Survey of Academic Library Facilities Management: Plans for Furniture, examining how academic libraries assess, maintain, and plan for public furniture across a wide range of institution types. Based on original survey research, the report provides detailed benchmarks on furniture condition, lifecycle planning, power access, floor finishes, replacement priorities, and governance. The findings highlight a sector managing heavy use and evolving student expectations with limited long-term planning and uneven infrastructure investment. Five Key Findings from the Report Furniture condition is "adequate but stressed." While a plurality of libraries rate overall furniture condition as Good (35.56%), a full 20.00% rate it Poor or Very Poor, signaling meaningful deterioration across the sector Formal replacement planning is rare. Nearly two-thirds of libraries (62.

22%) report having no furniture lifecycle or replacement schedule, and only 4.44% have a funded replacement plan in place. Power access is the dominant pain point. "Not enough power at seats" is the single largest driver of complaints, cited by 35.56% of respondents, far exceeding any other furniture-related issue. Most libraries rate power infrastructure as inadequate. Only 33.34% say power access at seats is adequate or better, while 64.

44% rate it barely adequate or worse, underscoring a widespread mismatch between furniture and technology needs. Soft seating tops replacement priorities. When asked what single furniture category they would replace first, 24.44% chose lounge or soft seating-more than any other category-reflecting concerns about comfort, wear, and cleanliness. Beyond these findings, the report explores differences by enrollment size, Carnegie classification, building age, and footprint, as well as open-ended responses highlighting demand for wired furniture, privacy pods, durable materials, and inclusive design.