Executive Summary

For decades, the New England Commission of Higher Education (NECHE) has shaped institutional priorities across governance, academic quality, student success, and resource allocation for academic institutions in its geographic area. NECHE’s accreditation standards define how colleges and universities demonstrate legitimacy, direct funding priorities, and organize their academic and student support systems. Historically, academic libraries were a respected and necessary part of the accreditation standards for NECHE institutions. Unfortunately, that may not be the case in the next iteration of institutional accreditation standards covered by NECHE.

The 2021 NECHE Standards for Accreditation currently in effect specifically recognize libraries, library staff, information resources, and librarians as essential components of institutional quality. The 2021 institutional accreditation standards embedded libraries within the overall framework for teaching and learning, institutional resources, information literacy, and governance. This language reflected the deeply integrated role that libraries play in supporting curricular quality, faculty research, student success, and institutional mission.

However, the Draft 2026 NECHE Standards eliminates all references to libraries, librarians, and library services. Key terms such as “library,” “librarians,” and “information resources,” which were present in multiple sections of the 2021 standards, are entirely absent from the 2026 draft. The omission signals a shift in NECHE’s framing of what institutions must demonstrate to achieve accreditation, with profound implications for the standing, funding, and strategic visibility of campus libraries and library staff across higher education in the region.

In addition to the elimination of libraries, the Draft 2026 Standards removes all references to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI). Historically, NECHE’s standards required colleges and universities to follow any DEI commitments they set for themselves, maintain nondiscriminatory policies in employment and academics, and cultivate an inclusive atmosphere that supported individuals of diverse identities and backgrounds. These provisions have now been stripped from the 2026 Draft Standards and replaced with language requiring institutions only to ensure that students “feel welcomed, supported, [and] included in the community.”

The 2026 Standards Draft is being circulated at a time when the integrity of our colleges and universities, as well as the accreditation systems that uphold academic quality, is being undermined by partisan pressures that look to erase fundamental principles from higher education policy. This is not a normal policy revision. These significant shifts follow an April 2025 executive order from the Trump administration warning accreditors that they could face denial, suspension, or termination of federal recognition if they continued to include DEI-related requirements in their standards. The order argued that DEI provisions constituted unlawful discrimination, putting accreditors in the position of choosing between federal compliance and existing accreditation practice.

NECHE leaders have publicly acknowledged that the 2026 Draft changes are a direct response to federal pressure. Following an April 2025 executive order from the Trump administration threatening accreditors with “denial, monitoring, suspension, or termination of recognition” if they included DEI requirements, NECHE has chosen to retreat from decades of educational best practice. In the same period, federal officials have sought to punish institutions for maintaining DEI programs and even urged NECHE to revoke Harvard University’s accreditation.

The administration’s scrutiny has gone further: in August 2025, it formally urged NECHE to reconsider Harvard’s accreditation following a Department of Health and Human Services finding that the university had violated federal civil rights law. NECHE has requested a report from Harvard and is expected to review the matter later this year. While revoking accreditation remains rare, doing so would jeopardize Harvard’s access to federal student aid and research grants, placing billions in funding at risk.

If approved by NECHE’s membership in December 2025, the Draft Standards will take effect in July 2026. Their adoption would mark a major shift in how accreditation defines institutional responsibility for diversity, equity, and inclusion and would underscore the growing influence of federal politics over the historically independent accreditation process.

The public comment period for the 2026 Draft standards is open until October 15, 2025. Academic library consortia, systems, state associations, and institutional leaders in the  New England Commission region must engage in this comment process. Without significant feedback about the importance of continuing with standards that include libraries and librarians, our sector could be written out of this regional accreditation framework as early as next year. Once erased, gaining back that ground will be far more difficult.

Term Analysis

A straightforward textual comparison of the current NECHE 2021 Standards and the draft 2026 Standards shows the depth of the problem:

The absence is universal. The terms that once affirmed libraries as essential academic infrastructure have been removed from the draft 2026 text.

Documents We’re Discussing

2021 New England Commission of Higher Education (NECHE) Standards for Accreditation

        Main page: https://www.neche.org/standards-for-accreditation/

Direct download: https://www.neche.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Standards-for-Accreditation-2021.pdf (opens PDF)

2026 Draft NECHE Standards for Accreditation

        Main page: https://www.neche.org/2026-draft-of-revised-standards/ 

Direct download: https://www.neche.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Draft-2026-NECHE-Standards-for-Accreditation.pdf (opens PDF)

Section-by-Section Comparison of Omissions

Please note that the section numbering in the NECHE 2026 Draft does not neatly map to the current 2021 NECHE Standards.

A. Teaching, Learning, and Scholarship (Standard Six, 2021)

2021 (Standard 6.2):
 “There are an adequate number of faculty and academic staff, including librarians, advisors, and instructional designers, whose time commitment to the institution is sufficient to assure the accomplishment of class and out-of-class responsibilities…”

Analysis: This provision explicitly recognized librarians as part of the academic workforce and affirmed their instructional, advisory, and curricular support roles. It also anchored librarians’ presence within the faculty governance and teaching structure.

2026 (Draft Standard 2.6):
 “There is an adequate number of faculty and academic staff to accomplish curricular, co-curricular, and student support responsibilities.”

Change: The specific mention of librarians is eliminated. The shift to a generic phrase (“faculty and academic staff”) dilutes the recognition of librarians’ instructional and curricular roles, leaving their inclusion to institutional discretion rather than accreditation expectations.

B. Institutional Resources (Standard Seven, 2021 vs. Standard Three, 2026)

2021 (Standard 7.22):
“The institution provides access to library and information resources, services, facilities, and qualified staff sufficient to support its teaching and learning environments and its research and public service mission as appropriate.”

Analysis: This statement is among the strongest affirmations of libraries in any U.S. accreditation standard. It explicitly links library services and staff to institutional mission, academic quality, and research support.

2026 (Draft Standard 3.9):
“Institutions must ensure their physical, information, and technological resources are sufficient to support student learning.”

Change: All references to libraries, library services, and library staff are removed. The concept of “information resources” is retained but in a generic, infrastructure-oriented context. There is no requirement for professional staff, organized services, or collection development — core components of academic libraries.

C. Information Literacy and Research Support (Standard Four, 2021)

2021 (Standard 4.19):
“Requirements for the major or area of concentration are based upon clear and articulated learning objectives, including a mastery of the knowledge, information resources, methods, and theories pertinent to a particular area of inquiry.”

Analysis: This language integrates library-supported or -centered competencies such as information literacy and resource mastery into curricular design and outcomes assessment.

2026 Draft
No comparable language exists in the 2026 draft. According to our reading, the draft does not require institutions to support students’ development of information literacy or engagement with curated scholarly resources as part of program outcomes.

D. Public Disclosure and Student Information (Standard Nine, 2021 vs. Standard Five, 2026)

2021 (Standard 9.20):
“For each location and modality of instruction, the institution publishes a description of the programs, academic and other support services, co-curricular and non-academic opportunities, and library and other information resources available to students.”

Analysis: This standard includes libraries in systems that ensure a high degree of transparency and accountability across the institution.

2026 (Draft Standard 5.3):
“The institution publishes its accreditation status, complaint and public comment procedures, transfer and credit policies, articulation agreements, list of programs offered and student services, cost, financial aid, and anti-discrimination policies.”

Change: The requirement to disclose library and information resources is deleted. Without it, institutions could omit library services from public-facing materials without affecting accreditation status. High transparency and accountability.

Interpretive Analysis: Risks and Implications

The elimination of library-related language in the draft 2026 NECHE standards is a semantic shift that represents a structural change in how accreditors will understand institutional quality. When “library” and “librarian” appear in accreditation standards, they describe a service and affirm the necessity of that service for institutional legitimacy. Their removal shifts libraries from being required components of accredited institutions to optional amenities, dependent on local leadership priorities rather than systemic expectations.

Accreditation language is a key driver of budgetary decisions. When libraries are explicitly mentioned, institutions must allocate resources accordingly to remain in compliance. Without that anchor, libraries are more easily deprioritized, especially during budget cuts or restructuring. By removing librarians from the definition of “academic staff” in the standards, NECHE reduces the accreditation basis for their participation in faculty governance, curricular development, and assessment processes. Over time, this could weaken arguments for faculty status, tenure eligibility, and shared governance roles for library professionals.

Consortial and system-level library initiatives, particularly shared collections, digital infrastructure, and research support networks, rely on institutional accreditation language to justify institutional participation and funding. Removing libraries from the standards could undermine the policy and financial rationale for these collaborations.

_________________________________________________

Further reading: “Institutional Accreditation and the Academic Library: A Strategy for Engagement and Representation”, a July 2025 report by the EveryLibrary Institute: https://www.everylibraryinstitute.org/institutional_accreditation_academic_library_report 

Review and download any of the Reports or Policy Position Papers from the EveryLibrary Institute for free at everylibraryinstitute.org/research.

_________________________________________________

Recommendations and Call to Action

NECHE has invited stakeholders to submit comments: “Please share those [public] comments [on the 2026 Draft] to this email, Standardsreview@neche.org, by October 15, 2025, so that the Commission can consider them as it prepares a final set of Standards to be presented for approval by its members at NECHE’s December 2025 Annual Meeting. The new Standards will then go into effect July 1, 2026.”  NECHE makes a PDF version of its Public Comment policy manual available at: https://www.neche.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Pp77-Policy-and-Procedures-for-Public-Comments.pdf (via https://www.neche.org/policies-procedures/).  

With the public comment period open until October 15, 2025, academic library leaders, consortia, systems, and state associations must act now to ensure libraries are not erased from accreditation. EveryLibrary Institute recommends the following:

1. Submit detailed public comment to NECHE asking them to continue using the 2021 language referencing libraries, library staff, and library services in sections related to academic staff (2026 Standard 2.6), institutional resources (Standard 3.9), public disclosure (Standard 5.3), and teaching, learning, research, and public service missions (Standard 7.22).
2. In your public comment, recommend that any modifications of language similar to 2021 be made in close consultation with your organization and aligned library organizations to ensure that they accurately reflect the impact and integrity of academic library programs on campus missions.
3. Engage other New England regional organizations representing provosts, general counsels, faculty senates, and academic affairs offices to underscore that this is not a “library issue” but an academic quality issue.
   

Accreditation standards shape budgets, determine governance structures, guide strategic plans, and legitimize institutional priorities. The removal of library- and librarian-related language from the draft 2026 NECHE Standards could represent a profound shift in how institutional quality is defined. The 2021 standards embedded libraries at the heart of accredited institutions. Their disappearance from the 2026 Draft threatens to marginalize one of higher education’s most essential academic and intellectual infrastructures.

The NECHE public comment period closes on October 15, 2025. Please make your organizational or individual comment via Standardsreview@neche.org. The EveryLibrary Institute urges regional library consortia, systems, and associations to make their voices heard and submit public comments that libraries, librarians, and information resources remain visible, valued, and required in the accreditation framework that shapes the future of higher education.

For more information or to coordinate outreach efforts, please contact our Executive Director, John Chrastka, john.chrastka@everylibrary.org, or Senior Policy Fellow, Kathleen McEvoy, at kathleen.mcevoy@everylibrary.org.

Appendix: Possible Crosswalk of the 2025 Draft ACRL Standards for Libraries in Higher Education

The 2025 draft revision of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Standards for Libraries in Higher Education provides the most current and comprehensive professional framework for defining the role, contributions, and assessment of academic libraries. Grounded in national best practices and institutional effectiveness principles, the ACRL standards articulate how libraries advance student learning, faculty scholarship, institutional mission, and strategic goals.

As the draft 2026 NECHE Standards eliminate explicit references to libraries, librarians, and information resources, the ACRL framework becomes a benchmark for advocacy. By aligning public comments with ACRL’s language and principles, library consortia, systems, and associations can demonstrate that the omission of libraries from NECHE’s accreditation framework is inconsistent with professional consensus, national norms, and higher education’s shared understanding of institutional quality.

Crosswalk: ACRL 2025 Draft Standards and NECHE 2025 Draft Gaps

The table below maps major principles from the ACRL 2025 draft to the sections of the NECHE 2026 draft where library-related language is absent, diluted, or replaced with generic terminology. This crosswalk is intended to guide comment drafting and help stakeholders make standards-based recommendations: