The UC Hastings Law Community Experience Survey took place from March 2-29, 2021. The data collected from the survey will help the college’s leadership assess its initiatives that support creating a diverse, equitable, and inclusive community for students, faculty, and staff. The results were presented to the campus on September 23 and 24, 2021. The executive summary of the results is now available for download and review. To get information on the Advisory Committee the Chancellor & Dean commissioned to generate proposals for improving the campus climate, please see this page.

Leadership

A diverse group of community members developed the community experience survey in close consultation with Rankin and Associates, LLC.

Chairs

  • Ascanio Piomelli, Professor
  • Grace Hum, Dean of Students
  • John DiPaolo, General Counsel and Secretary to the Board of Directors
  • Andrea Bing, Director, Accreditation & Assessment
  • Annie Rosenthal, CARE Advocate and Prevention Program Manager, MSW
  • Areca Smit, Associate Director for Electronic Media, Communications
  • Elizabeth McGriff, Director of LEOP and Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Advisor
  • Emily Murphy, Professor
  • Jacob Barrera, 2L
  • Jamie Dolkas, Director of Women & Leadership at the Center for WorkLife Law
  • Jesse-Issa Hawatmeh, 1L
  • Lauren Lofton, Associate Director for Student Life and Inclusion
  • Manoj Viswanathan, Professor
  • Mario Lopez, Associate Director of Admissions
  • Mecole Tate, 2L
  • Mei Cooley, Assistant Director of Graduate Admissions
  • Morris Ratner, Academic Dean
  • Simran Virdi, 2L
  • Yasmin Kouchesfahani, 2L

 

FAQs

  1. Why did UC Hastings conduct a community experience survey?
  2. What protections are in place for storage of sensitive data, including for future secondary use?
  3. Who conducted the survey and compiled the results?
  4. What was the model for the survey?
  5. Why was a non-UC Hastings researcher selected for the project?
  6. How were the questions developed?
  7. What was the Institutional Review Board (IRB) process for this study?
  8. What will be done with data from the results?
  9. How is a respondent’s confidentiality protected?
  10. What will be included in the final summary reports?
  11. Why was this a population survey and not a sample survey?
  12. What was the timeline?
  13. Feedback?
  14. Was the survey accessible to people with vision and/or hearing impairments?
  15. How did employees and contract staff who don’t have a computer or phone available take the survey?
  16. Who was invited to participate?


1. Why did UC Hastings conduct a community experience survey?

The idea to conduct this survey originated from interested students, faculty, and staff who believed data from such a survey might be useful in planning for the future and improving the climate at UC Hastings. The Diversity Equity & Inclusion Working Group recommended, and the Chancellor & Dean approved, contracting with expert consultants to design and administer the survey.

2. What protections are in place for storage of sensitive data, including for future secondary use?

UC Hastings has worked with the consultant to develop a research data security description and protocol, which includes specific information on data encryption, the handling of personally identifiable information, physical security, and a protocol for handling unlikely breaches of data security. The data from online participants were submitted to a secure server hosted by the consultant. The survey was run on a firewalled web server with forced 256-bit SSL security and is stored on a SQL database that can only be accessed locally. The server itself may only be accessed using encrypted SSH connections originating from the local network. Rankin & Associates has access to the raw data. All Rankin & Associates analysts have CITI (Human Subjects) training and approval and have worked on similar projects for other institutions. The web server runs with the SE-Linux security extensions (that were developed by the NSA). The server is also in RAID to highly reduce the chance of any data loss due to hardware failure. The server performs a nightly security audit from data acquired via the system logs and notifies the administrators. The number of system administrators was limited and each had required background checks.

The consultant has conducted more than 200 institutional surveys and maintains an aggregate merged database. The data from the UC Hastings project was merged with all other existing climate data stored indefinitely on the consultant’s secure server. No institutional identifiers are included in the full merged data set held by the consultant. The raw unit-level data with institutional identifiers is kept on the server for six months and then destroyed. The consultant will notify the committee chairs of any breach or suspected breach of data security of the consultant’s server.

The consultant will provide the primary investigator with a data file at the completion of the project.


3. Who conducted the survey and compiled the results?

The Community Experience Survey Working Group (CESWG) was charged with conducting the UC Hastings Law community experience survey. After a review of potential vendors, the committee selected Rankin & Associates Consulting, LLC to conduct the survey. Rankin & Associates reports directly to the CESWG. The committee—in consultation with Rankin & Associates—was solely responsible for the development, implementation, and interpretation of the survey and its results.

4. What was the model for the survey?
Dr. Susan Rankin, the President and CEO of Rankin & Associates Consulting, LLC, is an emeritus faculty member of Education Policy Studies and College Student Affairs at Pennsylvania State University and a senior research associate in the Center for the Study of Higher Education. She has extensive experience in institutional climate assessment and institutional climate transformation based on data-driven action and strategic planning. Dr. Rankin has conducted multi-location institutional climate studies at more than 200 institutions across the country. She developed and utilizes the Transformational Tapestry model as a research design for campus climate studies. The model is a “comprehensive, five-phase strategic model of assessment, planning, and intervention. The model is designed to assist campus communities in conducting inclusive assessments of their institutional climate to better understand the challenges facing their respective communities” (Rankin & Reason, 2008).


5. Why was a non-UC Hastings researcher selected for the project?
In reviewing efforts by other universities to conduct comprehensive climate studies, several best practices were identified. One was the need for external expertise in survey administration. The administration of a survey relating to a very sensitive subject like campus climate is likely to yield higher response rates and provide more credible findings if led by an independent, outside agency. Members of a college community may feel particularly inhibited to respond honestly to a survey administered by their own institution for fear of retaliation.

6. How were the questions developed?
To assist in contextualizing the survey for UC Hastings Law, and to capitalize on the many assessment efforts already undertaken, the Community Experience Survey Working Group was formed. The committee was responsible for developing the survey questions. The team reviewed selected survey questions from the consultant’s tested collection and added many UC Hastings-specific questions.


7. What was the Institutional Review Board (IRB) process for this study?
The study was exempt from the IRB review pursuant to applicable regulations.

8. What will be done with data from the results?
Chancellor & Dean David Faigman has constituted a Campus Climate Advisory Committee (“Advisory Committee”) for academic year 2021-2022, which is expected to complete its work by April 2022. Its charge is to discuss and digest the results of the 2021 Community Experience Survey and develop a report for the Chancellor & Dean composed of recommendations to improve the campus climate. The Advisory Committee will hold public fora and provide other means to seek specific suggestions on actions to take to improve the campus climate for all portions of our community.

9. How is a respondent’s confidentiality protected?

Confidentiality is vital to the success of campus climate research; particularly as sensitive and personal topics are discussed. While the survey cannot guarantee complete confidentiality because of the nature of multiple demographic questions, the consultant took multiple precautionary measures to enhance individual confidentiality and the de-identification of data. No data already protected through regulation or policy (e.g., Social Security number, campus identification number, medical information) were obtained through the survey. In the event of any publication or presentation resulting from the assessment, no personally identifiable information will be shared.

Confidentiality in participating has been maintained to the highest degree permitted by the technology used (e.g., IP addresses will be stripped when the survey is submitted). No guarantees can be made regarding the interception of data sent via the Internet by any third parties; however, to avoid interception of data, the survey is was run on a firewalled web server with forced 256-bit SSL security. In addition, the consultant and college did not report any group data for groups of fewer than five individuals, because those “small cell sizes” may be small enough to compromise confidentiality. Instead, the consultant and the college will combine the groups or take other measures to eliminate any potential for demographic information to be identifiable. Additionally, any comments submitted in response to the survey were separated at the time of submission to the consultant, so they are not attributed to any individual demographic characteristics. Identifiable information submitted in qualitative comments was redacted and the college only received these redacted comments.

Participation in the survey was completely voluntary, and participants did not have to answer any question and could skip any other questions they considered to be uncomfortable. Information in the introductory section of the survey described the manner in which confidentiality would be guaranteed.


10. What will be included in the final summary reports?
The consultant will provide a final report that will include: an executive summary; a report narrative of the findings based on cross tabulations selected by the consultant; frequencies, percentages, means and standard deviations of quantitative data; and content analysis of the textual data. The reports provide high-level summaries of the findings and will identify themes found in the data. Generalizations for populations are limited to those groups or subgroups with response rates of at least 30%. A five-person review subcommittee (composed of the survey co-chairs and a student and staff member of the survey working group) reviewed draft reports and provided feedback to the consultant prior to public release.


11. Why was this a population survey and not a sample survey?
The survey was administered to all students, staff, and faculty at UC Hastings. Climate exists in micro-climates, so creating opportunities to maximize participation is important as well as maximizing opportunities to reach minority populations. Along these lines, the consultant has recommended not using random sampling as we may “miss” particular populations where numbers are very small (e.g., Native American students). Since one goal of the project is inclusiveness and allowing invisible “voices” to be heard, this sampling technique is not used. In addition, randomized stratified sampling is not used because we do not have population data on most identities. For example, UC Hastings collects population data on gender and race/ethnicity, but not on disability status or sexual orientation. A sample approach could miss many groups.

12. What was the timeline?
This initiative had multiple phases, including survey development (fall 2020), survey implementation that sought input from all students, faculty, and staff at UC Hastings (spring 2021), and reporting of results (Fall 2021). Going forward, the Chancellor has constituted a Campus Climate Advisory Committee (“Advisory Committee”) for academic year 2021-2022, which is expected to complete its work by April 2022. Its charge is to discuss and digest the results of the 2021 Community Experience Survey and develop a report for the Chancellor & Dean comprised of recommendations to improve the campus climate. The Advisory Committee will hold public fora and provide other devices to seek specific suggestions on actions to take to improve the campus climate for all portions of our community.

13. Feedback?
Your questions and comments are very important as we move through this process. Please share your suggestions for issues to prioritize and steps to take with the Advisory Committee.

14. Was the survey accessible to people with vision and/or hearing impairments?
The survey worked with both screen readers and voice recognition software. People having any difficulty with access were advised to contact the chairs for assistance:

  • Ascanio Piomelli, Professor
  • Grace Hum, Dean of Students
  • John DiPaolo, General Counsel and Secretary to the Board of Directors


15. Who was invited to participate?
All students, and all employees including full-time academic faculty, adjunct faculty who were teaching during the Spring 2021 semester, and full-time contract staff (such as cleaning, maintenance, and security).

16. How did employees and contract staff who didn’t have a computer or phone available take the survey?
They were advised to contact Kathryn Cunningham, operations and sustainability coordinator, who helped them get access to a computer.