In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many higher educational institutions moved their courses on-line in hopes of slowing disease spread. The advent of multiple highly-effective vaccines offers the promise of a return to "normal" in-person operations, but it is not clear if-or for how long-campuses should employ non-pharmaceutical interventions such as requiring masks or capping the size of in-person courses. In this study, we develop and fine-tune a model of COVID-19 spread to UC Merced's student and faculty population. We perform a global sensitivity analysis to consider how both pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical interventions impact disease spread. Our work reveals that vaccines alone may not be sufficient to eradicate disease dynamics and that significant contact with an infectious surrounding community will maintain infections on-campus. Our work provides a foundation for higher-education planning allowing campuses to balance the benefits of in-person instruction with the ability to quarantine/isolate infectious individuals.