It was the kind of report card to write home about -- high marks all around from the campus's most important constituencies.

"The campus is seen by every audience as a university on its way up, a dynamic institution on the rise," says Geoff Garin of Peter G. Hart Research Associates of Washington, D.C. "And you're seen as an important contributor to the region, more so than other UC campuses to their regions."

Garin's firm has just completed the campus's first comprehensive survey research project in 15 years.

The survey provides important information about internal and external constituencies' perceptions and expectations and will help inform campus decision-making.

The project included surveys of 912 students; 318 parents; 971 staff members; 178 faculty members; 504 alumni; 711 adults in the greater Sacramento region, including 210 Davis residents; two alumni focus groups in San Francisco; one alumni and one opinion-leader focus group in Sacramento; and a focus group session with the UC Davis Foundation Board.

"There are lots of reasons to take pride in how people feel about your institution," Garin says, "but there's also room for improvement."

It's mainly a question of aspiration, according to Garin.

For example, when asked to rank the overall quality of eight California universities, the public and alumni respectively ranked UC Davis No. 2, behind Stanford, and No. 3, behind Stanford and UC Berkeley. But staff and students ranked UC Davis No. 5, behind Stanford, Berkeley, UCLA and Cal Tech. And faculty ranked UC Davis No. 6, behind Stanford, Berkeley, Cal Tech, UCLA and UC San Diego.

Ninety-one percent of alumni ranked UC Davis' quality as excellent or very good, compared to 72 percent of the public, 67 percent of staff and students and 65 percent of faculty.

The campus's toughest critics, though, rated the campus as "on its way up": 62 percent of the faculty, 60 percent of the students, and 53 percent of staff.

Here are some of the survey results, by constituency.

Regional public

When survey respondents were asked which organizations contribute most substantially to quality of life in the seven-county region, "colleges and universities" was the No. 1 answer by a substantial margin. UC Davis was seen as the most important institution in the region (56 percent), followed by California State University, Sacramento (38 percent), state government (27 percent) and Northern California technology companies (27 percent).

In fact, 89 percent of the regional public reported positive feelings about UC Davis (62 percent "very positive" and 27 percent "somewhat positive") and 92 percent of the Davis residents sampled reported positive feelings (61 percent "very positive" and 31 percent "somewhat positive").

There was no consensus on unfavorable impressions, but among those cited were high student fees, the "liberalness" of the campus, overcrowding, lack of affordable and on-campus housing, and too-tough admissions standards.

Alumni

Among alumni, 88 percent of donor alumni and 82 percent of non-donor alums said they were satisfied with their UC Davis experience. They were "proud" (46 percent), "satisfied" (27 percent) and "grateful" (17 percent).

They most often cited these positive aspects of the campus: great professors, classes and educational experience; friendships with other students; good location, community, small-town atmosphere; campus setting; and variety of classes and programs. The few with complaints cited large class size; small, isolated community; unavailability of classes; and inaccessible professors.

When asked how they might get involved with UC Davis, alumni said they probably or definitely would contribute financially to:

• Their specific academic area (55 percent);
• A specific area of academic scholarship and research (52 percent);
• Scholarships to attract best students (48 percent); and
• Support the faculty in a general way (27 percent).

Alumni also said they would likely volunteer time to:

• Share information about the campus to help attract the best students and faculty (46 percent); and
• Help increase UC Davis' visibility in their local community, the region and state (36 percent).

Faculty

Seventy-nine percent of surveyed faculty reported satisfaction with their personal and professional experience at UC Davis. Fifty-seven percent said their experience at UC Davis has been more satisfying than that of faculty at other universities; 18 percent said it has been somewhat or much less satisfying.

Eighty-six percent said they would be very or somewhat likely to recommend UC Davis to someone seeking a faculty position. They cited good location, great research opportunities, friendly environment, high-quality faculty, and great college with a good reputation as reasons to recommend the campus. Reasons for not recommending UC Davis were: low pay, lack of administration support, high cost of living/housing, large class sizes, lack of resources, too much red tape, and lack of respect for research.

Respondents rate UC Davis highest in faculty quality, cutting-edge research and scholarship, knowledgeable/helpful staff, contributing to the community and state, and pursuing an interdisciplinary approach. Areas for improvement, they said, were faculty input in campus decisions, rich social/cultural life, promoting work/life balance, and student affordability and financial aid.

Staff

Seventy-two percent of surveyed staff reported overall job satisfaction. Eighty-two percent said they would recommend the campus to someone looking for a job. Cited as employment positives were a good benefits package, likeable co-workers, friendly atmosphere, job security, great location/community and professional respect from students. Negatives were low wages and no merit increases, budget cuts, criticisms of managers/supervisors, promotion opportunities and voice in decisions.

Asked to which one or two areas they'd most like to see improvement made in the next few years, staff cited salaries and raises (81 percent); advancement opportunities (35 percent); workload (18 percent); and respect and fair treatment (15 percent).

Looking 10 years ahead, staff said they'd like to see better salaries, an emphasis on quality teaching, more cutting-edge research, greater respect for staff, and renovation of facilities.

Students

Ninety-one percent of undergraduates and 88 percent of graduate students said they were satisfied with their UC Davis experiences.

They rated the campus highest in faculty willingness to meet with students (69 percent undergrads, 67 percent graduate students), quality of facilities (67 percent and 53 percent), quality of faculty (65 percent and 71 percent), variety of programs/majors and quality advising (63 percent and 48 percent) and cutting-edge research and scholarship (55 percent and 67 percent).

Areas for improvement included rich social/cultural life, quality and variety of learning opportunities outside the classroom, availability of classes, amount of financial aid available, and affordability and financial aid.

Parents

Ninety-seven percent of surveyed parents were satisfied with their child's decision to attend UC Davis. Seventy percent said a UC Davis education is a good value, and 83 percent said the admissions standards are just about right.

Ninety-five percent said they'd likely recommend UC Davis to a close friend or family member applying to college or graduate school. They cite these reasons for doing so: quality education, community atmosphere, high-ranking reputation, close to home, quality of faculty and staff, variety of programs and academic choices, small-town feeling, affordable education. Negatives cited included high fees, lack of suitable/affordable housing, overcrowded classrooms, availability of classes for majors, and campus size.

Forty-three percent of parents said they'd like to hear from the university more frequently; 51 percent were satisfied.

Consultant's recommendations

Among Hart Research's conclusions and recommendations:

• The campus is building upon a strong reputation as a leader in agricultural sciences and veterinary medicine; as a university where students are taught by first-rate faculty who care about student education; and as an institution that contributes to the economy, education, health care and cultural life in its region.
• UC Davis should leverage its "on its way up" perception in all of its communications, conveying a sense of a dynamic institution that is on the rise and in the forefront of meeting challenges in higher education, the economy and the world.
• National rankings and other such external recognition provide important validations of the campus's rising excellence.
• UC Davis must be much more committed to communicating its virtues and successes with real focus and real resources. "Modesty is not a virtue for institutions that rely on the support of others," Garin says.
• The university's needs and goals must be clearly, simply and compellingly expressed if fund-raising efforts are to be successful.
• As the campus grows, it must find ways to maintain the quality of the student academic experience as part of the institutional ethic. Already there are signs from both faculty and students that the student experience is becoming dominated by "bigness" - large classes, difficulty getting classes, etc.
• Constituents judge excellence by faculty quality. While senior faculty generally are satisfied today, the campus needs to keep close watch on the impact of budget austerity on faculty attitudes.
• Despite controversies with the city of Davis, the campus is considered a key local and regional asset and a reasonably good neighbor. Its high-quality education and cutting-edge research in agriculture, veterinary medicine, biology and the environment are seen as benefits to the region. Its role in K-12 education and health care throughout the region also are valued.

Next steps

Insights gained from the survey will be particularly helpful as the campus prepares for its first comprehensive campaign.

"These findings will help us inform and inspire prospective donors and advocates, and that should help us achieve our fund-raising goals," said Lisa Lapin, assistant vice chancellor for university communications. "And it will help us judge the effectiveness of our communications by giving us baseline information to measure change over time."