A state audit of six California universities concerning compliance with federal Clery Act crime reporting has found that there is widespread confusion among California campuses, including at UC Davis, about the law and a "lack of guidance" that has resulted in inaccurate reporting.

UC Davis reported more crimes than necessary for the three years studied by the Bureau of State Audit. The audit found that the campus over-reported crimes by an average of 15 percent in 1999, 2000 and 2001.

The state audit found that UC Davis reported more incidents than required under the Clery Act by broadly defining categories of crime, as well as reporting crimes that occur on non-campus property -- particularly crimes in the neighborhood surrounding the UC Davis Medical Center.

In a letter to State Auditor Elaine Howle, Provost Virginia Hinshaw said that UC Davis welcomed the state audit and agreed with its principal findings. "It appears we may have some good-faith differences of opinion regarding interpretations of the Clery Act terms and appropriate categorization of crimes," Hinshaw wrote. "These differences, I believe, underscore the lack of specific guidance to those entities seeking to comply with the Clery Act."

The state audit contradicts past media reports that had accused UC Davis of intentionally underreporting crime on campus.

"This audit shows very clearly that UC Davis has not hidden any crime and has worked very hard to comply with the Clery Act," said Bob Loessberg-Zahl, assistant executive vice chancellor.

He said that UC Davis has chosen to broadly interpret the Clery Act requirements to ensure "the fullest public disclosure of crimes and incidents consistent with the law."

A state law enacted in 2002 requires California to audit crime reporting at six college campuses every three years. For the first audit, the state reviewed the Clery Act crime reporting at UC Davis; California State University, Sacramento; City College of San Francisco; San Diego State University; UC Santa Barbara and the University of Southern California.

"We found that institutions sometimes report inaccurate or incomplete statistics in their annual reports, because the Clery Act does not always provide clear definitions and the institutions must make judgements on which incidents they should include," the audit concluded.

The audit recommended that the state Legislature form a task force to help campuses determine how crimes as already defined by California law might be reportable under the federal Clery law.

The audit did find that UC Davis had kept confusing or incomplete crime records that made it difficult for the auditors to verify reported crimes. As a result, UC Davis will be improving record keeping practices so that specific crimes reported under the Clery Act can be easily traced. It will also assign case numbers to reports received from offices on campus that are not part of the campus police department, to avoid double counting crimes that could be handled by more than one unit, such as Student Housing and Student Judicial Affairs.

Absent further specific guidance from the U.S. Department of Education, which has federal responsibility for implementing the Clery Act, UC Davis will continue to report crime from public property adjacent to the UC Davis Medical Center. The audit found that UC Davis' reporting of crime from those areas was too broad in interpretation of the Clery Act.