Hearing the national call for higher education accountability, the author of this tripartite article urges university administrators to move towards a more data-driven approach to counseling center supervision. Toward that end, the author first examines a key factor--perceived increase in student pathology--that appears to shape budget and staffing decisions in many university centers. Second, she reviews the emerging but conflicting research of clinician-scholars who are trying to empirically verify or refute that perception; their conflicting results suggest that no study alone should be used as the "final word" in evidence-based decision-making. Third, the author delineates the campus-specific data that should be gathered to guide staffing and budgeting decisions on each campus. She concludes by reminding readers that data-driven decisions can and should foster high-quality care that is concurrently efficient, effective, and in sync with the needs of a particular university and student body.