Updating FOI post

Author: DaveBathnes

_posts/2025-07-31-requesting-data-with-foi.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 title: Requesting library data via Freedom of Information
-excerpt: How to request library data from local authorities using Freedom of Information
+excerpt: Using Freedom of Information to get bulk datasets of library data
 categories:
   - Data
 tags:
@@ -11,19 +11,21 @@ published: true
 
 Regular readers will know I've [previously written about requesting data](https://blog.librarydata.uk/freedom-of-information/) from libraries using Freedom of Information (FOI). These have been genuine requests - to understand and compare datasets. However, FOI is not the most efficient way to obtain data. It is slow, and often requires follow-up requests to clarify or correct the data provided.
 
-For libraries it is also not an ideal way of providing data. There isn't much time to respond to requests, and these have to be handled as they come in. It would be better for a library service to have regular data processes in place, where they know what data they will be publishing and when. FOI is also a major source of data breaches - the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has just today [released more guidance](https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/media-centre/news-and-blogs/2025/07/new-guidance-on-disclosing-documents-to-the-public/) on disclosing documents to the public, due to data breaches involving personal data in FOI responses. These breaches are not caused by too much open data or transparency - they are from not releasing data in a controlled way and a lack of data literacy.
+For libraries it is also not ideal. There isn't much time to respond to requests, and these have to be handled as they come in. It would be better for a library service to have regular data processes in place, where they know what data they will be publishing and when. FOI is also a major source of data breaches - the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has just [released more guidance](https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/media-centre/news-and-blogs/2025/07/new-guidance-on-disclosing-documents-to-the-public/) on disclosing documents to the public, due to data breaches involving personal data in FOI responses.
 
-The ideal situation for library data would be for services to adopt an open by default policy for data, and publish in standardised formats under an open licence. The primary purpose would be to serve the public, but it could also benefit any organisations requiring data from libraries, including sector bodies and other library services.
+These breaches are not caused by too much open data or transparency - they are from being overly locked down by default, causing a lack of data literacy in data sharing when responding to FOIs. Some of the most high profile data breaches are situations where the requested data should have already been openly available, the public body has just made a mess of responding to the individual request.
 
-For example, the task of Public Lending Right payments to authors _should_ involve the British Library retrieving open data about books borrowed, automatically published by library management systems. At the moment this is a separate process arranged by the British Library, available to no-one else. There are other loans data processes like CollectionHQ gathering data for their collection analysis product, Nielsen for their LibScan service, CIPFA, the Reading Agency, etc. And for plenty of them libraries don't even really know what they're providing.
+The ideal situation for library data would be for services to adopt an open by default policy for data, and publish in standardised formats under an open licence. The primary purpose would be to serve the public, but it could benefit any organisation requiring data from libraries, including sector bodies and other library services.
 
-The same goes for library locations. If library services published branch and mobile locations and details in a standardised format, there would be no need for the [LibraryOn team](https://libraryon.org/libraries) to maintain that data themselves. It would also be easily fed into Google and other map services.
+For example, the task of Public Lending Right payments to authors _should_ involve the British Library obtaining data on books borrowed that has been openly published from library management systems. Instead, this is a separate process arranged by the British Library, available to no-one else. There are other data processes like CollectionHQ gathering data for their collection analysis product, Nielsen for their LibScan service, CIPFA, the Reading Agency, etc. And for plenty of them, the library service don't have oversight of the process or really know what they're providing.
 
-Open by default would significantly reduce data efforts but should also increase data literacy in libraries, where data is a clearly defined public task.
+The same goes for library locations. If library services published branch and mobile locations and hours in a standardised format, there would be no need for the [LibraryOn team](https://libraryon.org/libraries) to maintain that data themselves and take emails asking them to update it. It would also be easily fed into Google and other map services.
 
-Essentially: **open data publishing by libraries for all purposes NOT data collection by third parties for specific purposes.**
+Open by default would significantly reduce data efforts but should also increase data literacy in libraries, with data becoming a clearly defined public task of public libraries.
 
-Anyway, that ideal is a long way off! But we have Freedom of Information. For all its faults, it is a good direct data link between the public and library services.
+Essentially a principle of: _open data publishing by libraries for any purpose **NOT** data collection by third parties for specific purposes._
+
+Anyway, that ideal is a long way off! But we have Freedom of Information. For all its faults, it is a good direct link between the public and library services.
 
 After a short pilot, data requests have gone out to all library services in the UK. So what data is being requested? Fairly basic usage data for the previous financial year (2024/25):
 
@@ -33,15 +35,15 @@ After a short pilot, data requests have gone out to all library services in the
 4. A count of active members, per home branch, for the year
 5. A count of visits, per library branch, and per month.
 
-Some goals and principles of the data requests:
+Some goals and principles of these data requests:
 
-- Collect a small standardised set of basic but still useful data from each library service in the UK
+- Collect a small standardised set of basic but useful data from each library service in the UK
 - Analyse each one to understand differences between services, and to identify trends
 - Request data that is easily available within library services to limit the amount of work required
-- Ensure the data is openly licensed so that it can be used by anyone
+- Ensure the data is openly licensed and made widely available so that it can be used by anyone
 
-This is not an attempt to replicate CIPFA data collection, or the work that has been done by Libraries Connected, or the current work by the library data team at Arts Council England (ACE). Alongside the great sector support work, it is also important to have a public-first data strategy involving data publishing. How that happens in future remains to be seen, but it should be on the radar of all library services.
+This is not an attempt to replicate CIPFA data collection, or the work that has been done by Libraries Connected, or the current work by the library data team at Arts Council England (ACE). Alongside great sector support work, it is also important to have a public-first data strategy for library data. How that happens in future remains to be seen, but it should be on the radar of all services.
 
-To some extent it is (rightly) easier for a member of the public to get data than it is for a sector support body. Those organisations can't make demands of services, or insist they send data. Then again, it's hard enough for the public as well. We'll see how it goes.
+To some extent it is (rightly) easier for a member of the public to get data than it is for a sector support body. Those organisations can't make demands of services, or insist they send data. In many cases they may be restricted by policies in the requests they can make of public services. Despite that it's hard enough for the public as well, and FOI requests are not exactly easy going. We'll see how it goes!
 
-So, we should be thankful for Freedom of Information, and the opportunities and rights it gives. But library services should also be working towards a future where data is published carefully, and widely open. For the public benefit and also their own.
+So, we should be thankful for Freedom of Information, and the opportunities and rights it gives. But library services could also be working towards a future where data is published carefully, and made widely open. For the public benefit and also their own.