, with 1 being most highly ranked and 8 being least: Materials and Tools Provided to PTDLs Strongly Agree/ Need Agree/ Need Disagree/ Don't Need Strongly Disagree/ Don't Need Don't Know or Not Applicable R A N K 1. Extra supplies of general information brochures. 2. Updated Directory of Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries. 3. Updated Patentee/Assignee Index microfiche. 4. Subscription to U.S. Trademark Law. 5. Direct mail of Official Gazette. 6. CD-ROM Usage Log reports. 7. Survey of PTDLs. 8. Informational material, installation instructions, and memoranda -20- IX. Evaluation of Training and Consciousness-raising Events Provided to the Public and to PTDLs Using the following table, and in this order: A. First, please check the box which best reflects your perception of the importance or need of the training, consciousness-raising events provided to the public and to PTDLs by the OPDLP; B. Second, please RANK (in the last column) EACH item in order of importance from 1 to 11, with 1 being most highly ranked and 11 being least: Training and Consciousness-raising Events Provided to the Public and to PTDLs Strongly Agree/ Need Agree/ Need Disagree/ Don't Need Strongly Disagree/ Don't Need Don't Know or Not Applicable R A N K 1. "Accessing Patent and Trademark Information" (APTI) Seminars at PTDLs. 2. Staff training after APTI Seminar. 3. Exhibit and APTI Seminar at Special Libraries Association (SLA) annual Conference. 4. Exhibit and APTI Seminar at American Libraries Association (ALA) annual Conference. 5. Exhibit and APTI Seminar at Public Library Association (PLA) triennial Conference. 6. Exhibit and APTI Seminar at American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) annual Conference. 7. Director's Reception at ALA 8. PTO/PTDL Conference. 9. PTO/PTDL Pre-conference Workshops. 10. Project XL activities. 11. Young Inventor's Competition. X. -21- Evaluation of Services and Programs Provided to PTDLs Using the following table, and in this order: A. First, please check the box which best reflects your perception of the importance of the services provided to PTDLs by the OPDLP; please RANK (in the last column) EACH item in order of importance from 1 to 6, with 1 being most highly ranked and 6 being least: Services and Programs Provided to PTDLs Strongly Agree/ Need Agree/ Need Disagree/ Don't Need Strongly Disagree/ Don't Need Donl Know or Not Applicable R A N K 1. Toll-free telephone line to OPDLP. 2 Electronic mail (CASSIS) to OPDLP and other PTDLs. 3. Reference assistance. 4. On demand copy service. 5. Fellowship Program. 6. Technical assistance with CD-ROM and APS. -22- XI. Evaluation of W&Y Services/Materials are Provided to PTDLs Using the following table, please check the box which best reflects your perception of the importance of the service(s) provided to PTDLs by the OPDLP: The WAY Services/Materials are Provided to PTDLs Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Donl Know or Not Applicable 1. The staff in the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) has been successful in anticipating my/our needs for materials. 2 The staff in the OPDLP has been successful in anticipating my/our needs for information. 1 The staff in the OPDLP respond to my/our requests in a timely way. 4. The staff of the OPDLP respond to my/our requests with quality assistance. 5. Informational material is clear and concise. 6. OPDLP staff has a helpful, positive attitude. 7. OPDLP keeps me/us well informed. XII. Comments A. Things the Office of particularly well: PDL Programs ( OPDLP ) does Things the OPDLP could do better: -23- C. Other comments: ( XIII. The Amount of Personal Time and Money Committed to the PTDLP A. Estimate the amount of personal money per year spent by you and your staff in fulfilling responsibilities of the Program ( include non- reimbursed expenses for such things as travel, mileage, entertaining, and supplies): $ of personal money spent per year on PTDLP activities B. Estimate the amount of personal time per year spent by you and your staff in fulfilling responsibilities of the Program ( include unpaid time for such things as travel, entertaining, and judging competitions ) : hours of personal time spent per year on PTDLP activities XIV. The Amount of Time Expended in Completing This Survey Was: person hours spent completing Part A of the Survey of PTDLs Please return this questionnaire by Friday, August 30, 1991, in the enclosed postage- free envelope to: PTDLP Survey — Part A Carole A. Shores, Director Office of Patent Depository Library Programs CRYSTAL MALL 2, Room 306 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Washington, DC 20231 EXHIBIT 3 SERVICE PROFILE SURVEY FORMS **TTS<* UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office ASSISTANT! SECRETARY AND COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS Washington, D.C. 20231 MEMO RAND UM DATE TO FROM SUBJECT September 19, 1991 PTDL Representatives Carole A. Shores, Director Office of Patent Depository Library Programs Survey of Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries — Part B This Part B of the PTDL survey effort comprises tally sheets for staff members to record the number of reference questions answered and the number of directional questions answered or services provided each day. If you want, you may use these sheets to provide you with totals for each hour or shift. Many libraries routinely conduct such surveys and the guidelines used in those libraries should be used in this survey. Our intent is not to redefine what constitutes a "reference question". The following considerations are offered, and sample sheets are attached, for those who need or want some guidance. • Directional questions and services are generally identified by the fact that the staff member probably will not quote a source or authority with the answer. Examples of directional questions or services are: "Where do you keep the Official Gazette? 1 shelf over there by the windows." It's on the "Can you show me how to print a page from this (patent) microfilm?" "Sure, the print button has been used so much the label is warn off — it's this one." Sometimes it makes a difference who is helping the patron. For a seasoned staff member the question, "Do you have USPQ for 1986?", the answer may be, "Yes, the library should have the complete set. Please check at the desk in the Serials Department at the foot of the main stairs on first floor." This may be considered to be a directional question by this staff member. For a less seasoned staff member it may be necessary to do some digging, and the answer might be, "Yes, according to the serials list (shelf list) the library should have the complete set...." This staff member may consider this to be a reference question. -2- Considering the training, expertise, and truly professional way staff members help the public, you may feel comfortable to err on the side of calling a question a reference question when there is some doubt. Don't hesitate to tally cumulated or multi-part questions, or answers to unasked questions, which a staff member offers knowing what the next question will be if the answer isn't offered. Reference questions are generally those questions which require "professional" or "staff" expertise or training. Feel free to use as many copies of the Telephone and of the In Person tally sheets each day as needed to be convenient — one Telephone tally sheet by each telephone; In Person tally sheets at each service point; In Person tally sheets on clip boards carried with the staff member, when "working the floor". It is suggested that tallies be made in "fives" as in the sample. You may want to total the number of tallies each hour or each shift. The level of sophistication you use is up to you — we hope the tally sheets and summary sheets will suit most needs--we are interested in receiving and reporting only the total number of: — Patent Reference Questions each day; — Trademark Reference Questions each day; — Patent and Trademark Directional Questions/Services each day. The Tally Sheets are color coded for your convenience- -green for In Person patrons and yellow for Telephone patrons. You may reproduce them on colored or white paper or let us know how many you need to complete the survey lasting an accumulation of six weeks . At the least, return two week's worth of information at a time--as soon after the end of the second, fourth, and sixth weeks as possible. This may be accomplished by sending a completed Summary B sheet or by sending us the bundle of completed tally sheets ( for us to total ) , using one of the postage- free labels enclosed. [You do not have to complete Summary A or Summary B — these are provided for your convenience.] If you want this information and compile it, however, please share it with us. We would like to have materials from the survey period(s) for Part B of the survey of PTDLs returned as stated on the Survey Intent form (copy attached) using a postage-free mailing label attached. -3- Copies Of the EXAMPLE IN-PERSON TALLY SHEET, EXAMPLE TELEPHONE ( TALLY SHEET, EXAMPLE SUMMARY A, and EXAMPLE SUMMARY B distributed at Conference XIV are attached. Note that you will have an opportunity to indicate the time expended in administering this part of the survey at the bottom of Summary B. If you have any questions about this or any of the other parts of the survey, please call Jim Arshem on the toll-free line, 800 435-7735. Thank you for your continuing support of the PTDL Program. Attachments: Completed Intent Form EXAMPLE IN-PERSON TALLY SHEET EXAMPLE TELEPHONE TALLY SHEET EXAMPLE SUMMARY SHEET A EXAMPLE SUMMARY SHEET B Enclosures: 25 SUMMARY A (ivory) 5 SUMMARY B (gray) Postage- free PTDLP address labels 25 TELEPHONE TALLY SHEETS (yellow) 25 IN PERSON TALLY SHEETS (green) Salt Patent and Trademark Depository Library Survey Intent Date: f K 00:01- 08:59 ~" "* 09O0- 09:59 — 10.-00- i/ 10:59 /0 11:00- p 11:59 O 12O0- ^« 12:59 XZ* 13:00- ,~ 13^59 A? 1400- / / 14:59 It 1500- i *2 15:59 /O 16O0- ii 16:59 // 17:00- ~ 17:59 % 18.-00- r 18:59 19:00- r- 19:59 J? 20.-00- « 20:59 _5 21:00- O 21^59 *»» 22O0- 22:59 23:00- 23:59 ToUl of this . * f~" Sectioa: /*<3 Trademark Reference Questions \Q\0Ofa \il^>lll00A U ITJIOOtf *un poor T/u 1 woe W zM ^3a>p mi &«* "i v* '" T.oo? r.oor n p ) ^ oooi- 08:59 """ 09O0- mm 09:59 10O0- -2 10:59 O 11.-00- o 11:59 **■ 12O0- £-- 12:59 -9 13:00- / 13:59 4? 1400- £- 14:59 ^? 15O0- -2 15:59 s3 16.-00- A, 16:59 T 17:00- *7 17:59 O 18O0- *2 18:59 J 19HJ0- A 19:59 £/> 20O0- 2 20:59 A 21:00- 1 21:59 / 22O0- 2239 23.-00- 23:59 ToUJ of this *2 "/ Section: >^/ Directional Questions/Services /0>£ y/// ///a?> 4 ## / Wft Tift // z;<*)/> w /// 3:oof M 6:* ? wli 7:00? mu ii r;*P rnui IT.** Tffl 4->f UK Veep Ml oooi- _ 08:59 09O0- 09:59 — 10:00- A. 10:59 T 11O0- / 1149 12:00- // 12:59 // 13O0- 1- 13:59 /A 1400- jO' 14:59 O 15O0- £- 15:59 O 16-00- A 16^59 T 17.00- 2 17:59 -J 18O0- 18:59 6 1900- ^ 19:59 / 20O0- -T 20-.59 / 21O0- 1 21:59 *Y 22O0- ^ 2239 23O0- . 23:59 ToUl of tfafe w -* Sccttoa: / / TELEPHONE Patent and Trademark Reference and Service Survey TALLY SHEET U I A ., TALLY s Sheet [PDL] Of Day, Date: Name of person returning/using this sheet: M* Too Patent Reference Questions fr^Ok II 9160 A /// /O.W/f lll( II ,' 00 A Tlfk )l[66H TttU li*P Jti^n 2.K90P milll 3!aopUL)l &do? mi s:**p tni iiup mi J:*,? ), ( r? 1 00:01- O 08:59 ***" 09:00- n 09:59 O 10:00- A 10:59 *J 11:00- /•" 11:59 s5 12:00- / 12:59 O 13:00- -7 13.59 / 14:00- cr 14:59 15:00- -t 15:59 / 16:00- / 16:59 C7 17:00- £- 17^59 J) 18:00- A 18:59 fj" 19:00- ^ 19:59 O 20:00- -n 20:59 >L. 21:00- 1 21:59 / 22:00- 22:59 "~" 23:00- 23:59 Total of this / "2 Secrto.: ^^ Trademark Reference Questions A- II ) T.oop utf 4.:oo P tHk ( 00:01- 08:59 / 09:00- 09:59 10:00- 10:59 11.-00- O 11:59 >- 12:00- 12:59 13:00- 13:59 14:00- 14:59 L 15:00- 15:59 it ™5 i7.-oo- f 17:59 O 18.-00- r~ 18:59 ^ 19:00- 19:59 20.-00- A 20:59 f 21:00- 21:59 22.00- 2159 23:00- 23:59 Total ofthu Settkw: A-h Directional Questions/Services g'£oA f.'OOA I /«/<*? A IPCOA It \V.(,oH I i'.oop jjmP I 3;eof /// ^.oof \\ 5'ooP I fceof T.eo? I r.oop ^otP 00:01- 08:59 09:00- 09-.39 10:00- 10:59 11:00- 11:59 12.-00- 12^9 13:00- 13:59 MjOO- 14:59 15:00- n 15:59 >? 16:00- 16^59 X. 17:00- 17:59 18:00- 18:59 19:00- I 19:59 / 20:00- 20:59 21:59 (/ 22.-00- 2239 23:00- 23:59 Total of thk IZ SUMMARY A Day, Date: MtlUAfj Afjtl /, fit I Patent and Trademark Reference and Service Survey [PDL] Name of person returning this sheet: J»» r*l . >JMl jf Number of hours of service represented on this sheet: [j 9 t? Hour ! Reference Questions Directional Questions/ Services Total Patent Trademark Total 00:01-08:59 z 1 3 3 09:00-09:59 3 1 4- I i" 10:00-10:59 Z.0 5 l£ 4 Z? 11:00-11:59 13 + n 2 25" 12:00-12:59 US i 3t> /i 4? 13:00-13:59 IZ f . <^3) 12. 43 14:00-14:59 24 ,# '' 32 1 42 15:00-15:59 Z.0 n>^ a ? 35" 16:00-16:59 iM f f u b 3Z 17:00-17:59 /3 ? zl 4- 2-5 18:00-18:59 > ID ? 1? t, 24 19:00-19:59 U.. Apr. I. Ml to: SkL Apr. J3. Iff I Name of person returning this sheet: J^ , M . Sniii Number of hours of service represented on this sheet: I w J- SUMMARY A Patent and Trademark Reference and Service Survey Salt Lake City, UT Day, Date: Name of person returning this sheet: Number of hours of service represented on this sheet: Hour Reference Questions Directional Questions/ Services Total Patent Trademark Total 00:01-08:59 09:00-09:59 <&. 10:00-10:59 .V 11:00-11:59 fi# 12:00-12:59 < u> 13:00-13:59 ^ V i 14:00-14:59 15:00-15:59 16:00-16:59 17:00-17:59 18:00-18:59 19:00-19:59 20:00-20:59 21:00-21:59 22:00-22:59 23:00-23:59 TOTALS SUMMARY B Patent and Trademark Reference and Service Survey Inclusive dates of service represented on this sheet (Month, Date, Year)-- From: Name of person returning this sheet: Number of hours of service represented on this sheet: Salt Lake City, UT To: 4 Day/Date Reference Questions Directional Questions/ Services Total Patent Trademark Total Sun. Mon. Tue. Fri. ^ tf ' ' Sat. Totals Sun. Mon. Tue. Wed. Thu. Fri. Sat. Totals .I Time expended in administering the Patent and Trademark Reference and Service Survey (Part B) represented on this form: hours TELEPHONE Patent and Trademark Reference and Service Survey TALLY SHEET Salt Lake City, UT Day, Date: Sheet Name of person returning/using this sheet: Patent Reference Questions \f^ f> ^ \» 00:01- 09:00- 10:00- nm- 12:00- 13:00- 14:00- 15:00- 16:00- 08:59 09:59 10:59 11:59 12:59 13:59 14:59 15:59 16:59 17:00- 18:00- 19:00- 20:00- 21:00- 22:00- 23:00- Total of this 17:59 18:59 19:59 20:59 21:59 22:59 23:59 Sea ion: < Trademark Reference Questions 00:01- 08:59 09:00- 09:59 10:00- 10:59 11:00- 11:59 12:00- 12:59 13:00- 13:59 14:00- 14:59 15:00- 15:59 16:00- 16^59 17:59 18:00- 18:59 19:00- 19:59 20:00- 20:59 21 m- 21:59 22:00- 22:59 23:00- 23:59 Total or this Section: Directional Questions/Services % 00:01- 09:00- 10:00- 11.00- 12900- 13:00- 14:00- 15:00- 16:00- 08:59 09:59 10:59 11:59 12:59 13:59 14:59 15:59 16:59 nm- 18:00- 1M0- 20:00- 21:00- 22:00- 23:00- Total of this | 17:59 18:59 19:59 20:59 21:59 22:59 23:59 Section: IN-PERSON Patent and Trademark Reference and Service Survey TALLY SHEET Salt Lake City, UT Day, Date: Sheet of Name of person returning/using this sheet: Patent Reference Questions %t $$ ^\S 00:01- 09:00- 10:00- 11:00- 12:00- 13:00- um- 15:00- 16:00- 08:59 09:59 10:59 11:59 12:59 13:59 14:59 15:59 16:59 17:00- 18:00- 19:00- 20:00- 21:00- 22m- 23:00- Total of this 17:59 18:59 19:59 20:59 21:59 22.59 23:59 Section: Trademark Reference Questions 1 00:01- 09:00- 10:00- 11:00- 12:00- 13:00- 14:00- 15:00- 16:00- 08:59 09:59 10:59 11:59 12:59 13:59 14:59 15:59 16:59 17:00- 18:00- 19:00- 20:00- 21 m- 22:00- 23:00- Total of this 17:59 18:59 19:59 20:59 21:59 22:59 23:59 Section: Directional Questions/Services 00:01- 08:59 09:00- 09:59 10:00- 10:59 11:00- 11:59 12:00- 12:59 13:00- 13:59 14:00- 14:59 15:00- 15:59 16:00- i 16:59 17:00- 17:59 18:00- 18:59 19:00- 19:59 20:00- 20:59 21:00- 21:59 22:00- 22:59 23:00- 23:59 Total of this Section: EXHIBIT 4 USER PROFILE SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRES • UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Patent and Trademark Office ASSISTANT SECRETARY AND COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS Washington, D.C. 20231 MEMORANDUM DATE TO FROM SUBJECT September 18, 1991 PTDL Representatives Carole A. Shores, Director Office of Patent Depository Library Programs Survey of Patent and Trademark Depository Libraries Part C Part C of the PTDL survey effort consists of response forms to be completed by patent and by trademark patrons. Patrons are urged to complete a form EACH TIME they use patent or trademark information. If a patron comes into the PTDL in the morning and returns in the afternoon, ideally the patron would fill out two forms as two different patrons. In practice, you will be lucky to get patrons to fill out one form per quest. The form is printed front-to-back to accommodate a one time use of patent and/or of trademark information. On request, the PATENTS USER and the TRADEMARKS USER forms will be provided on separate sheets. • Counting the number of forms filled out on the patent/ trademark side will give an indication of the number of patent and of trademark patrons in a given time. • ZIP Codes are used to determine which patrons live and work/study inside and outside the "service area" of the PTDL ( "inside the service area" ranges from a state library serving the whole state to a university serving its staff, faculty, and students). The PATENTS/TRADEMARKS USER response forms are on pink or blue paper for your convenience. You may reproduce them on colored or white paper or let us know how many you need to complete this part of the survey effort lasting three two-week periods. We would like to have materials from the survey period(s) for Part C of the survey of PTDLs returned as stated on the Survey Intent form (copy attached) using a postage- free mailing label attached. -2- At the least, return two week's worth of information at a time--as soon after the end of each of the three two-week periods as possible, but within two weeks after. This may be accomplished by- sending a completed PATENTS /TRADEMARKS USER SUMMARY SHEET set or by sending us the bundle of completed USER forms ( for us to total ) , using one of the postage- free labels attached. [You do not have to complete USER SUMMARY SHEET — which is provided for your convenience.] If you want this information and compile it, however, please share it with us. Note that you will have an opportunity to indicate the time expended in administering this part of the survey at the end of the PATENTS USER and the TRADEMARKS USER SUMMARY SHEET. If you have any questions about this or any of the other parts of the survey, please call Jim Arshem on the toll-free line, 800 435-7735. Thank you for your continuing support of the PTDL Program. Attachment: Completed Intent Form Enclosures: 3 PATENTS USER SUMMARY SHEETS (buff) 3 TRADEMARKS USER SUMMARY SHEETS (salmon) Postage- free PTDLP address labels PATENTS USER form master (white) TRADEMARK USER form master (white) 100 PATENTS/TRADEMARKS USER forms (pink/blue) PATENTS USER Marriott Library University of Utah < Please HELP US develop a profile of patent information users and how patent information is used. Please complete a copy of this form each TIME you use patent information. Please use the other side for use of trademark information. If additional space is needed for comments and suggestions about patent information, please write them on a separate sheet of paper. Please give this form with any additional sheets of comments and suggestions to a staff member or mail to: Date: ZIP Code in which you live: ZIP Code in which you work or study: & Q About how many pages of patent materials did you photocopy? Patent Depository Library Representative Marriott Library University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112 Please check below ALL that apply. How would you describe yourself? □ Inventor. D Patent attorney or agent. □ Professional patent searcher. □ Faculty. □ Student. □ Information broker. □ Corporate representative. □ Other (Please Specify) What was the purpose of using patent materials? □ To see if my invention has already been patented. □ Scientific Research. D Historic research. Please continue in the next column. (Purpose continued) D Economic research. □ Other (Please Specify) What patent tools did you use? □ Index to the U.S. Patent Classification. □ Manual of Classification. □ Patent Classification Definitions. □ CD-ROM computer system. □ Official Gazette. □ Full text patent(s) on microfilm or paper. □ Automated Patent System (APS) patent text search system. □ Other (Please Specify) Have you used patent materials at this library before? □ Yes □ No Did you obtain the patent information you wanted? □ Yes D No Will you try to use patent information at this library again? □ Yes □ No Please use the other side for use of trademark information. PATENTS USER Salt Lake City, UT SUMMARY SHEET Date: Name of person returning this sheet: Inclusive dates of service represented on this sheet (Day, Month, Year): From: To: Number of hours of service represented on this sheet: I. ZIP Code numbers/ranges considered to be service area of PTDL: ^-\^\^> C. Patent Classification Definitions. D. CD-ROM computer system. E. Official Gazette. F. Full text patent(s) on microfilm or paper. G. Automated Patent System (APS) patent search system. H. Other—Please enumerate on the other side. VI. Number of patrons who: A. Have used patent materials at this library before: . B. Have not used patent materials at this library before: . C. Did obtain the patent information wanted: . < D. Did not obtain the patent information wanted: E. Will try to use patent information at this library again: F. Will not try to use patent information at this library again: VII. Number of hours expended to administer the PATENTS USER survey represented on this sheet: hours Please use the other side for enumerating "other" information and comments. TRADEMARKS USER Marriott Library University of Utah Please HELP US develop a profile of trademark information users and how trademark information is used. Please complete a copy of this form each TIME you use trademark information. Please use the other side for use of patent information. If additional space is needed for comments and suggestions about trademark information, please write them on a separate sheet of paper. Please give this form with any additional sheets of comments and suggestions to a staff member or mail to: Date: ZIP Code in which you live: ZIP Code in which you work or study: ,Q Patent Depository Library Representative Marriott Library University of Utah Salt Lake City, UT 84112 About how many pages of trademark materials did you photocopy? Please check below ALL that apply. How would you describe yourself? □ Small business representative. □ Corporate representative. □ Attorney. □ Professional trademark searcher. □ Faculty. □ Student. □ Information broker. □ Other (Please Specify) What was the purpose of using trademark materials? □ To determine whether a mark has been registered prior to filing an application (Pre- registration search). □ To obtain a list of marks registered for particular goods or services, or to a particular class (Goods/Services— Class search). Please continue in the next column. (Purpose continued) □ To obtain a list of marks containing specific word(s) (Mark search). □ To learn who has registered a mark (Owner search). □ To identify marks registered to a company or individual. □ To conduct a trademark search for a client. D To gather data for a research project. D Other (Please Specify) What trademark tools did you use? □ CD-ROM computer system. □ Official Gazette. □ Other (Please Specify) Have you used trademark materials at this library before? □ Yes □ No Did you obtain the trademark information you wanted? □ Yes □ No Will you try to use trademark information at this library again? □ Yes □ No Please use the other side for use of patent information. TRADEMARKS USER Salt Lake City, UT SUMMARY SHEET Name of person returning this sheet: Inclusive dates of service represented on this sheet (Day, Month, Year): From: To: Number of hours of service represented on this sheet: I. ZIP Code numbers/ranges considered to be service area of PTDL: ZIP Code in which patrons live: 1. Who are "residents" of PTDL service area: 2. Who are "non-residents" of PTDL service area: B. ZIP Code in which patrons work or study: 1. Who are "residents" of PTDL service area: 2. Who are "non-residents" of PTDL service area: _ Number of pages of trademark materials photocopied: How trademark patrons described themselves: A. Small business representatives. B. Corporate representatives. C. Attorneys. D. Professional trademark searchers. E. Faculty members. F. Students. G. Information brokers. H. Other—Please enumerate on the other side. f v -2- IV. The purpose of using trademarks materials: A. To determine whether a mark has been registered prior to filing an application (Pre-registration search). B. To obtain a list of marks registered for particular goods or services, or to a particular class (Goods/Services— Class search). C. To obtain a list of marks containing specific word(s) (Mark search). D. To learn who has registered a mark (Owner search). E. To identify marks registered to a company or individual. F. To conduct a trademark search for a client. G. To gather data for a research project. H. Other— Please enumerate on the other side. Trademark tools used by the patrons; IK A. CD-ROM computer system. B. Official Gazette. C. Other—Please enumerate on the other side VI Number of patrons who: A. Have used trademark materials at this library before: f v B. Have not used trademark materials at this library before: C. Did obtain the trademark information wanted: D. Did not obtain the trademark information wanted: E. Will try to use trademark information at this library again: F. Will not try to use trademark information at this library again: VII. Number of hours expended to administer the TRADEMARKS USER survey represented on this sheet: hours Please use the other side for enumerating "other" information and comments. EXHIBIT 5 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF SURVEY DATA PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY SERVICE PROFILE SURVEY PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS PATENT SURVEY DATA TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Frequency distributions of data reported by PTDL Representatives on the PTDL Institutional Profile survey are presented on the following pages. Names of the institutions that submitted responses Albuquerque, NM Anchorage, AK Ann Arbor, MI Atlanta, GA Auburn University, AL Austin, TX Boston, MA Buffalo, NY Butte, MT Charleston, SC Chicago, IL Cincinnati, OH Cleveland, OH College Station, TX Columbus, OH Denver, CO Detroit, MI Durham, NH Grand Forks, ND Honolulu, HI Houston, TX Jackson, MS Kansas City, MO Lincoln, NE Little Rock, AR Louisville, KY Memphis, TN Miami, FL Milwaukee, WI Minneapolis, MN Newark, NJ New York, NY Orlando, FL Philadelphia, PA Piscataway, NJ Reno, NV Salem, OR Salt Lake City, UT San Diego, CA Springfield, IL Seattle, WA Stillwater, OK Tampa, FL Tempe, AZ Toledo, OH University Park, PA Washington, DC Wichita, KS Valid cases 48 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Type of PTDL (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent City or City/County Library 1 College or University Library 2 State Library Library 3 Research-Oriented Library 4 17 35.4 35.4 35.4 25 52.1 52.1 87.5 5 10.4 10.4 97.9 1 2.1 2.1 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.792 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Sum 86.000 Valid cases 48 Missing cases PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of Hours PER YEAR PTDL is open to the public for in-person use of patent and trademark collections/materials: Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2000 1 2.1 2.4 2. 4 2016 1 2.1 2.4 4 . 8 2168 1 2.1 2. 4 7.1 2210 1 2.1 2.4 9.5 2223 1 2.1 2.4 11.9 2268 1 2.1 2.4 14.3 2340 1 2.1 2.4 16.7 2359 1 2.1 2.4 19.0 2900 1 2.1 2.4 21.4 2916 1 2.1 2.4 23.8 2973 1 2.1 2.4 26.2 3040 1 2.1 2.4 28.6 3060 1 2.1 2.4 31.0 3094 1 2.1 2.4 33.3 3178 1 2.1 2.4 35.7 3195 1 2.1 2.4 38.1 3220 1 2.1 2.4 40.5 3292 1 2.1 2.4 42.9 3294 1 2.1 2.4 45.2 3328 1 2.1 2.4 47.6 3380 1 2.1 2.4 50.0 3394 1 2.1 2.4 52.4 3432 1 2.1 2.4 54.8 3500 1 2.1 2.4 57.1 3508 1 2.1 2.4 59.5 3600 1 2.1 2.4 61.9 3616 1 2.1 2.4 64.3 3800 1 2.1 2.4 66.7 3804 1 2.1 2.4 69.0 3840 1 2.1 2.4 71.4 3865 1 2.1 2.4 73.8 3930 1 2.1 2.4 76.2 4196 1 2.1 2. 4 78.6 4322 1 2.1 2.4 81.0 4500 1 2.1 2.4 83.3 4680 1 2.1 2.4 85.7 4712 1 2.1 2.4 88.1 4720 1 2.1 2.4 90.5 4760 2 4.2 4.8 95.2 5000 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 5338 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 3469.786 145731.000 Median 3387.000 Mode 4760.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of Hours PER YEAR PTDL is open to the public for in-person patent and trademark reference service: Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2000 2 4.2 4.8 4.8 2016 1 2.1 2.4 7.1 2160 1 2.1 2.4 9.5 2168 1 2.1 2.4 11.9 2210 1 2.1 2.4 14.3 2223 1 2.1 2.4 16.7 2268 1 2.1 2.4 19.0 2295 1 2.1 2.4 21.4 2340 2 4.2 4.8 26.2 2359 1 2.1 2.4 28.6 2411 1 2.1 2.4 31.0 2640 1 2.1 2.4 33.3 2806 1 2.1 2.4 35.7 2900 1 2.1 2.4 38.1 2916 1 2.1 2.4 40.5 2973 1 2.1 2.4 42.9 3040 1 2.1 2.4 45.2 3094 1 2.1 2.4 47.6 3120 1 2.1 2.4 50.0 3160 1 2.1 2.4 52.4 3178 1 2.1 2.4 54.8 3220 1 2.1 2.4 57.1 3292 1 2.1 2.4 59.5 3294 1 2.1 2.4 61.9 3328 1 2.1 2.4 64.3 3380 1 2.1 2.4 66.7 3394 1 2.1 2.4 69.0 3400 1 2.1 2.4 71.4 3432 1 2.1 2.4 73.8 3458 1 2.1 2.4 76.2 3500 1 2. 1 2.4 78.6 3508 1 2.1 2.4 81.0 3630 1 2.1 2.4 85.7 3749 1 2.1 2.4 88.1 4322 1 2.1 2.4 90.5 4500 1 2.1 2.4 92.9 4680 1 2.1 2.4 95.2 4760 2 4.2 4.8 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 3091.048 129824.000 Median 3140.000 2000.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 42 Missing cases 6 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of Hours PER YEAR PTDL is open to the public for telephone patent and trademark reference service : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don ' t Know 1 2. 1 2.4 2.4 1820 1 2.1 2.4 4. 9 2000 2 4.2 4.9 9.8 2016 1 2.1 2.4 12.2 2168 1 2.1 2.4 14.6 2210 1 2. 1 2.4 17.1 2223 1 2.1 2.4 19.5 2268 1 2.1 2.4 22.0 2295 1 2. 1 2.4 24.4 2340 2 4.2 4.9 29.3 2359 1 2.1 2.4 31.7 2640 1 2.1 2.4 34.1 2806 1 2.1 2.4 36.6 2900 1 2.1 2.4 39.0 2916 1 2. 1 2.4 41.5 2931 1 2.1 2.4 43.9 2973 1 2.1 2.4 46.3 3040 1 2.1 2.4 48.8 3060 1 2.1 2.4 51.2 3160 1 2.1 2.4 53.7 3178 1 2.1 2.4 56.1 3220 1 2.1 2.4 58.5 3292 1 2.1 2.4 61.0 3294 1 2.1 2.4 63.4 3328 1 2.1 2.4 65.9 3380 1 2.1 2.4 68.3 3394 1 2.1 2.4 70.7 3400 1 2.1 2.4 73.2 3458 1 2.1 2.4 75.6 3500 1 2.1 2.4 78.0 3508 1 2.1 2.4 80.5 3600 1 2.1 2.4 82.9 3749 1 2.1 2.4 85.4 4082 1 2.1 2.4 87.8 4322 1 2.1 2.4 90.2 4500 1 2.1 2.4 92.7 4680 1 2.1 2.4 95.1 4760 2 4.2 4.9 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 8888 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 3021.220 Median 3060.000 Mode* 2000.000 Sum 123870.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for patent and trademark equipment (microform readers/reader printers, computers photocopy machines, file cabinets, and access for same): Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum r alue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 8 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 14 1 2.1 2.6 5.1 20 1 2.1 2.6 7.7 45 1 2.1 2.6 10.3 60 1 2.1 2.6 12.8 61 1 2.1 2.6 15.4 65 1 2.1 2.6 17.9 68 1 2.1 2.6 20.5 90 1 2.1 2.6 23.1 122 1 2.1 2.6 25.6 132 1 2.1 2.6 28.2 138 1 2.1 2.6 30.8 155 1 2.1 2.6 33.3 166 1 2.1 2.6 35.9 168 1 2.1 2.6 38.5 200 1 2.1 2.6 41.0 250 3 6.3 7.7 48.7 288 2 4.2 5.1 53.8 355 1 2.1 2.6 56.4 392 1 2.1 2.6 59.0 400 1 2.1 2.6 61.5 440 2 4.2 5.1 66.7 476 1 2.1 2.6 69.2 500 1 2.1 2.6 71.8 540 1 2.1 2.6 74.4 550 1 2.1 2.6 76.9 585 1 2.1 2.6 79.5 589 1 2.1 2.6 82.1 600 1 2.1 2.6 84.6 602 1 2.1 2.6 87.2 640 1 2.1 2.6 89.7 700 1 2.1 2.6 92.3 900 1 2.1 2.6 94.9 931 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 4400 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 8888 1 2.1 Missing 9999 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 432.769 16878.000 Median 288.000 Mode 250.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for patent and trademark equipment as a percent of total space (calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.36 1 2. 1 2.6 2.6 2.01 1 2.1 2.6 5.3 2.36 1 2. 1 2.6 7.9 4.55 1 2.1 2.6 10.5 4.58 1 2.1 2.6 13.2 4.87 1 2.1 2.6 15.8 4.96 1 2. 1 2.6 18.4 5.04 1 2. 1 2.6 21.1 5.43 1 2.1 2.6 23.7 5.77 1 2.1 2.6 26.3 5.84 1 2.1 2.6 28.9 7.55 1 2.1 2.6 31.6 8.27 1 2.1 2.6 34.2 8.70 1 2.1 2.6 36.8 10.17 1 2.1 2.6 39.5 10.68 1 2.1 2.6 42.1 11.78 1 2.1 2.6 44.7 14.46 1 2.1 2.6 47.4 16.67 1 2.1 2.6 50.0 16.71 1 2.1 2.6 52.6 17.31 1 2.1 2.6 55.3 17.31 1 2.1 2.6 57.9 17.38 1 2.1 2.6 60.5 18.06 1 2.1 2.6 63.2 20.14 1 2.1 2.6 65.8 20.72 1 2.1 2.6 68.4 20.78 1 2.1 2.6 71.1 22.92 1 2.1 2.6 73.7 22.98 1 2.1 2.6 76.3 23.53 1 2.1 2.6 78.9 25.00 1 2.1 2.6 81.6 26.48 1 2.1 2.6 84.2 26.59 1 2.1 2.6 86.8 34.95 1 2.1 2.6 89.5 38.53 1 2.1 2.6 92.1 48.54 1 2.1 2.6 94.7 56.60 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 75.38 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 10 20.8 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 18.025 684.965 Median 16.690 Mode 1 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 1.358 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for patent and trademark materials (book stacks , microform cabinets , and aisles for acces for same) : Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 25 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 30 1 2.1 2.6 5.1 60 1 2.1 2.6 7.7 80 1 2.1 2.6 10.3 98 1 2.1 2.6 12.8 120 1 2.1 2.6 15.4 125 1 2.1 2.6 17.9 131 1 2.1 2.6 20.5 135 1 2.1 2.6 23.1 150 2 4.2 5.1 28.2 190 1 2.1 2.6 30.8 204 1 2.1 2.6 33.3 241 1 2.1 2.6 35.9 286 1 2.1 2.6 38.5 300 2 4.2 5.1 43.6 309 1 2.1 2.6 46.2 339 1 2.1 2.6 48.7 342 1 2.1 2.6 51.3 383 1 2.1 2.6 53.8 387 1 2.1 2.6 56.4 404 1 2.1 2.6 59.0 421 1 2.1 2.6 61.5 500 1 2.1 2.6 64.1 569 1 2.1 2.6 66.7 600 1 2.1 2.6 69.2 768 1 2.1 2.6 71.8 861 1 2.1 2.6 74.4 954 1 2.1 2.6 76.9 1008 1 2.1 2.6 79.5 1186 1 2.1 2.6 82.1 1480 1 2.1 2.6 84.6 2500 1 2.1 2.6 87.2 3118 1 2.1 2.6 89.7 3600 1 2.1 2.6 92.3 5333 1 2.1 2.6 94.9 14125 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 24419 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 8888 1 2.1 Missing 9999 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1698.231 66231.000 Median 342.000 Mode' 150.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 39 Missing cases 9 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for patent and trademark materials as a percent of total space (calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequ ency Percent Percent Percent 2.10 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 2.52 1 2.1 2.6 5.3 3.42 1 2.1 2.6 7.9 6.48 1 2.1 2.6 10.5 6.52 1 2.1 2.6 13.2 9.98 1 2.1 2.6 15.8 11.32 1 2.1 2.6 18.4 11.82 1 2.1 2.6 21.1 14.43 1 2.1 2.6 23.7 14.71 1 2.1 2.6 26.3 17.10 1 2.1 2.6 28.9 17.65 1 2.1 2.6 31.6 20.00 1 2.1 2.6 34.2 22.34 1 2.1 2.6 36.8 22.73 1 2.1 2.6 39.5 22.99 1 2.1 2.6 42.1 23.38 1 2.1 2.6 44.7 23.83 1 2.1 2.6 47.4 24.76 1 2.1 2.6 50.0 25.00 1 2.1 2.6 52.6 25.39 1 2.1 2.6 55.3 28.80 1 2.1 2.6 57.9 29.13 1 2.1 2.6 60.5 33.52 1 2.1 2.6 63.2 34.18 1 2.1 2.6 65.8 36.54 1 2.1 2.6 68.4 37.32 1 2.1 2.6 71.1 39.16 1 2.1 2.6 73.7 39.72 1 2.1 2.6 76.3 41.45 1 2.1 2.6 78.9 46.40 1 2.1 2.6 81.6 61.64 1 2.1 2.6 84.2 65.22 1 2.1 2.6 86.8 79.87 1 2.1 2.6 89.5 83.34 1 2.1 2.6 92.1 84.18 1 2.1 2.6 94.7 91.92 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 95.93 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 10 20.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 33.073 1256.785 Median 24.878 Mode^ * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 2.103 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for seating for patron use of [near to] patent and trademark materials (reading tables, index tables, microform readers and reader printers, chairs, and access for same): Don ' t Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 24 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 25 1 2.1 2.6 5.3 31 1 2.1 2.6 7.9 60 1 2.1 2.6 10.5 64 1 2.1 2.6 13.2 100 2 4.2 5.3 18.4 120 1 2.1 2.6 21.1 132 1 2.1 2.6 23.7 142 1 2.1 2.6 26.3 160 2 4.2 5.3 31.6 161 1 2.1 2.6 34.2 170 1 2.1 2.6 36.8 240 4 8.3 10.5 47.4 250 1 2.1 2.6 50.0 352 1 2.1 2.6 52.6 483 1 2.1 2.6 55.3 600 1 2.1 2.6 57.9 632 1 2.1 2.6 60.5 671 1 2.1 2.6 63.2 680 1 2.1 2.6 65.8 720 1 2.1 2.6 68.4 844 1 2.1 2.6 71.1 856 1 2.1 2.6 73.7 1000 3 6.3 7.9 81.6 1080 1 2.1 2.6 84.2 1816 1 2.1 2.6 86.8 2200 1 2.1 2.6 89.5 2640 1 2.1 2.6 92.1 2850 1 2.1 2.6 94.7 6000 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 10000 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 8888 1 2.1 Missing 9999 3 6.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1002.184 38083.000 Median 301.000 Mode 240.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 10 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for seating for patron use of [near to] patent and trademark materials, percent of total space (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.03 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 1.63 1 2.1 2.6 5.3 2.58 1 2.1 2.6 7.9 4.04 1 2.1 2.6 10.5 4.54 1 2. 1 2.6 13.2 9.01 1 2.1 2.6 15.8 10.84 1 2. 1 2.6 18.4 10.87 1 2.1 2.6 21.1 13.33 1 2. 1 2.6 23.7 13.77 1 2.1 2.6 26.3 15.02 1 2.1 2.6 28.9 15.33 1 2.1 2.6 31.6 16.67 1 2.1 2.6 34.2 17.03 1 2.1 2.6 36.8 17.15 1 2.1 2.6 39.5 17.32 1 2.1 2.6 42.1 19.15 1 2.1 2.6 44.7 19.29 1 2.1 2.6 47.4 19.42 1 2.1 2.6 50.0 19.77 1 2.1 2.6 52.6 21.02 1 2.1 2.6 55.3 22.64 1 2.1 2.6 57.9 25.71 1 2.1 2.6 60.5 30.77 1 2.1 2.6 63.2 30.86 1 2.1 2.6 65.8 34.19 1 2.1 2.6 68.4 35.14 1 2.1 2.6 71.1 35.29 1 2.1 2.6 73.7 36.18 1 2.1 2.6 76.3 36.84 1 2.1 2.6 78.9 37.14 1 2.1 2.6 81.6 38.55 1 2.1 2.6 84.2 41.67 1 2.1 2.6 86.8 50.81 1 2.1 2.6 89.5 54.55 1 2.1 2.6 92.1 63.65 1 2.1 2.6 94.7 64.94 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 84.03 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 10 20.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 26.099 991.759 Median 19.594 Mode 1 1.034 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 11 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for staff associated with providing patent and trademark reference assistance (desks, reference desks, chairs, and access for same) : Don ' t Know No Answer Valid Cum 'alue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 15 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 35 1 2.1 2.6 5.3 39 1 2.1 2.6 7.9 54 1 2.1 2.6 10.5 70 2 4.2 5.3 15.8 80 1 2.1 2.6 18.4 90 1 2.1 2.6 21.1 100 2 4.2 5.3 26.3 121 1 2.1 2.6 28.9 137 1 2.1 2.6 31.6 158 1 2.1 2.6 34.2 160 1 2.1 2.6 36.8 186 1 2.1 2.6 39.5 203 1 2.1 2.6 42.1 225 1 2.1 2.6 44.7 250 1 2.1 2.6 47.4 300 1 2.1 2.6 50.0 322 1 2.1 2.6 52.6 330 1 2.1 2.6 55.3 336 1 2.1 2.6 57.9 400 3 6.3 7.9 65.8 480 1 2.1 2.6 68.4 484 1 2.1 2.6 71.1 600 1 2.1 2.6 73.7 700 1 2.1 2.6 76.3 729 1 2.1 2.6 78.9 822 1 2.1 2.6 81.6 900 1 2.1 2.6 84.2 972 1 2.1 2.6 86.8 1065 1 2.1 2.6 89.5 1344 1 2.1 2.6 92.1 1654 1 2.1 2.6 94.7 2000 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 8800 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 8888 1 2.1 Missing 9999 3 6.3 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 661.342 25131.000 Median 311.000 Mode 400.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 12 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services: Floor space for staff associated with providing patent and trademark reference assistance, as a percent of total space (calculated) : Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.09 2.1 2.6 2.6 2.09 2. 1 2.6 5.3 2.91 2.1 2.6 7. 9 4.37 2.1 2.6 10.5 4.71 2.1 2.6 13.2 4.92 2. 1 2.6 15.8 5.64 2. 1 2.6 18.4 5.84 2. 1 2.6 21.1 7.64 2.1 2.6 23. / 7.91 2. 1 2.6 26.3 8.40 2.1 2.6 28.9 8.86 2.1 2.6 31.6 9.24 2.1 2.6 34.2 9.43 2.1 2.6 36.8 10.42 2. 1 2.6 39.5 11.11 2.1 2.6 42.1 11.78 2.1 2.6 44.7 11.84 2.1 2.6 47.4 15.22 2.1 2.6 50.0 15.38 2.1 2.6 52.6 16.43 2.1 2.6 55.3 18.18 2. 1 2.6 57.9 20.83 2.1 2.6 60.5 22.46 2.1 2.6 63.2 23.53 2.1 2.6 65.8 24.64 2.1 2.6 68.4 26.27 2.1 2.6 71.1 28.81 2. 1 2.6 73.7 34.35 2. 1 2.6 76.3 34.71 2. 1 2.6 78.9 36.36 2. 1 2.6 81.6 37.40 2. 1 2.6 84.2 38.64 2. 1 2.6 86.8 40.00 2.1 2.6 89.5 46.67 2.1 2.6 92.1 47.89 2.1 2.6 94.7 49.55 2.1 2.6 97.4 52.95 10 2.1 20.8 2.6 Missing 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 19.960 Median 15.301 Mode* 1.087 Sum 758.483 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 13 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Space committed to patent and trademark services : Total floor space associated with providing patent and trademark services (may be more than sum of the square feet in 1, 2, 3, and 4 above) : No Answer Mean 4043 225 Sum 161729 000 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 230 ] L 2.1 2.5 2.5 351 3 L 2.1 2.5 5.0 515 3 L 2.1 2.5 7.5 520 3 L 2.1 2.5 10.0 594 3 L 2.1 2.5 12.5 666 3 L 2.1 2.5 15.0 834 3 L 2.1 2.5 17.5 861 3 L 2.1 2.5 20.0 913 3 L 2.1 2.5 22.5 924 3 L 2.1 2.5 25.0 1053 3 L 2.1 2.5 27.5 1060 3 L 2.1 2.5 30.0 1142 3 L 2.1 2.5 32.5 1190 3 L 2.1 2.5 35.0 1200 ] L 2.1 2.5 37.5 1235 : L 2.1 2.5 40.0 1253 : L 2.1 2.5 42.5 1335 3 L 2.1 2.5 45.0 1409 ] L 2.1 2.5 47.5 1485 3 L 2.1 2.5 50.0 1500 ] L 2.1 2.5 52.5 1700 3 L 2.1 2.5 55.0 1831 ] L 2.1 2.5 57.5 2291 : L 2.1 2.5 60.0 2400 : L 2.1 2.5 62.5 2436 3 L 2.1 2.5 65.0 2800 ] L 2.1 2.5 67.5 2853 ] L 2.1 2.5 70.0 3478 3 L 2.1 2.5 72.5 3500 ; L 2.1 2.5 75.0 4330 ] L 2.1 2.5 77.5 4741 ] L 2.1 2.5 80.0 5058 ] L 2.1 2.5 82.5 5802 3 L 2.1 2.5 85.0 11000 ] L 2.1 2.5 87.5 11193 ] L 2.1 2.5 90.0 14725 3 L 2.1 2.5 92.5 15400 ] L 2.1 2.5 95.0 16619 3 L 2.1 2.5 97.5 29302 ] L 2.1 2.5 100.0 < 5 12.5 Missing 9999 I > 4.2 Missing Total 4{ i 100.0 100.0 Median 1492. 5( )0 Mode 230.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 14 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Computer Work Station-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 4 8.3 100.0 100.0 44 91.7 Missing Pereent Percent Percent Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 4.000 Valid cases 4 Missing cases 44 Patron Computer Workstation-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 50.0 50.0 2 1 2.1 50.0 100.0 46 95.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.500 Median 1.500 Mode* 1.000 Sum 3.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 Patron Computer Work Station-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 15 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Computer Work Station-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 6 12.5 100.0 100.0 42 87.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 6.000 Valid cases 6 Missing cases 42 Patron Computer Work Station — -Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 2.00 11 1 36 22.9 91.7 2.1 8.3 75.0 Missing 91.7 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.083 13.000 Median 1 .000 Mode 1.000 Valic i cases 12 Missing cases 36 Patron Computer/CD-ROM-Number Used About About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 13 27.1 81.3 81.3 2 3 6.3 18.8 100.0 32 66.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.188 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 19.000 Valid cases 16 Missing cases 32 16 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Computer/ CD -ROM-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 6 12.5 85.7 85.7 7 1 2.1 14.3 100.0 41 85.4 Missing Mean 1.857 Sum 13.000 Valid cases 7 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 1.000 Mode Missing cases 41 Patron Computer/CD-ROM-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 9 18.8 100.0 100.0 39 81.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 9.000 Valid cases 9 Missing cases 39 Patron Computer CD/ROM-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 9 18.8 100.0 100.0 39 81.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 9.000 Valid cases 9 Missing cases 39 17 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Computer CD/ROM-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 2.00 7.00 Total 37 77.1 90.2 90.2 3 6.3 7.3 97.6 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 7 14.6 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.220 50.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases Patron Film Reader/Printer-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2 2 1 3 4 41 Total 48 4.2 28.6 28.6 2.1 14.3 42.9 8.3 57.1 100.0 )5.4 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.286 16.000 Median 3.000 Mode 3.000 Valid cases Missing cases 41 Patron Film Reader/ Printer -Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 9 18.8 69.2 69.2 2 2 4.2 15.4 84.6 4 1 2.1 7.7 92.3 10 1 2.1 7.7 100.0 35 72.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.077 27.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 13 Missing cases 35 18 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Film Reader/Printer-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: 1 3 2 2 4 1 5 1 41 Total 48 Valid Cum cent Percent Percent 6.3 42.9 42.9 4.2 28.6 71.4 2.1 14.3 85.7 2.1 14.3 100.0 5.4 Missing Mean 2.286 Median Sum 16.000 Valid cases 7 Missin 2.000 Mode 1.000 Patron Film Reader/ Printer-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 4 8.3 25.0 25.0 2 7 14.6 43.8 68.8 3 . 2 4.2 12.5 81.3 4 2 4.2 12.5 93.8 6 1 2.1 6.3 100.0 32 66.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 2.375 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Sum 38.000 Valid cases 16 Missing cases 32 19 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Film Reader/ Printer-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 13 27.1 34.2 34.2 2.00 9 18.8 23.7 57.9 3.00 8 16.7 21.1 78.9 4.00 4 8.3 10.5 89.5 5.00 2 4.2 5.3 94.7 6.00 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 10.00 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 10 20.8 Missing Mean 2.553 Sum 97.000 Valid cases 38 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 2.000 Mode 1.000 Missing cases 10 Patron Film Reader-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2 4.2 66.7 66.7 3 1 2.1 33.3 100.0 45 93.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.667 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 5.000 Valid cases 3 Missing cases 45 Patron Film Reader-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 ♦ 20 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Film Reader -Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 50.0 50.0 2 1 2.1 50.0 100.0 46 95.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.500 3.000 Median 1.500 Mode 1 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 Patron Film Reader-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: 1.000 Valid Cum ue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 3 6.3 25.0 25.0 2 2 4.2 16.7 41.7 3 2 4.2 16.7 58.3 8 1 2.1 8.3 66.7 9 1 2.1 8.3 75.0 10 1 2.1 8.3 83.3 16 1 2.1 8.3 91.7 20 1 2.1 8.3 100.0 36 75.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum Valid cases 6.333 76.000 12 Median Missing cases 3.000 36 Mode 1.000 21 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Film Reader-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 4 8.3 25.0 25.0 2.00 4 8.3 25.0 50.0 3.00 3 6.3 18.8 68.8 8.00 1 2.1 6.3 75.0 9.00 1 2.1 6.3 81.3 10.00 1 2.1 6.3 87.5 16.00 1 2.1 6.3 93.8 20.00 1 2.1 6.3 100.0 32 66.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 5.250 14.000 Median 2.500 Mode* * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 16 Missing cases 32 1.000 Patron Fiche Reader-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 5 43 48 10.4 100.0 100.0 89.6 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Valid cases 5 Mode 1.000 Sum Missing cases 43 5.000 Patron Fiche Reader-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 48 2.1 97.9 100.0 Missing 100.0 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Valid cases 1 Mode 1.000 Missing cases 47 Sum 1.000 22 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Fiche Reader -Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 50.0 50.0 2 1 2.1 50.0 100.0 46 95.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.500 Median 1.500 Mode* 1.000 Sum 3.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is sh^wn. Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 Patron Fiche Reader-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 10 20.8 50.0 50.0 2 4 8.3 20.0 70.0 3 3 6.3 15.0 85.0 4 2 4.2 10.0 95.0 6 1 2.1 5.0 100.0 28 58.3 Missing Total Mean 2.050 Median 1.500 Mode 1.000 Sum 41.000 Valid cases 20 Missing cases 28 23 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Fiche Reader-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 17 35.4 60.7 60.7 2.00 5 10.4 17.9 78.6 3.00 3 6.3 10.7 89.3 4.00 2 4.2 7.1 96.4 6.00 1 2.1 3.6 100.0 20 41.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.786 50.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases Missing cases 20 Patron Fiche Reader/Printer-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 47 2.1 97.9 100.0 Missing 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 1.000 Valid cases 1 Missing cases 47 Patron Fiche Reader/Printer-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 50.0 50.0 2 1 2.1 50.0 100.0 • 46 95.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.500 3.000 Median 1.500 Mode* 1.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 24 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Fiche Reader/Printer-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 4.2 100.0 100.0 95.8 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Valid cases 2 Mode 1.0 00 Missing cases 46 2.000 Patron Fiche Reader/ Printer -Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 19 39.6 79.2 79.2 3 6.3 12.5 91.7 1 2.1 4.2 95.8 1 2.1 4.2 100.0 24 50.0 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.417 34.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 24 Missing cases 24 Patron Fiche Reader/Printer-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 21 43.8 75.0 75.0 2.00 5 10.4 17.9 92.9 4.00 1 2.1 3.6 96.4 5.00 1 2.1 3.6 100.0 20 41.7 Missing Total 48 Mean Sum 1.429 40.000 Median 1.000 1.000 Valid cases 28 Missing cases 20 25 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Photocopiers-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 33.3 33.3 2 2 4.2 66.7 100.0 45 93.8 Missing Mean 1.667 Median Sum 5.000 Valid cases 3 Missin Total 48 100.0 100.0 2.000 Mode 2.000 45 Patron Photocopiers -Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Patron Photocopiers -Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 3 6.3 100.0 100.0 45 93.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 3.000 Valid cases 3 Missing cases 45 ♦ 26 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Photocopiers -Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 16 33.3 47.1 47.1 2 9 18.8 26.5 73.5 3 4 8.3 11.8 85.3 4 1 2.1 2.9 88.2 5 1 2.1 2.9 91.2 6 1 2.1 2.9 94.1 10 2 4.2 5.9 100.0 14 29.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 382 000 Median 2.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 34 Missing cases 14 Patron Photocopiers-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum a. Lue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 00 17 35.4 44.7 44.7 2 00 11 22.9 28.9 73.7 3 00 5 10.4 13.2 86.8 4 00 1 2.1 2.6 89.5 5 00 1 2.1 2.6 92.1 6 00 1 2.1 2.6 94.7 00 2 4.2 5.3 100.0 10 20.8 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean 2.342 Sum 89.000 Valid cases 38 2.000 Missing cases 10 Mode 1.000 27 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Color Photocopiers-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Patron Color Photocopiers-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Patron Color Photocopiers -Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Patron Color Photocopiers -Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 < 28 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Color Photocopiers-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Patron Telef acsi-.d-le-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Patron Telef acsimile-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Patron Telef acsimile-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 29 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Patron Telef acsimile-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 9 39 18.8 100.0 100.0 81.3 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Valid cases 9 Mode 1.000 Missing cases 39 9.000 Patron Telef acsimile-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 Total 18.8 100.0 100.0 81.3 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 9.000 Valid cases 9 Missing cases 39 Staff Computer Work Station-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 46 Total 48 4.2 100.0 100.0 95.8 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 2.000 30 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Computer Workstation-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 100.0 100.0 47 97.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 1.000 Valid cases 1 Missing cases 47 Staff Computer Work Station-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2 4.2 66.7 66.7 2 1 2.1 33.3 100.0 45 93.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.333 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 4.000 Valid cases 3 Missing cases 45 Staff Computer Work Station-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 39.6 90.5 90.5 2.1 4.8 95.2 2.1 4.8 100.0 56.3 Missing 1 19 2 1 3 1 27 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.143 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 24.000 Valid cases 21 Missing cases 27 31 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Computer Work Station-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 2.00 3.00 Total 22 45.8 84.6 84.6 3 6.3 11.5 96.2 1 2.1 3.8 100.0 22 45.8 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.192 31.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 26 Missing cases 22 Staff Computer/CD-ROM-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 20.8 90.9 90.9 2.1 9.1 100.0 77.1 Missing 1 10 2 1 37 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.091 Sum 12.000 Valic 1 cases 11 Median Missing cases 1.000 37 Mode 1.000 Staff Computer/CD-ROM-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 48 100.0 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 32 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Computer/CD-ROM-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 5 10.4 100.0 100.0 43 89.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 5.000 Valid cases 5 Missing cases 43 Staff Computer CD/ROM-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 21 43.8 95.5 95.5 2 1 2.1 4.5 100.0 26 54.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.045 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 23.000 Valid cases 22 Missing cases 26 Staff Computer CD/ROM-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 36 75.0 94.7 94.7 2.00 2 4.2 5.3 100.0 10 20.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.053 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 40.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 33 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Film Reader/ Printer-Nu m ber Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 3 6.3 75.0 75.0 1 2.1 25.0 100.0 44 91.7 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum Valid cases 1.250 5.000 Median Missing cases 1.000 44 Mode 1.000 Staff Film Reader/Printer-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 Total 48 10.4 100.0 100.0 89.6 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum Valid cases 5 Missing cases 43 5.000 Staff Film Reader/Printer-Number Used About 1/2 of the Ti me : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 2 4.2 40.0 40.0 2 4.2 40.0 80.0 1 2.1 20.0 100.0 43 89.6 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.800 9.000 Median 2.000 Mode* * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown, Valid cases 5 Missing cases 43 1.000 34 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Film Reader/Printer-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 13 27.1 56.5 56.5 2 4 8.3 17.4 73.9 3 2 4.2 8.7 82.6 4 2 4.2 S.7 91.3 5 1 2. 1 4.3 95.7 6 1 2.1 4.3 100.0 25 52.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 Mean Sum 087 000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 23 Missing cases 25 Staff Film Reader/Printer-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 20 41.7 57.1 57.1 2.00 7 14.6 20.0 77.1 3.00 4 8.3 11.4 88.6 4.00 2 4.2 5.7 94.3 5.00 1 2.1 2.9 97.1 8.00 1 2.1 2.9 100.0 13 27.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.914 67.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 13 35 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Film Reader-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 47 2.1 100.0 100.0 97.9 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean 3.000 Valid cases 1 Mode 3.000 Sum Missing cases 47 3.000 Staff Film Reader-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 16 Total 2.1 100.0 100.0 97.9 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 16.000 Valid cases 1 Mode 16.000 Missing cases 47 Sum 16.000 Staff Film Reader-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2.1 100.0 100.0 97.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 2.000 Valid cases 1 Mode 2.000 Sum Missing cases 47 2.000 36 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Film Reader-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 7 14.6 58.3 58.3 2 2 4.2 16.7 75.0 8 1 2.1 8.3 83.3 9 1 2.1 8. 3 91.7 2 1 2.1 8.3 100.0 36 75.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 4.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 48.000 Valid cases 12 Missing cases 36 Staff Film Reader-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 7 14.6 46.7 46.7 2.00 3 6.3 20.0 66.7 3.00 1 2.1 6.7 73.3 8.00 1 2.1 6.7 80.0 9.00 1 2.1 6.7 86.7 16.00 1 2.1 6.7 93.3 20.00 1 2.1 6.7 100.0 33 68.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 4.600 Median 2.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 69.000 Valid cases 15 Missing cases 33 37 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Fiche Reader-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 100.0 100.0 47 97.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 1.000 Valid cases 1 Missing cases 47 Staff Fiche Reader-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 100.0 100.0 47 97.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 1.000 Valid cases 1 Missing cases 47 Staff Fiche Reader-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2 4.2 100.0 100.0 46 95.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 2.000 Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 38 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY itaff Fiche Reader-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 14 29.2 66.7 66.7 2 3 6.3 14.3 81.0 3 3 6. 3 14.3 95.2 6 1 2.1 4.8 100.0 27 56.3 Missing 1 48 100.0 100.0 Total Mean 1.667 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 35.000 Valid cases 21 Missing cases 27 Staff Fiche Reader-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 18 37.5 72.0 72.0 2.00 3 6.3 12.0 84.0 3.00 3 6.3 12.0 96.0 6.00 1 2.1 4.0 100.0 23 47.9 M issing Total 48 Mean 1.560 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 39.000 Valid cases 25 Missing cases 23 Staff Fiche Reader/Printer-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 39 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Fiche Reader/ Printer-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 100.0 100.0 47 97.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 1.000 Valid cases 1 Missing cases 47 Staff Fiche Reader/ Printer-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Staff Fiche Reader/ Printer-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 15 31.3 71.4 71.4 2 3 6.3 14.3 85.7 4 1 2.1 4.8 90.5 6 1 2.1 4.8 95.2 8 1 2.1 4.8 100.0 27 56.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.857 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 39.000 Valid cases 21 Missing cases 27 • 40 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Fiche Reader/Printer-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 16 33.3 72.7 72.7 2.00 3 6.3 13.6 86.4 4.00 1 2.1 4.5 90.9 6.00 1 2.1 4. 5 95.5 8.00 1 2.1 4.5 100.0 26 54.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.818 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 40.000 Valid cases 22 Missing cases 26 Staff Photocopiers -Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 50.0 50.0 2 1 2.1 50.0 100.0 46 95.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.500 Median 1.500 Mode* 1.000 Sum 3.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 41 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Photocopiers -Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum f Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 3 6.3 75.0 75.0 3 1 2.1 25.0 100.0 44 91.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.500 Median 1.000 Sum 6.000 Valid cases 4 Missing cases 4 Mode 1.000 Staff Photocopiers-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 33.3 33.3 2 2 45 4.2 93.8 66.7 Missing 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.667 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Sum 5.000 Valid cases 3 Missing cases 45 Staff Photocopiers -Number Dsed About 1/4 of the Time : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 16 33.3 61.5 61.5 2 6 12.5 23.1 84.6 3 1 2.1 3.8 88.5 5 2 4.2 7.7 96.2 10 1 2.1 3.8 100.0 22 45.8 Missing 42 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.962 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 51.000 Valid cases 26 Missing cases 22 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Photocopiers-Total Number (Calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 20 41.7 62.5 62.5 2.00 5 10.4 15.6 78.1 3.00 2 4.2 6.3 84.4 4.00 1 2. 1 3.1 87.5 5.00 3 6.3 9.4 96.9 10.00 1 2.1 3.1 100.0 16 33.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 Mean 2.031 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 65.000 Valid cases 32 Missing cases 16 Staff Color Photocopiers -Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Staff Color Photocopiers -Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid cases 48 100 Missing Total 48 100 100.0 issing cases 48 43 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Color Photocopiers-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Staff Color Photocopiers -Number Used About 1/-S of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Staff Color Photocopiers-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Staff Telefacsimile-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 100.0 100.0 47 97.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 1.000 Valid cases 1 Missing cases 47 44 ♦ PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Telefacsimile-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Staff Telefacsimile-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2 4.2 100.0 100.0 46 95.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 2.000 Valid cases 2 Missing cases 46 Staff Telefacsimile-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 54.2 96.3 96.3 2.1 3.7 100.0 43.8 Missing 1 26 2 1 21 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.037 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 28.000 Valid cases 27 Missing cases 21 45 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Telefacsimile-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 29 60.4 96.7 96.7 2.00 1 2.1 3.3 100.0 18 37.5 Missing Mean 1.033 Median Sum 31.000 Valid cases 30 Missim Total 48 100.0 100.0 1.000 Mode 1.000 Missing cases 18 Itaff Fiche-to-Fiche Duplicator-Number Used About All of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 itaff Fiche-to-Fiche Duplicator-Number Used About 3/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 Staff Fiche-to-Fiche Duplicator-Number Used About 1/2 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 48 100.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Valid cases Missing cases 48 ♦ 46 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Fiche-to-Fiche Duplicator-Number Used About 1/4 of the Time: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 10 20.8 100.0 100.0 38 79.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 10.000 Valid cases 10 Missing cases 38 Staff Fiche-to-Fiche Duplicator-Total Number (Calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 10 20.8 100.0 100.0 38 79.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 ▲ Valid cases 10 Missing cases 38 47 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of reading tables , index tables , trademark patrons : •generally used by patent and Valid Cum lue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 2.4 2.4 2 11 22.9 26.2 28.6 3 8 16.7 19.0 47.6 4 7 14.6 16.7 64.3 5 6 12.5 14.3 78.6 6 1 2.1 2.4 81.0 7 1 2.1 2.4 83.3 8 4 8.3 9.5 92.9 10 1 2.1 2.4 95.2 12 1 2.1 z.4 97.6 120 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 6.952 Median Sum 292.000 Valid cases 42 Missin 000 Mode 2.000 48 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of chairs. . .generally used by patent and trademark patrons: Valid Cum lue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 3 6.3 7.1 7.1 4 3 6.3 7.1 14.3 5 1 2.1 2.4 16.7 6 3 6.3 7.1 23.8 7 4 8.3 9.5 33.3 8 6 12.5 14.3 47.6 10 2 4.2 4.8 52.4 12 3 6.3 7.1 59.5 14 3 6. 3 7.1 66.7 15 2 4.2 4.8 71.4 16 1 2.1 2.4 7L.8 18 1 2.1 2.4 76.2 20 4 8.3 9.5 85.7 24 1 2.1 2.4 88.1 25 1 2.1 2.4 90.5 28 1 2.1 2.4 92.9 32 1 2.1 2.4 95.2 36 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 110 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 14.619 Median 10.000 Mode 8.000 Sum 614.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 49 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of reading tables , index tables . trademark patrons : generally used by patent and Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 2.4 2.4 2 11 22.9 26.2 28.6 3 8 16.7 19.0 47.6 4 7 14.6 16.7 64.3 5 6 12.5 14.3 78.6 6 1 2.1 2.4 81.0 7 1 2.1 2.4 83.3 8 4 8.3 9.5 92.9 10 1 2.1 2.4 95.2 12 1 2.1 z.4 97.6 120 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 6.952 Median Sum 292.000 Valid cases 42 Missim 4.000 Mode 2.000 48 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of chairs. . .generally used by patent and trademark patrons: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 3 6.3 7.1 7.1 4 3 6.3 7.1 14.3 5 1 2.1 2.4 16.7 6 3 6.3 7.1 23.8 7 4 8.3 9.5 33.3 8 6 12.5 14.3 47.6 10 2 4.2 4.8 52.4 12 3 6.3 7.1 59.5 14 3 6.3 7. 1 66.7 15 2 4.2 4.8 71.4 16 1 2.1 2.4 70.8 18 1 2.1 2.4 76.2 2 4 8.3 9.5 85.7 24 1 2.1 2.4 88.1 25 1 2.1 2.4 90.5 28 1 2.1 2.4 92.9 32 1 2.1 2.4 95.2 36 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 110 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 14.619 Median 10.000 Mode 8.000 Sum 614.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 49 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of individual carrela [and chairs] generally used by patent and trademark patrons : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 16 33.3 44.4 44.4 1 5 10.4 13.9 58.3 2 2 4.2 5.6 63.9 3 3 6.3 8.3 72.2 4 2 4.2 5.6 77.8 5 1 2.1 2.8 80.6 6 4 8.3 11.1 91.7 7 1 2.1 2.8 94.4 10 1 2.1 2.8 97.2 120 1 6 2.1 12.5 2.8 Missing 100.0 No Answer 99 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 5.333 Median 1, ,000 Mode .000 Sum 192.000 Valid cases 36 Missing cases 12 Number of individual [carrels and] chairs generally us ed by patent and trademark patrons: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent No Answer Mean Sum 6.800 238.000 10 20.8 28.6 28.6 1 5 10.4 14.3 42.9 2 3 6.3 8.6 51.4 3 3 6.3 8.6 60.0 4 3 6.3 8.6 68.6 5 2 4.2 5.7 74.3 6 4 8.3 11.4 85.7 7 1 2.1 2.9 88.6 10 1 2.1 2.9 91.4 15 1 2.1 2.9 94.3 30 1 2.1 2.9 97.1 110 1 2.1 2.9 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 99 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 2.000 Mode .000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 13 50 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Linear feet of shelving committed to patent and trademark materials: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent No Answer Mean 1023.725 Sum 40949.000 12 1 2. 1 2.5 2.5 2 1 2. 1 2.5 5.0 60 1 2. 1 2.5 7.5 69 1 2.1 2.5 10.0 77 1 2.1 2.5 12.5 90 1 2. 1 2.5 15.0 104 1 2.1 2. 5 17.5 105 1 2.1 2. 5 20.0 108 1 2. 1 2.5 22.5 126 1 2. 1 2.5 25.0 234 1 2.1 2.5 27.5 276 1 2.1 2.5 30.0 282 1 2.1 2.5 32.5 315 1 2.1 2.5 35.0 320 1 2.1 2.5 37.5 345 1 2.1 2.5 40.0 351 1 2. 1 2.5 42.5 363 1 2.1 2.5 45.0 384 1 2. 1 2.5 47.5 400 1 2. 1 2.5 50.0 441 1 2.1 2.5 52.5 489 1 2.1 2.5 55.0 500 1 2.1 2.5 57.5 504 1 2.1 2.5 60.0 524 1 2.1 2.5 62.5 555 1 2.1 2.5 65.0 560 1 2.1 2.5 67.5 583 1 2.1 2.5 70.0 600 1 2.1 2.5 72.5 650 1 2.1 2.5 75.0 678 1 2.1 2.5 77.5 705 1 2.1 2.5 80.0 710 1 2.1 2.5 82.5 922 1 2.1 2.5 85.0 1163 1 2.1 2.5 87.5 1368 1 2.1 2.5 90.0 1767 1 2.1 2.5 92.5 5382 1 2.1 2.5 95.0 8247 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 10560 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 99 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 420.500 Mode 12.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown, Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 51 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of individual carrels [and chairs] generally used by patent and trademark patrons : No Answer Valid Cum lue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 16 33.3 44.4 44.4 1 5 10.4 13.9 58.3 2 2 4.2 5.6 63.9 3 3 6.3 8.3 72.2 4 2 4.2 5.6 77.8 5 1 2.1 2.8 80.6 6 4 8.3 11.1 91.7 7 1 2.1 2.8 94.4 10 1 2.1 2.8 97.2 120 1 2.1 2.8 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 99 6 12.5 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 5.333 192.000 Median Mode 000 Valid cases 36 Missing cases 12 Number of individual [carrels and] chairs generally used by patent and trademark patrons: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent No Answer 10 20.8 28.6 28.6 1 5 10.4 14.3 42.9 2 3 6.3 8.6 51.4 3 3 6.3 8.6 60.0 4 3 6.3 8.6 68.6 5 2 4.2 5.7 74.3 6 8.3 11.4 85.7 7 2.1 2.9 88.6 10 2.1 2.9 91.4 15 2.1 2.9 94.3 30 2.1 2.9 97.1 110 2.1 2.9 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 99 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 6.800 238.000 Median 2.000 Mode .000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 13 50 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Linear feet of shelving committed to patent and trademark materials: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent No Answer Mean Sum 1023.725 40949.000 12 1 2.1 2.5 2.5 2 1 2.1 2.5 5.0 60 1 2.1 2.5 7.5 69 1 2.1 2. 5 10.0 77 1 2.1 2.5 12.5 9 1 2. 1 2.5 15.0 104 1 2. 1 2.5 17.5 105 1 2.1 2.5 20.0 108 1 2.1 2.5 22.5 126 1 2.1 2. 5 25.0 234 1 2. 1 2.5 27.5 276 1 2. 1 2.5 30.0 282 1 2. 1 2.5 32.5 315 1 2. 1 2.5 35.0 320 1 2.1 2.5 37.5 345 1 2.1 2.5 40.0 351 1 2. 1 2.5 42.5 363 1 2.1 2.5 45.0 384 1 2.1 2.5 47.5 400 1 2. 1 2.5 50.0 441 1 2.1 2.5 52.5 489 1 2.1 2.5 55.0 500 1 2.1 2.5 57.5 504 1 2.1 2.5 60.0 524 1 2.1 2.5 62.5 555 1 2.1 2.5 65.0 560 1 2.1 2.5 67.5 583 1 2.1 2.5 70.0 600 1 2.1 2.5 72.5 650 1 2.1 2.5 75.0 678 1 2.1 2.5 77.5 705 1 2.1 2.5 80.0 710 1 2.1 2.5 82.5 922 1 2.1 2.5 85.0 1163 1 2.1 2.5 87.5 1368 1 2.1 2.5 90.0 1767 1 2.1 2.5 92.5 5382 1 2.1 2.5 95.0 8247 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 10560 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 99 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 420.500 Mode 12.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 51 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Estimate of the number of patent and trademark monographic titles/editions in the catalog: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 3 2.1 2.5 2.5 5 2.1 2.5 5.0 40 2.1 2.5 7.5 50 2.1 2.5 10.0 58 2.1 2.5 12.5 60 2.1 2.5 15.0 65 2.1 2.5 17.5 73 2.1 2.5 20.0 78 2.1 2.5 22.5 80 2.1 2.5 25.0 81 2.1 2.5 27.5 90 2.1 2.5 30.0 100 8.3 10.0 40.0 105 2.1 2.5 42.5 120 2.1 2.5 45.0 140 2.1 2.5 47.5 170 2.1 2.5 50.0 175 4.2 5.0 55.0 200 2.1 2.5 57.5 204 2.1 2.5 60.0 206 2.1 2.5 62.5 295 2.1 2.5 65.0 350 4.2 5.0 70.0 354 2.1 2.5 72.5 413 2.1 2.5 75.0 450 2.1 2.5 77.5 475 2.1 2.5 80.0 600 2.1 2.5 82.5 610 2.1 2.5 85.0 625 2.1 2.5 87.5 828 2.1 2.5 90.0 1029 2.1 2.5 92.5 1200 2.1 2.5 95.0 1261 2.1 2.5 97.5 3183 6 2.1 12.5 2.5 Missing 100.0 No Answer 999 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 365 025 Median 172.500 Mode 100.000 Sum 14601 000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 52 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Estimate of the number of patent and trademark serial titles in catalog: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2 4.2 5.1 5.1 2 5 10.4 12.8 17.9 5 6 12.5 15.4 33.3 6 1 2.1 2.6 35.9 1 1 2.1 2.6 38.5 10 2 4.2 5.1 43.6 15 1 2.1 2.6 46.2 17 1 2.1 2.6 48.7 18 1 2.1 2.6 51.3 20 1 2.1 2.6 53.8 25 2 4.2 5.1 59.0 29 1 2.1 2.6 61.5 3 3 6.3 7.7 69.2 31 1 2.1 2.6 71.8 35 1 2.1 2.6 74.4 4 1 2.1 2.6 76.9 45 1 2.1 2.6 79.5 56 1 2.1 2.6 82.1 66 1 2.1 2.6 84.6 80 1 2.1 2.6 87.2 85 1 2.1 2.6 89.7 120 1 2.1 2.6 92.3 125 1 2.1 2.6 94.9 151 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 202 1 6 2.1 12.5 2.6 Missing 100.0 Don't Know 888 1 2.1 Missing No Answer 999 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 34 615 Median 18.000 Mode 5.000 Sum 1350 000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases 9 53 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total number of permanent staff (on salary or hourly wage who work with, or are trained to work with, providing patent and trademark reference, non-reference, and maintenance services to the public: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.1 2.4 2.4 2 2 4.2 4.8 7.1 3 5 10.4 11.9 19.0 4 3 6.3 7.1 26.2 5 5 10.4 11.9 38.1 6 3 6.3 7.1 45.2 7 4 8.3 9.5 54.8 8 4 8.3 9.5 64.3 9 2 4.2 4.8 69.0 10 2 4.2 4.8 73.8 11 1 2.1 2.4 76.2 12 4 8.3 9.5 85.7 14 2 4.2 4.8 90.5 16 1 2.1 2.4 92.9 17 1 2.1 2.4 95.2 19 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 25 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 8.024 337.000 Median 7.000 Mode' 3.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown, Valid cases 42 Missing cases 6 54 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total number of temporary staff (student assistances, contract workers, other staff on hourly wage) who work with, or are trained to work with, providing patent and trademark reference, non-reference, and maintenance services to the public: Valid Cum ue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 18 37.5 43.9 43.9 1 8 16.7 19.5 63.4 2 4 8.3 9.8 73.2 3 1 2.1 2.4 75.6 4 3 6.3 7.3 82.9 5 2 4.2 4.9 87.8 6 1 2.1 2.4 90.2 8 1 2.1 2.4 92.7 11 1 2.1 2.4 95.1 14 1 2. 1 2.4 97.6 15 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 99 1 2.1 Missing No Answer Mean 2.317 Median 1.000 Mode .000 Sum 95.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 55 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percent of total staff (permanent plus temporary) that are permanent (calculated) : Valid Cum Pet Frequency Percent Percent Percent 28.57 1 2.1 2.4 2.4 41.67 1 2.1 2.4 4.8 44.44 1 2.1 2.4 7.1 50.00 1 2.1 2.4 9.5 52.17 1 2.1 2.4 11.9 63.64 1 2.1 2.4 14.3 66.67 2 4.2 4.8 19.0 69.23 2 4.2 4.8 23.8 70.00 1 2.1 2.4 26.2 71.43 2 4.2 4.8 31.0 72.73 1 2.1 2.4 33.3 75.00 2 4.2 4.8 38.1 79.17 1 2.1 2.4 40.5 80.00 2 4.2 4.8 45.2 83.33 1 2.1 2.4 47.6 85.71 1 2.1 2.4 50.0 87.50 1 2.1 2.4 52.4 88.89 1 2.1 2.4 54.8 100.00 19 39.6 45.2 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 82.678 3472.475 Median !6.607 Mode 100.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 56 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percent of total staff (permanent plus temporary) that are temporary (calculated) : Valid Cum Pet Frequency Percent Percent Percent Mean 17 745 Sum 727 525 Valid cases 41 .00 18 37.5 43.9 43.9 11.11 1 2.1 2.4 46.3 12.50 1 2.1 2.4 48.8 14.29 1 2. 1 2.4 51.2 16.67 1 2.1 2.4 53.7 20.00 2 4.2 4.9 58.5 20.83 1 2. 1 2.4 61.0 25.00 2 4.2 4.9 65.9 27.27 1 2.1 2.4 68.3 28.57 2 4.2 4.9 73.2 30.00 1 2. 1 2.4 75.6 30.77 2 4.2 4.9 80.5 33.33 2 4.2 4.9 85.4 36.36 1 2.1 2.4 87.8 47.83 1 2.1 2.4 90.2 50.00 1 2.1 2.4 92.7 55.56 1 2. 1 2.4 95.1 58.33 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 71.43 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 14.286 Mode .000 Missing cases 57 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total number of permanent plus temporary staff (calculated) Valid Cum ue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 2 4.2 4.8 4.8 3 3 6.3 7.1 11.9 4 2 4.2 4.8 16.7 5 3 6.3 7.1 23.8 6 5 10.4 11.9 35.7 7 7 14.6 16.7 52.4 8 3 6.3 7.1 59.5 9 1 2.1 2.4 61.9 10 1 2.1 2.4 64.3 11 2 4.2 4.8 69.0 12 2 4.2 4.8 73.8 13 2 4.2 4.8 78.6 17 1 2.1 2.4 81.0 20 2 4.2 4.8 85.7 22 1 2.1 2.4 88.1 23 1 2.1 2.4 90.5 24 2 4.2 4.8 95.2 25 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 27 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 10.286 432.000 Median 7.000 Mode 7.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 58 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total hours per day permanent and temporary staff provide patent and trademark assistance to the public: Don't Know Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .25 1 2. 1 2. 5 2. 5 1.00 2 4.2 5.0 7.5 1.41 1 2.1 2.5 10.0 2.00 3 6.3 7.5 17.5 2.25 1 2. 1 2. 5 20.0 2.50 2 4.2 5.0 25.0 2.75 2 4.2 5.0 30.0 3.00 1 2.1 2.5 32.5 3.25 1 2.1 2.5 35.0 3.40 1 2.1 2.5 37.5 3.50 3 6.3 7.5 45.0 4.00 1 2.1 2.5 47.5 4.50 1 2.1 2.5 50.0 4.75 4 8.3 10.0 60.0 5.50 2 4.2 5.0 65.0 6.00 2. 1 2.5 67.5 6.25 2.1 2.5 70.0 6.75 2.1 2.5 72.5 7.00 2.1 2.5 75.0 7.25 2.1 2.5 77.5 7.75 2.1 2.5 80.0 8.00 4.2 5.0 85.0 8.20 2.1 2.5 87.5 10.00 2.1 2.5 90.0 11.80 2.1 2.5 92.5 12.00 2.1 2.5 95.0 13.00 2.1 2.5 97.5 28.00 2.1 2.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 88.00 2 4.2 Missing Total GO.O 100.0 Mean Sum 5.527 221.060 Median 4.625 4.750 Valid cases Missing cases 59 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total number of hours per day staff are associated with providing patent and trademark non-reference assistance: Don't Know Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 2 4.2 5.0 5.0 .25 3 6.3 7.5 12.5 .50 4 8.3 10.0 22.5 .75 1 2.1 2.5 25.0 1.00 4 8.3 10.0 35.0 1.05 1 2.1 2.5 37.5 1.50 3 6.3 7.5 45.0 1.75 1 2.1 2.5 47.5 2.00 3 6.3 7.5 55.0 2.25 1 2.1 2.5 57.5 2.50 2 4.2 5.0 62.5 3.00 3 6.3 7.5 70.0 3.15 1 2.1 2.5 72.5 3.25 2 4.2 5.0 77.5 3.75 1 2.1 2.5 80.0 4.50 2 4.2 5.0 85.0 5.25 1 2.1 2.5 87.5 7.50 1 2.1 2.5 90.0 8.75 1 2.1 2.5 92.5 13.25 1 2.1 2.5 95.0 15.00 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 21.00 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 88.00 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 3.255 130.200 Median 2.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 500 60 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total number of hours per day staff are associated with maintaining patent and trademark materials, hardware, CD-ROM products, and APS system: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .50 .75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.60 1.75 2.00 2.25 3.00 3.20 3.25 3.50 4.00 4.25 4.50 4.75 5.00 10.00 Don't Know 8 8.00 Total 100.0 100.0 1.500 Mode 1.000 6 12.5 15.0 15.0 3 6.3 7.5 22.5 8 16.7 20.0 42.5 2 4.2 5.0 47.5 4 8.3 10.0 57.5 1 2.1 2.5 60.0 2 4.2 5.0 65.0 2 4.2 5.0 70.0 1 2. 1 2.5 7^.5 1 2.1 2.5 75.0 1 2. 1 2.5 77.5 1 2.1 2.5 80.0 1 2.1 2.5 82.5 1 2.1 2.5 85.0 1 2.1 2.5 87.5 2 4.2 5.0 92.5 1 2.1 2.5 95.0 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 2 4.2 Missing Mean 2.076 Median Sum 83.050 Valid cases 40 Missin 61 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total number of hours per day staff are associated with providing patent and trademark reference and non-reference assistance, and maintaining patent and trademark materials, hardware, CD-ROM products and the APS System (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 1 2.1 2.5 2.5 2.25 1 2.1 2.5 5.0 2.75 1 2.1 2.5 7.5 3.50 3 6.3 7.5 15.0 4.75 1 2.1 2.5 17.5 5.00 2 4.2 5.0 22.5 5.25 2 4.2 5.0 27.5 5.50 1 2.1 2.5 30.0 5.51 1 2.1 2.5 32.5 5.75 1 2.1 2.5 35.0 6.00 1 2.1 2.5 37.5 6.75 1 2.1 2.5 40.0 7.00 1 2.1 2.5 42.5 7.25 1 2.1 2.5 45.0 7.50 2 4.2 5.0 50.0 7.65 1 2.1 2.5 52.5 8.50 1 2.1 2.5 55.0 8.75 1 2.1 2.5 57.5 9.00 1 2.1 2.5 60.0 9.50 1 2.1 2.5 62.5 10.00 1 2.1 2.5 65.0 11.00 1 2.1 2.5 67.5 11.25 1 2.1 2.5 70.0 12.25 1 2.1 2.5 72.5 13.00 1 2.1 2.5 75.0 13.25 1 2.1 2.5 77.5 14.25 1 2.1 2.5 80.0 14.60 1 2.1 2.5 82.5 19.25 1 2.1 2.5 85.0 20.80 1 2.1 2.5 87.5 21.25 1 2.1 2.5 90.0 21.50 1 2.1 2.5 92.5 33.00 1 2.1 2.5 95.0 34.00 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 41.00 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 8 16.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 10.858 434.310 Median 7.575 Mode 3.500 Valid cases 40 Missing cases 62 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total staff salary costs (including benefits) per year in providing patent and trademark reference assistance: Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1745.00 1 2. 1 2.7 2.7 3497.00 1 2.1 2.7 5.4 4486.00 1 2.1 2.7 8.1 4635.00 1 2.1 2.7 10.8 5332.00 1 2.1 2.7 13.5 6662.66 1 2.1 2.7 16.2 7933.80 1 2. 1 2.7 18.9 9838.14 1 2.1 2.7 21.6 10713.86 1 2. 1 2.7 24.3 11729.00 1 2.1 2.7 27.0 11866.69 1 2. 1 2.7 29.7 12145.00 1 2.1 2.7 32.4 12780.00 1 2.1 2.7 35.1 14122.00 1 2.1 2.7 37.8 16476.00 1 2.1 2.7 40.5 16789.60 1 2.1 2.7 43.2 18581.00 1 2.1 2.7 45.9 18621.90 1 2.1 2.7 48.6 23460.00 1 2. 1 2.7 51.4 23947.00 1 2.1 2.7 54.1 26373.00 1 2.1 2.7 56.8 26465.00 1 2.1 2.7 59.5 26631.67 1 2.1 2.7 62.2 27657.02 1 2.1 2.7 64.9 32010.00 1 2.1 2.7 67.6 33222.00 1 2.1 2.7 70.3 33259.00 1 2.1 2.7 73.0 34270.00 1 2.1 2.7 75.7 36114.24 1 2.1 2.7 78.4 38076.00 1 2.1 2.7 81.1 41203.00 1 2.1 2.7 83.8 41219.00 1 2.1 2.7 86.5 43143.70 1 2.1 2.7 89.2 53660.00 1 2.1 2.7 91.9 73847.00 1 2.1 2.7 94.6 76562.20 1 2.1 2.7 97.3 77190.00 1 2.1 2.7 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 888888.00 3 6.3 Missing 999999.00 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 25844.986 956264.480 Median 23460.000 Mode 1 1745.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 37 Missing cases 11 63 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total staff salary costs (including benefits) per year in providing patent and trademark non-reference assistance: Don ' t Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 2 4.2 5.4 5.4 621.00 1 2.1 2.7 8.1 774.00 1 2.1 2.7 10.8 1097.00 1 2.1 2.7 13.5 1494.48 1 2.1 2.7 16.2 1557.00 1 2.1 2.7 18.9 1684.80 1 2.1 2.7 21.6 1938.00 1 2.1 2.7 24.3 2547.00 1 2.1 2.7 27.0 3120.00 1 2.1 2.7 29.7 3171.00 1 2.1 2.7 32.4 4772.00 1 2.1 2.7 35.1 5394.00 1 2.1 2.7 37.8 . 5640.48 1 2.1 2.7 40.5 6120.00 1 2.1 2.7 43.2 8348.86 1 2.1 2.7 45.9 8777.10 1 2.1 2.7 48.6 8884.00 1 2.1 2.7 51.4 9034.00 1 2.1 2.7 54.1 9476.00 1 2.1 2.7 56.8 9915.00 1 2.1 2.7 59.5 10018.00 1 2.1 2.7 62.2 10580.00 1 2.1 2.7 64.9 11550.98 1 2.1 2.7 67.6 11730.00 1 2.1 2.7 70.3 12308.00 1 2.1 2.7 73.0 12800.00 1 2.1 2.7 75.7 13369.55 1 2.1 2.7 78.4 13970.31 1 2.1 2.7 81.1 16077.00 1 2.1 2.7 83.8 17094.00 1 2.1 2.7 86.5 18776.00 1 2.1 2.7 89.2 19349.00 1 2.1 2.7 91.9 30643.30 1 2.1 2.7 94.6 33332.00 1 2.1 2.7 97.3 45635.20 1 2.1 2.7 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 888888.00 3 6.3 Missing 999999.00 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 10043. ,218 Sum 371599, ,060 Valid cases 37 Median 8884.000 Missing cases 11 Mode .000 64 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff salary costs (including benefits) associated with tasks such as maintaining patent and trademark equipment, processing patent and trademark materials, installing patent and trademark CD-ROM softwqare, which may be performed by prof iessional or non-professional PTDL staff or non-PTDL staff (such as cataloging staff or computer staff) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 225.00 1 2.1 2.7 2.7 769.50 1 2.1 2.7 5.4 1102.00 1 2. 1 2.7 8.1 1244.50 1 2.1 2.7 10.8 1323.00 1 2. 1 2.7 13.5 1796.60 1 2.1 2.7 16.2 1869.00 1 2.1 2.7 18.9 2168.70 1 2. 1 2.7 21.6 2227.00 1 2.1 2.7 24.3 2597.00 1 2.1 2.7 27.0 2625.00 1 2.1 2.7 29.7 2652.00 1 2.1 2.7 32.4 2847.00 1 2. 1 2.7 35.1 2936.00 1 2.1 2.7 37.8 3171.00 1 2.1 2.7 40.5 3346.00 1 2.1 2.7 43.2 4000.00 1 2.1 2.7 45.9 4025.00 1 2.1 2.7 48.6 4636.15 1 2.1 2.7 51.4 5060.00 1 2.1 2.7 54.1 5640.48 1 2.1 2.7 56.8 5865.00 1 2.1 2.7 59.5 7536.87 1 2.1 2.7 62.2 8003.35 1 2.1 2.7 64.9 8047.00 1 2.1 2.7 67.6 9259.00 1 2.1 2.7 70.3 9351.00 1 2.1 2.7 73.0 9461.40 1 2.1 2.7 75.7 9773.00 1 2.1 2.7 78.4 11367.00 1 2.1 2.7 81.1 12726.00 1 2.1 2.7 83.8 13522.00 1 2.1 2.7 86.5 14169.73 1 2.1 2.7 89.2 16098.11 1 2.1 2.7 91.9 17636.00 1 2.1 2.7 94.6 20367.00 1 2.1 2.7 97.3 42371.00 1 2.1 2.7 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Don't Know 888888.00 3 6.3 Missing No Answer 999999.00 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 7346.335 Median 4636.150 Mode 225.000 Sum 271814.390 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 37 Missing cases 11 65 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total staff salary costs (including benefits) for providing reference and non-reference patent and trademark assistance, and for maintaining patent and trademark equipment (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 3842.00 1 2.1 2.7 2.7 5957.00 1 2.1 2.7 5.4 7954.00 1 2.1 2.7 8.1 9401.64 1 2.1 2.7 10.8 9497.00 1 2.1 2.7 13.5 12649.50 1 2.1 2.7 16.2 14354.00 1 2.1 2.7 18.9 17664.00 1 2.1 2.7 21.6 18019.00 1 2.1 2.7 24.3 20271.00 1 2.1 2.7 27.0 20450.00 1 2.1 2.7 29.7 22399.86 1 2.1 2.7 32.4 22818.00 1 2.1 2.7 35.1 26190.35 1 2.1 2.7 37.8 28168.50 1 2.1 2.7 40.5 29541.00 1 2.1 2.7 43.2 30866.00 1 2.1 2.7 45.9 30922.00 1 2.1 2.7 48.6 30954.54 1 2.1 2.7 51.4 37912.63 1 2.1 2.7 54.1 38538.00 1 2.1 2.7 56.8 41055.00 1 2.1 2.7 59.5 43224.00 1 2.1 2.7 62.2 45662.72 1 2.1 2.7 64.9 46152.00 1 2.1 2.7 67.6 49910.00 1 2.1 2.7 70.3 57536.00 1 2.1 2.7 73.0 58650.00 1 2.1 2.7 75.7 62292.00 1 2.1 2.7 78.4 66182.66 1 2.1 2.7 81.1 71039.00 1 2.1 2.7 83.8 84930.00 1 2.1 2.7 86.5 86077.00 1 2.1 2.7 89.2 87956.73 1 2.1 2.7 91.9 90645.00 1 2.1 2.7 94.6 131658.80 1 2.1 2.7 97.3 138337.00 1 2.1 2.7 100.0 11 22.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 43234.539 1599677.93 Median 30954.540 Mode* 3842.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 37 Missing cases 11 66 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Many institutions have determined an "overhead cost" which represents certain operating expenses, including such things as the costs of utilities, landscaping, postage, insurance, telephone system, and others; but excluding such things as personnel costs. Overhead costs are often expressed as a percentage cost applied to certain other costs If your institution has an overhead cost as a percentage cost, it is: Valid Cum Pet Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer .00 2 4.2 13.3 13.3 10.00 1 2.1 6.7 20.0 12.50 1 2.1 6.7 26.7 20.90 1 2.1 6.7 33.3 30.00 2 4.2 13.3 46.7 38.00 1 2.1 6.7 53.3 43.00 1 2.1 6.7 60.0 47.00 1 2.1 6.7 66.7 48.00 1 2.1 6.7 73.3 58.70 1 2.1 6.7 80.0 59.00 1 2.1 6.7 86.7 67.30 1 2.1 6.7 93.3 78.00 1 2.1 6.7 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 88.00 4 8.3 Missing 99.00 23 47.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 36.160 542.400 Median 38.000 Mode'' .000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 15 Missing cases 33 67 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Library equipment (reader printers, vertical files, furniture) — annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 5 10.4 17.2 17.2 50.00 1 2.1 3.4 20.7 329.50 1 2.1 3.4 24.1 500.00 2 4.2 6.9 31.0 999.00 1 2.1 3.4 34.5 1000.00 1 2.1 3.4 37.9 1400.00 1 2.1 3.4 41.4 1500.00 1 2.1 3.4 44.8 1600.00 1 2.1 3.4 48.3 1664.00 1 2.1 3.4 51.7 2000.00 2 4.2 6.9 58.6 2700.00 1 2.1 3.4 62.1 3000.00 2 4.2 6.9 69.0 3938.91 1 2.1 3.4 72.4 4000.00 1 2.1 3.4 75.9 5724.00 1 2.1 3.4 79.3 8463.00 1 2.1 3.4 82.8 9559.00 1 2.1 3.4 86.2 9600.00 1 2.1 3.4 89.7 9906.00 1 2.1 3.4 93.1 10361.00 1 2.1 3.4 96.6 11300.00 1 2.1 3.4 100.0 19 39.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 3279.118 95094.410 Median 1664.000 Mode 000 Valid cases 29 Missing cases 19 68 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Telecommunication equipment (hardware, rental) --annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 8 16.7 33.3 33.3 100.00 1 2.1 4.2 37.5 180.00 1 2. 1 4.2 41.7 195.00 1 2. 1 4.2 45.8 200.00 1 2. 1 4.2 50.0 215.00 1 2.1 4.2 54.2 254.00 1 2.1 4.2 58.3 547.20 1 2.1 4.2 62.5 600.00 1 2.1 4.2 66.7 740.00 1 2. 1 4.2 70.8 822.00 1 2. 1 4.2 75.0 840.00 1 2.1 4.2 79.2 1000.00 1 2.1 4.2 83.3 1815.00 1 2. 1 4 .2 87.5 2600.00 1 2.1 4 .2 91.7 5000.00 1 2.1 4.2 95.8 5440.50 1 2.1 4.2 100.0 24 50.0 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean 856 196 Median 207 500 Sum 20548 700 Valid cases 24 Missing cases 2 Mode .000 69 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Maintenance of equipment, service contracts— annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 5 10.4 17.2 17.2 200.00 1 2.1 3.4 20.7 241.80 1 2.1 3.4 24.1 500.00 1 2.1 3.4 27.6 520.00 1 2.1 3.4 31.0 578.00 1 2.1 3.4 34.5 600.00 1 2.1 3.4 37.9 700.00 1 2.1 3.4 41.4 900.00 1 2.1 3.4 44.8 1000.00 2 4.2 6.9 51.7 1300.00 1 2.1 3.4 55.2 1450.00 1 2.1 3.4 58.6 2000.00 4 8.3 13.8 72.4 2150.00 1 2.1 3.4 75.9 2370.00 1 2.1 3.4 79.3 2400.00 1 2.1 3.4 82.8 2636.00 1 2.1 3.4 86.2 2795.00 1 2.1 3.4 89.7 3000.00 1 2.1 3.4 93.1 3560.00 1 2.1 3.4 96.6 4766.00 1 2.1 3.4 100.0 19 39.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1402.303 Median 1000. .000 Sum 40666.800 Valid cases 29 Missing cases 1 000 70 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Supplies (pencils, computer paper, etc) --annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Value Frequency Valid Cum Percent Percent Percent .00 1 2.1 3.4 3.4 25.00 1 2.1 3.4 6.9 48.03 1 2.1 3.4 10.3 54.30 1 2.1 3.4 13.8 100.00 2 4.2 6.9 20.7 170.00 1 2. 1 3.4 24.1 181.35 1 2.1 3.4 27.6 200.00 3 6.3 10.3 37.9 230.00 1 2. 1 3.4 41.4 260.00 1 2.1 3.4 44.8 300.00 2 4.2 6.9 51.7 350.00 2 4.2 6.9 58.6 440.00 1 2.1 3.4 62.1 500.00 1 2.1 3.4 65.5 540.00 1 2.1 3.4 69.0 600.00 2 4.2 6.9 75.9 650.00 1 2.1 3.4 79.3 1000.00 1 2. 1 3.4 82.8 1200.00 1 2.1 3.4 86.2 2000.00 1 2.1 3.4 89.7 2827.00 1 2.1 3.4 93.1 3684.00 1 2.1 3.4 96.6 4600.00 1 2.1 3.4 100.0 19 39.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 748.610 Median 300.000 Sum 21709.680 Valid cases 29 Missing cases 1 Mode 200.000 71 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Travel (to PTDLP Conference, regional training) — annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 1 2.1 2.8 2.8 350.00 1 2.1 2.8 5.6 400.00 1 2.1 2.8 8.3 422.05 1 2.1 2.8 11.1 500.00 3 6.3 8.3 19.4 550.00 1 2.1 2.8 22.2 600.00 2 4.2 5.6 27.8 650.00 1 2.1 2.8 30.6 693.00 1 2.1 2.8 33.3 712.85 1 2.1 2.8 36.1 779.00 1 2.1 2.8 38.9 800.00 2 4.2 5.6 44.4 825.00 1 2.1 2.8 47.2 900.00 1 2.1 2.8 50.0 1000.00 6 12.5 16.7 66.7 1080.00 1 2.1 2.8 69.4 1100.00 1 2.1 2.8 72.2 1118.00 1 2.1 2.8 75.0 1200.00 2 4.2 5.6 80.6 1400.00 1 2.1 2.8 83.3 1500.00 4 8.3 11.1 94.4 1521.00 1 2.1 2.8 97.2 2700.00 1 2.1 2.8 100.0 12 25.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 941, ,692 Sum 33900, ,900 Valid cases 36 Median 950.000 Missing cases 12 1000.000 72 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Serials — annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 5 10.4 16.7 16.7 35.00 1 2.1 3.3 20.0 100.00 3 6. 3 10.0 30.0 150.00 2 4.2 6.7 36.7 175.00 1 2. 1 3. 3 40.0 200.00 1 2.1 3.3 43.3 241.80 1 2.1 3. 3 46.7 278.00 1 2.1 3.3 50.0 323.00 1 2.1 3. 3 53.3 400.00 1 2. 1 3.3 56.7 500.00 2 4 .2 6.7 o3.3 800.00 1 2. 1 3.3 66.7 816.00 1 2.1 3.3 70.0 1000.00 1 2.1 3.3 73.3 1002.00 1 2.1 3.3 76.7 1425.00 1 2.1 3.3 80.0 1500.00 1 2. 1 3.3 83.3 1600.00 1 2.1 3.3 86.7 1755.00 1 2.1 3.3 90.0 3000.00 2 4.2 6.7 96.7 7100.00 1 2.1 3.3 100.0 18 37.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 875.027 Median 300 500 Sum 26250.800 Valid cases 30 Missing cases 1 Mode 000 73 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Monographs — annual cost including overhead (calculated) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 1 2.1 3.1 3.1 20.00 1 2.1 3.1 6.3 50.00 1 2.1 3.1 9.4 85.00 1 2.1 3.1 12.5 100.00 3 6.3 9.4 21.9 150.00 1 2.1 3.1 25.0 200.00 3 6.3 9.4 34.4 250.00 1 2.1 3.1 37.5 300.00 3 6.3 9.4 46.9 400.00 1 2.1 3.1 50.0 500.00 4 8.3 12.5 62.5 625.00 1 2.1 3.1 65.6 650.00 1 2.1 3.1 68.8 750.00 1 2.1 3.1 71.9 1000.00 3 6.3 9.4 81.3 1200.00 2 4.2 6.3 87.5 1500.00 1 2.1 3.1 90.6 2000.00 1 2.1 3.1 93.8 3600.00 1 2.1 3.1 96.9 3627.00 1 2.1 3.1 100.0 16 33.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 715.844 Sum 22907.000 Valid cases 32 Median 450.000 Missing cases 16 Mode 500.000 Memberships — annual cost including overhead (calculated) Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 18 37.5 56.3 56.3 10.00 6 12.5 18.8 75.0 20.00 1 2.1 3.1 78.1 30.00 2 4.2 6.3 84.4 45.00 1 2.1 3.1 87.5 50.00 2 4.2 6.3 93.8 90.00 1 2.1 3.1 96.9 100.00 1 2.1 3.1 100.0 16 33.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 14 844 Sum 475 000 Valid cases 32 Median Missing cases 000 16 Mode .000 74 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Statutory Fees—annual coat including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 50.00 Total 77.1 22.9 100.0 100.0 100.0 Missing 100.0 Mean 50.000 Valid cases 37 Mode 50.000 Missing cases 11 Sum 1850.000 Space—annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 9 18.8 52.9 52.9 100.00 1 2.1 5.9 58.8 3273.00 1 2.1 5.9 64.7 3396.00 1 2.1 5.9 70.6 3500.00 1 2.1 5.9 76.5 6153.84 1 2.1 5.9 82.4 8400.00 1 2. 1 5.9 88.2 14610.00 1 2.1 5.9 94.1 32500.00 1 2.1 5.9 100.0 31 64.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 4231.344 71932.840 Median .000 Mode 000 Valid cases 17 Missing cases 31 75 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Programs (special events, celebrations, exhibits, programs, Project XL, etc. ) --annual cost including overhead (calculated): Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 11 22.9 40.7 40.7 5.00 1 2.1 3.7 44.4 24.05 1 2.1 3.7 48.1 24.18 1 2.1 3.7 51.9 50.00 1 2.1 3.7 55.6 100.00 2 4.2 7.4 63.0 170.00 1 2.1 3.7 66.7 200.00 2 4.2 7.4 74.1 400.00 1 2.1 3.7 77.8 500.00 2 4.2 7.4 85.2 800.00 1 2.1 3.7 88.9 840.00 1 2.1 3.7 92.6 1000.00 1 2.1 3.7 96.3 3100.00 1 2.1 3.7 100.0 21 43.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 296.786 8013.230 Median 24.180 Mode 000 Valid cases 27 Missing cases 21 Training (facilities, speakers, luncheons, equipment rental, etc., not included above) — annual cost including overhead (calculated): Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 16 33.3 69.6 69.6 12.09 1 2.1 4.3 73.9 50.00 1 2.1 4.3 78.3 100.00 1 2.1 4.3 82.6 250.00 2 4.2 8.7 91.3 500.00 1 2.1 4.3 95.7 700.00 1 2.1 4.3 100.0 25 52.1 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean 80, ,960 Sum 1862, ,090 Valid cases 23 Median Missing cases .000 25 Mode 000 76 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Other expenses—annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 11 22.9 68.8 68.8 10.00 1 2.1 6.3 75.0 150.00 1 2. 1 6.3 81.3 1500.00 1 2.1 6. 3 87.5 2327.00 1 2. 1 6. 3 93.8 2328.00 1 2.1 6.3 100.0 32 66.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 Mean 394.688 Median .000 Mode .000 Sum 6315.000 Valid cases 16 Missing cases 32 77 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Subtotal of annual costs associated with patent and trademark related services (excluding staff salary) — annual cost including overhead (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 215.00 1 2.1 2.7 2.7 350.00 1 2.1 2.7 5.4 762.85 1 2.1 2.7 8.1 1050.00 1 2.1 2.7 10.8 1662.00 1 2.1 2.7 13.5 1850.00 1 2.1 2.7 16.2 2066.00 1 2.1 2.7 18.9 2143.00 1 2.1 2.7 21.6 2160.00 1 2.1 2.7 24.3 2800.00 1 2.1 2.7 27.0 3660.00 1 2.1 2.7 29.7 3750.00 1 2.1 2.7 32.4 4050.00 1 2.1 2.7 35.1 5046.00 1 2.1 2.7 37.8 5150.00 1 2.1 2.7 40.5 5516.20 1 2.1 2.7 43.2 5520.00 1 2.1 2.7 45.9 5760.00 1 2.1 2.7 48.6 5850.00 1 2.1 2.7 51.4 6010.00 1 2.1 2.7 54.1 6505.26 1 2.1 2.7 56.8 6534.00 1 2.1 2.7 59.5 7843.84 1 2.1 2.7 62.2 8832.00 1 2.1 2.7 64.9 9084.00 1 2.1 2.7 67.6 10702.00 1 2.1 2.7 70.3 11154.00 1 2.1 2.7 73.0 13034.00 1 2.1 2.7 75.7 13091.00 1 2.1 2.7 78.4 13105.00 1 2.1 2.7 81.1 17225.00 1 2.1 2.7 83.8 18650.00 1 2.1 2.7 86.5 18868.00 1 2.1 2.7 89.2 19491.72 1 2.1 2.7 91.9 26282.00 1 2.1 2.7 94.6 35952.00 1 2.1 2.7 97.3 49801.00 1 2.1 2.7 100.0 11 22.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 9500.699 351525.870 Median 5850.000 Mode' 215.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 37 Missing cases 11 78 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of volunteers who work with, or are trained to work with, patent and trademark patrons providing reference and non-reference servcies to the public: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 33 68.8 91.7 91.7 1 2 4.2 5.6 97.2 2 1 2.1 2.8 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 6 3 1 2.1 Missing 99 5 10.4 Missing Totax 100.0 100.0 Mean .111 Median Sum 4.000 Valid cases 36 Missin .000 12 Mode 000 Number of hours per year volunteers are associated with providing patent and trademark reference assistance to the public: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 20 200 9999 Total 33 68.8 94.3 94 3 1 2.1 2.9 97 1 1 2.1 2.9 100 6 12.5 Missing 1 2.1 Missing 6 12.5 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 6.286 220.000 Median .000 Mode 000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 13 79 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of hours per year volunteers are associated with providing patgent and trademark non-reference assistance to the public: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 35 6 72.9 12.5 100.0 Missing 100.0 Don * t Know 8888 1 2.1 Missing No Answer 9999 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean .000 Mode .000 Sum .000 Valid cases 35 Mi ssing cases 13 Number of hours per year volunteers are associated with maintaining patent and trademark materials, hardware, and CD-ROM products: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 5 104 88 99 Total 34 1 1 6 1 5 48 70.8 2.1 2.1 12.5 2.1 10.4 100.0 94.4 2.8 2.8 Missing Missing Missing 100.0 94.4 97.2 100.0 Mean Sum 3 109 028 000 Median .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 36 Mi ssing cases 12 80 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Total number of hours per year volunteers provide patent and trademark assistance to the public (calculated) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent ♦ 32 66.7 88.9 88.9 5 1 2.1 2.8 91.7 20 1 2.1 2.8 94.4 104 1 2.1 2.8 97.2 200 1 2.1 2.8 100.0 12 25.0 Missing tal 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 9.139 Median .000 Mode .000 Sum 329.000 Valid cases 36 Missing cases 12 81 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of formal patent and trademark staff training person hours per year received by PTDL staff from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (include attendance at PTDL Conference, Accessing Patent and Trademark Information [APTI] Seminars, workshops, Interagency Depository Seminars) [if a staff member attended the PTDL Conference XIV for 40 hours and back at the PTDL eacfh of 5 staff members attended an eight hour PTDLP APTI Seminar (for 40 staff training person hours) , there would be 80 hours of formal staff training person hours received (incidental assistance at the reference desk to a colleague is not considered formal training) ] : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent No Answer 2 4.2 4.9 4.9 10 1 2.1 2.4 7.3 24 1 2.1 2.4 9.8 32 1 2.1 2.4 12.2 40 20 41.7 48.8 61.0 42 1 2.1 2.4 63.4 48 1 2.1 2.4 65.9 50 2 4.2 4.9 70.7 54 1 2.1 2.4 73.2 55 1 2.1 2.4 75.6 56 1 2.1 2.4 78.0 58 1 2.1 2.4 80.5 80 2 4.2 4.9 85.4 100 2 4.2 4.9 90.2 104 1 2.1 2.4 92.7 121 1 2.1 2.4 95.1 123 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 140 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 999 1 2.1 Missing Mean 51.878 Sum 2127.000 Valid cases 41 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 40.000 Mode 40.000 Missing cases 7 82 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of formal patent and trademark PTDL staff training person hours per year given by PTDL staff to other PTDL staff [if a staff member provided 5 hours of formal training to each of 4 other staff members, 20 staff training person hours were given] : Don ' t Know No Answer Valid Cum lue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 4.2 5.0 5.0 4 1 2.1 2.5 7.5 5 4 8.3 10.0 17.5 7 1 2.1 2.5 20.0 8 1 2.1 2.5 22.5 9 2 4.2 5.0 27.5 10 2 4.2 5. 32.5 12 1 2. 1 2.5 35.0 14 2 4.2 5.0 40.0 15 1 2.1 2.5 42.5 16 2 4.2 5.0 47.5 20 4 8.3 10.0 57.5 24 1 2.1 2.5 60.0 25 2 4.2 5.0 65.0 30 2 4.2 5.0 70.0 33 1 2.1 2.5 72.5 40 2 4.2 5.0 77.5 42 1 2.1 2.5 80.0 50 1 2.1 2.5 82.5 51 1 2.1 2.5 85.0 54 1 2.1 2.5 87.5 57 1 2.1 2.5 90.0 65 1 2.1 2.5 92.5 90 1 2.1 2.5 95.0 100 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 180 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 888 1 2.1 Missing 999 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 29.500 Median 20.000 Mode 1 Sum 1180.000 5.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 83 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of formal patent and trademark volunteer training person hours per year given by PTDL staff to PTDL volunteers: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent No Answer 2 99 34 3 6 5 70.8 6.3 12.5 10.4 91.9 8.1 Missing Missing 91.9 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum .162 6.000 Median .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 37 Missing cases 11 Number of formal patent and trademark training events presented for patrons during the most recent 12 months (or calendar year or fiscal year) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don ' t Know No Answer 7 14.6 17.5 17.5 1 7 14.6 17.5 35.0 2 4 8.3 10.0 45.0 3 6 12.5 15.0 60.0 4 2 4.2 5.0 65.0 5 2 4.2 5.0 70.0 6 2 4.2 5.0 75.0 10 2 4.2 5.0 80.0 11 2 4.2 5.0 85.0 12 4 8.3 10.0 95.0 15 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 20 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 888 1 2.1 Missing 999 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 4.700 188.000 Median 3.000 Mode' .000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 84 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Number of formal patron training person hours given during this year period [if one event for 20 patrons took 1/2 hour (10 patron training person hours) and another for 5 patrons took 2 hours (10 patron training person hours) , then these events total 20 patron training person hours] : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 14.6 17.5 17.5 Don't Know No Answer 8 1 2.1 2.5 20.0 15 1 2.1 2.5 22.5 20 1 2.1 2.5 25.0 26 1 2.1 2.5 27.5 28 1 2.1 2.5 30.0 30 2 4.2 5.0 35.0 51 1 2.1 2.5 37.5 55 1 2.1 2.5 40.0 60 1 2.1 2.5 42.5 68 2 4.2 5.0 47.5 75 1 2. 1 2.5 50.0 9 2 4.2 5.0 55.0 100 2 4.2 5.0 60.0 111 1 2.1 2. 5 62.5 135 1 2. 1 2.5 65.0 151 1 2.1 2.5 67.5 187 1 2.1 2.5 70.0 300 2 4.2 5.0 75.0 345 1 2.1 2.5 77.5 350 1 2. 1 2.5 80.0 420 1 2.1 2.5 82.5 428 1 2.1 2.5 85.0 565 1 2.1 2.5 87.5 1006 1 2.1 2. 5 90.0 1026 1 2.1 2.5 92.5 1041 1 2.1 2.5 95.0 1048 1 2.1 2.5 97.5 1140 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 8888 1 2.1 Missing 9999 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 M ean 236 675 S irm 9467 000 V alid cases 40 Median 82.500 Missing cases Mode .000 85 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Self-service photocopying, printing, and telef axing from patent and trademark paper originals, pages per year: Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 5 10.4 27.8 27.8 50 1 2.1 5.6 33.3 100 2 4.2 11.1 44.4 400 1 2.1 5.6 50.0 500 1 2.1 5.6 55.6 1200 1 2.1 5.6 61.1 1500 1 2.1 5.6 66.7 1560 1 2.1 5.6 72.2 2460 1 2.1 5.6 77.8 4000 1 2.1 5.6 83.3 5200 1 2.1 5.6 88.9 7200 1 2.1 5.6 94.4 42500 1 2.1 5.6 100.0 10 20.8 Missing 888888 11 22.9 Missing 999999 9 18.8 Missing Mean 3709, .444 Sum 66770, .000 Valid cases 18 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 450.000 Mode .000 Missing cases 30 86 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Self-service photocopying, printing, and telef axing from patent and trademark microform originals, pages per year: Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 4.2 8. 3 8.3 200 1 2.1 4.2 12.5 500 1 2.1 4.2 16.7 1100 1 2. 1 4.2 20.8 1800 1 2.1 4.2 25.0 2000 1 2.1 4 .2 29.2 3144 1 2. 1 4 .2 33.3 6500 1 2.1 4 .2 37.5 7000 1 2.1 4.2 41.7 8384 1 2.1 4.2 45.8 9432 1 2.1 4.2 50.0 10522 1 2.1 4.2 54.2 12684 1 2. 1 4.2 58.3 13369 1 2.1 4.2 62.5 13685 1 2.1 4.2 66.7 14400 1 2.1 4.2 70.8 19973 1 2.1 4.2 75.0 30000 1 2.1 4.2 79.2 30755 1 2.1 4.2 83.3 42500 1 2.1 4.2 87.5 50000 1 2.1 4.2 91.7 156000 1 2.1 4.2 95.8 170000 1 2.1 4.2 100.0 10 20.8 Missing 8888888 9 18.8 Missing 9999999 5 10.4 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 25164.500 603948.000 Median 9977.000 Mode 000 Valid cases 24 Missing cases 24 87 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Self-service photocopying, printing, and telef axing from patent and trademark paper and microform originals (not distinguished) , pages per year: Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequ< sncy Percent Percent Percent 500 1 2.1 25.0 25.0 4000 1 2.1 25.0 50.0 46380 1 2.1 25.0 75.0 58258 1 2.1 25.0 100.0 35 72.9 Missing 8888 7 14.6 Missing 9999 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 Mean Sum 27284.500 109138.000 Median 25190.000 500.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 4 Missing cases 44 88 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Self-service photocopying, printing, and telef axing from patent and trademark electronic resources, produced on dot matrix printers, sheets per year: Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2.1 4. 3 4. 3 600 1 2.1 4. 3 8.7 850 1 2.1 4.3 13.0 2000 1 2.1 4. 3 17.4 3000 1 2. 1 4.3 21.7 5000 2 4.2 8.7 30.4 5200 1 2. 1 4.3 34.8 7500 1 2.1 4. 3 39.1 8000 1 2.1 4.3 43.5 8250 1 2.1 4.3 47.8 9900 1 2.1 4.3 52.2 10000 1 2.1 4.3 56.5 10500 1 2.1 4.3 60.9 10800 1 2.1 4. 3 65.2 12000 1 2.1 4.3 69.6 13250 1 2. 1 4. 3 73.9 15000 1 2.1 4.3 78.3 16500 1 2.1 4.3 82.6 22500 1 2.1 4.3 87.0 24750 1 2.1 4.3 91.3 26000 1 2.1 4.3 95.7 38400 1 2.1 4.3 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 888888 7 14.6 Missing 999999 12 25.0 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 11086.957 255000.000 9900.000 Mode 5000.000 Valid cases 23 Missing cases 25 89 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Self-service photocopying, printing, and telefaacing from patent and trademark electronic resources , produced on laser printers , sheets per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer Mean Sum 1220.588 20750.000 15 31.3 88.2 88.2 750 1 2.1 5.9 94.1 20000 1 2.1 5.9 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 888888 7 14.6 Missing 999999 18 37.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 17 Missing cases 31 Self-service photocopying, printing, and telef axing, other copying, such as color or telef axing, sheets per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 15 31.3 36.6 36.6 100 1 2.1 2.4 39.0 150 1 2.1 2.4 41.5 180 1 2.1 2.4 43.9 1610 1 2.1 2.4 46.3 2500 1 2.1 2.4 48.8 88888 8 16.7 19.5 68.3 99999 13 27.1 31.7 100.0 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 49161.732 2015631.00 Valid cases 41 Median 8 8 8f Missing cases 000 Mode .000 90 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent paper originals, pages per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 12 25.0 60.0 60.0 25 1 2.1 5.0 65.0 75 1 2.1 5.0 70.0 100 3 6.3 15.0 85.0 500 2 4.2 10.0 95.0 5250 1 2.1 5.0 100.0 17 35.4 Missing 8888 5 10.4 Missing 99S9 6 12.5 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 332.500 6650.000 Median .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 20 Missing cases 28 Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent paper originals, patents per year: Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 2 20 75 125 750 9999 Total 10 20.8 66.7 66.7 1 2.1 6.7 73.3 1 2.1 6.7 80.0 1 2.1 6.7 86.7 1 2.1 6.7 93.3 1 2.1 6.7 100.0 18 37.5 Missing 5 10.4 Missing 10 20.8 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 64.800 972.000 Median .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 15 Missing cases 33 91 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from trademark paper originals, pages per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 10 20.8 66.7 66.7 2 1 2.1 6.7 73.3 5 1 2.1 6.7 80.0 50 1 2.1 6.7 86.7 100 1 2.1 6.7 93.3 500 1 18 2.1 37.5 6.7 Missing 100.0 Don ' t Know 8888 6 12.5 Missing No Answer 9999 9 18.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 43, .800 Median .000 Mode .000 Sum 657, .000 Valid cases 15 Missing cases 33 Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from trademark paper originals, trademarks per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don ' t Know No Answer 9 18.8 64.3 64 .3 2 1 2.1 7.1 71 .4 5 1 2.1 7.1 78 ,6 25 2 4.2 14.3 92, .9 100 1 2.1 7.1 100 .0 17 35.4 Missing 8888 6 12.5 Missing 9999 11 22.9 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 11.214 Sum 157.000 Valic i cases 14 Median Missing cases .000 34 Mode .000 92 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent and trademark paper originals (not distinguished) , pages per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don ' t Know No Answer 1 2.1 20.0 20.0 120 1 2.1 20.0 40.0 300 1 2. 1 20.0 60.0 1000 1 2.1 20.0 80.0 1250 1 2.1 20.0 100.0 38 79.2 Missing 88888 4 8.3 Missing 99999 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 534.000 Sum 2670.000 Median 300.000 Mode' .000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown Valid cases 5 Missing cases 43 Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent and trademark paper originals (not distinguished) , documents per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 100 120 856 9999 Total 2 1 25.0 25 2 1 25.0 50 2 1 25.0 75 2 1 25.0 100 9 2 Missing 8 3 Missing 4 2 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 269.000 1076.000 Median 110.000 Mode' 000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 4 Missing cases 44 93 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent microform originals, pages per year: Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 4.2 8.0 8.0 40 1 2.1 4.0 12.0 100 2 4.2 8.0 20.0 125 2.1 4.0 24.0 500 2.1 4.0 28.0 698 2.1 4.0 32.0 1000 2.1 4.0 36.0 1250 2.1 4.0 40.0 1500 2.1 4.0 44.0 1600 2.1 4.0 48.0 3745 2.1 4.0 52.0 4060 2.1 4.0 56.0 5000 2.1 4.0 60.0 5250 2.1 4.0 64.0 7075 2.1 4.0 68.0 7500 1 2.1 4.0 72.0 7950 1 2.1 4.0 76.0 8000 1 2.1 4.0 80.0 10816 1 2.1 4.0 84.0 12500 1 2.1 4.0 88.0 24000 2 4.2 8.0 96.0 45000 1 2.1 4.0 100.0 18 37.5 Mi ssing 888888 4 8.3 Ml ssing 999999 1 2.1 Ml ssing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean 6872 360 Sum 171809 000 Valid cases 25 Median 3745.000 Missing cases 23 Mode .000 94 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent microform originals, patents per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 4.2 11.1 11.1 20 2 4.2 11.1 22.2 25 1 2.1 5.6 27.8 5 1 2.1 5.6 33.3 100 1 2.1 5.6 38.9 130 1 2.1 5.6 44.4 150 1 2.1 5.6 50.0 535 1 2.1 5.6 55.6 580 1 2.1 5.6 61.1 750 1 2.1 5.6 66.7 984 1 2.1 5.6 72.2 1092 1 2.1 5.6 77.8 1178 1 2.1 5.6 83.3 1800 1 2.1 5.6 88.9 4500 1 2. 1 5.6 94.4 4800 1 18 2.1 37.5 5.6 Missing 100.0 Don ' t Know 88888 5 10.4 Missing No Answer 99999 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 928.556 Median 342 .500 Mode .000 Sum 16714.000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 18 Missing cases 30 Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from trademark microform originals, pages per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 000 13 27.1 100.0 19 39.6 Missing 8888 6 12.5 Missing 9999 10 20.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mode .000 Sum 100.0 .000 Valid cases 13 Missing cases 35 95 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from trademark microform originals, trademarks per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 11 19 22.9 39.6 100.0 Missing 100.0 Don't Know 8888 6 12.5 Missing No Answer 9999 12 25.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean .000 Mode .000 Sum .000 Valid cases 11 Missing cases 37 Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent and trademark microform originals (not distinguished) , pages per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 2.1 16.7 16.7 900 2.1 16.7 33.3 1000 2.1 16.7 50.0 5872 2.1 16.7 66.7 11529 2.1 16.7 83.3 49632 2.1 16.7 100.0 38 79.2 Missing 888888 3 6.3 Missing 999999 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 11488.833 68933.000 Median 3436.000 Mode' 000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 6 Missing cases 42 96 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent and trademark microform originals (not distinguished) , documents per year) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 1 2. 1 20.0 20.0 150 1 2.1 20.0 40.0 250 1 2.1 20.0 60.0 1478 1 2.1 20.0 80.0 9945 1 2.1 20.0 100.0 38 79.2 Missing 88888 4 8.3 Missing 99999 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2364.600 11823.000 Median 250.000 Mode* 000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 5 Missing cases 43 Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent and trademark paper and microform originals (not distinguished) , pages per year: No Answer Don't Know Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 16.7 16.7 8500 2 16.7 33.3 14400 2 16.7 50.0 43012 2 16.7 66.7 43345 2 16.7 83.3 50000 2 16.7 100.0 36 75 Missing 99999 3 6 3 Missing 888888 3 6 3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 26542.833 159257.000 Median 28706.000 Mode' * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 6 Missing cases 42 .000 97 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, from patent and trademark paper and microform originals (not distinguished) , documents per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 4.2 28.6 28.6 850 1 2.1 14.3 42.9 1800 1 2.1 14.3 57.1 4775 1 2.1 14.3 71.4 4855 1 2.1 14.3 85.7 5720 1 35 2.1 72.9 14.3 Missing 100.0 Don't Know 8888 3 6.3 Missing No Answer 9999 Total 3 48 6.3 100.0 Missing 100.0 Mean 2571. ,429 Median 1800 .000 Mode .000 Sum 18000. ,000 Valid cases 7 Missing cases 41 Staff or volunteer produced photocopying, other copying, such as color, sheets per year: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 14 29. .2 100.0 12 25 .0 Missing 8888 4 8 ,3 Missing 9999 18 37, .5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 100.0 Mean .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 14 Missing cases 34 Sum 000 98 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percentage of staff produced photocopying for patron pickup at the PTDL: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't know No Answer 2 4.2 10.0 10.0 1 5 10.4 25.0 35.0 2 2 4.2 10.0 45.0 5 2 4.2 10.0 55.0 20 2.1 5.0 60.0 35 2.1 5.0 65.0 40 2.1 5.0 70.0 45 2.1 5.0 75.0 60 2.1 5.0 80.0 75 2.1 5.0 85.0 84 2.1 5.0 90.0 89 2.1 5.0 95.0 95 2.1 5.0 100.0 17 35.4 Missing 888 14.6 Missing 999 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 28.100 562.000 Median 5.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 20 Missing cases 28 99 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percentage of staff produced photocopying for mailing to the patron, inside the "service area": Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 2 4.2 16.7 16.7 3.00 1 2.1 8.3 25.0 15.00 1 2.1 8.3 33.3 45.00 1 2.1 8.3 41.7 68.00 1 2.1 8.3 50.0 70.00 1 2.1 8.3 58.3 94.00 1 2.1 8.3 66.7 95.00 1 2.1 8.3 75.0 96.90 1 2.1 8.3 83.3 97.00 1 2.1 8.3 91.7 100.00 1 2.1 8.3 100.0 25 52.1 Missing 888.00 7 14.6 Missing 999.00 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 56.992 683.900 Median 69.000 Mode 000 Valid cases 12 Missing cases 36 Percentage of staff produced photocopying for mailing to the patron outside the "service area": Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer .00 2 4.2 20.0 20.0 .05 1 2.1 10.0 30.0 2.00 1 2.1 10.0 40.0 3.00 1 2.1 10.0 50.0 4.00 1 2.1 10.0 60.0 15.00 1 2.1 10.0 70.0 17.00 1 2.1 10.0 80.0 50.00 1 2.1 10.0 90.0 100.00 1 2.1 10.0 100.0 . 27 56.3 Missing 888.00 7 14.6 Missing 999.00 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100T0 100.0 Mean Sum 19.105 191.050 Median 3.500 Mode 000 Valid cases 10 Missing cases 38 100 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percentage of staff produced photocopying for mailing to the patron inside or outside the "service area" (without distinction) : Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum ue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 4.2 13.3 13.3 5 1 2.1 6.7 20.0 15 1 2.1 6.7 26.7 29 1 2.1 6.7 33.3 30 1 2.1 6.7 40.0 40 1 2.1 6.7 46.7 60 1 2.1 6.7 53.3 79 1 2.1 6.7 60.0 85 1 2.1 6.7 66.7 86 1 2.1 6.7 73.3 90 2 4.2 13.3 86.7 93 1 2.1 6.7 93.3 98 1 2.1 6.7 100.0 22 45.8 Missing 88 7 14.6 Missing 99 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 53.333 100.000 Median 60.000 Mode 1 .000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 15 Missing cases 33 101 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percentage of staff produced photocopying for telefacsimile to patrons inside the "service area": Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer .00 2 4.2 20.0 20.0 .05 1 2.1 10.0 30.0 1.00 1 2.1 10.0 40.0 3.00 1 2.1 10.0 50.0 5.00 2 4.2 20.0 70.0 12.00 1 2.1 10.0 80.0 35.00 1 2.1 10.0 90.0 40.00 1 2.1 10.0 100.0 27 56.3 Missing 888.00 7 14.6 Missing 999.00 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 10.105 101.050 Median 4.000 Mode^ 000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 10 Missing cases 38 Percentage of staff produced photocopying for telefacsimile to patrons outside the " service area" : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don ' t Know No Answer .00 2 4.2 50.0 50.0 3.00 1 2.1 25.0 75.0 5.00 1 2.1 25.0 100.0 33 68.8 Missing 888.00 7 14.6 Missing 999.00 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 2.000 Median Sum 8.000 Valid cases 4 Missin 1.500 44 Mode 000 102 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percentage of staff produced photocopying for telefacsimile to patrons inside or outside the "service area" (without distinction) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 4.2 16.7 16.7 1 2 4.2 16.7 33.3 2 1 2.1 8.3 41.7 5 1 2.1 8.3 50.0 10 2 4.2 16.7 66.7 12 2 4.2 16.7 83.3 13 1 2.1 8.3 91.7 30 1 25 2.1 52.1 8.3 Missing 100.0 Don't Know 888 7 14.6 Missing No Answer 999 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 8 000 Median 7.500 Mode * .000 Sum 96 000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 12 Missing cases 36 Percentage of staff produced photocopying for interlibrary loan: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 2 4.2 9.5 9.5 1 6 12.5 28.6 38.1 3 1 2.1 4.8 42.9 4 1 2.1 4.8 47.6 5 5 10.4 23.8 71.4 9 1 2.1 4.8 76.2 10 1 2.1 4.8 81.0 80 1 2.1 4.8 85.7 100 3 6.3 14.3 100.0 16 33.3 Missing 888 7 14.6 Missing 999 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum Valid cases 20.810 437.000 21 Median Missing cases 5.000 27 1.000 103 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Percentage of staff produced photocopying for other purpose: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 1 20 888 999 3 1 1 32 7 4 6.3 2.1 2.1 66.7 14.6 8.3 60.0 20.0 20.0 Missing Missing Missing 60.0 80.0 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 4 21 200 000 Median .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 5 Missing cases 43 Percentage of staff produced photocopying which receives special or rush handling: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don ' t Know No Answer 11 22.9 42.3 42.3 1 1 2.1 3.8 46.2 2 2 4.2 7.7 53.8 3 1 2.1 3.8 57.7 5 5 10.4 19.2 76.9 10 1 2.1 3.8 80.8 13 1 2.1 3.8 84.6 15 1 2.1 3.8 88.5 20 2 4.2 7.7 96.2 90 1 2.1 3.8 100.0 8 16.7 Missing 888 5 10.4 Missing 999 9 18.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum Valid cases 7.731 201.000 26 Median 2.000 Mode Missing cases 22 .000 104 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY By statute, ordinance, or other reason, is this institution restricted from charging for such things as service, Jc photocopies, and materials provided? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Yes 1 5 10.4 12.5 12.5 No 2 35 6 72.9 12.5 87.5 Missing 100.0 No Answer 9 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.875 Median 2 .000 Mode 2.000 Sum 75.000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 Revenue from self-service photocopying, dollars per year: Value Frequency Valid Cum Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer .00 4 8.3 17.4 17.4 100.00 1 2.1 4.3 21.7 135.00 1 2.1 4.3 26.1 200.00 1 2.1 4.3 30.4 238.00 1 2.1 4.3 34.8 471.60 1 2.1 4.3 39.1 520.00 1 2.1 4.3 43.5 840.00 1 2.1 4.3 47.8 1000.00 2 4.2 8.7 56.5 1268.40 1 2.1 4.3 60.9 1560.00 1 2.1 4.3 65.2 1700.00 1 2.1 4.3 69.6 1847.00 1 2.1 4.3 73.9 2077.10 1 2.1 4.3 78.3 2160.00 1 2.1 4.3 82.6 3000.00 1 2.1 4.3 87.0 3075.00 1 2.1 4.3 91.3 6000.00 1 2.1 4.3 95.7 17000.00 1 2.1 4.3 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 88888.00 8 16.7 Missing 99999.00 11 22.9 Missing Total 100:0 100.0 Mean Sum 1921.396 44192.100 Median 1000.000 000 Valid cases 23 Missing cases 25 105 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Revenue from staff or volunteer produced photocopying, dollars per year: Don ' t Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 9 18.8 32.1 32.1 70.00 1 2.1 3.6 35.7 100.00 1 2.1 3.6 39.3 164.50 1 2.1 3.6 42.9 300.00 1 2.1 3.6 46.4 370.00 1 2.1 3.6 50.0 500.00 1 2.1 3.6 53.6 600.00 1 2.1 3.6 57.1 800.00 2.1 3.6 60.7 1276.90 2.1 3.6 64.3 1719.00 2.1 3.6 67.9 2945.00 2.1 3.6 71.4 5520.00 2.1 3.6 75.0 7500.00 2.1 3.6 78.6 10250.00 2.1 3.6 82.1 12000.00 2.1 3.6 85.7 12500.00 2.1 3.6 89.3 12533.00 2.1 3.6 92.9 12963.00 2.1 3.6 96.4 31500.00 2.1 3.6 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 88888.00 5 10.4 Missing 99999.00 9 18.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 4057.550 113611.400 Median 435.000 Mode 000 Valid cases 28 Missing cases 20 106 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Revenue from telefacsimile services, dollars per year Don ' t Know No Answer V alid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 14 29.2 63.6 63.6 20.00 1 2.1 4.5 68.2 120.00 1 2.1 4.5 72.7 125.00 1 2.1 4.5 77.3 200.00 1 2. 1 4.5 81.8 360.00 1 2.1 4.5 86.4 517.00 1 2.1 4.5 90.9 924.00 1 2.1 4.5 95.5 1860.00 1 2.1 4.5 100.0 6 12.5 Mi ssing 8888.00 5 10.4 Ml ssing 9999.00 15 31.3 Mi ssing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 187.545 4126.000 Median .000 Mode 000 Valid cases 22 Missing cases Revenue from other revenue such as gifts or grants, dollars per year: Don't Know No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent .00 17 35.4 73.9 73.9 205.00 1 2.1 4.3 78.3 210.00 1 2.1 4.3 82.6 2400.00 1 2.1 4.3 87.0 3000.00 1 2.1 4.3 91.3 5000.00 1 2.1 4.3 95.7 7500.00 1 2.1 4.3 100.0 7 14.6 Missing 88888.00 4 8.3 Missing 99999.00 14 29.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 796.304 18315.000 Median .000 Mode .000 Valid cases 23 Missing cases 25 ♦ 107 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY CASSIS/BIB CD-ROM is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Strongly Agree/Need Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 42 6 87.5 100.0 100.0 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Valid cases 1.000 42 Mode 1.000 Missing cases 6 Sum 42.000 CASSIS/CLSF CD-ROM is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 1 39 81.3 92.9 92.9 2 3 6.3 7.1 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.071 45.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases ASIST CD-ROM is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 39 81.3 92.9 92.9 2 3 6.3 7.1 100.0 • 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.071 45.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 108 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Trademarks CD-ROM ia Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs : Strongly Agree/Need Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Total 42 87.5 100.0 100.0 12 . 5 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 6 Sum 42.000 U.S. Patent Image CD/ROM is Important and or needed by the PTDLs Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Stronly Disagree/Don Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 11 22.9 29.7 29.7 2 17 35.4 45.9 75.7 3 8 16.7 21.6 97.3 4 1 2.1 2.7 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 8 4 8.3 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum Valid cases 1.973 73.000 37 Median Missing cases 2.000 11 Mode 2.000 109 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Japanese Abstract CD-ROM is Important and or needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Val ue Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need 1 8 16.7 21.1 21.1 Agree/Need 2 19 39.6 50.0 71.1 Disagree/Don't Need 3 9 18.8 23.7 94.7 Stronly Disagree/Don 4 2 6 4.2 12.5 5.3 Missing 100.0 Don't Know/Not Appli 8 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.132 il. 000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases Missing cases 10 PraCTis CD-ROM is Important and or needed by the PTDLs: Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Stronly Disagree/Don Don't Know/Not Appli Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 11 22.9 28.9 28.9 2 18 37.5 47.4 76.3 3 8 16.7 21.1 97.4 4 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 8 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.974 75.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 110 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY APS Deployment to PTDLs is Important and or needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer Mean Sum 1.690 49.000 1 14 29.2 48.3 48.3 2 10 20.8 34.5 82.8 3 5 10.4 17.2 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 8 12 25.0 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 2.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 29 Missing cases 19 CASSIS/BIB CD/ROM Rank Order of Important and or needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1.0 28 58.3 68.3 68.3 2.0 10 20.8 24.4 92.7 3.0 2 4.2 4.9 97.6 4.0 1 6 2.1 12.5 2.4 Missing 100.0 No Answer 9.0 Total 1 48 2.1 100.0 Missing 100.0 Mean 1 415 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 58 000 Valid cases 41 Mi ssing cases 7 111 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY CLSF CD/ROM Rank Order of Importance ('1' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Highest No Answer Valid Cum ill le Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1, .0 11 22.9 26.8 26.8 2, .0 10 20.8 24.4 51.2 3, .0 9 18.8 22.0 73.2 4, ,0 8 16.7 19.5 92.7 5, .0 3 6.3 7.3 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 9. ,0 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.561 105.000 Median 2.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases AS I ST CD/ROM Rank Order of Importance ('!' being highest ranked and '8* lowest ranked) Highest No Answer Valid Cum lue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.0 4 8.3 9.8 9.8 2.0 6 12.5 14.6 24.4 3.0 11 22.9 26.8 51.2 4.0 15 31.3 36.6 87.8 5.0 4 8.3 9.8 97.6 7.0 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 9.0 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 3.317 136.000 Median 3.000 Mode 4.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 112 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Trademarks CD/ROM Rank Order of Importance ('!' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1.0 6 12.5 14.6 14.6 2.0 10 20.8 24.4 39.0 3.0 13 27.1 31.7 70.7 4.0 9 18.8 22.0 92.7 5.0 2 4.2 4.9 97.6 6.0 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 9.0 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.854 117.000 Median 3.000 Mode 3.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases U.S. Patent Image CD/ROM Rank Order of Importance ('!' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Lowest No Answer 3.0 2 4.2 5.1 5.1 4.0 1 2.1 2.6 7.7 5.0 11 22.9 28.2 35.9 6.0 13 27.1 33.3 69.2 7.0 7 14.6 17.9 87.2 8.0 5 10.4 12.8 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 9.0 3 6.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 5.949 232.000 Median 6.000 6.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases 113 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Japanese Abstract CD/ROM Rank Order of Importance (*!' being highest ranked and '8* lowest ranked) Lowest No Answer Valid Cum lue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 5.0 5 10.4 12.5 12.5 6.0 10 20.8 25.0 37.5 7.0 10 20.8 25.0 62.5 8.0 15 31.3 37.5 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 9.0 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 6.875 275.000 Median 7.000 .000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases PraCTis CD/ROM Rank Order of Importance ('!' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Value Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cum Percent Lowest No Answer 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 Total 1 3 7 19 10 6 2 48 2.1 6.3 14.6 39.6 20.8 12.5 4.2 100.0 2.5 7.5 17.5 47.5 25.0 Missing Missing 100.0 2.5 10.0 27.5 75.0 100.0 Mean Sum 6, 274, .850 .000 Median 7 .000 Mode 7.000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 114 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY APS Deployment to PTDLs Rank Order of Importance ('!' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest Lowest No Answer 1.0 4 8.3 11.4 11.4 2.0 1 2.1 2.9 14.3 4.0 2 4.2 5.7 20.0 5.0 14 29.2 40.0 60.0 6.0 7 14.6 20.0 80.0 7.0 2 4.2 5.7 85.7 8.0 5 10.4 14.3 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 9.0 7 14.6 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 5.143 10.000 Median 5.000 Mode 5.000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 13 Extra Supplies of General Infromation Brochures are important and/or needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need 1 30 62.5 71.4 71.4 2 10 20.8 23.8 95.2 3 2 4.2 4.8 100.0 • 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.333 Sum 56.000 Valid cases 42 Median Missing cases 1.000 1.000 115 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Updated Directory of PTDLs is Important and or needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need 1 24 50.0 57.1 57.1 2 18 37.5 42.9 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum Valid cases 1.429 60.000 42 Median 1.000 Missing cases ( Mode 1.000 Patentee/Assignee Index fiche is Important or needed by the PTDLs: Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Stronly Disagree/Don Don't Know/Not Appli Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 10 20.8 25.6 25.6 2 17 35.4 43.6 69.2 3 10 20.8 25.6 94.9 4 2 4.2 5.1 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 8 3 6.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.103 82.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases 116 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY U.S. Trademark Law is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer Mean Sum 1.750 63.000 1 12 25.0 33.3 33.3 2 21 43.8 58.3 91.7 3 3 6.3 8.3 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 8 4 8.3 Missing 9 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 36 Missing cases 12 Direct mail of Official Gazette is Important and or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Total 37 77.1 88.1 88.1 5 10.4 11.9 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.119 47.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 117 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY CD-ROM Usage Log is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli 1 13 27.1 31.7 31.7 2 23 47.9 56.1 87.8 3 5 10.4 12.2 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 8 1 2.1 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.805 74.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases Survey of PTDLs is Important and/or Needed and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need No Answer 1 2 3 9 9 29 3 6 1 18.8 60.4 6.3 12.5 2.1 22.0 70.7 7.3 Missing Missing 22.0 92.7 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.854 Sum 76.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 118 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Informational material is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLa : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Total 79.2 90.5 90.5 8.3 9.5 100.0 12.5 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.095 Median Sum 46.000 Valid cases 42 Missin 1.000 Mode 1.000 Extra Supplies of Gernal Information Brochures, rank order of importance : ('1' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 8 16.7 19.5 19.5 2 5 10.4 12.2 31.7 3 11 22.9 26.8 58.5 4 7 14.6 17.1 75.6 5 3 6.3 7.3 82.9 6 3 6.3 7.3 90.2 7 2 4.2 4.9 95.1 Lowest 8 2 6 4.2 12.5 4.9 Missing 100.0 No Answer 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 3 463 Median 3.000 Mode 3.000 Sum 142 000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 119 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY PTDL Directory Rank Order of Importance: ('l 1 being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 3 6.3 7.3 7.3 2 2 4.2 4.9 12.2 3 7 14.6 17.1 29.3 4 16 33.3 39.0 68.3 5 5 10.4 12.2 80.5 6 4 8.3 9.8 90.2 7 3 6.3 7.3 97.6 Lowest 8 1 6 2.1 12.5 2.4 Missing 100.0 No Answer 9 1 2.1 Missing Tot- al 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 4, .146 Median 4.000 Mode 4.000 Sum 170, .000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 Patentee/Assignee Index Rank Order of Importance: ('!' being highest ranked and '8* lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest Lowest No Answer 1 1 2.1 2.4 2.4 2 2 4.2 4.9 7.3 3 3 6.3 7.3 14.6 4 5 10.4 12.2 26.8 5 7 14.6 17.1 43.9 6 7 14.6 17.1 61.0 7 3 6.3 7.3 68.3 8 13 27.1 31.7 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 5.756 236.000 Median 6.000 Mode 000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 120 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY U.S. Trademark Law Rank Order of Importance: (*!' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Val ue Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 1 2.1 2.4 2.4 2 3 6.3 7.3 9.8 3 5 10.4 12.2 22.0 4 1 2.1 2.4 24.4 5 8 16.7 19.5 43.9 6 7 14.6 17.1 61.0 7 9 18.8 22.0 82.9 Lowest 8 7 6 14.6 12.5 17.1 Missing 100.0 No .\nswer 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 5 537 Median 6 000 Mode 7.000 Sum 227 000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 Direct Mail of Official Gazette Rank Order of Importance: ('l 1 being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Value Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1 18 37.5 43.9 43.9 2 12 25.0 29.3 73.2 3 5 10.4 12.2 85.4 4 2 4.2 4.9 90.2 5 2 4.2 4.9 95.1 6 2 4.2 4.9 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 2.122 Sum 87.000 Valid cases 41 Median Missing cases 2.000 Mode 1.000 121 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY CD/ROM Usage Log Rank Order of Importance: ('!' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Val je Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 2 4 5 9 13 2.1 4.2 4.2 8.3 10.4 18.8 27.1 2.5 5.0 5.0 10.0 12.5 22.5 32.5 2.5 7.5 12.5 22.5 35.0 57.5 90.0 Lowest 8 4 6 8.3 12.5 10.0 Missing 100.0 No Answer 9 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 5 725 Median 6 .000 Mode 7.000 Sum 229 000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases 8 Survey of PTDLs Rank Order of Importance: ('!' being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Lowest No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 2 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 3 3 6.3 7.7 10.3 4 2 4.2 5.1 15.4 5 7 14.6 17.9 33.3 6 6 12.5 15.4 48.7 7 10 20.8 25.6 74.4 8 10 20.8 25.6 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 9 3 6.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 6.154 240.000 Median 7.000 Mode* * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 39 Missing cases 9 7.000 122 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Informational Material Rank Order of Importance: ('1* being highest ranked and '8' lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1 12 25.0 30.0 30.0 2 13 27.1 32.5 62.5 3 6 12.5 15.0 77.5 4 4 8.3 10.0 87.5 5 4 8.3 10.0 97.5 6 1 2.1 2.5 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.450 98.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases APTI Seminars at PTDLs are Important and Needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Don't Know/Not Appli 1 39 81.3 86.7 86.7 2 6 12.5 13.3 100.0 8 3 6.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.133 51.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 45 Missing cases 123 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY APTI Staff Training after APTI Seminar is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer Mean 1.279 Sum 55.000 Valid cases 43 1 32 66.7 74.4 74 4 2 10 20.8 23.3 97 7 3 1 2.1 2.3 100 1 2.1 Missing 8 3 6.3 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total lian 48 1.000 100.0 Mode 100.0 • 1.00( ) Missing cases Exhibit and APTI Seminar at the Special Libraries Association is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli 1 10 20.8 26.3 26.3 2 26 54.2 68.4 94.7 3 2 4.2 5.3 100.0 8 10 20.8 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.789 68.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 124 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Exhibit and APTI Seminar at the American Libraries Association Annual Conference is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't KnowNot Applic 1 14 2 21 3 3 8 10 Total 29.2 36.8 36.8 43.8 55.3 92.1 6.3 7.9 100.0 20.8 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.711 Sum 65.000 Valid cases 38 Median Missing cases 2.000 10 Mode 2.000 Exhibit and APTI Seminar at the Public Library Asssociation Triennial Conference is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli 1 11 22.9 30.6 30.6 2 22 45.8 61.1 91.7 3 3 6.3 8.3 100.0 8 12 25.0 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.778 64.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 36 Missing cases 12 125 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Exhibit and APTI Seminar at the American Association of Law Libraries Annual Conference is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer 1 2 3 8 9 12 18 4 13 1 25.0 37.5 8.3 27.1 2.1 35.3 52.9 11.8 Missing Missing 35.3 88.2 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.765 Sum 60.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 34 Mi ssing cases 14 Director ' s Reception at ALA is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli 1 7 14.6 25.0 25.0 2 14 29.2 50.0 75.0 3 7 14.6 25.0 100.0 8 20 41.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.000 56.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 28 Missing cases 20 PTO/PTDL Conference is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Don't Know/Not Appli 1 44 91.7 95.7 95.7 2 2 4.2 4.3 100.0 8 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.043 48.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 46 Missing cases 126 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY PTO/PTDL Pre-conference workshop is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer 1 40 83.3 88.9 88.9 2 5 10.4 11.1 100.0 8 2 4.2 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.111 50.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 45 Missing cases Project XL Activities are Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer Mean Sum 1.861 67.000 1 2 3 8 9 8 25 3 10 2 16.7 52.1 6.3 20.8 4.2 22.2 69.4 8.3 Missing Missing 22.2 91.7 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 3 6 Missing cases 12 127 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Young Inventor's Competition is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLa : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer 1 2 3 8 9 7 26 5 9 1 14.6 54.2 10.4 18.8 2.1 18.4 68.4 13.2 Missing Missing 18.4 86.8 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.947 Sum 74.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 Accessing Patent and Trademark Information Seminars at PTDLs , rank order of importance: (with ' 1* being highest ranked and '11' being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1 9 18.8 21.4 21.4 2 2 4.2 4.8 26.2 3 26 54.2 61.9 88.1 4 3 6.3 7.1 95.2 7 1 2.1 2.4 97.6 9 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 2 4.2 Missing 9 4 8.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 2.833 119.000 Median 3.000 Mode 3.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 128 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Staff Training After APTI Seminar, rank order of importance: (with ' 1' being highest ranked and '11 'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Fre quency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 2 4.2 4.8 4.8 2 7 14.6 16.7 21.4 3 3 6.3 7.1 28.6 4 24 50.0 57.1 85.7 5 2 4.2 4.8 90.5 6 1 2.1 2.4 92.9 8 1 2.1 2.4 95.2 10 2 2 4.2 4.2 4.8 Missing 100.0 No Answer 99 Total 4 48 8.3 100.0 Missing 100.0 Mean 3 929 Median 4 .000 Mode 4.000 Sum 165 000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 6 Exhibit and APTI Seminar at Special Libraries Associartion Annual Conference, rank order of importance : (with '1' being highest ranked and * 11 'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer Mean Sum 6.308 246.000 1.0 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 3.0 4 8.3 10.3 12.8 4.0 1 2.1 2.6 15.4 5.0 5 10.4 12.8 28.2 6.0 12 25.0 30.8 59.0 7.0 6 12.5 15.4 74.4 8.0 3 6.3 7.7 82.1 9.0 4 8.3 10.3 92.3 10.0 3 6.3 7.7 100.0 2 4.2 Missing 99.0 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 6.000 Mode 6.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases 129 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Exhibit and APTI Seminar at American Libraries Association Annual Conference , rank order of importance : (with '1' being highest ranked and 'll'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1.0 2 4.2 5.1 5.1 3.0 2 4.2 5.1 10.3 4.0 2 4.2 5.1 15.4 5.0 7 14.6 17.9 33.3 6.0 9 18.8 23.1 56.4 7.0 9 18.8 23.1 79.5 9.0 5 10.4 12.8 92.3 10.0 1 2.1 2.6 94.9 Lowest 11.0 2 2 4.2 4.2 5.1 Missing 100.0 No Answer 99.0 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 6 282 Median 6.000 Mode * 6.000 Sum 245 000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 39 Missing cases 9 Exhibit and APTI Seminar at Public Library Association Triennial Conference, rank order of importance: (with '1' being highest ranked and 'll'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 2 1 2.1 2.6 5.1 3 1 2.1 2.6 7.7 4 1 2.1 2.6 10.3 5 5 10.4 12.8 23.1 6 1 2.1 2.6 25.6 7 8 16.7 20.5 46.2 8 13 27.1 33.3 79.5 9 2 4.2 5.1 84.6 10 6 12.5 15.4 100.0 2 4.2 Missing 99 7 14.6 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 7.154 279.000 Median .000 Mode 8.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases 130 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Exhibit and APTI Seminar at American Association of Law Libraries Annual Conference, rank order of importance: (with '1' being highest ranked and 'll'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 2 4.2 5.3 5.3 5 4 8.3 10.5 15.8 6 3 6.3 7.9 23.7 7 5 10.4 13.2 36.8 8 9 18.8 23.7 60.5 9 5 10.4 13.2 73.7 10 8 16.7 21.1 94.7 Lowest 11 2 2 4.2 4.2 5.3 Missing 100.0 No Answer 99 8 16.7 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 7 737 Median 8.000 Mode 8.000 Sum 294 000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 Director's Reception at ALA, rank order of importance: (with '1' being highest ranked and 'll'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Lowest No Answer 5 2 4.2 5.7 5.7 6 2 4.2 5.7 11.4 7 2 4.2 5.7 17.1 8 1 2.1 2.9 20.0 9 6 12.5 17.1 37.1 10 6 12.5 17.1 54.3 11 16 33.3 45.7 100.0 3 6.3 Missing 99 10 20.8 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 9.543 334.000 Median 10.000 Mode 11.000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 13 131 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY PTO/PTDL Conference, rank order of importance: (with '1' being highest ranked and 'll'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1 2 3 8 99 32 4 7 1 2 2 66.7 8.3 14.6 2.1 4.2 4.2 72.7 9.1 15.9 2.3 Missing Missing 72.7 81.8 97.7 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1 69 568 000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 44 Missing cases 4 PTO/PTDL Pre-Conference Workshop, rank order of importance: (with ' 1' being highest ranked and 'll'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 6 12.5 13.6 13.6 2 29 60.4 65.9 79.5 4 7 14.6 15.9 95.5 5 1 2.1 2.3 97.7 9 1 2 2.1 4.2 2.3 Missing 100.0 No Answer 99 2 4.2 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 2 409 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Sum 106 000 Valid cases 44 Missing cases 4 132 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Project XL Activities, rank order of importance: (with '1' being highest ranked and 'll'being lowest ranked) Lowest No Answer Valid Cum ue Frequency Percent Percent Percent 3 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 4 2 4.2 5.3 7.9 5 9 18.8 23.7 31.6 6 4 8.3 10.5 42.1 7 3 6.3 7.9 50.0 8 4 8.3 10.5 60.5 9 6 12.5 15.8 76.3 10 7 14.6 18.4 94.7 11 2 4.2 5.3 100.0 . 3 6.3 Missing 99 7 14.6 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 7.342 279.000 Median 7.500 Mode 5.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 10 Young Inventor's Competition, rank order of importance : (with '1' being highest ranked and *' 11 'being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Lowest No Answer 5 5 10.4 13.5 13.5 6 9 18.8 24.3 37.8 7 3 6.3 8.1 45.9 8 1 2.1 2.7 48.6 9 4 8.3 10.8 59.5 10 4 8.3 10.8 70.3 11 11 22.9 29.7 100.0 . 3 6.3 Missing 99 8 16.7 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 8.243 305.000 Median 9.000 Mode 11.000 Valid cases 37 Missing cases 11 133 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Toil-Free Telephone Line to OPDLP ia Important and/or Heeded by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need 1 39 81.3 92.9 92.9 2 3 6.3 7.1 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.071 45.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases Electronic Mail (CASSIS) to OPDLP and other PTDLs is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Total 34 70.8 81.0 81.0 7 14.6 16.7 97.6 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.214 51.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases Reference Assistance is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Total 31 64.6 73.8 73.8 11 22.9 26.2 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.262 Sum 53.000 Valid cases 42 Median Missing cases 1.000 Mode 1.000 134 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY On Demand Copy Service Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Disagree/Don't Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer Mean Sum 1.730 64.000 1 13 27.1 35.1 35.1 2 21 43.8 56.8 91.9 3 3 6.3 8.1 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 8 4 8.3 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 37 Missing cases 11 Fellowship Program is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs : Value Frequency Percent Valid Percent Cum Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need Don't Know/Not Appli No Answer 1 2 8 9 15 25 6 1 1 31.3 52.1 12.5 2.1 2.1 37.5 62.5 Missing Missing Missing 37.5 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.625 Sum 65.000 Median 2.000 Mode 2.000 Valid cases 40 Mi ssing cases 8 135 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Technical Assistance With CD/ROM and APS is Important and/or Needed by the PTDLs: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree/Need Agree/Need No Answer 1 2 9 40 1 6 1 83.3 2.1 12.5 2.1 97.6 2.4 Missing Missing 97.6 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1.024 Sum 42.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 Toll-free Telephone Line to OPDLP, rank order of importance : (with ' 1' being highest ranked and '6' being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1 21 43.8 51.2 51.2 2 11 22.9 26.8 78.0 3 5 10.4 12.2 90.2 4 3 6.3 7.3 97.6 5 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.829 75.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 136 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Electronic mail (CASSIS) to OPDLP and other PTDLa , rank order of importance : (with ' 1' being highest ranked and '6' being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 4 8.3 9.8 9.8 2 8 16.7 19.5 29.3 3 17 35.4 41.5 70.7 4 6 12.5 14.6 85.4 5 4 8.3 9.8 95.1 Lowest 6 2 6 4.2 12.5 4.9 Missing 100.0 No Answer 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 3 098 Median 3.000 Mode 3.000 Sum 127 000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 Reference Assistance, rank order of importance: (with '1' being highest ranked and '6* being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest No Answer 1 9 18.8 22.0 22.0 2 3 6.3 7.3 29.3 3 9 18.8 22.0 51.2 4 17 35.4 41.5 92.7 5 3 6.3 7.3 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 3 125 049 000 Valid cases 41 Median Missing cases 3.000 Mode .000 137 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY On Demand Copy Service, rank order of importance: (with ' 1' being highest ranked and '6' being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest Lowest No Answer 1 2 4.2 4.9 4 9 4 4 8.3 9.8 14 6 5 15 31.3 36.6 51 2 6 20 41.7 48.8 100 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum Valid cases 5.195 213.000 41 Median 5.000 Missing cases Mode 6.000 Fellowship Program, rank order of importance: (with ' 1* being highest ranked and '6' being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest Lowest No Answer 1 ' 2 4.2 5.0 5.0 2 1 2.1 2.5 7.5 4 6 12.5 15.0 22.5 5 16 33.3 40.0 62.5 6 15 31.3 37.5 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 2 4.2 Missing Total 46 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 4.950 198.000 Median 5.000 Mode 5.000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases 138 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Technical Assistance with CD/ROM and APS, rank order of importance: (with ' 1' being highest ranked and '6' being lowest ranked) Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Highest 1 16 33.3 39.0 39.0 2 16 33.3 39.0 78.0 3 7 14.6 17.1 95.1 4 2 6 4.2 12.5 4.9 Missing 100.0 No Answer 9 1 2.1 Missing Tot al 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1 878 Median 2.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 77 000 * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 41 Missing cases 7 The Staff in the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) Has Been Successful in Anticipating My/Our Needs for Materials: Strongly Agree Agree Disagree No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1 2 3 9 Total 26 13 1 6 2 54.2 27.1 2.1 12.5 4.2 65.0 32.5 2.5 Missing Missing 65.0 97.5 100.0 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.375 55.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases 139 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY The Staff in the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) Has Been Successful in Anticipating My/Our Needs for Information: Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree Agree Disagree No Answer Mean Sum 439 000 1 25 52.1 61.0 61.0 2 14 29.2 34.1 95.1 3 2 4.2 4.9 100.0 . 6 12.5 Missing 9 1 2.1 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases The Staff in the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) Respond to My/ Our Requests in a timely way. Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree Agree Disagree No Answer 1 2 3 9 34 6 1 6 1 70.8 12.5 2.1 12.5 2.1 82.9 14.6 2.4 Missing Missing 82.9 97.6 100.0 Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean 1 195 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Sum 49 000 Valid cases 41 Mi ssing cases 7 140 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY The Staff in the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) Responds to My/Our Requests with Quality Assistance. Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree Agree Total 75.0 85.7 85.7 12.5 14.3 100.0 12 . 5 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.143 48.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases Informational Material is Clear and Concise Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree 1 26 54.2 61.9 61.9 2 12 25.0 28.6 90.5 3 3 6.3 7.1 97.6 4 1 2.1 2.4 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.500 63.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases The Staff in the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) Has a Helpful, Positive Attitude. Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree Agree Total 37 77.1 88.1 88.1 5 10.4 11.9 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.119 47.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases 141 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY The Staff in the Office of Patent Depository Library Programs (OPDLP) Keeps Us Well Informed. Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Strongly Agree Agree 1 35 72.9 83.3 83.3 2 7 14.6 16.7 100.0 6 12.5 Missing Total 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 1.167 49.000 Median 1.000 Mode 1.000 Valid cases 42 Missing cases Estimate the amount of personal money (HOURS) per year spent by you and your staff in fulfilling responsibilities of the Program (include non- reimbursed expenses for such things as travel, mileage, entertaining, and supplies) : Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don ' t Know No Answer 11 22.9 31.4 31.4 35 1 2.1 2.9 34.3 50 3 6.3 8.6 42.9 60 1 2.1 2.9 45.7 75 1 2.1 2.9 48.6 80 1 2.1 2.9 51.4 100 3 6.3 8.6 60.0 135 1 2.1 2.9 62.9 200 5 10.4 14.3 77.1 300 , 1 2.1 2.9 80.0 375 1 2.1 2.9 82.9 500 2 4.2 5.7 88.6 600 1 2.1 2.9 91.4 825 1 2.1 2.9 94.3 1000 2 4.2 5.7 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 8888 1 2.1 Missing 9999 6 12.5 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 198.143 6935.000 Median 80.000 Mode 000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 13 142 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Estimate the amount of personal time (HOURS) per year spent by you and your staff in fulfilling responsibilities of the Program (include unpaid time for such things as travel, entertaining, and judging competitions): Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Don't Know No Answer 9 18.8 25.0 25.0 5 2 4.2 5.6 30.6 8 2 4.2 5.6 36.1 10 2 4.2 5.6 41.7 15 1 2.1 2.8 44.4 20 3 6.3 8.3 52.8 24 1 2.1 2.8 55.6 25 3 6.3 8.3 63.9 35 1 2.1 2.8 66.7 40 1 2.1 2.8 69.4 48 1 2.1 2.8 72.2 50 3 6.3 8.3 80.6 100 1 2.1 2.8 83.3 150 2 4.2 5.6 88.9 200 1 2.1 2.8 91.7 240 1 2.1 2.8 94.4 250 1 2.1 2.8 97.2 644 1 2.1 2.8 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 888 1 2.1 Missing 999 5 10.4 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 61.861 2227.000 Median 20.000 Mode .000 Valid cases 36 Missing cases 12 143 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY The amount of time (HOURS) expended in completing this survey was: No Answer Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.5 1 2.1 2.6 2.6 2.0 2 4.2 5.1 7.7 2.3 1 2.1 2.6 10.3 3.0 3 6.3 7.7 17.9 4.0 4 8.3 10.3 28.2 4.5 1 2.1 2.6 30.8 5.0 2 4.2 5.1 35.9 6.0 4 8.3 10.3 46.2 8.0 4 8.3 10.3 56.4 9.0 1 2.1 2.6 59.0 10.0 3 6.3 7.7 66.7 14.0 1 2.1 2.6 69.2 15.0 3 6.3 7.7 76.9 16.0 3 6.3 7.7 84.6 24.0 2 4.2 5.1 89.7 35.0 1 2.1 2.6 92.3 56.0 1 2.1 2.6 94.9 61.0 1 2.1 2.6 97.4 127.0 1 2.1 2.6 100.0 6 12.5 Missing 999.0 3 6.3 Missing Total 48 100.0 100.0 Mean Sum 14.777 576.300 Median 8.000 Mode* * Multiple modes exist. The smallest value is shown. Valid cases 39 Missing cases 9 4.000 144 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY PTDL REPRESENTATIVES' RESPONSES TO OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY II. Costs C. Patent and Trademark Related (P&TR) Equipment Cost of [P&TR library equipment] --$10 , 000 per year--high due to initial cost of setting up PTDL F. P&TR Serials Cost [of P&TR serials] --$10,000 per hear--high due to initial cost of setting up PTDL Initial costs of $45,900 M. P&TR Other Expenses (specify) : Dialog P&TR Files— $1 ,500 Remodel--$6,304 Patent microfilm backfile--$l , 195 Brochures and handouts--$150 Overhead transparencies — $10 Patent backfile (FY91) --$22,790 Postage— $2,328 Hand out materials (Tours, workshops, exhibits, brochures, etc.) — $2,327 IV. Training The library offers one-on-one training for most of its patent searchers routinely, and prefers this informal training method to the formal class sessions. 145 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY V. Photocopying, Printing, and Telef axing A5. Other copying, such as color or telef axing (specify) : Telef ax--100 sheets per year Telefaxing--1 ,610 sheets per year Telefaxing--180 sheets per year (est.) B5.e. Percentage of staff produced photocopying for "other" delivery (specify) : Personal delivery by staff member — 1% Materials delivery — 20% VI . Income 4. Other revenue, such as gifts or grants (specify): Patent collection — Friends Account--$200 donation from patent attorney--$205 donations — $2,400 Friends of the Library — $5,000 [one] plain paper/ reader from . . . patent law firm — purchased 8/91 — $7,500 VII. Evaluation of Electronic Products Provided to PTDLs APS deployed to PTDLS for free, on a CD-ROM system to offset online charges that most inventors can not afford. OPDLP are already running an excellent patent service on CD's, i.e., CASSIS, inventors know that they can search the system at any time the library is open without undue overhead costs, but it would be best if CASSIS were a full-text system like APS. CD-ROM images are very poor, also not enough equipment to support; prefer microfilm; [subscription to Japanese Abstracts CD-ROM and PraCTis CD-ROM] is nice but not essential. ) 146 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY The [CASSIS/BIB, CASSIS/CLASS, ASIST, and TRADEMARKS] CD-ROMS are used consistently. We have not had much demand for [U.S. Patent Image, Japanese Abstract, and PraCTis CD-ROM's. Maybe we don't know enough about them to make use of the information. [Re: subscription to U.S. Patent Image CD-ROMs] it would be great if it's free as a PTDL service, it comes regularly, and it comes quickly (i.e., within 2 months). [CASSIS/BIB, CASSIS/CLASS, ASIST, and TRADEMARKS] are all of co-equal importance in my judgment. [Would rank APS deployment higher] if we knew would not have to charge back to patrons. VIII. Evaluation of Materials and Tools Provided to PTDLs This survey not needed for PTDLs; survey of holdings info useful. This is a composite of the rankings of four librarians, most of whom did not agree in their views of which things were more necessary than the others. We would probably have ranked them all as numbers 1 and 2. [Re: updated Patentee/Assignee Index microfiche] keep ASIST disk up-to-date and forget the fiche. [Re: CD-ROM Usage Log reports] we can live without them, but they would be useful to have for statistical counts. We want them; we don 't need them. [Re: survey of PTDLs] will be useful to you [PTDL program office], not us. ) IX. Evaluation of Training and Consciousness-raising Events Provided to the Public and to PTDLs [Re: Director's Reception at ALA] how come no reception for the patent librarians doing the work--I'm wounded to the quick!! 147 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY X. Evaluation of Services and Programs Provided to PTDLs These should all be ranked #2 high priority. The numbers in the "rank" column are more or less arbitrary. [Re: Reference Assistance] good idea, do you do it? [Re: On demand copy service] what is it? XIII. Comments A. Things the Office of PTDL Programs (OPDLP) does particularly well: Communicates well with PTDL staff and accommodates our needs and concerns in a timely manner. -Provides CASSIS and related products/support. -Plans and conducts annual conference and workshops. -Provides useful reference materials and assistance. -Keeps us well-informed. Reference assistance: staff are helpful, supportive, timely. We have been receiving excellent technical assistance with CD-ROM products and APS. Responding to immediate questions on the phone. Enthusiastic support, help with CDs, informational handouts. Tries to keep us abreast of PTO activities and programs that are of interest to PTDL's. Sends us information of potential value to our patrons. Staff, in most cases, are excellent in answering reference questions related to patents. They have a positive attitude and are very helpful. Provides good support for PTDLs + staff. Keeps staff morale high regarding patent service Responding to any computer problems that may arise. The Patent and Trademark Conference. 148 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Responds to the needs of PTDL's. Quick response time to my inquiries,, in spite of the fact that they could use more staff and space. -Conference is especially valuable and well- planned. -Getting material to PTDLs. -Support--especially technical (i.e., computer) . -Communication-between PTDL's and also between PTO and PTDL's. training technical assistance, courtesy and speed in responding. The OPDLP staff is always very helpful for whatever reason we call. Excellent support. Producing remarkable products/on fringe of technology. Everything the OPDLP staff does is done accurately, courteously and effectively. Organize conference; administer documentation program; relate to PTDL needs. Helps me with my stupid hardware questions. All aspects as noted in this survey have been very well covered and appreciated. Due to the fine assistance of this department, we have been able to offer the citizens ... a faster means of access to the U.S. Patents and Trademarks Resources. We could not provide services to the public if we did not have the support of the OPDLP. I am sure we take advantage of the services we do receive. -conferences and training. -communi ca ti on . -providing materials on a timely basis. -writing CASSIS installation instructions. Provides excellent support to PTDLs; offers excellent (training) conference and pre- conference; wonderful "Accessing Patent Info" seminars. 149 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY The single most important service the OPDLP provides, and does particularly well, is always being willing and capable of providing us with whatever help we need if it is within their power to do so. They are all completely service oriented and understand our needs when dealing with patrons. Regardless of the level of expertise the caller may have, the staff will do whatever it takes to try and assist us. In fewer words, what the OPDLP does best is provide excellent service. Provides useful electronic products, useful reference help and technical assistance; keeps us well informed of patent/trademark news and issues. -follow-up on reference questions. -assistance with problems of individual patrons. Provides assistance promptly! Communicate- -anticipate needs- -extremely cooperative — Basically they do an outstanding job of helping us do our jobs. We could not function without them. B. Things the OPDLP could do better: The OPTDL office needs more staff, include staff that are conversant with the U.S. Patent Classification System so OPTDL staff can also be advising staff at PTDLs with patent subject matter queries. Not all inventors can afford patent attorney fees, having a staff member who can competently answer user queries on the patenting process would be a good service to inventors that the program is trying to support. Appropriate disclaimers to this service would be formulated and made clear to all who use the service. Documentation for CD. Phone service, direct line to OPDLP office support. 150 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY Provide more/better user aids for electronic products sent to PTDL's and supply them in [a] timely fashion. Make sure discs/software work well before sending. Provide uniform publicity materials. Find a way to provide patent microfilm faster. Issue incomplete reels and provide complete reels later. I have been reproducing "General Info. Concerning Patents and Trademarks" in quantity for handouts. A "large" number of those would be helpful. Mail a publication closer to the projected date, but sometimes this is probably out of their control. Not all informational material is clear. Also, some disks have come without instruction manuals on their use--PraCTis, Patent Image-Full Text. Please provide copies of the general information booklets! ! -Keep in mind distance--especially when mailing material with deadlines. -More coordination with GPO on timing of conference, since some/many of use also have Federal Depository responsibilities. -More centralized training materials would be helpful to patrons. Making classification system more user friendly. I often feel the OPDLP does too much, considering their budget and staff. This is not a criticism, but I do get the impression of crisis management sometimes. I would like to see more detailed, one-on-one (rather than group) classification and CD training sessions if possible. -provide CASSIS training materials, -provide up-to-date-CASSIS documentation. The things that the OPDLP could do better all require increased support and funding from other parts of the Patent and Trademark Office. Some glaring examples are: timely delivery of patent microfilm (they have to be printed before they can 151 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY be filmed) ; sufficient copies of certain publications such as Basic Facts About Trademarks ; additional equipment to handle the addition of Trademark information on the CD system. Respond in a more timely manner sometimes — the PTDLP Office needs more staff to handle the increased number of PTDLs — although my questions have always been answered eventually and more than satisfactorily. Follow-up on technical (equipment) questions /probl ems . Provide questions now for next survey. C. Other Comments: Please do whatever you can to urge GPO to distribute patent materials in a more timely manner and to expedite the filming and distribution of patents by RP. Participation in these surveys should be mandatory for all PTDLs. The PTDL Office is the most dedicated and hardworking office that I have seen. I find omissions and a real lack of consistency in the installation instructions for new discs received, esp. for the Bibliographic Information Files Disc. For example, it is not enough to follow the instructions dated December 18, 1989 (pages 3-5 through step 10) and the instructions in the CD Answer Reference Manual if one wishes to change and save settings. What is not stated anywhere is that after installing the disc, one must exit the HDM and go into a C prompt and then select settings, name your file, etc. and exit the C prompt. Maybe this is obvious to some, but not to all. The PTDL Programs Office should recognize that staff can change and will not always know intuitively what should be done, esp. in these days of staff cutbacks at all libraries. Clear, consistent and concise instructions will save needless confusion and wasted time. 152 PTDL INSTITUTIONAL SURVEY J really appreciate the hard work of OPDLP staff, particularly during the time we were setting up our PTDL. Despite the distance and the time difference, we always felt that help was available. While I understand that this survey is designed to provide much needed information in a variety of areas, it is my hope that the PTO administration will take a close look at the financial commitment each of us has made to disseminate Patent and Trademark information. I hardly think my library is getting a "free lunch" when I look at my bottom line investment which does not include the one quarter of a million dollars investment we have in back file microfilm. The OPDLP Office provides an invaluable service for us. I can't praise the staff enough for their helpful, positive attitude and their quality assistance. 153 PATENT SURVEY DATA Patent User Profile data were reported on Summary Sheets and/or individual user forms. The frequency distribution of data reported on the individual user forms is presented on the following pages with the heading PATENT SURVEY DATA. The frequency distributions of data reported on Summary Sheets is presented on the pages with the heading PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS. The column heading "Frequency" refers to the number of patrons who responded to the questionnaire item. The column heading "Value" refers to the code assigned to the particular response category. In the following example, 75 patrons checked the response category, "Economic research", when asked the question, "What was the purpose of using patent materials?" Another 1,281 patrons responded to this questionnaire item, but checked some other response category, such as "Historic research" or "Scientific research". Another 58 patrons did not respond to this questionnaire item by checking any of the response categories. What was the purpose of using patent materials? Economic research? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Category NOT checked Category Checked 1281 1 75 58 Valid cases 1356 90.6 94.5 94.5 5.3 5.5 100.0 4.1 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 58 100.0 Names of the institutions that submitted completed questionnaires Albany, NY Albuquerque, NM Auburn University, AL Austin, TX Baton Rouge, LA Butte, MT Charleston, SC College Station, TX Honolulu, HI Houston, TX Kansas City, Lincoln, NE Little Rock, Los Angeles, Miami, FL MO AR CA Milwaukee, WI New Haven, CT Orlando, FL Piscataway, NJ Raleigh, NC Reno, NV Salem, OR Salt Lake City, San Diego, CA Seattle, WA Stillwater, OK Sunnyvale, CA Toledo, OH Wichita, KS UT Valid cases 1414 Missing cases PATENT SURVEY DATA Day of week when patrons submitted survey forms: Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Total Valid cases Number of Forms Valid Cum Submitted Percent Percent Percent 62 4.4 4.5 4.5 249 17.6 18.1 22.6 253 17.9 18.4 41.0 235 16.6 17.1 58.0 239 16.9 17.4 75.4 179 12.7 13.0 88.4 160 11.3 11.6 100.0 37 2.6 Missing 1414 1377 Missing cases 100. U 37 100.0 Number of patrons with a residential zip code in the PTDL service area: Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent yes, in the service area no, not in service area 264 18.7 77.4 77.4 77 5.4 22.6 100.0 1073 75.9 Missing Valid cases 341 Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 1073 100.0 Number of patrons with a work zip code in the PTDL service area: Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent yes, in the service area no, not in service area Total Valid cases 274 19.4 84.3 84.3 51 3.6 15.7 100.0 1089 77.0 Missing 325 1414 100.0 Missing cases 1089 100.0 PATENT SURVEY DATA Number of pages of patent materials photocopied by the patron: Number Valid Cum of Copies Frequency Percent Percent Percent 318 22.5 31.0 31.0 1 30 2.1 2.9 33.9 2 44 3. 1 4.3 38.2 3 36 2.5 3.5 41.7 4 37 2.6 3.6 45.3 5 47 3.3 4.6 49.9 6 29 2.1 2.8 52.7 7 15 1.1 1.5 54.1 8 22 1.6 2.1 56.3 9 7 .5 .7 57.0 10 46 3.3 4.5 61.4 11 8 .6 .8 62.2 12 27 1.9 2.6 64.8 13 2 .1 .2 65.0 14 12 .8 1.2 66.2 15 31 2.2 3.0 69.2 16 6 .4 .6 69.8 17 4 .3 .4 70.2 18 6 .4 .6 70.8 19 3 .2 .3 71.1 20 44 3. 1 4.3 75.4 21 1 .1 .1 75.5 22 6 .4 .6 76.0 23 4 .3 .4 76.4 24 2 .1 .2 76.6 25 26 1.8 2.5 79.2 26 1 .1 .1 79.3 27 1 .1 .1 79.4 28 4 .3 .4 79.7 29 1 .1 .1 79.8 30 30 2.1 2.9 82.8 32 4 .3 .4 83.2 33 3 .2 .3 83.4 34 1 .1 . 1 83.5 35 7 .5 .7 84.2 36 2 .1 .2 84.4 37 3 .2 .3 84.7 38 2 .1 .2 84.9 39 1 .1 .1 85.0 40 18 1.3 1.8 86.8 41 2 .1 .2 87.0 42 1 .1 .1 87.0 43 2 .1 .2 87.2 44 2 .1 .2 87.4 45 5 .4 .5 87.9 47 2 .1 .2 88.1 50 29 2. 1 2.8 90.9 54 1 .1 .1 91.0 55 4 .3 .4 91.4 57 2 .1 .2 91.6 60 5 .4 .5 92.1 65 2 .1 .2 92.3 66 1 .1 . 1 92.4 68 1 .1 .1 92.5 PATENT SURVEY DATA 69 1 .1 .1 92.6 70 3 .2 .3 92.9 72 1 .1 .1 93.0 79 1 .1 .1 93.1 80 4 .3 .4 93.5 85 2 .1 .2 93.7 88 1 .1 .1 93.8 90 5 .4 .5 94.3 93 1 .1 .1 94.4 96 1 .1 .1 94.4 98 2 .1 .2 94.6 100 15 1.1 1.5 96.1 115 2 .1 .2 96.3 121 1 .1 .1 96.4 125 2 .1 .2 96.6 133 1 .1 .1 95.7 138 1 .1 .1 96.8 140 1 .1 .1 96.9 146 1 .1 .1 97.0 150 8 .6 .8 97.8 160 1 .1 .1 97.9 165 1 .1 .1 98.0 167 1 .1 .1 98.1 190 1 .1 .1 98.1 193 2 .1 .2 98.3 200 3 .2 .3 98.6 212 1 .1 .1 98.7 226 1 .1 .1 98.8 230 3 .2 .3 99.1 235 1 .1 .1 99.2 300 4 .3 .4 99.6 314 1 .1 .1 99.7 400 1 .1 .1 99.8 600 1 .1 .1 99.9 800 1 .1 .1 100.0 • 387 27.4 Missing Sum 22493.000 Valid cases 1027 Total Missing cases 1414 100.0 100.0 387 How would you describe yourself? Inventor? Inventor NOT checked Inventor checked Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent 648 45.8 46.3 46.3 1 752 53.2 53.7 100.0 14 1.0 Missing Valid cases 1400 Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 14 100.0 1331 94.1 95.1 95.1 1 69 4.9 4.9 100.0 14 1.0 Missing PATENT SURVEY DATA How would you describe yourself? Attorney? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Attorney NOT checked Attorney checked Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 1400 Missing cases 14 How would you describe yourself? Professional patent searcher? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Searcher NOT checked Searcher checked Valid cases 1400 How would you describe yourself? Faculty? 1 1364 36 14 96 2 1 5 5 97.4 2.6 Missing 97.4 100.0 Total 1414 100 100.0 issing cases 14 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Faculty NOT checked Faculty checked Valid cases 1400 1353 95.7 96.6 96 6 1 47 3.3 3.4 100 • 14 1.0 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 ssing cases 14 How would you describe yourself? Student? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Student NOT checked Student checked Valid cases 1400 1115 78.9 79.6 79.6 1 285 20.2 20.4 100.0 14 1.0 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 issing cases 14 PATENT SURVEY DATA How would you describe yourself? Information Broker? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Broker NOT checked 1372 97.0 98.0 98.0 Broker checked 1 28 2.0 2.0 100.0 14 1.0 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 1400 Missing cases 14 How would you describe yourself? Corporate Representative? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Corporate Representative NOT checked 1248 88.3 89.1 89.1 Corporate Representative checked 1 152 10.7 10.9 100.0 14 1.0 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 1400 Missing cases 14 How would you describe yourself? Other? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Other occupation NOT checked 1149 81.3 82.1 82.1 Other occupation checked 1 251 17.8 17.9 100.0 14 1.0 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 1400 Missing cases 14 PATENT SURVEY DATA What was the purpose of using patent materials? To see if (my) invention has already been patented? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1356 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 485 34.3 35.8 35.8 1 871 61.6 64.2 100.0 58 4.1 Missing Total 1414 Missing cases 51 100.0 100.0 What was the purpose of using patent materials? Scientific research? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Category NOT checked Category Checked 1002 70 9 73.9 73.9 1 354 25 26.1 100.0 • 58 4 1 Missing Valid cases 1356 Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases. 58 100.0 What was the purpose of using patent materials? Historic research? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1356 1230 87.0 90.7 90.7 1 126 8.9 9.3 100.0 58 4.1 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 58 100.0 PATENT SURVEY DATA What was the purpose of using patent materials? Economic research? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Category NOT checked Category Checked 1281 90.6 94.5 94.5 1 75 5.3 5.5 100.0 58 4.1 Missing Valid cases 1356 Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 58 100.0 What was the purpose of using patent materials? Other? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1355 1149 81.3 84.8 84.8 1 206 14.6 15.2 100.0 59 4.2 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 59 100.0 What patent tools did you use? Index to U.S. Patent Classification? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1325 624 44.1 47.1 47.1 1 701 49.6 52.9 100.0 • 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 89 100.0 PATENT SURVEY DATA What patent tools did you use? Manual of Classification? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1325 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 752 53.2 56.8 56.8 573 40.5 43.2 100.0 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 89 100.0 What patent tools did you use? Patent Classification Definitions? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1325 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1049 74.2 79.2 79.2 276 19.5 20.8 100.0 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 89 100.0 What patent tools did you use? CD-ROM computer system? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1325 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 472 33.4 35.6 35.6 1 853 60.3 64.4 100.0 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 89 100.0 What patent tools did you use? Official Gazette? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1325 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 738 52.2 55.7 55.7 587 41.5 44.3 100.0 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 89 100.0 PATENT SURVEY DATA What patent tools did you use? Full text patent (s) on microfilm or paper? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1325 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 867 61.3 65.4 65.4 1 458 32.4 34.6 100.0 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Missing cases 89 What patent tools did you use? Automated Patent System (APS) patent text search system? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid cases 1325 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1149 81.3 86.7 86.7 1 176 12.4 13.3 100.0 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Missing cases 89 What patent tools did you use? Other? Category NOT checked Category Checked Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1258 89.0 94.9 94.9 1 67 4.7 5.1 100.0 89 6.3 Missing Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 1325 Missing cases 89 Have you used patent materials at this library before? yes no Valid cases 1378 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 2.00 802 56.7 58.2 58.2 576 40.7 41.8 100.0 36 2.5 Missing Total 1414 100.0 Missing cases 36 100.0 10 1 00 1194 84 4 89.6 89 6 2 00 101 7 1 7.6 97 2 3 00 32 2 3 2.4 99 6 8 00 5 4 .4 100 82 5 8 Missing ot :al 1414 100 100.0 PATENT SURVEY DATA Did you obtain the patent information you wanted? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Yes no some/maybe Don't Know Valid cases 1332 Missing cases 82 Will you try to use patent information at this library again? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent yes no maybe Don ' t know Total 1414 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 1359 Missing cases 55 1 00 1346 95.2 99.0 99.0 2 00 9 .6 .7 99.7 3 00 3 .2 .2 99.9 8 00 1 .1 .1 100.0 55 3.9 Missing 11 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Patent User Profile data were reported on Summary Sheets and/or individual user forms. The frequency distributions of data reported on the Patent Summary Sheets is presented on the following pages with the heading PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS. The frequency distributions of data reported on individual user forms is presented on the pages with the heading PATENT SURVEY DATA. The column heading "Libraries" refers to the number of PTDLs, and the column heading "Value", refers to the number of patrons tabulated on the Summary Sheets. On the fourth line of the following example, one PTDL reported 5 patent patrons who, for instance, resided within the PTDL service area: Number of patrons with a residential zip code in the PTDL service area: Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 1 2.2 2.6 2.6 3 1 2.2 2.6 5.3 4 2 4.4 5. 3 10.5 5 1 2.2 2.6 13.2 143 2 4.4 5.3 97.4 145 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 7 15.6 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Names of the institutions that submitted completed Summary Sheets: Ann Arbor, MI Atlanta, GA Buffalo, NY Butte, MT Cincinnati, OH Cleveland, OH Columbus, OH Detroit, MI Ft. Lauderdale Grand Forks, ND Honolulu, HI Louisville, KY Memphis, TN Newark, NJ Philadelphia, PA Tampa FL PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons with a residential zip code in the PTDL service area: Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 1 2.2 2.6 2.6 3 1 2.2 2.6 5.3 4 2 4.4 5.3 10.5 5 1 2.2 2.6 13.2 7 1 2.2 2.6 15.8 8 3 6.7 7.9 23.7 10 4 8.9 10.5 34.2 13 2 4.4 5.3 39.5 14 1 2.2 2.6 42.1 15 4 8.9 10.5 52.6 16 1 2.2 2.6 55.3 21 1 2.2 2.6 57.9 22 1 2.2 2.6 60.5 23 1 2.2 2.6 63.2 28 1 2.2 2.6 65.8 29 1 2.2 2.6 68.4 40 1 2.2 2.6 71.1 47 1 2.2 2.6 73.7 51 1 2.2 2.6 76.3 67 1 2.2 2.6 78.9 68 1 2.2 2.6 81.6 70 1 2.2 2.6 84.2 73 1 2.2 2.6 86.8 76 1 2.2 2.6 89.5 88 1 2.2 2.6 92.1 143 2 4.4 5.3 97.4 145 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 7 15.6 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 1339.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons with a residential zip code outside the PTDL service area : Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 5 11.1 13.9 13.9 1 3 6.7 8.3 22.2 2 2 4.4 5.6 27.8 3 4 8. 9 11.1 38.9 4 3 6.7 8.3 47.2 5 2 4.4 5.6 52.8 6 5 11.1 13.9 66.7 7 1 2.2 2.8 69.4 10 1 2.2 2. 8 72.2 14 1 2.2 2.8 75.0 16 2 4 .4 5. 6 80.6 17 1 2.2 2.8 83.3 19 1 2.2 2.3 86.1 26 1 2.2 2.8 88.9 32 1 2.2 2.8 91.7 72 1 2.2 2.8 94.4 81 1 2.2 2.8 97.2 13 1 2.2 2.8 100.0 9 20.0 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sura 494.000 Valid cases 36 Missing cases > PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons with a work (or study) zip code in the PTDL service area: Sum 1404.000 Valid cases 38 Valid Cum lue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 1 2.2 2.6 2.6 4 1 2.2 2.6 5.3 5 1 2.2 2.6 7.9 6 1 2.2 2.6 10.5 7 1 2.2 2.6 13.2 8 1 2.2 2.6 15.8 9 2 4.4 5.3 21.1 10 3 6.7 7.9 28.9 12 1 2.2 2.6 31.6 14 1 2.2 2.6 34.2 15 2 4.4 5.3 39.5 16 2 4.4 5.3 44.7 18 1 2.2 2.6 47.4 19 1 2.2 2.6 50.0 22 1 2.2 2.6 52.6 23 2 4.4 5.3 57.9 29 1 2.2 2.6 60.5 30 1 2.2 2.6 63.2 36 1 2.2 2.6 65.8 41 1 2.2 2.6 68.4 47 1 2.2 2.6 71.1 49 1 2.2 2.6 73.7 59 1 2.2 2.6 76.3 60 1 2.2 2.6 78.9 63 1 2.2 2.6 81.6 67 1 2.2 2.6 84.2 68 1 2.2 2.6 86.8 72 1 2.2 2.6 89.5 86 1 2.2 2.6 92.1 136 1 2.2 2.6 94.7 143 1 2.2 2.6 97.4 145 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 • 7 15.6 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons with a work (or study) zip code outside the PTDL service area: Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 5 11.1 13.5 13.5 1 5 11.1 13.5 27.0 2 7 15.6 18.9 45.9 3 3 6.7 8.1 54.1 5 3 6.7 8. 1 62.2 6 3 6.7 8. 1 70.3 10 1 2.2 2.7 73.0 12 2 4.4 5.4 78.4 15 1 2.2 2.7 81.1 16 1 2.2 2.7 83.8 17 1 2.2 2.7 86.5 21 1 2.2 2.7 89.2 26 1 2.2 2.7 91.9 46 1 2.2 2.7 94.6 57 1 2.2 2.7 97.3 71 1 2.2 2.7 100.0 8 17.8 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 364.000 Valid cases 37 Missing cases > PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of pages of patent materials photocopied by the patrons Valid Cum 'alue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 4.4 4.5 4.5 4 1 2.2 2.3 6.8 6 1 2.2 2.3 9.1 13 1 2.2 2.3 11.4 20 2 4.4 4.5 15.9 31 1 2.2 2.3 18.2 44 1 2.2 2.3 20.5 52 1 2.2 2.3 22.7 88 1 2.2 2.3 25.0 104 1 2.2 2.3 27.3 111 1 1.2 2.3 29.5 116 1 2.2 2.3 31.8 151 1 2.2 2.3 34.1 163 1 2.2 2.3 36.4 166 1 2.2 2.3 38.6 170 1 2.2 2.3 40.9 191 1 2.2 2.3 43.2 242 1 2.2 2.3 45.5 271 1 2.2 2.3 47.7 291 1 2.2 2.3 50.0 332 1 2.2 2.3 52.3 350 1 2.2 2.3 54.5 379 1 2.2 2.3 56.8 411 1 2.2 2.3 59.1 440 1 2.2 2.3 61.4 444 1 2.2 2.3 63.6 460 1 2.2 2.3 65.9 497 1 2.2 2.3 68.2 589 1 2.2 2.3 70.5 633 1 2.2 2.3 72.7 772 1 2.2 2.3 75.0 846 1 2.2 2.3 77.3 907 1 2.2 2.3 79.5 1388 1 2.2 2.3 81.8 1525 1 2.2 2.3 84.1 1614 1 2.2 2.3 86.4 1801 1 2.2 2.3 88.6 2384 1 2.2 2.3 90.9 3548 1 2.2 2.3 93.2 3771 1 2.2 2.3 95.5 4213 1 2.2 2.3 97.7 4698 1 2.2 2.3 100.0 1 2.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 34256.000 Valid cases 44 Missing cases PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Inventor? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2 4.4 4.4 4. 4 2 2 4.4 4 .4 8.9 3 1 2.2 2.2 11.1 4 3 6.7 6.7 17.8 5 1 2.2 2.2 20.0 6 2 4.4 4.4 24.4 7 5 11.1 11.1 35.6 8 4 8.9 8.9 44.4 10 3 6.7 6.7 51.1 11 2 4.4 4.4 55.6 12 2 4.4 4.4 60.0 24 1 2.2 2.2 62.2 26 1 2.2 2.2 64.4 27 1 2.2 2.2 66.7 30 1 2.2 2.2 68.9 31 1 2.2 2.2 71.1 32 1 2.2 2.2 73.3 34 1 2.2 2.2 75.6 35 3 6.7 6.7 82.2 36 1 2.2 2.2 84.4 37 1 2.2 2.2 86.7 38 1 2.2 2.2 88.9 42 1 2.2 2.2 91.1 45 2 4.4 4.4 95.6 59 1 2.2 2.2 97.8 69 1 2.2 2.2 100.0 Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 861.000 Valid cases 45 Missing cases PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Sum 201.000 Valid cases 30 •? Attorney? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 6 13.3 20.0 20.0 1 4 8.9 13.3 33.3 2 4 8.9 13.3 46.7 3 4 8.9 13.3 60.0 5 1 2.2 3.3 63.3 7 3 6.7 10.0 73.3 10 1 2.2 3.3 76.7 11 1 2.2 3.3 80.0 12 2 4.4 6.7 86.7 17 1 2.2 3.3 90.0 25 1 2.2 3.3 93.3 30 1 2.2 3.3 96.7 34 1 2.2 3.3 100.0 15 33.3 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 15 How would you describe yourself? Professional Patent Searcher? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent Sum 35.000 Valid cases 25 8 17.8 32.0 32.0 1 8 17.8 32.0 64.0 2 3 6.7 12.0 76.0 3 5 11.1 20.0 96.0 6 1 2.2 4.0 100.0 20 44.4 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 20 100.0 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Value Faculty? Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 6 13.3 23.1 23.1 1 7 15.6 26.9 50.0 2 5 11.1 19.2 69.2 3 5 11.1 19.2 88.5 4 1 2.2 3.8 92.3 5 1 2.2 3.8 96.2 7 1 2.2 3.8 100.0 19 42.2 Missing Sum 48.000 Valid cases 26 Total Missing cases 45 100.0 19 How would you describe yourself? ? Student? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 2.4 2.4 1 5 11.1 12.2 14.6 2 3 6.7 7.3 22.0 3 8 17.8 19.5 41.5 4 3 6.7 7.3 48.8 5 1 2.2 2.4 51.2 6 3 6.7 7.3 58.5 7 1 2.2 2.4 61.0 8 1 2.2 2.4 63.4 9 2 4.4 4.9 68.3 11 1 2.2 2.4 70.7 12 2 4.4 4.9 75.6 14 1 2.2 2.4 78.0 15 1 2.2 2.4 80.5 16 3 6.7 7.3 87.8 18 2 4.4 4.9 92.7 25 1 2.2 2.4 95.1 31 1 2.2 2.4 97.6 85 1 2.2 2.4 100.0 4 8.9 Missing Sum 392.000 Valid cases 41 Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Information broker? Sum Valid cases 50.000 27 Value Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 4 8.9 14.8 14.8 1 11 24.4 40.7 55.6 2 6 13.3 22.2 77.8 3 2 4.4 7.4 85.2 4 2 4.4 7.4 92.6 6 1 2.2 3.7 96.3 7 1 2.2 3.7 100.0 18 40.0 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 18 How would you describe yourself? Corporate representative? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 3 6.7 7.7 7.7 1 10 22.2 25.6 33.3 2 3 6.7 7.7 41.0 3 6 13.3 15.4 56.4 4 3 6.7 7.7 64.1 5 2 4.4 5.1 69.2 6 3 6.7 7.7 76.9 7 1 2.2 2.6 79.5 10 1 2.2 2.6 82.1 12 2 4.4 5.1 87.2 13 2 4.4 5.1 92.3 16 2 4.4 5.1 97.4 20 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 6 13.3 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 193.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases 10 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Other? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 2.9 2.9 1 6 13.3 17.1 20.0 2 2 4.4 5.7 25.7 3 4 8.9 11.4 37.1 4 7 15.6 20.0 57.1 5 3 6.7 8.6 65.7 7 1 2.2 2.9 68.6 9 1 2.2 2.9 71.4 10 2 4.4 5.7 77.1 15 1 2.2 2.9 80.0 16 1 2.2 2.9 82.9 18 1 2.2 2.9 85.7 19 1 2.2 2.9 88.6 25 1 2.2 2.9 91.4 42 1 2.2 2.9 94.3 47 1 2.2 2.9 97.1 60 1 2.2 2.9 100.0 10 22.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 343.000 Valid cases 35 Missing cases 10 11 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What was the purpose of using patent materials? To see if (my) invention has already been patented? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.2 2.4 2.4 2 2 4.4 4.9 7.3 4 3 6.7 7.3 14.6 5 3 6.7 7.3 22.0 6 1 2.2 2.4 24.4 7 5 11.1 12.2 36.6 8 2 4.4 4.9 41.5 9 5 11.1 12.2 53.7 10 1 2.2 2.4 56.1 11 2 4.4 4.9 61.0 13 1 2.2 2.4 63.4 15 1 2.2 2.4 65.9 28 1 2.2 2.4 68.3 33 2 4.4 4.9 73.2 35 2 4.4 4.9 78.0 37 1 2.2 2.4 80.5 44 1 2.2 2.4 82.9 45 1 2.2 2.4 85.4 46 1 2.2 2.4 87.8 48 1 2.2 2.4 90.2 54 1 2.2 2.4 92.7 60 1 2.2 2.4 95.1 62 1 2.2 2.4 97.6 65 1 2.2 2.4 100.0 • 4 8.9 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 819.000 Valid cases 41 Missing cases 12 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS research? ate nt material 3? Scientific Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 3 6.7 7.7 7.7 1 2 4 .4 5. 1 12.8 2 3 6.7 7.7 20.5 3 2 4.4 5. 1 25.6 4 3 6.7 7 .7 33.3 5 2 4.4 5. 1 38.5 6 3 6.7 7.7 46.2 7 1 2.2 2.6 48.7 8 2 4.4 5.1 53.8 10 2 4.4 5.1 59.0 12 1 2.2 2.6 61.5 13 1 2.2 2.6 64.1 14 1 2.2 2.6 66.7 15 1 2.2 2.6 69.2 17 1 2.2 2.6 71.8 18 2 4.4 5.1 76.9 22 1 2.2 2.6 79.5 23 1 2.2 2.6 82.1 25 1 2.2 2.6 84.6 26 1 2.2 2.6 87.2 31 1 2.2 2.6 89.7 33 2 4.4 5.1 94.9 41 1 2.2 2.6 97.4 42 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 6 13.3 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 480.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases 13 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS research? Sum 220.000 Valid cases 35 ate nt material s? Historic Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 2.9 2.9 1 11 24.4 31.4 34.3 2 5 11.1 14.3 48.6 3 1 2.2 2.9 51.4 4 1 2.2 2.9 54.3 5 3 6.7 8.6 62.9 7 1 2.2 2.9 65.7 8 2 4.4 5.7 71.4 10 1 2.2 2.9 74.3 11 1 2.2 2.9 77.1 12 2 4.4 5.7 82.9 13 1 2.2 2.9 85.7 17 2 4.4 5.7 91.4 18 1 2.2 2.9 94.3 22 2 4.4 5.7 100.0 10 22.2 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 10 What was the purpose of using patent materials' research? Economic Sum 129.000 Valid cases 34 Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 10 22.2 29.4 29.4 2 7 15.6 20.6 50.0 3 3 6.7 8.8 58.8 4 5 11.1 14.7 73.5 5 2 4.4 5.9 79.4 6 2 4.4 5.9 85.3 7 2.2 2.9 88.2 8 2.2 2.9 91.2 10 2.2 2.9 94.1 14 2.2 2.9 97.1 15 2.2 2.9 100.0 11 24.4 Missing al 45 100.0 ' 100.0 Missing cases 11 14 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS ate nt materials? Other ■> Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 4.4 6.3 6.3 1 5 11.1 15.6 21.9 2 1 2.2 3.1 25.0 3 4 8.9 12.5 37.5 4 3 6.7 9.4 46.9 5 1 2.2 3. 1 50.0 6 3 6.7 9.4 59.4 7 1 2.2 3. 1 62.5 8 1 2.2 3.1 65.6 9 1 2.2 3. 1 68.8 10 1 2.2 3. 1 71.9 11 2 4.4 6.3 78.1 13 1 2.2 3. 1 81.3 14 1 2.2 3. 1 84.4 19 1 2.2 3.1 87.5 21 1 2.2 3.1 90.6 46 1 2.2 3. 1 93.8 54 1 2.2 3.1 96.9 59 1 2.2 3.1 100.0 13 28.9 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 336.000 Valid cases 32 Missing cases 13 15 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What patent tools did you use? Index to U.S. Patent Classification? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 3 6.7 7.0 7.0 2 2 4.4 4.7 11.6 4 6 13.3 14.0 25.6 5 1 2.2 2.3 27.9 6 7 15.6 16.3 44.2 7 2 4.4 4.7 48.8 8 1 2.2 2.3 51.2 9 2 4.4 4.7 55.8 10 4 8.9 9.3 65.1 11 1 2.2 2.3 67.4 18 1 2.2 2.3 69.8 22 1 2.2 2.3 72.1 24 1 2.2 2.3 74.4 26 2 4.4 4.7 79.1 27 1 2.2 2.3 81.4 29 1 2.2 2.3 83.7 32 1 2.2 2.3 86.0 35 1 2.2 2.3 88.4 38 1 2.2 2.3 90.7 43 1 2.2 2.3 93.0 51 1 2.2 2.3 95.3 65 1 2.2 2.3 97.7 99 1 2.2 2.3 100.0 2 4.4 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 704.000 Valid cases 43 Missing cases 16 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What patent tools did you use? Manual of Classification? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 3 6.7 7.0 7.0 2 4 8.9 9. 3 16.3 3 3 6.7 7.0 23.3 4 7 15.6 16.3 39.5 5 3 6.7 7.0 46.5 6 3 6.7 7.0 53.5 7 1 2.2 2. 3 55.8 8 2 4.4 4.7 60.5 10 1 2.2 2.3 62.8 12 1 2.2 2.3 65.1 13 1 2.2 2.3 67.4 14 1 2.2 2.3 69.8 16 2 4.4 4.7 74.4 18 1 2.2 2.3 76.7 20 1 2.2 2.3 79.1 22 1 2.2 2.3 81.4 23 1 2.2 2.3 83.7 28 1 2.2 2.3 86.0 30 1 2.2 2.3 88.4 31 1 2.2 2.3 90.7 36 1 2.2 2.3 93.0 51 1 2.2 2.3 95.3 65 1 2.2 2.3 97.7 97 1 2.2 2.3 100.0 2 4.4 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 606.000 Valid cases 43 Missing cases > 17 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What patent tools did you use? Patent Classification Definitions? Sum 322.000 Valid cases 38 Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 2.6 2.6 1 7 15.6 18.4 21.1 2 7 15.6 18.4 39.5 3 4 8.9 10.5 50.0 4 1 2.2 2.6 52.6 6 3 6.7 7.9 60.5 7 2 4.4 5.3 65.8 8 3 6.7 7.9 73.7 10 1 2.2 2.6 76.3 11 1 2.2 2.6 78.9 12 1 2.2 2.6 81.6 15 2 4.4 5.3 86.8 17 1 2.2 2.6 89.5 23 1 2.2 2.6 92.1 33 1 2.2 2.6 94.7 45 1 2.2 2.6 97.4 48 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 7 15.6 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 18 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What patent tools did you use? CD-ROM computer system? ) Valid Cum lue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 2 4 . 4 4 . 5 4. 5 3 1 2.2 2.3 6.8 5 6 13.3 13.6 20.5 6 1 2.2 2.3 22.7 7 1 2.2 2.3 25.0 8 1 2.2 2.3 27.3 9 3 6.7 6.8 34.1 10 3 6.7 6.8 40.9 12 4 8.9 9. 1 50.0 13 1 2.2 2.3 52.3 14 1 2.2 2.3 54.5 13 1 2.2 2.3 56.8 19 1 2.2 2.3 59.1 20 2 4.4 4. 5 63.6 21 1 2.2 2.3 65.9 22 2 4.4 4. 5 70.5 24 1 2.2 2.3 72.7 25 1 2.2 2.3 75.0 26 1 2.2 2.3 77.3 28 1 2.2 2.3 79.5 31 1 2.2 2.3 81.8 36 1 2.2 2.3 84.1 39 2 4.4 4.5 88.6 40 1 2.2 2.3 90.9 51 1 2.2 2.3 93.2 65 1 2.2 2.3 95.5 81 1 2.2 2.3 97.7 112 1 2.2 2.3 100.0 1 2.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 929.000 Valid cases 44 Missing cases 19 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What patent tools did you use? Official Gazette? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 4 8.9 9.3 9.3 2 3 6.7 7.0 16.3 3 2 4.4 4.7 20.9 4 3 6.7 7.0 27.9 5 5 11.1 11.6 39.5 6 3 6.7 7.0 46.5 7 8.9 9.3 55.8 8 8.9 9.3 65.1 9 2.2 2.3 67.4 11 4.4 4.7 72.1 12 2.2 2.3 7. .4 15 2.2 2.3 76.7 16 2.2 2.3 79.1 19 4.4 4.7 83.7 20 2.2 2.3 86.0 22 2.2 2.3 88.4 24 2.2 2.3 90.7 25 2.2 2.3 93.0 42 2.2 2.3 95.3 54 2.2 2.3 97.7 96 2.2 2.3 100.0 2 4.4 Missing al 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 526.000 Valid cases 43 Missing cases 20 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What patent tools did you use? Full text patent (s) on microfilm or paper? Valid Cum lue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 2.6 2.6 1 1 2.2 2.6 5.3 2 3 6.7 7.9 13.2 3 2 4.4 5.3 18.4 4 4 8.9 10.5 28.9 5 1 2.2 2.6 31.6 7 1 2.2 2.6 34.2 9 3 6.7 7.9 42.1 10 2 4.4 5.3 47.4 12 1 2.2 2.6 50.0 13 2 4.4 5. 3 55.3 16 1 2.2 2.6 57.9 17 1 2.2 2.6 60.5 18 1 2.2 2.6 63.2 19 1 2.2 2.6 65.8 24 1 2.2 2.6 68.4 28 1 2.2 2.6 71.1 35 1 2.2 2.6 73.7 38 1 2.2 2.6 76.3 43 1 2.2 2.6 78.9 45 1 2.2 2.6 81.6 47 1 2.2 2.6 84.2 55 1 2.2 2.6 86.8 60 1 2.2 2.6 89.5 88 1 2.2 2.6 92.1 96 1 2.2 2.6 94.7 114 1 2.2 2.6 97.4 125 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 7 15.6 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 994.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 21 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS What patent tools did you use? Automated Patent System (APS) patent text search system? Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 3 6.7 50.0 50.0 24 1 2.2 16.7 66.7 29 1 2.2 16.7 83.3 30 1 2.2 16.7 100.0 39 86.7 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 83.000 Valid cases 6 Missing cases 39 What patent tools did you use? Other? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2 3 4 7 8 12 13 Total 45 100.0 100.0 4 8.9 15.4 15.4 8 17.8 30.8 46.2 6 13.3 23.1 69.2 3 6.7 11.5 80.8 1 2.2 3.8 84.6 1 2.2 3.8 88.5 1 2.2 3.8 92.3 1 2.2 3.8 96.2 1 2.2 3.8 100.0 19 42.2 Missing Sum 73.000 Valid cases 26 Missing cases 19 22 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who have used patent materials at this library before: Valid Cum lue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 4 8.9 9. 3 9.3 3 2 4.4 4.7 14.0 4 2 4.4 4.7 18.6 5 1 2.2 2.3 20.9 7 3 6.7 7.0 27.9 9 1 2.2 2.3 30.2 9 4 8.9 9.3 39.5 10 1 2.2 2.3 41.9 11 1 2.2 2.3 44.2 12 1 2.2 2.3 46.5 17 1 2.2 2.3 48.8 18 2 4.4 4.7 53.5 19 1 2.2 2.3 55.8 20 1 2.2 2.3 58.1 22 2 4.4 4.7 62.8 24 1 2.2 2.3 65.1 28 1 2.2 2.3 67.4 31 1 2.2 2.3 69.8 35 2 4.4 4.7 74.4 36 1 2.2 2.3 76.7 42 1 2.2 2.3 79.1 43 1 2.2 2.3 81.4 47 1 2.2 2.3 83.7 48 1 2.2 2.3 86.0 50 1 2.2 2.3 88.4 62 1 2.2 2.3 90.7 82 1 2.2 2.3 93.0 116 1 2.2 2.3 95.3 120 2 4.4 4.7 100.0 2 4.4 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 1180.000 Valid cases 43 Missing cases ) 23 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who have not used patent materials at this library before: Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 1 2.2 2.3 2.3 2 4 8.9 9.1 11.4 3 3 6.7 6.8 18.2 4 2 4.4 4.5 22.7 5 4 8.9 9.1 31.8 7 2 4.4 4.5 36.4 8 3 6.7 6.8 43.2 9 4 8.9 9.1 52.3 12 3 6.7 6.8 59.1 13 2 4.4 4.5 63.6 14 1 2.2 2.3 65.9 19 1 2.2 2.3 68.2 23 1 2.2 2.3 70.5 25 1 2.2 2.3 72.7 26 1 2.2 2.3 75.0 27 2 4.4 4.5 79.5 28 1 2.2 2.3 81.8 30 3 6.7 6.8 88.6 31 1 2.2 2.3 90.9 32 1 2.2 2.3 93.2 35 1 2.2 2.3 95.5 48 1 2.2 2.3 97.7 92 1 2.2 2.3 100.0 1 2.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 699.000 Valid cases 44 Missing cases 24 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who did obtain the wanted patent information: Valid Cum lue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 2 4 . 4 4. 4 4.4 3 1 2.2 2.2 6.7 4 2 4.4 4.4 11.1 5 1 2.2 2.2 13.3 7 3 6.7 6.7 20.0 9 1 2.2 2.2 22.2 10 2 4.4 4.4 26.7 11 1 2.2 2.2 28.9 12 4 8.9 8.9 37.8 14 1 2.2 2.2 40.0 15 3 6.7 6.7 46.7 18 1 2.2 2.2 48.9 22 1 2.2 2.2 51.1 23 2 4.4 4.4 55.6 24 1 2.2 2.2 57.8 30 1 2.2 2.2 60.0 36 1 2.2 2.2 62.2 40 1 2.2 2.2 64.4 45 1 2.2 2.2 66.7 50 1 2.2 2.2 68.9 51 1 2.2 2.2 71.1 52 1 2.2 2.2 73.3 59 2 4.4 4.4 77.8 65 1 2.2 2.2 80.0 69 1 2.2 2.2 82.2 73 1 2.2 2.2 84.4 75 1 2.2 2.2 86.7 81 1 2.2 2.2 88.9 99 1 2.2 2.2 91.1 116 1 2.2 2.2 93.3 124 1 2.2 2.2 95.6 140 1 2.2 2.2 97.8 141 1 2.2 2.2 100.0 Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 1703.000 Valid cases 45 Missing cases 25 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who did not obtain the wanted patent information: Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 7 15.6 18.4 18.4 1 5 11.1 13.2 31.6 2 10 22.2 26.3 57.9 3 5 11.1 13.2 71.1 4 4 8.9 10.5 81.6 5 2 4.4 5.3 86.8 6 1 2.2 2.6 89.5 7 1 2.2 2.6 92.1 9 2 4.4 5.3 97.4 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 7 15.6 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 107.000 Valid cases 38 Missing cases 26 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who will try to use patent information at this library again: ) Valid Cum lue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 1 2.2 2.2 2.2 3 1 2.2 2.2 4.4 4 3 6.7 6.7 11.1 5 1 2.2 2.2 13.3 7 3 6.7 6.7 20.0 10 2 4.4 4.4 24.4 11 1 2.2 2.2 26.7 12 3 6.7 6.7 33.3 14 2 4.4 4.4 37.8 15 1 2.2 2.2 40.0 17 2 4.4 4.4 44.4 18 1 2.2 2.2 46.7 22 1 2.2 2.2 48.9 25 2 4.4 4.4 53.3 27 1 2.2 2.2 55.6 28 1 2.2 2.2 57.8 34 1 2.2 2.2 60.0 38 1 2.2 2.2 62.2 45 1 2.2 2.2 64.4 49 1 2.2 2.2 66.7 51 1 2.2 2.2 68.9 53 1 2.2 2.2 71.1 59 1 2.2 2.2 73.3 69 1 2.2 2.2 75.6 70 1 2.2 2.2 77.8 72 1 2.2 2.2 80.0 73 1 2.2 2.2 82.2 79 1 2.2 2.2 84.4 83 2 4.4 4.4 88.9 106 1 2.2 2.2 91.1 115 1 2.2 2.2 93.3 128 1 2.2 2.2 95.6 135 1 2.2 2.2 97.8 145 1 2.2 2.2 100.0 Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 1819.000 Valid cases 45 Missing cases > 27 PATENT SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who will not try to use patent information at this library again: Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 24 53.3 82.8 82.8 1 4 8.9 13.8 96.6 4 1 2.2 3.4 100.0 16 35.6 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 8.000 Valid cases 29 Missing cases 16 28 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS Trademark User Profile data were reported on Summary Sheets and/or individual user forms. The frequency distribution of data reported on the Trademark Summary Sheets is presented on the following pages with the heading TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS. The frequency distributions of data reported on individual user forms is presented on pages with the heading TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA. The column heading "Libraries" refers to the number of PTDLs, and the column heading "Value" refers to the number of patrons tabulated on the Summary Sheets. On the fourth line of the following example, five PTDLs each reported 3 trademark patrons who resided within the PTDL service area: Number of patrons with a residential zip code in the PTDL service area: Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 4.4 5.1 5.1 1 5 11.1 12.8 17.9 2 8 17.8 20.5 38.5 3 5 11.1 12.8 51.3 15 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 6 13.3 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Names of the institutions that submitted completed Summary Sheets: Ann Arbor, MI Atlanta, GA Buffalo, NY Butte, MT Cincinnati, OH Cleveland, OH Columbus, OH Detroit, MI Ft. Lauderdale, FL Grand Forks, ND Honolulu, HI Louisville, KY Memphis, TN Newark, NJ Philadelphia, PA Tampa, FL TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons with a residential zip code in the PTDL service area: Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 4.4 5.1 5.1 1 5 11.1 12.8 17.9 2 8 17.8 20.5 38.5 3 5 11.1 12.8 51.3 4 3 6.7 7.7 59.0 5 4 8.9 10.3 69.2 6 2 4.4 5.1 74.4 7 2 4.4 5.1 79.5 8 1 2.2 2.6 82.1 9 2 4.4 5.1 87.2 10 1 2.2 2.6 89.7 12 1 2.2 2.6 92.3 13 1 2.2 2.6 94.9 14 1 2.2 2.6 97.4 15 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 6 13.3 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 184.000 Valid cases 39 Missing cases Number of patrons with service area: a residential zip code outside the PTDL Value Libraries Percent Valid Cum Percent Percent 11 24.4 36.7 36.7 1 10 22.2 33.3 70.0 2 8.9 13.3 83.3 3 2.2 3.3 86.7 7 2.2 3.3 90.0 11 2.2 3.3 93.3 16 2.2 3.3 96.7 18 2.2 3.3 100.0 15 33.3 Missing al 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 73.000 Valid cases 30 Missing cases 15 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons with a work (or study) zip code in the PTDL service area: Sum 185.000 Valid cases 39 Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 6 13.3 15.4 15.4 2 8 17.8 20.5 35.9 3 6 13.3 15.4 51.3 4 4 8.9 10.3 61.5 5 4 8.9 10.3 71.8 6 2 4.4 5.1 76.9 7 3 6.7 7.7 84.6 9 1 2.2 2.6 87.2 11 1 2.2 2.6 89.7 12 1 2.2 2.6 92.3 13 1 2.2 2.6 94.9 14 1 2.2 2.6 97.4 17 1 2.2 2.6 100.0 6 13.3 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 Nu m ber of patrons with a work (or study) zip code outside the PTDL service Sum 68.000 Valid cases 29 Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 14 31.1 48.3 48.3 1 5 11.1 17.2 65.5 2 8.9 13.8 79.3 4 2.2 3.4 82.8 5 2.2 3.4 86.2 6 2.2 3.4 89.7 9 2.2 3.4 93.1 5 2.2 3.4 96.6 6 2.2 3.4 100.0 16 35.6 Missing 1 45 100.0 100.0 Missing cases 16 ) TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS Number of pages of trademark materials photocopied by the patrons : Sum 850.000 Value Libraries Percent Valid Percent Cum Percent 1 3 4 5 6 9 10 11 13 16 17 25 29 30 34 36 38 40 43 45 46 47 57 61 74 Total 11.1 4.4 2.2 4.4 2.2 2.2 2.2 4.4 2.2 2.2 2.2 4.4 2. 2. 4. 2. 2. 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 20.0 13 5, 2 5 2 2 2 5 2 2 2 5 2 2 5.6 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 2.8 Missing 13.9 19.4 22.2 27.8 30.6 33.3 36.1 41.7 44.4 47.2 50.0 55.6 58.3 61.1 66.7 69.4 72.2 75.0 77.8 80.6 83.3 86.1 88.9 91.7 94.4 97.2 100.0 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 36 Missing cases TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Small business representative? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 2.5 2.5 1 6 13.3 15.0 17.5 2 8 17.8 20.0 37.5 3 9 20.0 22.5 60.0 4 3 6.7 7.5 67.5 5 3 6.7 7.5 75.0 6 5 11.1 12.5 87.5 7 2 4.4 5.0 92.5 1 2.2 2.5 95.0 1 1 2.2 2.5 97.5 2 1 2.2 2.5 100.0 5 11.1 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 153.000 Valid cases 40 Missing cases How would you describe yourself? Corporate representative? Value Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 4 8.9 17.4 17.4 1 12 26.7 52.2 69.6 2 4 8.9 17.4 87.0 3 1 2.2 4.3 91.3 4 1 2.2 4.3 95.7 5 1 2.2 4.3 100.0 • 22 48.9 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 32.000 Valid cases 23 Missing cases 22 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Attorney? Sum Valid cases 22.000 23 Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 6 13.3 26.1 26.1 1 12 26.7 52.2 78.3 2 5 11.1 21.7 100.0 22 48.9 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 22 How would you describe yourself? Professional trademark searcher? Sum Valid cases 7.000 14 e Libraries Percent Valid Percent Cum Percent 1 2 9 3 2 31 20.0 6.7 4.4 68.9 64.3 21.4 14.3 Missing 64.3 85.7 100.0 Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 31 How would you describe yourself? Faculty? Sum Valid cases 5.000 14 Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent Total 9 20.0 64.3 64.3 1 5 11.1 35.7 100.0 31 68.9 Missing Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 31 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS How would you describe yourself? Student? Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 3 6.7 11.5 11.5 1 13 28.9 50.0 61.5 2 8 17.8 30.8 92.3 3 1 2.2 3.8 96.2 5 1 2.2 3.8 100.0 19 42.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 37.000 Valid cases 26 Missing cases 19 How would you describe yourself? Information broker? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 8 17.8 50.0 50 1 7 15.6 43.8 93 8 2 1 2.2 6.3 100 • 29 64.4 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 9.000 Valid cases 16 Missing cases 29 How would you describe yourself? Other? Value Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 5 11.1 19.2 19.2 1 12 26.7 46.2 65.4 2 6 13.3 23.1 88.5 3 2 4.4 7.7 96.2 4 1 2.2 3.8 100.0 19 42.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 34.000 Valid cases 26 Missing cases 19 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To determine whether a mark has been registered prior to filing an application? Sum 176.000 Valid cases 40 Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 2.5 2.5 1 5 11.1 12.5 15.0 2 10 22.2 25.0 40.0 3 8 17.8 20.0 60.0 4 2 4.4 5.0 65.0 5 2 4.4 5.0 70.0 6 1 2.2 2.5 72.5 7 5 11.1 12.5 85.0 8 2 4.4 5.0 90.0 :: 2 4.4 5.0 95.0 15 2 4.4 5.0 100.0 5 11.1 Missing Total Missing cases 4 5 100.0 100.0 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To obtain a list of marks registered for particular goods or services, or to a particular class? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent o 4 8.9 14.3 14.3 l 11 24.4 39.3 53.6 2 S 17.8 28.6 82.1 3 4 8.9 14.3 96.4 4 1 2.2 3.6 100.0 • 17 37.8 Missing Sum 43.000 Valid cases 28 Total Missing cases 45 100.0 17 100.0 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS What was the purpose of using trad em ark materials? To obtain a list of marks containing specific word(s)? Value Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 3 6.7 11.5 11.5 1 10 22.2 38.5 50.0 2 8 17.8 30.8 80.8 3 2 4.4 7.7 88.5 4 1 2.2 3.8 92.3 5 2 4.4 7.7 100.0 19 42.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 46.000 Valid cases 26 Missing cases 19 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To learn who has registered a mark? ) Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 2.2 3.7 3.7 1 9 20.0 33.3 37.0 2 9 20.0 33.3 70.4 3 6 13.3 22.2 92.6 4 1 2.2 3.7 96.3 5 1 2.2 3.7 100.0 18 40.0 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 54.000 Valid cases 27 Missing cases 18 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS What was the purpose of using trad em ark materials? To identify marks registered to a company or individual? Value Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 4 8.9 17.4 17.4 1 14 31.1 60.9 78.3 2 3 6.7 13.0 91.3 3 2 4.4 8.7 100.0 22 48.9 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum Valid cases 26.000 23 Missing cases 22 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To conduct a trademark search for a client? Value Libraries Percent Valid Cum Percent Percent 3 6.7 12.0 12.0 1 18 40.0 72.0 84.0 2 4 8.9 16.0 100.0 20 44.4 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 26.000 Valid cases 25 Missing cases 20 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To gather data for a research project? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 3 6.7 16.7 16.7 1 8 17.8 44.4 61.1 2 6 13.3 33.3 94.4 3 1 2.2 5.6 100.0 27 60.0 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 23.000 Valid cases 18 Missing cases 27 10 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS What was the purpose of using trademark materials? Other? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 7 15.6 50.0 50.0 1 4 8.9 28.6 78.6 2 3 6.7 21.4 100.0 31 68.9 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum Valid cases 10.000 14 Missing cases 31 What trademark tools did you use? CD-ROM computer system? • Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 7 15.6 15.6 15.6 2 4 8.9 8.9 24.4 3 7 15.6 15.6 40.0 4 7 15.6 15.6 55.6 5 5 11.1 11.1 66.7 6 5 11.1 11.1 77.8 7 4 8.9 8.9 86.7 8 1 2.2 2.2 88.9 10 1 2.2 2.2 91.1 11 1 2.2 2.2 93.3 12 1 2.2 2.2 95.6 14 1 2.2 2.2 97.8 16 1 2.2 2.2 100.0 Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 218.000 Valid cases 45 Missing cases ) 11 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS What trademark tools did you use? Official Gazette? Value Sum Valid cases 74.000 33 Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 3 6.7 9.1 9.1 1 10 22.2 30.3 39.4 2 9 20.0 27.3 66.7 3 6 13.3 18.2 84.8 4 2 4.4 6.1 90.9 5 1 2.2 3.0 93.9 6 1 2.2 3.0 97.0 9 1 2.2 3.0 100.0 12 26.7 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 12 What trademark tools did you use? Other? Value Sum 36.000 Valid cases 20 Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 4 8.9 20.0 20.0 1 5 11.1 25.0 45.0 2 5 11.1 25.0 70.0 3 4 8.9 20.0 90.0 4 1 2.2 5.0 95.0 5 1 2.2 5.0 100.0 25 55.6 Missing Total Missing cases 45 25 100.0 100.0 12 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who have used trademark materials at this library before: Sum 108.000 Valid cases 39 Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 4.4 5.1 5.1 1 13 28.9 33.3 38.5 2 9 20.0 23.1 61.5 3 7 15.6 17.9 79.5 4 2 4.4 5.1 84.6 5 1 2.2 2.6 87.2 6 2 4.4 5. 1 92.3 9 1 2.2 2.6 94.9 1 2 4.4 5.1 100.0 • 6 13.3 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 Number of patrons who have not used trad em ark materials at thij library before: Sum 160.000 Valid cases 41 Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 2 4.4 4.9 4.9 1 7 15.6 17.1 22.0 2 10 22.2 24.4 46.3 3 2 4.4 4.9 51.2 4 6 13.3 14.6 65.9 5 3 6.7 7.3 73.2 6 3 6.7 7.3 80.5 7 2 4.4 4.9 85.4 8 1 2.2 2.4 87.8 9 3 6.7 7.3 95.1 10 1 2.2 2.4 97.6 11 1 2.2 2.4 100.0 4 8.9 Missing Total Missing cases 45 100.0 100.0 13 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS Number of patrons who did obtain the wanted trademark information? Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 6 13.3 13.3 13.3 2 5 11.1 11.1 24.4 3 8 17.8 17.8 42.2 4 4 8.9 8.9 51.1 5 4 8.9 8.9 60.0 6 8 17.8 17.8 77.8 7 1 2.2 2.2 80.0 8 1 2.2 2.2 82.2 9 1 2.2 2.2 84.4 10 2 4.4 4.4 88.9 13 2 4.4 4.4 93.3 14 1 2.2 2.2 95.6 16 1 2.2 2.2 97.8 19 1 2.2 2.2 100.0 Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 243.000 Valid cases 45 Missing cases Number of patrons who did not get the wanted trademark information: Value Valid Cum e Libraries Percent Percent Percent 16 35.6 57.1 57.1 1 5 11.1 17.9 75.0 2 6 13.3 21.4 96.4 3 1 2.2 3.6 100.0 • 17 37.8 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum Valid cases 20.000 28 Missing cases 17 14 TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS » Number of patrons who will try to use trad em ark information at this library again: Valid Cum ue Libraries Percent Percent Percent 1 5 11.1 11.4 11.4 2 6 13.3 13.6 25.0 3 6 13.3 13.6 38.6 4 3 6.7 6.8 45.5 5 6 13.3 13.6 59.1 6 6 13.3 13.6 72.7 7 2 4.4 4.5 77.3 9 2 4.4 4.5 81.8 10 2 4.4 4.5 86.4 12 1 2.2 2.3 88.6 13 1 2.2 2.3 90.9 14 2 4.4 4.5 95.5 18 1 2.2 2.3 97.7 19 1 2.2 2.3 100.0 1 2.2 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum 255.000 Valid cases 44 Missing cases Number of patrons who will not try to use trademark information at this library again: Valid Cum Value Libraries Percent Percent Percent 22 48.9 88.0 88.0 1 3 6.7 12.0 100.0 20 44.4 Missing Total 45 100.0 100.0 Sum Valid cases 3.000 25 Missing cases 20 15 TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA Trademark User Profile data were reported on Summary Sheets and/or individual user forms. The frequency distribution of data reported on the individual user forms is presented on the following pages with the heading TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA. The frequency distributions of data reported on Summary Sheets is presented on pages with the heading TRADEMARK SUMMARY SHEETS. The colum heading "Frequency" refers to the number of patrons who responded to the questionnaire item. The colum heading "Value" refers to the code assigned to the particular response category. In the following example, 10 trademark patrons checked the response category, "Attorney", when asked the question, "How would you describe yourself?" Another 243 trademark patrons responsed to this questionnaire item, but checked some other response category, such as "Corporate representative" or "Student". Another 6 trademark patrons did not respond to this questionnaire item by checking any of the response categories. How would you describe yourself? Attorney? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Attorney NOT checked Attorney checked Valid cases 253 243 1 10 6 Total 259 Missing cases 93.8 96.0 96.0 3.9 4.0 100.0 2.3 Missing 100.0 100.0 Names of the institutions that submitted completed questionnaires: Albany, NY Albuquerque, NM Auburn University, Austin, TX Baton Rouge, LA Butte, MT Charleston, SC College Station, 1 Honolulu, HI Houston, TX Kansas City, Lincoln, NE Little Rock, Los Angeles, CA Miami, FL AL MO AR Milwaukee, WI New Haven, CT Orlando, FL Piscataway, NJ Raleigh, NC Reno, NV Salem, OR Salt Lake, City, UT San Diego, CA Seattle, WA Stillwater, OK Sunnyvale, CA Toledo, OH Wichita, KS Valid cases 259 Missing cases TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA Day of week when patrons submitted survey forms (calculated; based on date on the respondents' survey forms): Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Valid cases Number o f Fo rms Valid Cum Submitted Percent Percent Percent 14 5.4 5.6 5.6 50 19.3 19.8 25.4 48 18.5 19.0 44.4 46 17.8 18.3 62.7 45 17.4 17.9 80.6 29 11.2 11.5 92.1 20 7.7 7.9 100.0 7 2.7 Missing Total 259 252 Missing cases 100.0 100.0 Number of patrons with a residential zip code in the PTDL service area : yes, in the service area no, not in service area Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent 61 23.6 78.2 78.2 17 6.6 21.8 100.0 181 69.9 Missing Valid cases Total 259 100.0 100.0 78 Missing cases 181 Number of patrons with a work zip code in the PTDL service yes, in the service area no, not in service area Valid Cum Frequency Percent Percent Percent 63 24.3 86.3 86.3 10 3.9 13.7 100.0 186 71.8 Missing Valid cases Total 259 100.0 73 Missing cases 186 100.0 TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA Number of pages of trademark materials photocopied by the patron: Number Valid Cui of Copies Frequency Percent Percent Perc 92 35 5 52.0 52.0 1 18 6 9 10.2 62.1 2 11 4 2 6.2 68.4 3 11 4 2 6.2 74.6 4 6 2 3 3.4 78.0 5 3 1 2 1.7 79.7 6 4 1 5 2.3 81.9 7 3 1 2 1.7 83.6 8 5 1 9 2.8 86.4 9 1 4 .6 87.0 10 7 2 7 4.0 91.0 12 2 8 1.1 92.1 13 1 4 .6 92.7 15 1 4 .6 93.2 18 1 4 .6 93.8 20 1 4 .6 94.4 25 1 4 .6 94.9 30 1 4 .6 95.5 32 2 8 1.1 96.6 35 1 4 .6 97.2 40 2 .8 1.1 98.3 52 1 .4 .6 98.9 55 1 .4 .6 99.4 60 1 .4 .6 100.0 82 31 .7 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 177 Missing cases 82 How would you describe yourself? Small business representative? Small business represen- tative NOT checked Small business represen- tative checked Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Valid cases 253 121 132 6 46.7 47.8 51.0 52.2 2.3 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Missing cases 6 47.8 100.0 TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA How would you describe yourself? Corporate representative? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Corporate representative NOT checked Corporate representative checked 231 89.2 91.3 91.3 1 22 8.5 8.7 100.0 6 2.3 Missing 243 93.8 96.0 96.0 1 10 3.9 4.0 100.0 6 2.3 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 253 Missing cases 6 How would you describe yourself? Attorney? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Attorney NOT checked Attorney checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 253 Missing cases. 6 How would you describe yourself? Professional trademark searcher? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Professional trademark searcher NOT checked 253 97.7 100.0 100.0 6 2.3 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 253 Missing cases 6 240 92.7 94.9 94.9 1 13 5.0 5.1 100.0 6 2.3 Missing TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA How would you describe yourself? Faculty? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Faculty NOT checked Faculty checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 253 Missing cases 6 How would you describe yourself? Student? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Student NOT checked Student checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 253 Missing cases 6 How would you describe yourself? Information broker? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Information broker NOT checked Information broker checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 253 Missing cases 6 212 81.9 83.8 83.8 1 41 15.8 16.2 100.0 6 2.3 Missing 250 96.5 98.8 98.8 1 3 1.2 1.2 100.0 6 2.3 Missing TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA How would you describe yourself? Other? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Other occupation NOT checked Other occupation checked 194 74.9 76.7 76.7 59 22.8 23.3 100.0 6 2.3 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 253 Missing cases 6 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To determine whether a mark has been registered prior to filing an application? Category NOT checked Category checked Valid cases 247 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 71 27.4 28.7 28.7 1 176 68.0 71.3 100.0 12 4.6 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Missing cases 12 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To obtain a list of marks registered for particular goods or services , or to a particular class? Value Label Category NOT checked Category checked Valid cases 247 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 188 72.6 76.1 76.1 1 59 22.8 23.9 100.0 • 12 4.6 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Missing cases 12 TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To obtain a list of marks containing specific word(s)? Category NOT checked Category checked Valid cases 247 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 67.6 70.9 70.9 27.8 29.1 100.0 4 . 6 Missing 175 1 72 12 Total 259 100.0 Missing cases 12 100.0 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To learn who has registered a mark? Category NOT checked Category checked Valid cases 247 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 74.9 78.5 78.5 20.5 21.5 100.0 4.6 Missing 194 1 53 12 Total 259 100.0 100.0 Missing cases 12 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To identify marks registered to a company or individual? Category NOT checked Category checked Valid cases 247 Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 214 82.6 86.6 86.6 5 33 12.7 13.4 100.0 12 4.6 Missing Total 259 100.0 Missing cases 12 100.0 TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA What was the purpose of using trad em ark materials? To conduct a trademark search for a client? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 227 87.6 91.9 91.9 1 20 7.7 8.1 100.0 12 4.6 Missing Category NOT checked Category checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 247 Missing cases 12 What was the purpose of using trademark materials? To gather data for a research project? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Category NOT checked Category checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 247 Missing cases 12 What was the purpose of using trad em ark materials? Other? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 222 85.7 89.9 89.9 1 25 9.7 10.1 100.0 12 4.6 Missing Category NOT checked Category checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 247 Missing cases 12 236 91.1 95.5 95.5 1 11 4.2 4.5 100.0 • 12 4.6 Missing TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA What trademark tools did you use? CD-ROM computer system? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent CD-ROM NOT checked CD-ROM checked 24 9.3 10.9 10.9 1 197 76.1 89.1 100.0 38 14.7 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 221 Missing cases 38 What trademark tools did you use? Official Gazette? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent OG NOT checked OG checked Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 221 Missing cases 38 What trademark tools did you use? Other? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent Other tools NOT checked 197 76.1 89.1 89.1 Other tools checked 1 24 9.3 10.9 100.0 14.7 Missing 156 60.2 70.6 70.6 1 65 25.1 29.4 100.0 38 14.7 Missing 197 1 24 38 Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 221 Missing cases 38 Have you used trademark materials at this library before? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent yes 1.00 103 39.8 41.9 41.9 no 2.00 143 55.2 58.1 100.0 1.00 103 2.00 143 13 5.0 Missing Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 246 Missing cases 13 TRADEMARK SURVEY DATA Did you obtain the trademark information you wanted? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 222 85.7 93.7 93.7 2.00 11 4.2 4.6 98.3 3.00 4 1.5 1.7 100.0 • 22 8.5 Missing Yes no some Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 237 Missing cases 22 Will you try to use trademark information at this library again? Valid Cum Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent 1.00 235 90.7 99.2 99.2 2.00 1 .4 .4 99.6 8.00 1 .4 .4 100.0 22 8.5 Missing yes no Don't know Total 259 100.0 100.0 Valid cases 237 Missing cases 22 10 - 3 2 AD0DDE1677HTD BOOKBINDING GrantviUe, Pa.