Accountability Report 2022

Chapter 12:
chapter 12: institutional performance


As the novel coronavirus began to spread, teams across University of California knew that the need to translate scientific discovery into therapies and vaccines to fight COVID-19 would be urgent. At the same time, the growing pandemic highlighted widespread inequalities in health and the urgency of achieving greater health equity.

UC’s five Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) teams were already positioned to address needs at the intersection of COVID-19 and health equity, but the process of securing funding for research and community outreach programs often can be slow. UC Biomedical Research Acceleration, Innovation and Development (UC BRAID) took action to support immediate projects by creating a grant program to enable UC CTSAs to quickly respond to the need for COVID-19 related clinical trials and vaccination efforts that are inclusive and benefit vulnerable communities.

Dr. Carrie L. Byington, Executive Vice President, University of California Health, and an infectious disease expert, opines, “The inequality in health across our state and nation is now even more apparent as we see the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 in communities of color and lower socioeconomic areas. The problems leading to health disparities will take years to address. In the short term, we must start working toward better diversity in the clinical trials that translate the wealth of scientific research in our state and nation into benefits for all. The UC BRAID grants have helped create momentum for addressing these issues.”


UC requires significant resources and planning to support its instruction, research, and public service missions. The indicators in this chapter provide insight into the financial health of the University, the state of capital and space resources, and the environmental sustainability of campus operations. This chapter now also includes information on the UC Community Safety Plan, which re-envisions safety at the University of California locations.

Financial trends

The University’s revenues, totaling over $41.6 billion in 2020–21 (excluding Department of Energy laboratories), fund its core mission and a wide range of support activities. Over one-third comes from the five UC medical centers, which have collectively nearly doubled in size in the past decade. Contracts and grants, which help sustain the University’s research mission and reflect UC’s preeminence in research, are the next largest source of funds.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic through fiscal year 2020-21 resulted in large revenue losses across various areas of the University. Reductions in services such as nonessential patient care, housing and dining, and other auxiliary functions, including student refunds for cancelled contracts, resulted in revenue losses of about $2.28 billion as of June 30, 2021. As of that date, these losses were partially offset by Higher Education Emergency Relief Funds (HEERF) I - III — Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (HEERF I), Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act (HEERF II), and American Rescue Plan (HEERF III) — totaling $753 million in institutional portion federal funding intended to help with costs associated with the pandemic such as facilities cleaning, COVID patient care, and remote instruction. The University also received an additional $605 million in HEERF I-III funding restricted for emergency student financial support.

State General Funds, tuition and fees, and UC General Funds make up the core revenues for the University’s instructional mission. State funds were historically the largest single source of support for instruction; however, cuts in State funding over the past two decades reduced this resource. State educational appropriations are less today in inflation-adjusted dollars than they were in 2006–07 and over $1 billion less than what they were in 2000–01, despite substantial enrollment growth. In 2000–01, State funding for UC, including Cal Grants, contributed $19,660 per student —– 75% of the total cost. In 2020–21, the State share declined to $8,790, or 47% of the total cost. From 2000–01 to 2010–11, systemwide tuition and fees were increased to offset the impacts of reduced funding from the State, though financial aid increases made up for those increases for many UC students. In-state tuition at UC has remained flat for nine of the last ten years. Under these circumstances, the importance of alternative sources of funding, such as Nonresident Supplemental Tuition, has increased.

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, improvements in the California economy since 2012, combined with the passage of Proposition 30, had brought some stability to the State budget and thus to the University’s core budget. Modest increases in State support during times of fiscal stability have not been enough to both fully restore prior funding levels and keep pace with enrollment growth. In addition, the significant impact of the COVID-19 pandemic toward the end of the 2019–20 fiscal year resulted in State budget uncertainty for 2020–21 and 2021–22.

As core revenues per student have declined from $40,602 in 2000–01 to $23,895 in 2020–21, driven primarily by decreases in State General Funds on a per-student basis, the University has sought to increase revenues from other sources. Gift funds have become increasingly important. Private giving has increased; however, over 99 percent is restricted. Gift support tends to be for research, departmental support, and capital projects. The small amounts for instruction and student support cannot offset needs created by enrollment growth that has outpaced proportional growth in core revenues. Private giving varies significantly by campus and relates to the campus’ age, number of alumni, and the presence of health science programs.

As is typical for universities, salaries and benefits for academic and support staff are the largest areas of expenditures. Although the inflation-adjusted expenditures for educating a student at UC have dropped by 29 percent since 2000, reflecting both operational efficiencies and reductions in available resources, the State’s share of this cost has fallen even more steeply. Consequently, students and their families now contribute a larger share through tuition and fees.

Chronic shortfalls in priority areas — graduate student support, faculty salaries, the ratio of students to faculty, capital renewal, the need to upgrade outdated information systems, and a focus on sustainability — present ongoing financial challenges.

Capital program and funding

The University maintains approximately 6,000 buildings enclosing 146 million gross square feet on approximately 30,000 acres across its ten campuses, five medical centers, nine agricultural research and extension centers, and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. With such a substantial infrastructure, the University strives to be a good steward of the capital resources entrusted to its care.

UC's capital program is funded by a combination of State and non-State funds. Historically, most of UC's core academic capital projects were funded by the State. With State funds playing a declining role over the past decade, the University has been forced to rely on other resources. In the past decade, non-State funds, including external financing that utilizes non-State sources to service the debt, have accounted for 80 percent of UC's capital program funding.

During 2020-21, UC approved capital project budgets totaling $4 billion. Almost three-fourths of the cost was met through debt financing, including external financing supported by State General Funds. Non-State sources funded the remaining capital projects.

In 2015–16 and before, most capital projects were aimed at growing core academic programs and replacing aging facilities. In more recent years (2016–17 onward), there has been an increase in projects that address enrollment growth and program improvements. The majority (56 percent) of 2020–21 capital projects were for the medical centers, and a significant number of projects (21 percent) addressed student housing for increased enrollment.

UC sustainability

The University of California is a national leader in sustainability. UC’s sustainability commitment began in 2003 with a Regental action that led to the adoption of a Presidential Policy on Green Building Design and Clean Energy Standards in 2004. Demonstrating the University’s commitment to wise stewardship of its resources and the environment, the Policy has since expanded to include multiple areas of focus: Climate Protection, Green Building Design, Clean Energy, Sustainable Transportation, Sustainable Building and Laboratory Operations, Zero Waste, Sustainable Procurement, Sustainable Food Service, Water, Sustainability in the University of California Health System, and Health and Well-Being. The University’s Sustainable Practices Policy was updated again in 2021.

The University committed to systemwide climate action leadership in 2007, when all ten Chancellors signed the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment to achieve carbon neutrality as soon as possible. Furthering this leadership, in November 2013, UC announced an initiative to achieve carbon neutrality by 2025. This initiative will make UC the first major research university system to achieve carbon neutrality. Most recently, UC Merced became the first public research university in the country to achieve carbon neutrality. Additionally, all campuses, including their health systems, achieved the University’s climate policy goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (based on reported emissions that will be third-party verified by early 2022).

The University’s Carbon Neutrality Initiative has advanced the University’s work on climate and carbon neutrality research and education, and furthers its leadership in sustainable business practices. Even as the campuses expand, overall greenhouse gas emissions have continued to drop due to improvements in energy efficiency, developing new sources of renewable energy, and enacting a range of related strategies to cut carbon emissions. For example, the University’s Clean Power Program is providing 100 percent clean electricity to eight campuses and three medical centers that are eligible to select an alternative energy provider. The Clean Power Program supplies approximately 30 percent of the University’s electricity use from off-campus sources. UC now generates more on-site renewable energy than any other university in the country and has over 100 renewable energy projects across the system. The University also funded 44 students with Carbon Neutrality Initiative Fellowships during the 2020–21 school year to work on projects supporting UC’s carbon neutrality goal.

Upfront investments in energy efficiency are often costly, but energy efficiency projects across the system have so far netted approximately $347 million in cumulative avoided utility costs since 2005. Moreover, UC’s policy requiring that all new construction projects and major renovations receive LEED® (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) certification helps assure that campus growth does not increase energy costs and climate pollution as much as it would otherwise. As of 2021, UC has 384 LEED certifications, the most of any higher education institution in the country. In addition to LEED and energy efficiency requirements, starting in 2019, new buildings were required to take advantage of the University’s access to carbon-free electricity and not use fossil-fuel combustion for space and water heating except under special circumstances.

Additionally, UC’s fleet continues to move toward zero-emission vehicles. Systemwide, 50 percent of all new light-duty fleet vehicles purchased in fiscal year 2020–21 were electric (zero-emission) or hybrid. There are over 1,400 electric vehicle charging stations throughout the UC system.

UC Community safety plan

The UC Community Safety Plan ( re-envisions safety at the University of California locations and calls for transforming UC's culture, policies, and practices to ensure that all members of the community feel welcomed, respected, and protected from harm. This plan emerged from robust discussions, including two separate systemwide Presidential Symposia, and Chancellors forming campus-based safety task forces to engage their communities in re-envisioning campus safety and policing. As a result of these discussions, the UC Community Safety Plan is based on the following fundamental guidelines:

  1. Community and service-driven safety: All members of the UC community should feel valued, welcomed, and free from any threat of physical, psychological, or emotional harm. Individuals should receive high-quality, courteous, and accessible services. Every interaction will be held to a high standard of respect and fairness and will be monitored.
  2. Holistic, inclusive, and tiered response model for safety services: A tiered response model will match a call for service with the appropriate type of response and responder(s). This holistic approach will include mental health, wellness, basic needs, bias/hate response, law enforcement, emergency response, and other services through interdepartmental partnerships and cross-trainings.
  3. Transparency and continuous improvement through data: A systemwide dashboard with location-level detail will be created and regularly updated to inform and empower the UC community. Based on new systemwide reporting requirements and uniform standards for data collection, this information will be used to assess campus safety practices, generate recommendations for best practices, and hold the institution accountable.
  4. Accountability and independent oversight: A standardized and robust complaint and investigation process will be implemented through police accountability boards to broaden oversight of existing mechanisms for the community to report instances when officer actions may be inconsistent with rules, policies, and the law.

A Community Safety Data Dashboard Workgroup commenced in Fall 2021 to meet the key milestones to demonstrate our commitment to transparency and continuous improvement through data. In the first phase (2021), we posted public reports on Crimes and Use of Force data on the community safety plan website and launched a new systemwide police department workforce report. These reposted Crimes and Use of Force reports reflect data gathered and summarized according to federal and state reporting requirements.

In the second phase (2022), the workgroup will establish a standardized process to collect data from all UC locations on a quarterly basis to support systemwide reporting on community safety. These quarterly submissions will record aggregated numbers of crimes, use of force, stops, complaints, and calls for service. The workforce report will be published annually along with a budget report. The workgroup will develop a systemwide dashboard for these new, central aggregate data collections. The UC Information Center will host the systemwide dashboard starting in 2022 and key metrics will be available for annual reporting in the 2023 publication of the UC Accountability Report.

A systemwide Vehicles, Uniform, and Equipment Workgroup also commenced in Fall 2021 to provide recommendations to the visible elements for every tier in the safety model. This working group is examining similarities in appearance between local (municipal or county) law enforcement vehicles, for instance, to University of California official fleet vehicles. Further, department uniforms and vehicles within each campus may be difficult for the community to distinguish among such different roles as parking enforcement personnel, security desk staff, and sworn officers. The working group will also make recommendations regarding visual identification of new mental health response personnel who could be dispatched in emerging crisis response.

In addition, the UC Office of the President is hiring a full-time position to monitor and support the systemwide implementation of this plan while ensuring it continues to meet the evolving needs of each UC location. In summary, these improvements do not represent the end of this conversation at UC. This community-driven plan is designed to be a living document that all partners will continue to update and adapt together, considering the latest information and data.

 For more information

UC’s operating budget (website)

Annual financial report (website)

Annual financial report (Medical Centers) (website)

Revenues and expenses (dashboard)

Annual reports on University private support (website)

UC’s capital programs (website)

Annual major capital projects report (website)

Ten-year capital financial plan (website)

Information on UC’s sustainability (website)

Annual sustainability report (website)

UC Community Safety Plan (website)

Over time, UC's varied sources of revenue have grown at different rates.

12.1.1 Revenues by source, Universitywide, 2000–01 to 2020-21


Source: UC Revenues and Expense Trend Report. Amounts do not include Department of Energy Laboratories.

Two major trends are reflected in the University’s revenue sources over time. First, revenues associated with the University’s medical centers and related activities have grown substantially since 2000–01. Medical center revenues now represent 39 percent of all UC revenues. On top of this category, a significant portion of revenues shown as “Educational activities” above is also related to health services.

Second, among the University’s core fund revenues, State appropriations now contribute less to the University’s operating budget than student tuition and fees. In 2020–21, State General Funds comprised 39 percent of UC’s core fund budget, while student tuition and fees comprised 43 percent.

Historically, State funding had been the largest single source of support for the University’s core budget. State support has declined from 87 percent of core funds in 1980–81 to 39 percent in 2020–21.

The COVID-19 pandemic further complicated the University’s revenue sources. In addition to State and federal budget volatility driven by the pandemic, there were significant impacts to medical centers and auxiliary enterprises. Revenue losses were offset by the 2020 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020 (“CARES Act”), Coronavirus Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2021 (“CRRSAA”), and American Rescue Plan (“ARP”), which provided federal funding via Higher Education Emergency Relief Funds (“HEERF”) I, II, and III.

Since 2000–01, available core revenues per student have declined by 30 percent.

12.1.2 Per-student average inflation-adjusted core revenues, Universitywide, 2000–01 to 2020-21


Source: UC Budget Office

Since 2000–01, average inflation-adjusted revenues per student have declined 30 percent. During the same period, the State General Fund portion has fallen even more steeply, by 53 percent.

In some years, the University increased student tuition and fee levels to partly offset the long-term decline in State support. Financial aid increases have covered some or all of these cost increases for families with financial need. These increases in student fee revenue have not, however, fully offset the reduction in State funding per student.

UC General Funds are composed mostly of Nonresident Supplemental Tuition Revenue and indirect cost recovery from research contracts and grants.

Overall, decreases in available core revenues per student have put downward pressure on spending per student, as seen in indicator 12.1.5. Ultimately, this pullback may affect the quality of instruction and the student experience.

Virtually all gift funds (98 percent) are restricted by donors in how they may be used.

12.1.3 Current giving by purpose, Universitywide, 2000–01 to 2020-21


Source: UC Institutional Advancement

The University is energetically pursuing increased philanthropic giving as a means to help address budget shortfalls and expand student financial aid. Philanthropic support has been key to supporting the University, particularly through the challenging impacts of COVID-19.

In 2020–21, new gifts to the University totaled over $2.9 billion. Virtually all of these funds are restricted for specific purposes and are not available to support general operating costs. In addition, approximately $673 million was designated for endowment, so only the income/payout is available for expenditure. Gifts designated for department support are only eligible for use by a specific department or academic division.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, campuses received gifts to support remote learning resources, critical student financial needs, procurement of protective equipment, and expansion of infection testing.

The University’s remarkable achievement in obtaining private funding in recent years — even during state, national, and global economic downturns — is a testament to UC’s distinction as a leader among the nation’s public colleges and universities in generating philanthropic funds. These gifts reflect the high regard in which the University is held by its alumni, corporations, foundations, and other supporters.

Personnel costs and medical centers are an increasing portion of UC expenditures.

12.1.4 Expenditures by function and type, Universitywide, 2000–01 to 2020-21



Source: UC Revenue and Expense Trends Report. Amounts do not include Department of Energy Laboratories.

When viewed by function, the combination of instruction, research, and public service accounted for 34 percent of total expenditures during 2020–21, while medical centers (UC’s teaching hospitals) accounted for 35 percent. Other expenses by function include interest, depreciation, and miscellaneous expenditures.

Looking at expenditures by type, about 64 percent are dedicated to personnel costs, since higher education, health care delivery, and research are inherently labor-intensive. Salary costs increased both due to higher average salaries and increased full-time equivalent (FTE) employees, particularly at the medical centers. These increases also affect employee benefits, though benefit costs also fluctuate due to variations in investment returns on the pension and the discount rate for retiree health.

Though medical centers were able to resume elective procedures, treatments, and patient visits, they continued to treat COVID-19 patients, perform testing, and offer vaccination services. Additional impacts of the pandemic were felt at auxiliary enterprises such as student residence and dining services, which were reduced dramatically during the 2020–21 fiscal year.

Since 2000-01, total instructional expenditures per UC student have declined by 29 percent, yet students and their families bear a greater share of that cost.

12.1.5 Average general campus core fund expenditures for instruction per student, 2001-01 to 2020-21


Source: UC Budget Office

Since 2000–01, average expenditures for instruction per student from core funds have declined by 29 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars. Of this amount, the share provided by State support for the University’s budget declined from 72 percent in 2000–01 to only 35 percent of the total in 2020–21. In contrast, the contribution from tuition and fees has increased from 19 percent to 48 percent during the same period.

The State’s Cal Grant program has covered tuition and fee increases for many California resident undergraduate students. However, even after taking Cal Grants into account, State funding covered only 47 percent of instructional expenditures from core funds in 2020–21 compared to 75 percent in 2000–01.

The majority of UC’s capital project funding over the last ten years continues to be derived from non-State fund sources. Starting in 2013–14, changes to the California Education Code allowed UC to direct a portion of its existing State operating funds support to capital.

12.2.1 Sources of capital project funding by year of approval, Universitywide, 2011-12 to 2020-21


Source: UC Capital Asset Strategies

The University’s capital program is driven by the campuses’ and medical centers’ strategic plans. UC’s capital program is funded by a combination of State and non-State funds. The nature of State funds has changed in recent years.

As illustrated in indicator 12.2.1, the dominant source of capital is non-State resources. A General Obligation bond was placed on the March 2020 ballot, but voters did not pass it.

State funds were historically the primary funding source for core academic facilities and seismic compliance for acute care hospitals. Legislation in 2013–14 and 2018–19 enacted a change in how UC could fund its debt service, availability payments, and capital outlay expenditures. UC can direct a portion of its State General Fund appropriations to fund debt service for State-eligible capital projects. The portion of State General Funds directed to capital does not represent new State funding and is made up of funds redirected from operations to support capital. With improvements in the state’s economy, the University’s funding included $41 million of new State funds for capital outlay in 2020–21.

Non-State sources fund most of UC’s State-eligible capital needs and all self-supporting enterprises, such as housing, parking, athletics, and medical centers. To the extent that non-State funds are used to support core academic capital needs, less funding is available to support other high-priority needs such as deferred maintenance, seismic, and enrollment growth.  

The 2020–21 capital project program is heavily supported by external financing.

12.2.2 Sources of capital spending detail, Universitywide, Project budgets approved in 2020-21


Source: UC Capital Asset Strategies

The University and each campus carefully consider how to deploy resources to optimize the benefits to academic programs and the University’s mission as a whole.

As evidenced in indicator 12.2.2, external financing plays an important role in funding capital needs. About 73 percent of capital project funding in 2020–21 came from non-State supported external financing. The majority of financing supported medical center construction, including the Irvine Campus Medical Complex and UC San Diego’s Hillcrest Outpatient Pavilion and Parking Structure. The remainder of non-State financing supports student housing projects (auxiliary) as well as renewal and modernization of instructional and research space and program improvements (education and general).

As referenced in indicator 12.2.1, the University utilizes external financing supported by State General Funds for State-eligible projects, primarily for seismic projects. The University also received some State funds to support capital projects. Campuses also redirect non-State funds to projects that otherwise would have been funded with State resources.

The remainder of UC’s capital program is funded by gift funds, campus funds, and other non-State sources. These campus funds are derived from various sources, including indirect cost recovery and investment earnings. 

The majority of capital funds approved for expenditure in 2020–21 supported program improvements and projects addressing enrollment growth.

12.2.3 Types of capital projects, based on budgets approved by year, Universitywide, 2011–12 to 2020-21


Source: UC Capital Asset Strategies

Program improvements and modern program initiatives require state-of-the-art space, often necessitating the repurposing of existing facilities or new construction. As shown in indicator 12.2.3, UC devoted approximately $2.5 billion for program improvements in 2020–21. About 70 percent of these improvements supported three medical center projects (Irvine Campus Medical Complex, UC San Diego Health’s Hillcrest Outpatient Pavilion and Parking Structure, and Mission Bay Block 34 Clinical Building for UC San Francisco). Program improvements also address academic and research priorities.

In 2020–21 alone, UC approved $863 million for projects that address enrollment needs, most notably, housing for the Berkeley campus and a new college at UCSD (Theater District Living and Learning Neighborhood). The campuses are expanding teaching laboratories, classrooms, and student services to meet enrollment increases.

Campus facilities age and must be renewed and modernized to extend the buildings’ useful life and improve energy efficiency. In addition, the University continues to review the seismic safety of its facilities. In 2020–21, UC approved almost $600 million for these projects.

UC space has increased by approximately 16 percent in the past decade, with most of the growth targeted for instruction and research and residential uses.

12.2.4 Assignable square footage (ASF), Universitywide, 2010-2021


Source: UC Capital Asset Strategies

Assignable square footage (ASF) is the space available for programs or assigned to specific uses. It does not include corridors, bathrooms, or building infrastructure.

Indicator 12.2.4 illustrates the growth in space over the last decade, according to categories for assignable space. Since 2010, space has increased by 13.1 million ASF to 84.8 million ASF.

In the past decade, instructional and research space increased by about 1.9 million ASF, office space by 3.8 million ASF, and residential space by 4.7 million ASF. The space increase for these areas (20 percent) has not kept pace with the increase in fall enrollment (27 percent) for the same period. Residential space has grown as campuses strive for more on-campus student housing to improve student life in living/learning communities and to reduce environmental impacts from commuting. Increases in the student population have also required additional athletic, recreational, and food service space.

Hospital space has grown in the past decade. All five medical centers experienced growth, but most of the growth in hospital space can be attributed to UCSF Medical Center at Mission Bay (2015) and Ron Conway Family Gateway Medical Building (2015), and the Jacobs Medical Center (2016) and Koman Family Outpatient Pavilion (2018) at UC San Diego Health.

UC has made consistent progress toward its greenhouse gas emission goals.

12.3.1 Greenhouse gas emissions compared to climate goals, Universitywide, 2009–2025

Source: UCOP Energy and Sustainability Office

All campuses, including their health systems, achieved the University’s climate policy goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 (based on reported emissions that will be third-party verified by early 2022). This includes a seven percent decrease in scope 1 emissions and a 33 percent reduction in scope 2 emissions in 2020 compared to 2019. Campuses purchased compliance and voluntary offsets that contribute to their emissions reductions. The magnitude of emissions reductions in 2020, especially for scope 3 air travel and commute emissions, reflect the impact of COVID-19.

The University also generates more on-site renewable energy than any other university in the country, with over 50 megawatts of capacity. UC’s inventory of renewable energy supplies includes generation from over 100 on-site and off-site sources.

Energy efficiency upgrades resulted in cumulative net avoided costs for the University of $347 million by the end of 2021.

12.3.2 Cost avoidance from energy efficiency projects, Universitywide, 2005–2021


Source: UCOP Energy and Sustainability Office

In 2004, the University formed a statewide energy efficiency partnership program with California State University and the state’s four investor-owned utilities to improve the energy performance of higher education facilities. The partnership has provided funding for equipment retrofits and monitoring-based commissioning.

Since its inception, over 100 energy efficiency and new construction projects have registered with the Energy Efficiency Partnership Program, which has allowed UC campuses to avoid approximately $347 million in utility costs while reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Forty-six UC projects participated in the program in 2021.

While campuses have used a portfolio approach to balance projects with shorter and longer paybacks, the future focus on the remaining deeper energy efficiency retrofits to achieve climate goals will result in lower levels of net avoided costs due to larger up-front investments.

By the end of 2021, UC had achieved 384 LEED® certifications, more than any other university in the country.

12.3.3 LEED® certifications, Universitywide, 2005-2021 (cumulative)


Source: UCOP Capital Resources Management

The University’s sustainable practices policy requires that all new buildings and renovations are designed and constructed to a minimum LEED® (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) for New Construction Silver rating.

UC has 384 LEED certifications systemwide, representing over 33 million square feet of certified green building space. In 2021, UC added 16 new LEED certifications, including three LEED Silver, nine LEED Gold and two LEED Platinum certifications. UC’s total of 384 LEED certifications is the most of any university.

UC LEED® certifications are listed at: