Funding trends in 2025 reflected an unsettled landscape, with few identifiable trends and many questions about what the future may hold

Words like “uncertainty” and “unprecedented” took up significant space in the American lexicon in 2025. The Trump Administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) ran through federal agencies cutting budgets, personnel, and data; the President fired Dr. Carla Hayden from the Library of Congress; and he signed an executive order that would have resulted in the shutdown of the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS). While IMLS received a stay of execution thanks to a federal injunction, the library field has remained cautious, and as represented in Library Journal’s 2026 Budgets and Funding Survey, appears to be maintaining a conservative stance amid ongoing political upheaval and the resulting impacts on funding across all sectors.

The Budgets and Funding Survey received responses from 288 U.S. public libraries between November 17 and December 31, 2025. While the annual survey receives responses from a different set of libraries each year, data is weighed by population served to minimize this variable. This year’s sample contains 22 percent urban libraries, 35 percent suburban, 40 percent small town, and 43 percent rural libraries (percentages total more than 100 as multi-branch systems can report the demographics represented by their individual locations).

On first look, the numbers appear overwhelmingly positive: 62 percent of libraries anticipate an increase in total operating budgets in the upcoming fiscal year. With 7 percent planning on decreased budgets and 31 percent predicting that they will remain at status quo, this is only a +2.5 percent net change in anticipated overall budgets, compared to last year’s more optimistic +5.4 percent. Fifty-nine percent of respondents report an upcoming increase in materials budgets, but 24 percent anticipate a decrease—continuing a multiyear downward trend. Personnel budgets are also expected to grow across a large majority of the sample (83 percent); however, the overall net change is effectively flat at -0.1 percent, marking a departure from prior years of stronger personnel budget growth.

Each library in the survey faces its own unique funding landscape; legislative changes have had critical impact in states like Wyoming, where property taxes were cut by 25 percent, and Ohio, where a change in the state’s public library funding model resulted in a $25 million shortfall. The volatile housing market has many library leaders waiting on edge for annual appraisal numbers, making long-term planning especially difficult. Pandemic-era grants have by and large been paid out and spent, with no other funding coming in to take the place of ARPA—which some libraries used to keep very basic services afloat. Independent library districts continue to outpace municipally funded libraries by 61 percent in operating budgets, 62 percent in materials, and 54 percent in personnel, but this golden standard of library structure could be increasingly challenging as anti-tax sentiment continues to shape political discourse and impact levy ballots.

Data also shows libraries are managing an interconnected triad of declining or condensed staffing, fewer open hours, and softening circulation. Budget priorities among the sample are strongly centered in payroll, staffing, and benefits (51 percent of responses list this as first priority), while programming, outreach, and staff development fall to the bottom of the list (three percent and one percent list these as first priorities, respectively). Given that this data analysis indicates a generally defensive budgeting posture, the next year in public libraries looks like focusing on protecting staff and scaled-down approaches to other discretionary spending, all while striving to meet the myriad informational and social needs of their communities.

CONTRACTION OVER EXPANSION

One of the biggest shifts seen in the sample this year is the marked reversal of grant funding; 28 percent of libraries reported decreases, leading to a net decline over last year of 17.1 percent. Last year’s survey had a net increase of 8.3 percent in grant funding. In 2025, libraries in the Northeast saw the largest net drop of all geographic U.S. regions, decreasing by 30.5 percent; in terms of community setting, rural libraries reported a 35.4 percent net decrease. A rural library in the Mountain West noted that “[the] IMLS grant freeze and end of grant periods explain the decrease in funding.” Because of the loss of grant money, this library saw a 60 percent drop in its materials budget. Another Mountain West library, this time in an urban community with a population base of 100,000–249,000, saw an overall operational budget decline owing to the expiration of pandemic-era ARPA grants, which had been funding a staff position in the library’s makerspace.

Of those 55 percent of libraries receiving grant monies in 2025, there was a significant move to fund programming and outreach (31 percent) compared to 2024’s grant spending focusing on materials, capital improvements, and technology, with only 18 percent of grant funds supporting programmatic areas. This year’s open-ended responses include using these funds for “human services and programs,” such as the Right Serve at the Right Time statewide social services platform investment put in place by the Orange County Library System, FL, as noted by Director Steve Powell. Other grant-funded programs include summer reading initiatives, lunch at the library, teen humanities programming, and adult literacy. The trend indicates that grants are increasingly being used to support visible, community-facing initiatives rather than infrastructure or digital expansion.

Core funding for both independent and municipal libraries was stable overall. However, there are important markers indicating that when state funding cuts do occur, they tend to be deeper, outweighing incremental gains elsewhere. The most significant net change in state funding appears in the Mountain West, with a 41.2 percent drop. The Goshen County Library was hit hard when the Wyoming Legislature cut property taxes by 25 percent, with the potential for further cuts this year. “Our library is primarily funded through property taxes acquired by the county,” noted Director Cristine Braddy. “The decrease in the overall budget was due to the decrease in property tax.” The library was hit with cuts to its materials, technology, and programming spending. To help fill in the loss, city commissioners “allocated funds directly for personnel to ensure we didn’t lose trained staff,” Braddy said, and the library’s foundation is running a “Library Sustainability Funding Challenge to increase the principal of our endowment.”

Ohio was also hit by legislative action: “Starting July 2025, the State of Ohio’s Public Library Fund was reduced by six percent and moved to a fixed line item vs. a percentage of monthly revenue,” according to one director. This library saw increases in both open hours and circulation, and anticipates a personnel budget increase of just over three percent; with the expectation of lessened revenue, only time will tell if those increases can be sustained.

Southern libraries, which in this sample include many large, urban systems, reported the highest increase in state funding at 41 percent. Tax base increases were noted in the responses, as well as support from library-focused state funds in Florida and Oklahoma.

Northeastern libraries, overall leaning to suburban and small-town communities in the sample, showed the most stable level of state funding: 78 percent were unchanged year over year. One urban, independent Pennsylvania library district experienced a boost in state funding and saw an eight percent rise in circulation, an increase in revenue from its Friends organization, and an increase in outreach and programming activities. The library also received a state grant designed to support violence intervention and prevention in youth through after-school programming—an encouraging story of expansion amid so much contraction, but far from the norm.

Municipal library funding, or lack thereof, is subject to many variables. One small Texas library lost out on receiving a budget increase because of “money constraints within the city. There was a tax accessor change, and taxes were not collected in a timely matter.” In suburban New Jersey, Bernardsville Public Library Executive Director Mary Fran Daley noted at the end of 2025 that budget uncertainty is a regular part of business: “We won’t know (about budget allocations) until the Council reorganizes in January and sets their annual budget. For this reason, I wish we had a July–June fiscal year, but we do not. We are asking for more due to skyrocketing health insurance costs, but we won’t have certainty on that until at least March.”

One area where libraries may be saving money is in advocacy spending; 50 percent fewer libraries reported allocating funds to advocacy or lobbying this year, down from 12 percent to six percent of respondents. While challenges to the freedom to read and punitive legislation continue to pose a threat, this decrease may reflect strained budgets and having to make choices that are more directly tied to service.

Some libraries are benefitting from new individual or corporate donations; nearly a quarter—24 percent—of the sample received donations compared to 21 percent in the previous year, and reported decreases fell drastically, with only four percent of libraries reporting a drop in corporate gifts in 2025, versus 12 percent in 2024.

THE TECHNOLOGY CYCLE

This year’s results on technology spending suggest a transition from large tech investments toward more incremental reinvestments, with an average spend down from $467,187 to $360,574. Large systems serving 500,000+ populations exceeded all other segments in technology spending, at an average of $4.34 million, with 57 percent of those large libraries working with an increased budget—up from 33 percent last year. Switching the view to libraries serving fewer than 10,000 residents, technology spending increased ($9,268 to $10,906), but these numbers highlight the differences in scale, which can lead to the categorization of libraries into technological haves and have-nots.

Enterprise software makes up the largest portion of tech spending (an average of 33 percent), followed by hardware (25 percent) and other software such as upgrades (16 percent). Large hardware investments came in at just six percent of library budgets, primarily seen in the segments serving 25,000–49,999 and 100,000–499,999. Responses noted new purchases like self-serve kiosks, automation such as integrated library systems (ILSs), and memory labs where visitors can scan or transform old media types to digital files. These purchases suggest specific, project-based investments. There is strong data in the survey from libraries across demographics and communities increasing the number of public PCs or adding loanable laptops, indicating that all libraries continue to serve the ongoing need of connecting their residents to computers.

Spending on new software purchases and upgrades declined overall from 19 percent to 16 percent, but remains a critical part of tech budgets in the largest library systems, where it represents 27 percent of technology spending.

FUNDING THE DESIRE FOR DIGITAL

For many libraries, meeting the technological needs of their patrons also means moving toward more e-content and digital materials. Altogether this year’s sample spends an average of 28 percent of its materials budget on digital content; population segment is again a predictor for this level of spend. Ninety percent of libraries serving 500,000+ spend over 30 percent of their materials budget on digital, while fewer than a third (29 percent) of libraries serving less than 10,000 spend in the same ratio. The overall net change for digital materials spending rose sharply this year, from an increase of 6.4 percent in 2024 to a 15 percent bump. Looking more closely at the breakdown, libraries serving 100,000–499,999 reported the highest share of increased digital spending, with 87 percent of respondents noting an increase.

It may be tempting to assume that these increases in spending mean equally increased access to more ebooks; however, 2025 saw multiple news stories about libraries being swamped by increasing digital license costs passed down from publishers. A July 2025 Computers in Libraries article (bit.ly/4qGSYAt) notes that “ebooks are now 3.63 times as expensive as print,” and that ebook licenses are evolving from a former perpetual-access model to more metered content, where an ebook or e-audio title can only circulate a limited number of times before a new license must be purchased. In the end, the article states, “keeping up with the demand for popular titles can...require considerable expense.” It’s clear that libraries are actively expanding digital spending, and likely reallocating dollars from physical materials purchases or from other discretionary categories, rather than finding an overall increase in operational budget.

DROPS IN STAFF, HOURS, AND CIRCULATION

While spending on personnel and benefits sits as the top priority for this year’s sample, the average number of full-time employees (FTEs) per system declined from 54.1 in 2024 to 47.1 in 2025. Going back to 2016, the average FTE stood at 63. Multibranch libraries may be rebalancing staff across locations, indicated by a growth in average FTEs per location (from 12.6 in 2024 to 14.8 in 2025) instead of expanding overall system staffing. The average spend per FTE declined for the second straight year ($73,390 to $72,168), a figure that highlights how wage and benefit growth in the field is not keeping pace with increases to the cost of living. Professional development (PD) remains a necessary investment for most libraries in the sample, with 91 percent reporting some level of PD spending and even the smallest libraries reporting high participation in PD offerings (80 percent). Regardless, the overall spend on PD is softening, with 17 percent of libraries reporting a decrease.

Workforce reduction due to retirements means some positions are lost to attrition, saving money for the library but lowering the FTE count. On the other hand, a suburban Northeast municipal system benefited from “county human resources implementing a salary and compensation adjustment in addition to a cost-of-living adjustment, resulting in significant increases to personnel costs.” This would be applied to current FTEs, not necessarily an indication of increased hiring. Overall, fewer library workforces are expanding, with 14 percent reporting decreases, up from an eight percent personnel contraction last year.

It’s not surprising that with these staffing challenges, the survey reveals a drop from 54.3 open hours to 41.9. This demonstrates a reduced service level compared with prior benchmarks. Some stabilization is evident, as nearly nine in 10 libraries report no change in open hours.

Per capita circulation can be closely tied to both personnel and open hours—if a library isn’t staffed, it can’t be open, and if it’s not open, items are not being checked out. Average per capita circulation declined this year, from 7.45 to 6.38, continuing a downward trend that hasn’t recovered since the pandemic. Midwestern libraries report a stronger average circ at nine items per capita, with suburban libraries in general showing the strongest numbers. Libraries in the Northeast had the most significant decline, from 8.32 to 3.09, though their open hours only decreased by two percent. Analysis suggests that user behavior, format preferences, and service models, as well as fewer open library hours, have shifted more permanently to impact physical checkouts.

TRENDS TO WATCH

In early 2026, it’s clear that uncertainty will continue to influence library budgets. Will restrictive anti–freedom to read legislation result in pockets of retributive fiscal cuts? Will private philanthropy step up and into the library funding space?

IMLS is releasing its next round of full grant funding, which is a positive story—however, the director is a Trump administration appointee without any library or museum background. Some fear a new recession and drops in property values, while other communities are in the middle of a housing boom, resulting in higher revenue—for now.

The high degree of uncertainty in all areas means that, currently, budgeting is as much an art as a science. The one constant, however, is that libraries will continue to meet an increasingly critical role in the lives of their communities—providing connectivity, education, literacy, information, and a wide range of lifelines—and continue to serve as careful stewards of the resources they have to work with.

April Witteveen is the library director at the Oregon State University–Cascades campus in Bend, OR.