Part of the SI Law family of independent guides Unofficial — read the disclaimer

For law schools

The ABA accreditation hub.

The ABA's Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools — in plain language — plus a documentation toolkit and an interactive readiness checklist for self-studies and site-visit preparation. These materials support documentation: they help a school organize evidence and spot gaps. They never declare a program compliant or noncompliant — only the ABA Council makes approval determinations. Eli works here as an accreditation copilot with the same posture.

The hub

Three rooms

The posture

How Eli reads evidence

When you paste a draft narrative or describe a process, Eli scores it against the standard using only this vocabulary — never a compliance verdict:

VerdictMeaning
Strong EvidenceThe materials appear to address the expectation with specific, dated, owned evidence.
Evidence Present but Could Be StrengthenedThe expectation is addressed, but the evidence is thin, dated, or indirect.
Potential Evidence GapSomething the standard asks for has no visible supporting evidence.
Conflicting EvidenceMaterials you provided say different things about the same process.
Needs VerificationA claim is made but can't be checked from what's provided.
No Supporting Evidence LocatedNothing provided addresses the expectation.

The evidence test. For every institutional claim, ask: if a site visitor asked the school to prove this statement, what evidence could it show? A policy proves a process is established, not that it is implemented — look for records, logs, minutes, and data that show the process actually runs.