Strategic Vision Data Appendix

An important component of the strategic planning process has been to describe UC Davis through a lens of diversity data. We have taken inventory of the data available on campus and beyond, and we have used those sources to emphasize the urgency for implementing the recommendations in this document.


As a public, land-grant institution, UC Davis has a responsibility to serve the citizens of the state of California. Forecasters at the Pew Research Center (2008) have described what the demographics of the United States will look like in 2050. California is already there. Our undergraduate student population reflects this shift.

The progress to map undergraduate diversity into our graduate and professional programs and especially into our faculty and our workforce has been slower, yet the opportunities are clear. Graduate students benefit by building cultural competence through teaching a diverse undergraduate population and new research topics emerge out of interactions between scholars at all levels.

To better reflect the state of California, UC Davis has been working toward designation as a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI), where more than 25% of the student (undergraduate and/or graduate) population is Hispanic. More than 50% of the K–12 students in California are of Hispanic background and Latinx have the largest education disparity among all ethnic groups in California, with just 10.7% of Latinx adults 25 and older holding a bachelor’s degree. In Fall 2016, UC Davis Hispanic undergraduate population was 21% (n. 6175), a four percentage point increase in five years. Through a commitment to K–12 outreach and preparation, UC Davis aims to continue to address disparity in its enrollment of Latinx students. Becoming an HSI also goes beyond enrollment figures: In achieving this designation, UC Davis makes a further commitment to support the retention, academic progression, and timely graduation of all students admitted to our campus. UC Davis needs to strive for inclusion as vigorously as it reaches for diversity.

Please see the bottom of the page for our Notes and Sources.

2016 Race/Ethnicity UC Davis


Poverty is another issue that affects the diversity and success of our undergraduate population. A higher percentage of people live in poverty in California as compared to the U.S. (California: 16.4 %, U.S.: 14.8%). Various initiatives at UC Davis provide transition assistance, retention services, and internship opportunities for students. The Center for Poverty Research at UC Davis was established in 2011 with core funding from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services as one of three federally designated Poverty Research Centers whose mission is to facilitate non-partisan academic research in the United States. UC Davis has introduced several initiatives to address food insecurity and homelessness so that all students can focus on learning. The New York Times rated UC Davis No. 2 among all universities in the U.S. for educating students of diverse economic backgrounds in 2015.

Eighteen percent of residents in the county of Sacramento live below the poverty line. We may think of Sacramento as an urban center, but the county includes a large rural population as well, many of whom must travel miles to access quality care. Because of its location, UC Davis Health (UCDH) is uniquely positioned to make an impact in both rural and urban settings. UC Davis was an official partner in the multi-year Sacramento Promise Zone initiative, with its goal of improving health care access and economic growth. UCDH is exploring a joint partnership with a local Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC) in the immediate vicinity of the Sacramento campus and the feasibility of providing a mobile clinic to provide primary care services in the community and to support student-run clinics.

UC Davis must continue to be at the forefront of a national discussion of health care financing. Despite health care reform, access is still limited in California—and will continue to be while support for Medi-Cal remains underfunded. At community engagement forums that took place at UC Davis Health, participants noted that discontinuation of contracts with Medi-Cal affiliated insurers has had an adverse effect on their exposure to a culturally and socio-economically diverse patient population in the primary care setting, a key driver for diverse faculty, clinicians, staff, and students to choose
UC Davis.

The education and training of students and residents who are interested in learning best practices of serving the underserved, the uninsured, and the underinsured remains a high priority, and UCDH recognizes that having a diverse workforce is a key component in the delivery of quality, competent health care. Studies by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the Institute of Medicine have indicated that race concordance between patients and physicians can result in improved patient satisfaction and trust, with better adherence to medical treatment, health literacy and patient safety. One of the most significant gaps is in the Latinx community, where Latinx make up 39% of the state’s population but only 4.7% of physicians in California. To respond to this need, UC Davis School of Medicine launched the Prep Medico initiative in partnership with The Permanente Medical Group.

Another group that faces challenge and inequity when seeking health care is the LGBTQIA community. Improving outcomes for this community has been a focus of several initiatives at UCD Health. The nation’s largest lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) civil rights organization, the Human Rights Campaign Foundation, has recognized UC Davis Medical Center as a Leader in Healthcare Equality for creating a safe, inclusive and welcoming environment for LGBT patients and employees, and the Campus Pride Index gives it 4.5 out of 5 stars.

UC Davis attracts a high proportion of international scholars to its graduate academic (28%) and professional (8%) programs and to its Postdoctoral appointments (25%). Twelve percent of undergraduates and fewer than 2% of members of the workforce (Academic Federation, Academic Senate, and staff) are considered international. UC Davis has a global reputation that attracts scholars from all over the world to research, study, and teach. Scholars with international backgrounds bring many experiences to our campus and confront their own challenges in integrating into an American system of higher education. While some have faced difficulties in their home countries or discrimination in the United States, their experience is often different from those who have felt systemic discrimination in the United States from an early age. Where possible, we try to bring some of this understanding to the data, with the caveat that many disagree as to who should be considered international and when it is appropriate to make that distinction in analyzing a set of data.

Understanding our place in our communities gives context to the data that follows. These sections explore the demographics of our students and workforce and summarize the findings from various engagement and climate reports to create a picture of what we look like and suggest directions for further data mining and analysis.

2015 US Population Demographics2015 Undergraduate Demographics










2015 California Demographics2015 Graduate Demographics


2050 Projected US Demographics 2015 Faculty Demographics

Schools of Medicine and Nursing enrollment by race/ethnicity 2012-2017

Workforce members who identify as POC/URM by campusWorkforce members by gender and campus

Undergraduate Students

In Fall 2016, UC Davis enrolled a record number of URM freshmen.

  • 7,460, or 25% of the total class enrollment identified as URM, compared to 5,287 or 21% of the Fall 2012 enrollment
  • 60% identify as a POC
  • 59% identify as female
  • 168 students identify as veterans, 47 as reservists, and 177 as the dependent of a veteran

On average, undergraduate students who identify as URM take longer to graduate. Responding to recommendations in the report of the Blue Ribbon Committee for Enhancing the Undergraduate Experience (2013), UC Davis established specific benchmarks and set goals accordingly to increase graduation rates for URM and all students; in the four years following the report’s publication, the campus has strengthened advising programs, streamlined pathways to graduation, established mechanisms for skilled mentoring and supported these enhancements with learning and assessment technologies.

In 2015, 69% of Californians over the age of 25 did not hold a bachelor’s degree or higher. Latinx have the largest education disparity among all ethnic groups in California, with nearly 90% of Latinx adults 25 and older without a bachelor’s degree. With a college degree increasingly becoming a prerequisite for many jobs, the number of first generation students—those whose parents are without a college degree—is on the rise throughout the UC system. The proportion of First Generation students at UC Davis was 38% in 2016, a three percentage point increase since 2012. Within the category of students who identify as Latinx, 65% also identify as first generation, the highest proportion among race/ethnic groups. For most race/ethnic categories, the proportion of first generation students is increasing as fast or faster than overall enrollment within the category.

The distribution of students from diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds is inconsistent across colleges, and many departments are supporting a higher proportion of first generation and URM students, an effort that must not go unrecognized or under-resourced. The highest numbers of URM students are in the Division of Social Sciences and the College of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. URM students are disproportionately over-represented in the Division of Humanities, Arts & Cultural Studies. URM students are disproportionately underrepresented in the College of Engineering and the Division of Math and Physical Sciences.

UC Davis seeks to welcome an increasing number of students who learn differently, and students, staff, and faculty who face challenges related to physical or intellectual disabilities or mental health illnesses. Across all undergraduate, graduate academic, professional, and self-supporting programs, 437 students identified as having a disability, this figure is down from 816 students identifying as having a disability in 2012. The system records self-identification as having a disability and requests for accommodation. Universal accommodation practices and mobile tools may decrease the need for students to make formal requests, but more research is needed. Members of focus groups report that services and accommodation for those with challenges related to mental health are stretched thin. UC Davis is not alone in its need to better understand the scope of need. Across the country, students, staff, and faculty alike are demanding more and better access to services along with diversification of professional counseling staff.

Race/Ethnicity Undergraduate 2016-17

First Gen - Undergraduate, 2016-17

Gender - Undergraduate, 2016-17

Undergraduate enrollment by race/ethnicity, 2009-17

Time to graduation, 2012-2015

Comparison of undergraduate student fall enrollment by race/ethnicity and 1st generation

Undergraduate students who identify as URM and POC by college 2016-2017

Graduate and Professional Students

The undergraduate population is the pipeline for our graduate programs. An increasing number of URM students are enrolling in graduate academic, professional, and self-supporting programs, as of fall 2016:

  • 998 students, or 14% identified as URM, compared to 870 or 11% of those enrolled in Fall 2012
  • 31% identify as a person of color
  • 54% are female
  • 50 identify as a veteran or reservist and 22 as the dependent of a veteran

In 2015, UC Davis ranked in the top 100 of Producers of Minority Degrees by Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, with top-10 ranking for doctoral degrees in Foreign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics; Physical Sciences, Biological and Biomedical Sciences, Computer and Information Sciences, among other top rankings. UC Davis was No. 1 for all minorities in Veterinary Medicine and No. 1 for Hispanics in Physical Sciences. In addition, UC Davis has enrolled more underrepresented minority (URM) Ph.D. students in the life sciences than any other UC campus.

As with the undergraduate population, distribution of students from diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds and female students remains uneven across schools and colleges. This inconsistency has significant implications for our academic workforce, which draws from the graduate population. Professional schools have higher proportions of students who identify as POC or URM. Women are disproportionately underrepresented in the College of Engineering and the Division of Math and Physical Sciences. Men are disproportionately underrepresented in the School of Education, School of Nursing, and School of Veterinary Medicine.

Understanding where students of diverse ethnic backgrounds fall out of the pipeline to completion may help to prioritize strategies for addressing the disparities between undergraduate and graduate populations. We can start to learn more about the pool for our academic workforce by looking at the past five years of degrees conferred, acknowledging that there can be significant differences in gender and ethnic diversity at the school, college, and program level. This campus-wide analysis does imply that UC Davis needs to provide greater support for African American and Latinx students, as well as other underrepresented groups, to consider and apply for graduate school.

Graduate and professional enrollment, by race/ethnicity and college/school, 2016-2017Graduate and professional student enrollment by gender and college/school, 2016-2017Degrees conferred, by race/ethnicity, 2011-2016Degrees conferred by gender, 2011-2016Fall 2016 enrollments in graduate programs

Academic Federation and Academic Senate

Because this vision plan was built on stakeholder engagement, this section utilizes our academic membership groups, Academic Senate and Academic Federation, as a way of understanding differential access to opportunity for academic personnel. UC Davis, as the only University of California campus to have an Academic Federation, has a unique opportunity to leverage its more nuanced understanding of academic appointees.

  • The Academic Senate is 37% female (n. 511), 26% POC (n. 366) and 10% URM (n. 143).
  • The Academic Federation is 50% female (n. 612), 31% POC (n. 387), and 8% URM (n. 101).

In the five years between October 2011 and October 2016, units made an effort to hire more women and people of color into academic roles.

  • Of 330 new hires in the Academic Senate, 48% (n. 162) were female, 18% (n. 58) were URM, and 32% (n. 107) were POC.
  • Of 520 new hires the Academic Federation, 50% (n. 278) were female, 11% (n. 58) were URM, and 34% (n. 178) were POC.

The diversity of new hires varies by campus, school and college, and rank. In several charts, we disaggregate those who hold an academic rank of assistant, associate, or full professor. We recognize that our approach may not offer a full picture, and that it would also be useful to look at those defined as “ladder rank” or “faculty” categories. As of October 2016, women, POC, and URM occupy many fewer full professor ranks in relation to the undergraduate population—29% (n. 278) female, 22% (n. 208) POC, and 7% (n. 63) URM. There are more representative proportions of females and POC in assistant ranks (Female 49%, n.332; POC 41%, n. 279; URM 12%, n. 84) and associate ranks (Female 47%, n. 207; POC 35%, n. 153; URM 11%, n.48). Numbers vary widely among colleges and professional schools. Disparities are less among those in academic ranks who are members of the Academic Federation.

UC Davis has been at the forefront of a number of key initiatives to both recruit and retain diverse faculty. In 2016, Forbes named UC Davis No. 1 for women in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM), citing its National Science Foundation’s (NSF) ADVANCE: Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers and Center for the Advancement of Multicultural Perspectives on Science (CAMPOS) programs. The ADVANCE initiative at UC Davis has already done extensive work with data on the STEM workforce, so this appendix does not specifically explore this area of data. Please see the ADVANCE reports at

academic senate by race/ethnicity october 2016academic senate by race/ethnicity new hires 2011-2016

academic federation by gender october 2016academic federation new hires by gender 2011-2016

academic federation by race/ethnicity october 2016academic federation new hires by race/ethnicity 2011-2016


academic senate and academic federation members who identify as POC/URM by rankNew hires: academic senate and academic federation members who identify as POC/URM by rankAcademic senate and academic federation members who identify as POC/URM, by college and schoolNew hires: academic senate and academic federation members who identify as POC/URM by college and schoolAcademic senate and academic federation members by gender and by rankAcademic senate and academic federation members by gender and by college and schoolNew hires: academic senate and academic federation members by gender and rankNew hires: academic senate and academic federation members gender and by college and school

For additional data on the diversity of UC systemwide faculty and academic appointees please visit here. 

Postdoctoral Scholars

Another set of opportunities for expanding faculty diversity are with the UC President’s Postdoctoral Fellows Program (PPF) and the UC Davis Chancellor’s Postdoctoral Fellowship Program (CPFP). These programs include hiring incentive start-up packages, salaries for additional hires, and resources for training, mentoring and development. The programs are currently underutilized. UC continues to lose 50% of PPF fellows to faculty positions at other institutions, yet these fellows are the best scholars in their field who also contribute to diversity. At UC Davis, 13% of UC Davis postdoctoral scholars identify as URM and 47% are female.

postdocs by gender and by college and school, october 2016

postdocs identify as POC/URM by college and school, october 2016


With a population of 21,844 as of October 2016, the category of staff represents the largest proportion of the UC Davis workforce.

  • 21% identify as URM
  • 42% identify as POC
  • 63% identify as female
  • 142 identify as veterans

New hires in the period from October 2011-October 2016 have not effectively increased the representation of racial minorities and people of color on staff.

For the purposes of this section, we look solely at incumbents and recent hires without benchmarking against availability pools. For more information on availability, please see the Office of Campus Community Relations website for the two annual affirmative action reports, one for Minorities and Females and one for Veterans and Individuals with Disabilities, that provide benchmarks and strategies for achieving affirmative action goals. In alignment with federal standards, UC Davis has identified affirmative action units that are consistent with its organizational structure. Meaningful job groupings enable the campus to compare roles with similar responsibilities, wages, opportunities, and minimum qualifications. An availability analysis identifies the demographics of qualified candidates, and these pools are then benchmarked against UC Davis incumbents. Hiring managers are provided with annual hiring goals in order to move UC Davis closer to a situation where its job incumbents match the job availability pools.

The following internal comparison of URM and women by location (divisions) and job group does not consider availability but may add additional dimensions or insights to our understanding of the campus that enables unit leaders to enable them to prioritize the recommendations in this plan. URM staff are disproportionately underrepresented in management and senior professional roles and disproportionately overrepresented in lower-level supervisor roles. POC Staff are disproportionately underrepresented in management roles and disproportionately overrepresented in lower supervisory and non-supervisory roles. Women are also disproportionately overrepresented in lower level supervisory and non-supervisory roles. The proportion of URM staff varies by campus unit, as low as 10% in Engineering and as high as 32% in Student Affairs. The proportion of POC staff varies by campus unit, as low as 24% in Development/Alumni relations and as high as 51% in the UC Davis Medical Clinics. Several units, such as the library, have diversified their staff through hiring in the past five years. The lowest proportion of women is located in Campus Planning and Information (24%) and Educational Technology (22%). The highest proportion is located in School of Education (84%), Letters and Science Admin (85%) and School of Nursing (81%).

URM staff is disproportionately overrepresented in some job groups, such as:

  • Lower Operatives
  • Food Services
  • Cleaning Services
  • Clerical/Medical
  • Hospital, Lab, Patient Technicians
  • Interpreters

URM staff are disproportionately underrepresented in some job groups, such as:

  • Architects, Physical Planners, Developers, Engineers Upper
  • Communications/Media
  • Dietary Services
  • Executive
  • Intern/Resident
  • MSP
  • Therapists and Veterinary Services

Women are disproportionately overrepresented in some job groups, such as:

  • Administration
  • Clerical/Administration
  • Clerical/Medical
  • Counseling
  • Dietary Services
  • Registered Nurses
  • Program Coordinators
  • Secretaries, Typists, Clerks
  • Vocational Nurses

Women are disproportionately underrepresented in some job groups, such as:

  • Architects, Physical Planners, Developers, Engineers
  • Computer Resources
  • Computer Science
  • Crafts
  • Engineers, Electronics and Science Technicians
  • Executive
  • Operatives
  • Police, Fire, Parking
  • Stores, Mail, Computer Coder, Reprographics
  • Unskilled

staff who identify as POC by location

new hires (past 5 years), staff who identify as POC, by division

staff who identify as URM by division

new hires, past 5 years, staff who identify as URM and non-URM by division

staff by gender, by division

new hires, past 5 years, staff by gender, by division

staff who identify as URM in management, senior professional, supervisory, and non-supervisory roles

staff who identify as POC in management, senior professional, supervisory, and non-supervisory roles

staff in management, senior professional, supervisory, and non-supervisory roles, by gender


Campus Engagement, Safety, and Climate


Seventy-six percent of undergraduate students, 82% of graduate/professional students, and 53% of faculty and post-docs were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate in their classes.

Whites are more likely (92.6%) to view the overall campus climate as “respectful” or “very respectful.”

Only 80.8% of African American respondents, 76.9% of American Indian/Alaska Natives, 86.1% of Asians, 82.9% of Hispanic/Latinx, 80.6% of Middle Eastern/South Asian/North Africans and 80.5% of Pacific Islanders view the overall campus climate as either “very respectful” or “respectful.”

LGBQ respondents were less comfortable than heterosexual respondents with the overall climate and less comfortable with the climate in their classes. White respondents were more comfortable with the climate in their classes than other racial groups.

Twenty-four percent of respondents believed that they had personally experienced exclusionary, intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct. Eight percent of respondents indicated that the conduct interfered with their ability to work or learn.

A higher percentage of staff respondents reported experiencing exclusionary conduct, as compared to faculty or students. A higher percentage of women, transgender, and genderqueer respondents than men respondents experienced exclusionary conduct.

The percentage of Academic Federation faculty who responded to the Campus Climate Survey was low, at 10%. The percentage of Academic Federation respondents who reported experiencing exclusionary, intimidating, offensive or hostile behavior (whether or not it interfered with their work) was 30.7%. Fifty percent of Academic Federation members who reported this behavior described the frequency of this behavior as “often” or “very often.”

Higher percentages of undergraduate students (4%, n = 248) experienced unwanted sexual contact in the past five years as compared to graduate/professional students (1%, n = 25), staff (2%, n = 147), faculty (1%, n = 14), or post-docs/trainees (2%, n = 9). More genderqueer respondents (7%, n = 7) and women respondents (3%, n = 345) experienced this conduct as compared to men (1%, n = 93).

Campus leaders need to ensure the climate and safety of our campus, especially with regard to sexual violence, hate crimes, and incidents of bias. The campus has already instituted the Hate-Free Campus Initiative (HFC) aimed at creating a supportive and affirming campus environment. Many staff across campus are engaged in creating an awareness of the resources for reporting incidents of conflict and bias and supporting those involved. A Case Management Team reviews and responds to all reports, issuing a quarterly report, available on the Report Hate and Bias website. Established in 2014, the UC Police Accountability Board, made up of community representatives, reviews any complaints of misconduct filed against the UC Davis Police and makes general recommendations to the Chief based on their findings. Open meetings are hosted quarterly and a report is issued annually. The UC Davis Police Department also complies with federal and state laws in issuing its annual Jeanne Clery Act Annual Security Report, available to the public on its website. Numbers from these reports are in line with peer campuses and have remained roughly consistent from year to year. These reports and institutions are in place to support a responsive and transparent process, with pathways for members of the community to report, participate, and stay informed.

The UC Campus Climate study of 2014 has provided UC Davis with important baseline data for efforts to make all people feel truly comfortable in their classrooms and workplace. In that survey, 24% of respondents (4,371) reported they had personally experienced exclusionary, intimidating, offensive or hostile conduct; differences emerged based on various demographic characteristics, including position, ethnic or racial identity and discipline of study. URM and LGBTQIA members of our campus are more likely to view the overall climate as disrespectful and experience exclusionary conduct in their classrooms and workplaces. The climate report and other institutional surveys have highlighted that power differentials are very real in UC Davis workplaces and issues of poor communication, disrespectful treatment, exclusion, positionality and bullying must be addressed. The climate survey did highlight areas that we can build upon to begin addressing these concerns. For example, 80% of respondents believe UC Davis values a diverse faculty and staff and a majority find the courses offered included sufficient materials, perspectives, or experiences of people based on a variety of characteristics (age, ethnicity, gender identity, marital status, race, sexual orientation).






Another assessment tool for measuring the climate for faculty is the COACHE Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey, administered every few years. According to the results from the COACHE survey, faculty of color are less satisfied than white faculty with opportunities for collaboration. Participation in the 2012–13 UC Davis COACHE Faculty Job Satisfaction Survey was lowest among faculty of color as compared to white faculty. Female faculty members rate all three areas of faculty work—research, teaching, and service—less positively than male faculty.

Every three years, the Council of University of California Staff Assemblies, or CUCSA, distributes a survey to nonrepresented staff. The latest version of the survey was opened for response in spring 2017.


Students of my race/ethnicity are respected on this campus

Students of my socio-economic status are respected on this campus

Students of my gender are respected on this campus

Students of my religious beliefs are respected on this campus

Students of my political beliefs are respected on this campus

Students of my sexual orientation are respected on this campus

Students of my immigration background are respected on this campus

Students with a physical, psychological, or learning disability like mine are respected on this campus

Overall, I feel comfortable with the climate for diversity and inclusiveness at this RU

Overall, I feel comfortable with the campus climate for diversity and inclusion in my major

Overall, I feel comfortable with the climate for diversity and inclusion in my classes

UC Davis is a safe and secure campus

UC Davis is a welcoming campus

Whites are more likely (92.6%) to view the overall campus climate as “respectful” or “very respectful.”

The campus Ombuds has also provided useful insights into issues related campus climate. From July 1, 2014, to June 30, 2015, the Ombuds provided services to 278 visitors. Key climate issues related to these visits fell into several major categories: (a) poor communication in evaluative relationships with a supervisor, manager, director, faculty member, chair or other person of higher “institutional status” (Davis 69%, Health 72%) and/or (b) lack of respect or poor treatment from the person with whom they had reporting (or otherwise administratively subordinate or dependent) relationship (Davis 62%, Health 54%). Where matters of respect/treatment were an issue, a high percentage fell into the subcategory of bullying: (a) in evaluative relationships (Davis 26%, Health 35%) and (b) involving peer and colleague mistreatment (Davis 48%, Health 31%). A by-product of many of these issues is work-related stress (Davis 24%, Health 32%).

Undergraduate student engagement is assessed via the University of California Undergraduate Experience Survey (UCUES). The 2016 UCUES tool included 13 items related to issues related to campus climate, diversity, and inclusiveness. All items were rated on a 6-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 6 (strongly agree). Valid responses to these items were collected from 9222 UC Davis students.

The Center for Student Affairs Assessment computed an index of campus climate for diversity and inclusiveness by averaging responses to all 13 items. Results suggest that perceptions of campus climate, diversity, and inclusiveness were moderately high for the overall population and for most of the analyzed ethnic groups, with the exception of the Black population, whom reported neutral perceptions of this concept.

Additionally, the Center for Student Affairs Assessment has created an indicator called the Student Persistence Measures that analyzes data from regularly-administered surveys to better understand how and when interventions are most meaningful for supporting diverse students. The first data is being collected in 2016-2017.

Peer Benchmarking

Peer Benchmarking, despite its limitations to the broadest analysis allowed by nationally-standardized data, enables us to assess whether diversity issues are localized or systemic—keeping in mind that only through efforts at the individual institution level, singly or in partnership, can progress be made to diversity the whole of higher education. In terms of ethnic and gender diversity for the undergraduate, graduate, faculty, and staff populations, we look at how UC Davis compares to other UCs in the system and to the Comparison 8, with which UC Davis already compares itself on faculty salaries and student fees (Cornell University, Harvard University, Stanford University, State University of New York (Buffalo), University of Illinois (Chicago), University of Michigan, University of Wisconsin, Yale University).

Key findings include:

  • Davis has a higher proportion of Asian undergraduate students than the Comparison 8 but a lower proportion of Black or African American undergraduates. UC Davis has a higher proportion of Hispanic Students than the Comparison 8, but a lower proportion than the other UC campuses.
  • UC Davis has a lower proportion of Black or African American graduate students (1.8%) than its peers (17% UC; 4% Comp-8). UC Davis’s proportion of white graduate students is equivalent to the Comparison 8 (46%) but higher than the 9 other UC campuses (39%). UC Davis has a higher proportion of Hispanic students (9%) than the Comparison 8 (6%), comparable to the 9 other UC campuses (9%).
  • UC Davis has a higher proportion of female undergraduate (58%) and female graduate students (52%) than its peers.
  • Within the UC System, most campuses report 3% or less undergraduates who have formally registered as students with disabilities. Several campuses, such as UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UC Santa Cruz, report percentages as high as 4% or 6%.
  • UC Davis has a higher proportion of Hispanic or Latinx faculty than the Comparison 8, but a lower proportion than the 9 other UC Campuses.
  • UC Davis and its peers reflect continued gender imbalances among tenured faculty. Within some URM (such as among Black or African American and Hispanic or Latinx faculty), gender imbalances appear less pronounced—but the overall numbers are too small to draw any clear conclusions.

undergrads formally registered as students with disabilities 2014undergraduate ethnicity 2014graduate student ethnicity, 2014undergrad and grad students gender 2014tenured faculty gender and ethnicity, 2014tenured faculty ethnicity all genders, 2014


California is ahead of the rest of the nation in the diversity of its population. UC Davis reflects some of this diversity, but not all of it—our undergraduates are fairly diverse, but representation of underrepresented groups falls off in our graduate programs and in our staff and academic workforce. We need more research to understand where and why diverse populations are falling out of our pipeline to education and employment as it relates to preparation and eligibility, awareness, and retention. More research is needed to understand why our African American/Black populations lag behind our peers, and why students, staff, and faculty report less engagement and more impact from exclusionary conduct and bias than others. Schools and colleges need to look more closely at their own practices to understand why there is disproportionate under- and over- representation of minorities and women; hiring managers and committees need to pay even more attention to practices that will help them achieve affirmative action goals in their hiring practices. In documenting the many sources for understanding our campus better, we hope to advocate for better integration and coordination among Institutional Analysis, Human Resources, Student Affairs, and Academic Affairs to provide a richer understanding of the challenges and opportunities we face. Most importantly, we hope this data underscores the very need to act on the recommendations in this strategic vision plan—both to better serve existing constituencies and to open our doors more widely to those who have new and important perspectives. To take full advantage of the opportunities to bring new perspectives into our teaching, research, and public service, our campus needs to embrace a changing state and national population.


  • For data used throughout this document, we define underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities (URM) as: African Americans, American Indian/Alaska Native, Chicanx/Latinx (including Puerto Rican), and Pacific Islander (including Native Hawaiian). The term “People of Color” (POC) includes all underrepresented minorities and Asian categories (Chinese-American/Chinese; East Indian/Pakistani; Filipino/Filipino-American; Japanese American/Japanese; Korean-American/Korean; Other Asian; SE Asian;not Vietnamese; and Vietnamese). URM and POC exclude the following categories: Other White/Unknown/Decline to State and White.
  • The University of California is committed to providing the opportunity for students, faculty, and staff to report their sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression on any forms used to collect demographic data. At both system-wide and campus levels, leaders have appointed groups to facilitate the integration of gender expression and sexual orientation questions are being integrated into admissions applications (undergraduate and graduate), job applications, and data systems—and to resolve issues of incompatibility with historic data. Not all systems yet have the capacity to report out this data; therefore, many of the following charts and graphs do not provide a full representation of the LGBTQIA community.
  • In this plan, we primarily use the term Latinx to refer to those who identify as Hispanic, Chicanx, Chicano, Chicana, Latino, and Latina. The purpose of using “x” in Latinx (and Chicanx, when used) is to allow for the Chicano, Chicana, Latino, and Latina community to include all those who identify and don’t identify within the gender spectrum.
  • International status for faculty and staff (including postdoctoral scholars) is based on citizenship status per the standard set by the 2015 UC Accountability report, especially the footnote on page 115. Undocumented students are counted as students from California (not international).
  • Workforce categories exclude students (undergraduate and graduate) but do include medical interns and residents. Postdoctoral scholars are included in workforce categories (staff and Academic Federation). The staff categories include anyone not specifically designated as Academic Federation or Academic Senate. Academic Senate and Academic Federation charts exclude emeritus or recall.
  • Workforce data is based on an October 27, 2016 snapshot and includes only those active on that date. Charts on recent hires (October 2011-October 2016) depend on the employee start date, excluding employees who both started and separated before the snapshot.
  • The programmatic category of graduate academic includes graduate groups and departmentally-based programs.



Most of the graphs and charts in this section use data from the following systems as provided by staff in Academic Affairs, Graduate Studies, and Institutional Analysis:

  • UC Corporate Personnel System (PPS), October 2016 snapshot
  • UC Davis Banner Student Information System, Fall 2009 to Fall 2016 Enrollments

Other sources include:

  • American Community Survey (ACS), 2015, 1-year estimates, U.S. Census Bureau
  • Division of Student Affairs Assessment Student Persistence Measure Survey data, Fall 2016
  • Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), Institute of Education Sciences–National Center for Educational Statistics, 2014
  • National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, Survey of Earned Doctorates
  • Pew Research 2008
  • UC Campus Climate Study, 2013
  • UC Davis COACHE Faculty Satisfaction Survey 2012-2013
  • UC Fall 2015 Enrollment Headcount by Level and Ethnicity
  • UC Undergraduate Experience Survey (UCUES), 2016
  • United States Census Bureau Quick Facts.

Quick Facts data are derived from: Population Estimates, American Community Survey, Census of Population and Housing, Current Populations Survey, Small Area Health Insurance Estimates, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates, State and County Housing Unit Estimates, County Business Patters, Nonemployer Statistics, Economic Census, Survey of Business Owners, Building Permits.