Why Access Control Construction Standards Matter Before the First Door Is Installed

Why Access Control Construction Standards Matter Before the First Door Is Installed

Access control projects can get complicated quickly. Doors, hardware, readers, cameras, contractors, IT, facilities, police, purchasing, card offices, and building users all touch the process at some point. Without clear standards, it is easy for things to become inconsistent, difficult to support, and expensive to fix later.

That was the central theme of a recent discussion featuring Stephen Cornett, Security Systems Director at the University of Kentucky, and Nelson Olivier, Director of the Integrated Security Management Division at Mississippi State University. Both institutions came to construction standards from slightly different starting points, but their message was remarkably similar: standards are not just paperwork. They are the foundation for building security systems that can grow, function, and be supported over time.

From the “Wild West” to a More Centralized Approach

Cornett described the University of Kentucky’s starting point as “the Wild West.” When the university began consolidating its systems in 2012 and 2013, there were 73 different access control and video systems that needed to be brought into one platform. Today, UK manages almost 5,000 camera streams, 58 blue light emergency towers, and nearly 11,000 access control points across campus, off campus locations, and medical centers.

Mississippi State had a similar challenge. Olivier shared that in 2016, there were no clear standards, cameras were spread across different recorders, and contractor submittals had very little oversight. Mississippi State now has two access control platforms, with an ongoing effort to move doors from a legacy platform to the Genetec Security Center platform. The university has installed 2,300 doors, 2,700 cameras, and 15 license plate recognition cameras, while also managing blue light emergency phones, drone detection software, panic alarms, and other security tools.

For both institutions, the move toward standards was about more than selecting equipment. It was about creating a consistent way to plan, install, review, support, and improve systems across campus.

Get Involved Early, Not After the Decisions Are Made

One of the strongest takeaways from the discussion was the importance of getting a seat at the table early in the construction process.

Olivier explained that their division pushed to be involved with planning, design, and construction much earlier than before. That early involvement allows the team to define what each opening should look like, what hardware should be used, how different trades need to handle their part of the project, and what quality expectations need to be met.

Cornett echoed that point. Getting involved during schematic design or design development makes a major difference because many decisions are made early that affect access control and video surveillance later. The later the security team enters the process, the harder it becomes to make the changes needed.

That is a practical point worth repeating. If access control is treated as something to figure out at the end, the project may already be locked into decisions that are harder, slower, or more expensive to correct.

Standards Help Protect the Future

At UK, construction standards became especially important when the university entered a period of major growth. Between 2013 and 2018, the university built or renovated 28 buildings, including 14 residence halls, a new business and economics college, a new student center, a new science building, and a new law building. Cornett said the system grew from what was originally expected to be 15 buildings and maybe 100 doors to 8,000 doors in a short amount of time.

Without standards in place at the beginning, that growth could have created a very difficult situation.

This is where standards become strategic. They are not only about the project in front of you. They also help make sure the next project, and the one after that, do not take the campus backward into disconnected systems, inconsistent hardware, or unsupported devices.

Partnerships Make Standards Enforceable

Both speakers made it clear that standards only work when the right relationships are in place.

At UK, Cornett said their team became the final decision maker on electronic safety and security products and installations. But that authority is supported by partnerships with purchasing, IT, facilities, capital construction, and university administration. He shared an example of purchasing contacting him when someone tried to buy a camera from Amazon. That created an opportunity to talk with the end user, understand the need, and help meet it through the university’s approved systems.

Olivier described a similar process at Mississippi State, where submittals for projects come through his team for review. If a contractor proposes a change, the team can review it and determine whether it fits the purpose of the project.

Done well, standards provide an opportunity to guide people toward the right solution before a separate system or unsupported product becomes another long-term problem, fostering communication between departments rather than reinforcing silos.

Door Hardware Is More Complicated Than It Looks

A funny but very real point from the discussion was how much the work of access control depends on understanding doors. As Cornett put it, there is a lot more to doors than just opening and closing.

The presenters focused heavily on the connection between Division 8 and Division 28 standards. Door hardware, locks, cabling, power transfer, hinges, schedules, readers, cameras, and system functionality all need to work together. The hardware schedule matters because it defines the operational flow of the building.

Olivier explained that Mississippi State provides individual door details for each door type to all trades involved once a project reaches the submittal phase. The goal is to make sure everyone knows exactly what is going where and how it should be installed. Mississippi State also includes a professional services project punch as part of the hardware schedule so issues can be identified, corrected, and reviewed again.

At UK, security system analysts commission every door. They review the door schedule, inspect the hardware, and test that everything functions the way it was designed to function. Cornett noted that this process also provides as built information, operational information, and documentation that becomes valuable after the warranty period ends.

Standards Are Never Really Finished

Another important point: standards are not something you write once and forget.

Cornett emphasized that UK reviews its standards every year. Hardware changes. Camera models change. Reader models change. A facilities team may discover that a piece of hardware is not working as expected. Standards have to keep up with those changes.

Olivier gave an example of reviewing a Division 8 standard for a project and catching items that did not match Mississippi State’s practices. Even when a campus has a standard, design teams may merge it with their own templates or include products the campus does not use. Reviewing those details before bid helps avoid change orders, which add cost to the project.

That ongoing review process may not be flashy, but it is what keeps standards useful.

Clear Roles Matter, Especially When Something Breaks

The presenters also touched on staffing and responsibility. At both institutions, the security operations are housed within the police department, but they still work closely with IT, facilities, locksmiths, vendors, and other campus partners.

Cornett described the challenge of determining whether an issue belongs to the police department, IT, or facilities. Sometimes all three touch the same door. Without strong partnerships, it is easy for an issue to bounce between departments while the problem continues. With strong partnerships, teams can meet at the door and solve the issue together.

Olivier described a similar relationship with the lock shop at Mississippi State. If the lock shop responds to a ticket and realizes the issue involves integrated security, they bring Olivier’s team in. The relationship allows both groups to work together instead of working around each other.

Start With Where You Want to End Up

Near the end of the discussion, the speakers were asked what advice they would give to a school that does not have this in place yet.

Cornett’s recommendation was to start by deciding where you want to end up. Once you know what access control system you want to use and what your long-term direction should be, begin developing standards and get in front of the capital construction group. New buildings, renovations, and even smaller projects can help move the campus toward that goal if standards are in place.

Olivier added that the work should stay connected to the larger purpose: safety and security. When people can see the impact of the work and understand why it matters, they are more likely to support it.

Cornett also emphasized the importance of executive sponsorship. To make standards work, campus leadership needs to support the direction so the security team has the authority to guide decisions rather than simply make suggestions that can be ignored.

The Bottom Line

Construction standards are one of the most important tools a campus can use to build access control and video systems that are consistent, scalable, and supportable.

The discussion made clear that the details matter: who reviews submittals, who defines the door schedule, who gets involved at schematic design, who commissions each opening, who approves products, and who keeps the standards current.

But the bigger message was about alignment. When security, IT, facilities, purchasing, capital construction, administration, and campus users are working from the same playbook, projects run more smoothly and campuses are better positioned to support the systems they are building.

For institutions still working toward that point, the advice from the presenters was straightforward: decide where you want to go, write the standards, build the partnerships, get involved early, and keep the focus on campus safety and security.

Watch the whole discussion here: