When the term “campus safety” is brought up, we often think of people. Security guards at the entrances and exits of buildings, watching live video feeds, even call boxes on campus with a direct line to safety teams or offices. But security guards and personnel represent just one part of the overall campus safety equation.
To understand what else shapes campus safety, a survey of 1,000 U.S. adults aged 18 and older was conducted by Dynata, on behalf of Accruent, in August 2026. The Campus Safety Confidence Gap survey found that 76% of respondents say campus safety is either very important or extremely important when choosing a college or university for themselves or a loved one.
The resulting data from Accruent’s survey establishes that campus safety includes far more than security teams alone. In fact, consumers increasingly see facilities, maintenance, communications and operational visibility as fundamental components for maintaining a safe campus.
When considering a higher education institution, people are focused on the physical environment, its operational readiness and whether they can trust in the infrastructure. Any failures in these areas can affect an institution’s reputation and enrollment consideration.
Campus safety is both an operations and security issue
Security departments can’t be left on an isolated island to create safe campuses on their own. Multiple other departments contribute to environments being perceived as safe, such as facilities, operations, maintenance, IT and emergency services.
When asked what makes a campus feel safer, visible security personnel ranked high at 89% of respondents, but this wasn’t the highest. Operational factors that ranked higher include:
-
Well-lit walkways, parking areas and outdoor spaces (94%)
-
Clean, well-maintained buildings (92%)
-
Emergency communication and notification systems (92%)
-
Controlled access to residence halls and campus buildings (92%)
-
Clearly marked emergency exits and evacuation routes (91%)
Additionally, 88% of respondents say technology that monitors building conditions or occupancy makes campuses feel safer, while 84% note reliable heating, cooling and ventilation systems as playing a role.
This tells us that Americans define campus safety across the entire built environment, from physical building conditions and access to communications and infrastructure reliability.
Safety on campus matters, but confidence in emergency preparedness falls short
Emergency preparedness requires the connection of people, facilities, systems and information, and Americans are questioning if college campuses are up to this task. Three out of four Americans say campus safety matters, but only 20% are highly confident that higher education institutions in the U.S. are prepared to effectively respond in the event of an emergency.
Another 57% of Americans are only somewhat confident that colleges and universities are prepared in the event of emergencies such as severe weather, power outages, fires, security threats or campus lockdowns. The hesitance to be fully confident doesn’t match up with the level of importance people place on campus safety, especially with 23% noting “not very” or “not at all” confident.
People and coordination play just as much of a role in emergency preparedness as technology. When asked what would make them most confident that a college takes safety seriously, well-trained staff who know how to respond during an emergency was the most selected response (43%). Other confidence factors include:
-
Visible coordination among campus safety, housing, health and facilities teams (30%)
-
Easy-to-find safety resources and reporting channels (29%)
-
Clear, timely emergency communications (28%)
-
Regular emergency preparedness training and drills (25%)
-
Clear policies and support related to harassment, violence and misconduct (24%)
-
Accessible transportation or escort options, especially at night (23%)
Americans see deferred maintenance as a critical safety concern
Deferred maintenance is, in fact, visible to the public. They may not know the ins and outs of every maintenance need on campus, but they do have concerns and specific preferences around what college campuses should be prioritizing.
When asked about colleges delaying repairs to critical infrastructure and building systems such as heating, cooling, electrical and life-safety equipment, 60% say they are either very or extremely concerned. Nearly six in 10 Americans say campus repair backlogs could affect where they choose to attend school, linking enrollment risk with deferred maintenance.
Americans do understand that higher education institutions face complexities around tightening budgets and aging infrastructure. Still, they would rather see colleges focus on preparedness and fix what they have than spend budget building something new. Twice as many respondents prioritize maintaining and modernizing existing buildings (28%) over new construction (14%). Another 32% say colleges should prioritize emergency preparedness and communications.
Here’s a breakdown of what respondents feel should be prioritized with limited funding:
-
32%: Emergency preparedness and communications
-
28%: Maintaining and modernizing existing buildings
-
16%: Lowering tuition/fees
-
14%: Constructing new buildings
-
10%: Expanding student services
Higher education institutions must consider that deferred maintenance is no longer a back-office facilities concern. It has the capacity to become a highly visible safety, reputation and enrollment issue, especially when facility conditions are visibly deteriorating and disruptions to campus life become more frequent as a result.
Real-time communication and visibility is now a baseline safety expectation
When something goes wrong on campus, Americans expect institutions to communicate quickly and transparently. Seventy-eight percent of respondents say real-time updates during emergencies or major facility disruptions are extremely or very important. Those that selected “extremely important” were in the majority out of this group at 44%.
While an overuse of technology can pose concerns for consumers, in the event of campus emergencies, Americans seem to be far more open. They are ok with college campuses using technology that can provide greater control and operational visibility so long as privacy remains at the center. In fact, 88% of respondents would support a college using privacy-protected building occupancy data as a way to understand where people need assistance during an emergency.
Consumers believe that building conditions and occupancy monitoring can contribute to making campuses feel safer (88%), but what they want is for the purpose of smarter campus infrastructure to be clear, with transparency and privacy safeguards in place.
Make facilities and operations an integral part of campus safety
It’s no longer enough to view campus safety solely through the lens of security personnel and in-the-moment emergency response. The state of campus facilities, reliability of critical systems and the ability to identify and address operational risks all shape how prepared and how safe a campus feels.
Higher education leaders must give facilities and operations a seat at the table when planning campus safety strategies. Operational readiness can no longer be treated as a behind-the-scenes function. The data shows that it needs to play a primary role in protecting the entire campus community.
Ready to give facilities and operations a seat at the table? Talk with our team about building a safer, more resilient campus.
.svg){kind=small}
