For law schools
An independent reference for the people who live accreditation — the Standards in plain language, an ABA 101 primer, the documentation toolkit, a living updates tracker, an interactive readiness checklist, and Eli, an accreditation copilot that answers from the Standards themselves. 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.
Currently referencing the 2026–2027 Standards and Rules of Procedure for Approval of Law Schools (reflects changes approved through August 2026). Unofficial reference — the authoritative source is always the ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar at americanbar.org.
What you can do here
Ask plain-language questions and get answers grounded in the published Standards, with standard citations. Eli drafts and critiques self-study narratives, spots evidence gaps, generates likely site-evaluator questions, and runs mock Q&A. Tell him your role and he tailors everything to your seat.
Ask a question →The standards that carry the most weight in a review cycle — browsable and searchable — plain-language explanations, interpretations and revision status, and the evidence a site team expects for each. Type in the search and hand any topic straight to Eli.
Open the reference →The official documents, one click away: the 2026–2027 Standards, the Rules of Procedure, and the Guidance Memos — plus an evidence matrix, a narrative review rubric, a workplan format, and the twelve FAQs everyone asks.
Open the toolkit →The Council, explained plainly — who the accreditor is, why ABA approval matters for bar eligibility, how a site evaluation actually works, which standards your role owns, and the paper trail every review runs on.
Start the crash course →Council meetings, standards revisions, guidance memos, and the Core Principles Review — a dated list, refreshed as new items are announced. Every item links to its source.
See what's coming →Upcoming ABA Section of Legal Education meetings and Council sessions — dates, locations, and what each one covers. Confirm details on americanbar.org before making travel plans.
See the calendar →See what Eli can do
Tap any question — it opens Eli with the question already asked, answered from the Standards with citations.
Trending on the hub
The topics visitors ask about most. Tap any card and Eli answers it in full, from the Standards with citations.
Loading trending questions…
Updated monthly from what visitors actually ask. Anonymous — no identities are tracked.
Who it's for
Deans and senior leaders get the national picture fast — the standards that carry weight, the revision activity that affects planning, and what the site evaluation team will actually probe — without wading through the full Standards book.
Directors and faculty leads get working tools: self-study drafting and critique, evidence-gap spotting, mock site-evaluator Q&A, and Eli on call at midnight before the visit.
Everyone else gets plain-language explainers, role guides that say what you own (set your role on the My Role page), and FAQs that answer the questions you're afraid to ask in the meeting.
The posture
When you paste a draft narrative or describe a process, Eli scores it against the standard using only this vocabulary — never a compliance verdict:
| Verdict | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Strong Evidence | The materials appear to address the expectation with specific, dated, owned evidence. |
| Evidence Present but Could Be Strengthened | The expectation is addressed, but the evidence is thin, dated, or indirect. |
| Potential Evidence Gap | Something the standard asks for has no visible supporting evidence. |
| Conflicting Evidence | Materials you provided say different things about the same process. |
| Needs Verification | A claim is made but can't be checked from what's provided. |
| No Supporting Evidence Located | Nothing provided addresses the expectation. |
The evidence test. For every institutional claim, ask: if a site evaluator 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.
Why it exists
Accreditation work runs on documents scattered across americanbar.org PDFs, guidance memos, and Council meeting materials. This hub puts the working parts in one place: the current Standards text, the calendar of what's next, and an assistant that reads the documents so you don't have to re-read them at midnight before a site evaluation. It is independent and unofficial — written from the perspective of people who do this work, not affiliated with the ABA or any law school.
Stay current
One short email when ABA Standards, timelines, or guidance change. No spam — unsubscribe anytime.