Library Technology Guides

Documents, Databases, News, and Commentary

Select another Product Report:

Statistical Report for Evergreen

Statistics according to type and size categories

The following table presents the 2018 results according to the type and size of the library.

EvergreenallAcademicPublicSchoolConsortium
smallmediumlargesmallmediumlarge
navgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavgnavg
SatisfactionLevelILS826.80 76.4300477.11116.73104
ILSFunctionality816.68 76.1400467.04116.45104
PrintFunctionality827.00 76.7100477.17116.82104
ElectronicFunctionality815.38 74.1400475.81114.91104
SatisfactionCustomerSupport797.51 76.4300457.93117.73103
CompanyLoyalty767.03 56.8000467.07117.45102



2018 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction82 1 3 1 7 4 6 24 27 9 86.807
ILS Functionality81 1 3 3 3 7 10 23 22 9 76.687
Print Functionality82 2 1 4 3 5 4 20 28 15 87.008
Electronic Functionality81 9 3 1 8 4 9 9 17 16 5 75.386
Company Satisfaction81 1 1 2 1 7 4 15 22 28 97.418
Support Satisfaction79 1 1 1 2 2 3 6 11 20 32 97.518
Support Improvement77 4 3 2 23 4 8 14 19 56.487
Company Loyalty76 7 1 1 6 5 11 14 31 97.038
Open Source Interest68 5 1 5 6 3 4 4 40 97.199

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS82 89.76%
Considering new Interface82 56.10%
System Installed on time?82 7591.46%

Average Collection size: 328719

TypeCount
Public60
Academic7
School0
Consortium4
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0001
[3] 100,001-250,0000
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2017 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction142 1 2 2 9 19 41 41 27 77.277
ILS Functionality142 3 3 16 16 45 38 21 77.087
Print Functionality142 1 1 1 4 5 15 36 44 35 87.438
Electronic Functionality138 3 3 4 6 6 15 22 37 31 11 76.287
Company Satisfaction137 1 2 6 11 8 28 34 47 97.498
Support Satisfaction135 1 3 5 7 9 23 37 50 97.618
Support Improvement133 1 1 8 35 6 17 36 29 86.897
Company Loyalty127 7 1 5 4 11 10 14 27 48 97.048
Open Source Interest121 15 4 2 3 9 6 2 3 9 68 96.619

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS142 53.52%
Considering new Interface142 117.75%
System Installed on time?142 12588.03%

Average Collection size: 462117

TypeCount
Public109
Academic11
School1
Consortium15
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0004
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2016 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction114 1 1 5 7 17 23 39 21 87.228
ILS Functionality113 1 8 4 16 30 34 20 87.197
Print Functionality112 1 1 4 6 12 22 38 28 87.428
Electronic Functionality112 2 1 5 3 6 16 19 24 26 10 86.297
Company Satisfaction113 2 1 4 8 11 19 32 36 97.408
Support Satisfaction111 3 2 3 8 10 14 26 45 97.478
Support Improvement109 3 2 29 8 11 23 33 96.968
Company Loyalty104 7 2 2 2 1 9 6 11 19 45 97.038
Open Source Interest105 15 2 1 3 5 2 4 5 8 60 96.729

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS116 65.17%
Considering new Interface116 32.59%
System Installed on time?116 10792.24%

Average Collection size: 340121

TypeCount
Public88
Academic13
School1
Consortium8
Special3

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0002
[3] 100,001-250,0002
[4] 250,001-1,000,0001
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2015 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction111 2 3 3 4 17 30 32 20 87.137
ILS Functionality110 2 2 6 4 13 33 31 19 77.117
Print Functionality111 1 4 4 15 19 36 32 87.548
Electronic Functionality105 4 1 4 6 8 12 10 25 23 12 76.157
Company Satisfaction107 2 1 1 3 4 6 8 18 28 36 97.298
Support Satisfaction106 4 1 4 4 4 6 10 29 44 97.398
Support Improvement106 4 7 29 7 11 20 28 56.647
Company Loyalty103 3 2 3 1 3 9 7 11 27 37 97.158
Open Source Interest96 10 6 3 6 2 1 3 1 64 96.849

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS116 54.31%
Considering new Interface116 32.59%
System Installed on time?116 9985.34%

Average Collection size: 182296

TypeCount
Public96
Academic10
School0
Consortium4
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0004
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2014 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction91 2 2 7 6 16 23 23 12 76.787
ILS Functionality91 2 4 6 9 11 26 26 7 76.647
Print Functionality89 1 5 7 4 25 30 17 87.298
Electronic Functionality89 3 3 4 14 12 19 16 10 8 65.756
Company Satisfaction89 2 2 3 9 12 17 22 22 87.107
Support Satisfaction89 2 1 6 6 11 19 22 22 87.127
Support Improvement89 1 1 6 25 12 14 11 19 56.526
Company Loyalty85 4 1 2 1 5 12 9 10 17 24 96.647
Open Source Interest79 8 1 2 1 3 3 4 3 5 49 97.109

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS93 22.15%
Considering new Interface93 88.60%
System Installed on time?93 8086.02%

Average Collection size: 203683

TypeCount
Public77
Academic6
School0
Consortium5
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0003
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2013 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction71 1 4 3 2 9 20 18 14 76.977
ILS Functionality71 2 3 2 1 3 10 17 20 13 86.897
Print Functionality71 1 1 1 3 2 6 16 26 15 87.318
Electronic Functionality70 5 1 3 6 3 14 4 20 8 6 75.566
Company Satisfaction70 1 2 1 1 2 2 5 14 23 19 87.268
Support Satisfaction68 1 1 1 1 3 6 4 13 19 19 87.158
Support Improvement69 2 1 2 9 7 16 17 15 86.967
Company Loyalty66 3 2 1 3 6 1 11 16 23 97.088
Open Source Interest58 7 1 3 2 1 2 6 36 97.169

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS71 22.82%
Considering new Interface71 34.23%
System Installed on time?71 6185.92%

Average Collection size: 211418

TypeCount
Public57
Academic7
School0
Consortium4
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0000
[3] 100,001-250,0001
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2012 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction106 10 2 4 3 12 9 31 25 10 76.227
ILS Functionality106 2 5 15 8 15 31 22 8 76.277
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction104 2 2 3 12 9 9 23 22 22 76.707
Support Satisfaction103 1 1 4 3 12 6 10 21 19 26 96.697
Support Improvement102 2 2 2 10 25 12 11 24 14 56.256
Company Loyalty101 6 2 1 2 10 6 5 19 26 24 86.607
Open Source Interest89 9 2 1 1 2 1 4 7 62 97.489

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS111 21.80%
Considering new Interface111 65.41%
System Installed on time?111 9181.98%

Average Collection size: 964406

TypeCount
Public96
Academic3
School1
Consortium7
Special2

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0000
[2] 10,001-100,0000
[3] 100,001-250,0000
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2011 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction60 1 1 1 4 2 12 23 9 7 76.627
ILS Functionality59 1 1 2 3 4 11 22 10 5 76.427
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction60 2 3 2 4 5 6 24 14 87.128
Support Satisfaction59 2 1 3 5 9 5 19 15 87.058
Support Improvement57 2 1 1 18 6 6 14 9 56.467
Company Loyalty58 6 2 1 2 4 4 5 9 25 96.748
Open Source Interest47 3 1 1 2 1 2 3 34 97.779

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS62 11.61%
Considering new Interface62 34.84%
System Installed on time?62 5182.26%

Average Collection size: 118879

TypeCount
Public53
Academic5
School1
Consortium2
Special1

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0001
[2] 10,001-100,0000
[3] 100,001-250,0000
[4] 250,001-1,000,0000
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0000
[6] over 10,000,0010



2010 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction46 1 2 8 4 16 7 8 76.837
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction45 2 1 2 2 2 7 12 8 9 76.587
Support Satisfaction45 2 1 2 3 1 5 3 11 8 9 76.297
Support Improvement45 3 1 1 8 8 1 9 9 5 75.827
Company Loyalty44 2 1 2 2 6 2 6 9 14 96.778
Open Source Interest42 1 1 1 2 37 98.319

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS47 12.13%
Considering new Interface47 714.89%
System Installed on time?47 4187.23%

Average Collection size: 178623

TypeCount
Public41
Academic3
School0
Consortium2
Special0

Size CategoryCount
[1] Under 10,0002
[2] 10,001-100,00020
[3] 100,001-250,0006
[4] 250,001-1,000,0008
[5] 1,000,001-10,000,0001
[6] over 10,000,0010



2009 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction50 1 11 5 21 6 6 76.727
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction50 2 1 1 13 1 15 10 7 76.607
Support Satisfaction49 2 2 13 2 15 7 8 76.457
Support Improvement48 3 3 12 6 2 16 6 86.467
Company Loyalty50 1 1 1 14 1 8 11 13 56.827
Open Source Interest44 1 1 1 1 40 98.439

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS51 11.96%
Considering new Interface51 611.76%
System Installed on time?51 4078.43%





2008 Survey Results
Product: Evergreen Response Distribution Statistics
CategoryResponses 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ModeMeanMedian
ILS Satisfaction13 1 2 4 4 2 77.087
ILS Functionality0 00.00
Print Functionality0 00.00
Electronic Functionality0 00.00
Company Satisfaction13 1 1 7 1 3 77.157
Support Satisfaction13 1 2 3 2 5 97.007
Support Improvement0 not applicable
Company Loyalty13 2 1 2 3 5 97.628
Open Source Interest10 10 99.009

CategoryTotalYespercent
Considering new ILS13 17.69%
Considering new Interface13 17.69%
System Installed on time?13 1076.92%




4 Responses for Evergreen in 2007

2018 : gen: 6.80 company 7.41 loyalty 7.03 support 7.51

2017 : gen: 7.27 company 7.49 loyalty 7.04 support 7.61

2016 : gen: 7.22 company 7.40 loyalty 7.03 support 7.47

2015 : gen: 7.13 company 7.29 loyalty 7.15 support 7.39

2014 : gen: 6.78 company 7.10 loyalty 6.64 support 7.12

2013 : gen: 6.97 company 7.26 loyalty 7.08 support 7.15

2012 : gen: 6.22 company 6.70 loyalty 6.60 support 6.69

2011 : gen: 6.62 company 7.12 loyalty 6.74 support 7.05

2010 : gen: 6.83 company 6.58 loyalty 6.77 support 6.29

2009 : gen: 6.72 company 6.60 loyalty 6.82 support 6.45

2008 : gen: 7.08 company 7.15 loyalty 7.62 support 7.00

Comments (survey2018)

Question 4 - We do not use our ILS for electronic records; this question need a n/a (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Question 4 - We do not use our ILS for electronic records; this question needs a n/a (Library type: Academic; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

We don't use the ILS to manage our electronic resources, so I left that question blank. We also switched hosting providers during the current year, so the question of whether customer support has gotten better is problematic. Most of the customer support is provided to us by the consortium, but also indirectly by the hosting provider. Consortium support is about the same; I think the new hosting provider is better than the previous one. We are currently in process of implementing Summon. (Library type: State; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

Because we get our ILS through our consortium most of these questions are not relevant to my library. The effectiveness of the print and electronic resources management questions are not relevant at all. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 8)

Creating report templates is an ongoing issue Evergreen. The system to create them is very complex. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

We went to a web based version of Evergreen this year and it is soooooo difficult. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 3)

Our consortium deals with these issues so I can't answer many of these questions. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 5)

Our library currently uses an open source ILS. We are very happy with both the product and the vendor who manages it. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

The number of items in the library's collection is broken down as follows: (Library type: Public; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

We have changed the ILS this year and made the decision to upload only the print records (in the previous ILS, we had also uploaded e-resources). This explains the decrease in the number of records. (Library type: Academic; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 7)

This catalog is not for the serious library user. (Library type: State; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 0)

Their price is right for small libraries with small budgets. Their shared catalogue saves time for understaffed libraries without a trained cataloguer. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 6)

Now on version 3.0 Will be upgrading to version 3.1 in January 2019 Will be using the web client in July 2019 A lot of Evergreen community participation in fixing bugs and other improvements which result in bugs getting fixed quicker and improvements getting funded than with a proprietary ILS system. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

We are part of a large statewide consortium that is growing. One of the biggest advantages is the statewide resource sharing. The continuing funding for the consortium is under review, however. This lends some uncertainty to the future. (Library type: Public; collection size: large; ils satisfaction: 7)

No course reserve function (Library type: Academic; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 4)

All of our technical support comes through our consortium, [...] . This is ideal for us as it means we don't need to manage anything on our own. (Library type: Public; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 8)

the product is becoming cumbersome and less efficient. (Library type: State; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 2)

Our current vendor (Evergreen) supports a discovery interface that allows [...] to maximize our Library Services Platform and offer our communities a statewide library that includes academic, public, and special collections. Partnerships with state Parks and Historic sites, local museums, Aquarium and Zoo are also available to our patrons as we are able to manage their use from our platform. The myriad of services we offer our communities and their integration in our library platform service allows an unprecedented opportunity of experience for every citizen of [...]. (Library type: State; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 9)

We mainly receive ILS support through [...] so the questions regarding the company and support are answered based on my experience with [...] , not with the ILS company. (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 7)

The Evergreen software is dated, slow, marginally functional, and no longer fits the needs of our library. The Reports section is absolutely unusable. I understand that it is cheap, but we are getting exactly what we are paying for. If it were up to me, we would no longer use an open source ILS; it seems that open source software is great in the beginning in that people are excited about it, maintenance and updates are frequent and responsive to customer needs. But as time goes on, maintenance and updates drop off, customer service becomes harder to come by, and eventually users are left with an out of date product that is hard to update or it becomes difficult to migrate data due to the data being in old/out of date formats. Open source is fun and cheap in the beginning, but as time goes on, frustration and costs mount when that software ages out of usefulness. (Library type: Public; collection size: very small; ils satisfaction: 2)

Will be moving to Symphony in March 19 (Library type: Public; collection size: medium; ils satisfaction: 6)

We are a very small library. I only responded to questions of which I had knowledge. (Library type: State; collection size: small; ils satisfaction: 7)

PINES contracted with an outside agency last year to do a comprehensive ILS evaluation of which ILSes could meet the needs of our large consortium, and Evergreen continued to be the only viable choice. (Library type: Consortium; collection size: very large; ils satisfaction: 8)

ILS