The University of California is losing to private colleges more of the top African-American, Latino and American Indian undergraduates it has already admitted than it has in the past, although the overall numbers are small.

This finding was presented to the UC regents Thursday in a report on how a major 2-year-old admissions change known as "comprehensive review" is affecting the makeup of the student body.

The new admissions process has not lowered the overall academic quality as some had feared, said Barbara Sawrey, chairwoman of the faculty Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools.

But the study did uncover a trend that began before the university switched to comprehensive review: More top minority or "underrepresented" students admitted to UC are choosing to attend private universities instead. The university defines underrepresented as African-American, Latino and American Indian.

In 1999, 55.7 percent of the underrepresented students UC admitted from the top one-third of applicants accepted the offer. That figure dropped to 50.1 percent in 2002. The proportion of all admitted students who accepted the offer decreased just slightly, from 65.3 percent to 63.4 percent.

These figures suggest that underrepresented students are choosing selective private universities. In 1999, 15.7 percent of high-achieving black, Latino and American Indian students admitted to UC selected a private college. That figure increased to 23.9 percent by 2002.

Sawrey cautioned that the change involves only a small number of students. Asked if small numbers should be a concern, Sawrey replied, "Trends are a concern."

One likely reason for the change, a couple of regents noted in discussion, is that private universities have the resources to recruit these students with scholarships.

But the finding also plays into an argument made by affirmative action advocates: Since voters in 1996 outlawed race-based affirmative action in university admissions, the most selective UC campuses have seen a decrease in black and Latino students, and that's a turnoff for prospective students.

Sawrey later said it's difficult to identify one factor as the cause.

In other areas, the regents discussed the impacts of comprehensive review.

Before comprehensive review, UC's eight campuses with undergraduates had to admit a certain percentage of students based on grades and test scores alone. Now, the university thoroughly reviews all applications and considers factors such as hardship and leadership qualities.

Some regents worried that high-achieving students who haven't experienced hardship might be pushed out of their first-choice campus by a less academically qualified student and decide not to attend any UC campus. The study, however, found no evidence that UC is losing a greater share of top students.

Of the top third of UC applicants, between 63 percent and 65 percent enroll at UC. That proportion has held steady for the past five years.

Regents also worried that students might make things up that could give them an edge under comprehensive review. To investigate this, the university sent a request to verify different aspects of their applications to fewer than 10 percent. Eighty-three percent responded and verified their applications. The remaining students either had picked other institutions to attend or were not UC-eligible, the study said.

Regent Peter Preuss pointed out that some of those students could have been lying and instead of admitting to it, simply didn't respond to the verification request.