Presidential Evaluations
Transparency in leadership is a core value for University of Louisville President Gerry Bradley. It is in that spirit that President Bradley shares his annual performance evaluations with the UofL community and the general public.
University of Louisville President Gerry Bradley's Presidential Evaluation for Fiscal Year 2025-26
Prepared by the University of Louisville Board of Trustees (Larry Benz, Chair)
1. Bottom Line
This is the most comprehensive presidential evaluation in the University of Louisville's history — a multiinstrument process that invited more than 1,450 participants, anchored by a campus-wide 360 conducted at this scale for the first time. For context, the Association of Governing Boards (AGB), the national authority on university governance, describes the standard presidential evaluation as 20 to 50 confidential interviews; this process invited roughly 30 to 70 times that number. The Board did not assess the President from the boardroom alone — it opened the question to the entire university.
The Board's own evaluation of President Bradley is uniformly strong: on the Board instrument, 100% of responding Trustees recommend he continue in the role, and he scores at or near 100% favorable on integrity, decisiveness, strategic planning, shared governance, and the Cardinal Principles. A separate, campus-wide 360 (1,442 invited) returns a more measured but still-favorable picture — roughly two-thirds express confidence in his leadership — and points clearly to where Year Two should focus: communication timing, shared governance, and campus climate/morale. The President grades himself a B/B+ and names the same gaps.
2. Process and Instruments Used
Board of Trustees Presidential Evaluation
The Board's formal instrument. 12 Trustees invited, 10 responded (83.3%). Measures integrity, decisiveness, vision, stewardship, transparency, climate, shared governance, Cardinal Principles, leadership team, strategic planning, and external relationships — plus a direct "recommend continuation" question and open comments.
360 Executive Leadership Evaluation
A broader listening instrument administered by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness. Invited ~1,442 people (Trustees, cabinet, executive leadership, and a random sample of faculty and staff); 187 responded (13%). Six competency domains plus overall effectiveness and open comments. Per the President's own account, a 360 of this scale had never been conducted for a UofL president before — making this the most comprehensive presidential review in the university's history. The same 360 was run for the President and for six cabinet members.
Read the two instruments together — do not rank one against the other.
The two tools have different rater universes. The Board instrument reflects the Trustees who actually appoint and oversee the President. The 360 reflects a broad campus sample and therefore captures institution-wide morale in a turnaround year — which is why its numbers are more measured. The cabinet 360s (below) drew from small peer/direct-report pools with much higher response rates, so their higher favorables are not directly comparable to the President's campus-wide 360. The correct use of the 360 is diagnostic — where to focus — not as a scoreboard against the cabinet.
3. President Bradley — Board Instrument (the Trustees' own view)
Trustee comments echo the strengths but flag two things to watch: internal communication (expected to improve with the new VPOCM) and low campus morale in a period of heavy change. Several noted there was "no honeymoon period" — the President moved quickly once his team was in place, which some faculty experienced as abrupt.
| Dimension | % Favorable (Agree + Strongly Agree) |
|---|---|
| Acts with integrity | 100% (70% strongly) |
| Acts decisively | 100% (70% strongly) |
| Committed to shared governance | 100% |
| Committed to the Cardinal Principles | 100% (60% strongly) |
| Fosters a positive, inclusive climate | 100% |
| Successfully managed strategic planning | 100% |
| Communicates the vision effectively | 90% |
| Is open and transparent | 90% |
| Has built a competent senior leadership team | 90% |
| Successfully manages university resources | 80% |
| RECOMMEND CONTINUATION IN ROLE | 100% (80% strongly agree) |
4. President Bradley — 360 (campus-wide view)
Strongest Domains
Communicates respectfully and professionally (~79% favorable) and is transparent about the challenges facing the university (~73%). Follows through on decisions (~76%). Stability, fiscal discipline, and external relationships are consistent strengths in the comments.
Weakest domain — Shared Governance & Collaboration
"Seeks input from stakeholders before making decisions" is the single softest item (~50% favorable, ~28% unfavorable). Receptiveness to feedback and clarity on the rationale behind decisions also lag. This is the throughline of the qualitative feedback.
IE qualitative synthesis
- Strengths — Steady, decisive, high-visibility leadership with strong fiscal discipline and external relationships.
- Growth — Communicate earlier in the decision process (not only after); explain the "why"; follow through on town-hall input; strengthen shared governance; address morale, workload, and compensation; ensure budget decisions are seen as equitable across athletics, administration, and academics; articulate a more aspirational vision.
| Overall-effectiveness item | Favorable | Neutral | Unfavorable |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall, this leader is effective | 67% | 11% | 22% |
| Confidence in ability to lead forward | 61% | 16% | 23% |
5. Goals — FY26 Scorecard and FY27
President's self-assessment: a B to B+. Self-identified misses: enrollment and retention targets, and being more open earlier in his decision-making. FY26 status by goal:
| FY26 Goal | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Student success — enrollment & retention | Partial | Record first-year retention 84.1% (+2.7%) and enrollment ~25,006 (+998). |
| 2. Compliance with new federal/state laws (KRS 164) | Complete | AG certified UofL in compliance; Office of Opportunity & Access redesign complete; integration into Provost by Sept. 1, 2026. |
| 3. Implement 2026–2030 Strategic Plan | Complete / launched | Board approved January 2026; execution now begins. |
| 4. ULH affiliation agreements / service lines | Complete | Completed December 11, 2025. |
| 5. Research Year 1 + research park | In progress | |
| 6. University–ULF alignment (MOU) | In progress | |
| 7. Financial outcomes + athletics budget model | In progress | |
| 8. Fundraising capacity / external engagement | On track | 7 of 10 new frontline fundraisers hired; +$1.7M from Foundation; positioning for a comprehensive campaign in 2027. |
| 9. Culture & climate | Complete (report) | Climate, Culture & Belonging commission report delivered May 15, 2026; campus climate survey completed March 2026. Action steps to be set for FY27. |
| 10. Leadership searches | Substantially complete | Five searches complete (Dentistry, Business, EVPFA, EVPUP, VPOCM). VPGR postponed to Spring 2027. |
| 11. Stansbury Park | In progress |
Notable Wins Beyond the Goal Grid
US News up 15 spots to 158 overall (85 among publics) — a 37-spot rise over two years; Carnegie community-engagement re-affirmation and Opportunity-campus designation; research expenditures $247.5M; ~70 legislators met one-on-one; monthly presidential podcast launched.
FY27 Proposed Goals (and connections to the 2026-30 strategic plan)
Student success; execute Year 1 of the 2026–2030 Strategic Plan; external/legislative engagement + philanthropy (campaign readiness for 2027); Cardinal Ventures rollout + a viable athletics revenue stream; UofL Health fiscal sustainability; Innovation Park second building + STEM-H; Stansbury Park; campus master-plan/housing; national/international collaborations + rankings + a communications overhaul with the new VPOCM; and continued culture/climate work.
Read more about President Bradley's 2026-27 goals in UofL News.
6. Executive Cabinet — 360 Results (for the Board's awareness)
The President also commissioned 360s on six cabinet members. These are the President's management tool; the Board reviews them to satisfy itself that the President has built and is managing a competent leadership team — not to adjudicate individual performance.
7. Three Themes to Carry Into Year Two
- Communication timing & the "why." Move from telling the campus after decisions to bringing people in earlier and explaining the rationale. The new VPOCM is the vehicle; make it an explicit FY27 expectation.
- Shared governance. The one place the campus 360 is genuinely soft. Meaningful, earlier involvement of faculty, staff, and mid-level leaders — visibly acted upon — is the highest-leverage trust-builder.
- Climate & morale. A turnaround year created real strain. The CCB report and climate survey give a roadmap; FY27 should show visible follow-through, especially on workload and compensation perceptions.