The Hidden Accreditation Landmine: Why Library Compliance Failures Derail Otherwise Strong Reviews
In 2024, a well-respected private college in the Midwest received conditional accreditation status. Their financials were strong, their student outcomes impressive, and their faculty highly qualified. The problem? Their library services failed to meet three critical standards that evaluators deemed non-negotiable.
Most institutions focus on the "big ticket" accreditation areas—financials, student outcomes, faculty credentials—while library compliance quietly becomes a vulnerability. This post reveals why library standards have become more complex, what accreditors are scrutinizing, and how to avoid being blindsided.
Why Library Compliance Has Become More Complex
The Evolution of Library Standards
Library standards have evolved from "adequate physical collection" to comprehensive information literacy integration
The rise of online and hybrid education has expanded expectations for 24/7 digital access
Accreditors now expect evidence of library impact on student learning outcomes
Multi-campus institutions face consistency requirements across all locations
What Accreditors Are Looking For Now
Evidence of systematic collection development tied to curriculum
Documented student services and reference support availability
Information literacy integration in coursework
Assessment data showing library contribution to learning
Qualified library personnel (not just staff, but professionally trained librarians)
Adequate budget allocation and spending patterns
Statistics to Include
Cite recent accreditation reports showing percentage of citations related to library deficiencies
Note the increase in conditional accreditations or required monitoring due to library issues
The Top 5 Library Compliance Failures We See
Failure #1: Inadequate Documentation of Services: Many institutions provide excellent library services but fail to document them in ways accreditors can evaluate.
What this looks like:
No formal policies for collection development
Missing service level agreements or hours of operation documentation
Lack of usage statistics or assessment data
No evidence trail of how library resources align with programs
Why it happens: At time, due to budget and staffing restraints: Librarians focus on serving students rather than creating documentation infrastructure.
The fix: Implement systematic documentation protocols and regular evidence collection throughout the accreditation cycle, not just before the site visit.
Failure #2: Insufficient Staffing or Unqualified Personnel: Accreditors expect professionally trained librarians, not just staff who manage the library space.
What this looks like:
Part-time librarian coverage with gaps in availability
Staff without MLIS/MLS degrees handling professional librarian duties
No professional development or continuing education for library personnel
Single point of failure (one person manages everything)
Why it happens: Budget pressures lead institutions to minimize library staffing costs.
The fix: Even if hiring full-time isn't feasible, demonstrate commitment through qualified part-time professionals, ongoing training, or remote library services partnerships.
Failure #3: Inconsistent Multi-Campus Library Services: Institutions with multiple locations must provide comparable library access at all sites.
What this looks like:
Different databases or collection quality across locations
Inconsistent student support services
No unified policies or procedures
Why it happens: Historical growth patterns without strategic library planning.
The fix: Standardize services, policies, and resources across all locations with documented evidence of parity.
Failure #4: Poor Integration with Online Programs: Online students must have library access equivalent to on-campus students.
What this looks like:
No 24/7 reference support for online learners
Complex login procedures that frustrate distance students
Library instruction not embedded in online courses
No dedicated outreach to online student populations
Why it happens: Library services designed for residential students, then retrofitted for online programs.
The fix: Design library services with online-first thinking, ensuring seamless digital access and proactive student engagement.
Failure #5: Weak Assessment and Evidence of Learning Impact: Modern accreditation requires evidence that library resources contribute to student learning outcomes.
What this looks like:
No assessment plan for library services
Usage statistics collected but not analyzed or acted upon
Information literacy outcomes not measured
No connection between library assessment and institutional effectiveness
Why it happens: Assessment expertise gap or lack of integration with institutional assessment processes.
The fix: Develop a library assessment plan aligned with institutional learning outcomes and regular evidence collection protocols
