Seventy-seven of ninety library evaluators of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) responded to a 1973 questionnaire to determine: (1) if evaluative criteria used are based with an authority other than SACS; and (2) if certain methods, procedures, and techniques employed by evaluators could be used to construct an ideal evaluator profile. Evaluators considered themselves competent and self-sufficient to evaluate libraries without strict adherence to SACS's standard. They expressed a need, however, for guidance from SACS through quantitative guidelines, check lists, and questionnaires, and have developed their own. A profile was constructed based on procedures used by evaluators. The study concluded that minimal guidance is given to evaluators, and that there is minimal communication between SACS and evaluators. The study recommended the SACS should: (1) produce and distribute publications to evaluators identifying differences between suggestions and recommendations; (2) give first-time evaluators copies of good past reports; (3) assign library evaluators to libraries and not other institutional aspects; and (4) make the library standard modern and flexible, containing normative data and quantitative guidelines. Further research on evaluator competency and other libraries and accreditating associations was recommended. Cover letter, questionnaire, and bibliography are appended. (Author/KP)