The Anti-Defamation League’s third annual “Campus Antisemitism Report Card,” which assigns letter grades to U.S. universities, found improvements at colleges across the country, including in Northern California, compared with the two previous years.
However, a companion study measuring non-Jewish student perceptions of Jews and Israel suggests that even as institutional responses to antisemitism are improving, many college students continue to encounter antisemitic and anti-Zionist attitudes and behavior.
The new report evaluated 150 colleges and universities, which were chosen based on Jewish student population, national rankings, and submissions by ADL’s regional offices.
As high school seniors across the country await college admissions decisions and begin considering which campus they’ll call home for the next four years, the data presents a complex portrait, the ADL acknowledged.
“There is no single metric that can capture a student’s lived experience,” said Shira Goodman, ADL’s vice president of advocacy.
In Northern California, four of five universities demonstrated progress since last year in the latest report card, released earlier this month:
- San Francisco State University improved from a “D” to a “C.”
- Stanford University rose from a “C” to a “B.”
- UC Berkeley shifted from a “C” to a “B.”
- UC Davis maintained its “C.”
- UC Santa Cruz improved from a “D” to a “C.”
The ADL announced its report card project in early 2023, months before the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel, amid “growing antisemitism” on campuses, the organization said. The report card is meant to serve as a tool for prospective students and their parents, as well as for school guidance counselors and alumni.
Goodman noted that the report card measures institutional response, not individual student experiences, and stressed that a high grade does not guarantee a great four years, nor does a lower grade mean a student cannot thrive.
“Our report card is one tool that measures a snapshot of what’s happening,” Goodman said. “I think students at ‘D’ and ‘F’ schools can have a fine experience if they have the support they need. And I think there are students probably at ‘A’ and ‘B’ schools who would say that grade doesn’t necessarily represent their experience. But that’s not what we’re purporting to do.”
This distinction is particularly relevant when comparing ADL findings, for example, with reports from other organizations that monitor the campus climate. In February, for example, campus watchdog group Amcha Initiative issued a report that highlighted high levels of anti-Zionist activism at three California schools, including UC Berkeley and UC Santa Cruz, which still received a “B” and “C,” respectively, from the ADL.
According to Goodman, such differences are not necessarily contradictions. Rather, they reflect different methods and areas of focus, she said.
Jordana Bischoff, a college counselor at Kehillah School, said students at the Palo Alto Jewish high school regularly consult ADL data alongside other resources, such as Hillel International’s rankings and comparison tools, to understand both the strength of Jewish life on campus and overall safety.
“The ADL Report Card is certainly a helpful tool that families use to see what each school offers in the way of support for Jewish students,” she said. “The report also helps students and families compare colleges and the support they have for Jewish students, so they get a sense of what is available to them at the various campuses they are exploring.”
For many Jewish students, the biggest concern when choosing a college is feeling safe and supported, according to Bischoff.
“They want to feel a sense of community and security on campuses so their focus can be on learning,” she said. “Jewish students want to feel secure among other students and faculty at the universities they consider.”
Parents, Bischoff said, largely share those same concerns. Many worry that their child will feel isolated among few Jewish students or will become a target of antisemitic activity. Parents also want reassurance that university administrations will actively protect Jewish students and respond appropriately to potential incidents.
Despite the report card’s usefulness, Bischoff emphasizes that it is just one factor in the college decision process. When advising students, counselors focus heavily on individual values and fit.
“We want to understand what Jewish students are looking for in their college experience,” she said. “We also advise on the quality of academic programs aligned with student interest, opportunities for research, career preparation, global experiences, etc. It is important to us to help students find their community and academic fit.”
The 2026 ADL report notes widespread improvement nationally in how colleges are addressing antisemitism. Nationally, 58 percent of assessed institutions earned “A” or “B” grades this year, up from 41 percent in 2025 and just 23.5 percent in 2024. Nearly half of the schools evaluated in the 2025 report card improved their grades in the new one.
ADL officials point to several factors that led to better grades in the new report, including the adoption of clearer definitions of antisemitism, expanded training and education programs and increased willingness by universities to publicly condemn antisemitic incidents.
According to ADL Central Pacific regional director Marc Levine, such gains reflect “meaningful steps to strengthen policies, establish advisory councils, mandate antisemitism education and improve bias reporting systems.”
The new report evaluated the selected colleges and universities using 32 criteria across three main categories: “administrative policies,” “Jewish life” and “conduct and climate concerns.”
“Administrative policies” covered codes of conduct, reporting systems and enforcement mechanisms. “Jewish life” measured access to Hillel, Chabad, Jewish fraternities and sororities, kosher dining and cultural resources. “Conduct and climate concerns” included documented antisemitic and anti-Zionist incidents and the presence of related activity among student or faculty groups.
Each category is weighted roughly equally, with additional assessment based on how effectively schools enforce policies and respond to incidents.
The ADL does not base grades on student surveys. While surveys are conducted, they are used to inform the structure of the grading system, not to directly determine scores.
Alongside the report card, ADL released a study titled “Campus Crossroads: Non-Jewish Student Perceptions of Jews and Israel.” Its findings paint a more troubling picture of campus culture: 48.3 percent of non-Jewish students reported “witnessing or experiencing anti-Jewish behavior in the past year” and 47.6 percent agreed with at least one anti-Jewish attitude.
These findings suggest that while administrative policies may be improving, those changes have not yet fully translated into better day-to-day on-campus experiences for students.