I did not perform a complete survey but The Jurisdictional Limits of Campus Police reports that, "subject to jurisdictional constraints, campus police officers had virtually the same powers as their municipal counterparts." (Internal quotes omitted.) Generally speaking, police are police not administration.
Here are some statutes:
HIGHER EDUCATION (110 ILCS 1020/) Private College Campus Police Act.
The Board of Trustees of a private college or private university, may
appoint persons to be members of a campus police department....
Members of the campus police department shall have the powers of
municipal peace officers and county sheriffs.
General Laws PART I TITLE II CHAPTER 22C Section 63.
The colonel may... at the request of an officer of a college, university, other
educational institution... appoint employees of such college,
university, other educational institution or hospital as special state
police officers. Such special state police officers shall... have the
same power to make arrests as regular police officers for any criminal
offense committed in or upon lands or structures owned, used or
occupied by such college, university, or other institution or
...certified campus police officer shall have the
authority to enforce... State criminal statutes.
departments formed by private institutions of higher education
pursuant to this act shall be deemed to be public agencies in the
State of Oklahoma
Here is a case:
People v. Boettner, 362 N.Y.S.2d 365 (N.Y.Sup., 1974) is a case where school officials at a private school tried to get the cops to come execute a search. While the cops were dragging their feet obtaining a warrant, the school officials did their own search, found marijuana which they turned over to the police. Suspect was arrested and convicted. When the cops can't go into the room, send in the administration. Sort of.
present search and seizure was conducted by college officials in a
private capacity without government knowledge or participation and
concludes that as such it is not subject to fourth amendment
constraints. While it is true that a student does not lose his
constitutional rights at the school house door or at the entrance to
the college campus neither does he become cloaked with greater
protection than any non-student who is the subject of a seizure of
evidence by a private citizen.
BUT the judge makes sure we understand that "State Police had no knowledge of and did not participate, directly or indirectly, in the search conducted by RIT officials on the 15th." So "it cannot be said that the RIT officials who decided on their own to search defendants' rooms were acting as agents, either actual or implied, of law enforcement.... Nor can it be said that the present search was only one incident in a close and continuing relationship between RIT and local law enforcement officers.... In the final analysis, RIT acted on its own, for its own reasons, and to further its own purposes."
Regarding a written policy:
The fact that the rules of the college regarding room searches were
not complied with is of no consequence in determining the
admissibility of the evidence for purposes of a criminal proceeding.
Public schools are an entirely different animal. In those cases the university staff are public employees and their searches can be fourth amendment violations but they ARE allowed to conduct searches subject to the "reasonable exercise of University supervisory duties."
"Even though the special relationship that existed between these petitioners and Troy University officials conferred upon the University officials the right to enter and search petitioners' dormitory rooms, that right cannot be expanded and used for purposes other than those pertaining to the special relationship."
Piazzola v. Watkins, 316 F.Supp. 624 (M.D. Ala., 1970)
Moore v. Student Affairs Committee of Troy State Univ., 284 F.Supp. 725 (M.D. Ala., 1968)