Domestic violence (DV) ranks among the most common 911 calls to police statewide. And a new report reveals that the victims making the calls – and the professionals working in Arizona’s criminal-justice system – say the state’s response is at risk of failing. System Alert: Arizona’s Criminal Justice Response to Domestic Violence, published by the Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University, finds that, despite important strides made over the past three decades, the Arizona’s criminal justice system is too often falling short of its goals of achieving victim safety and offender accountability.
Tenth-grade students in Arizona school to work (STW) regional partnerships were polled in 1997, 1998, and 1999, to determine whether systemic change was occurring across the state. Study results were mixed. Three activities increased significantly over the baseline year: class projects, computer use, and volunteerism. The use of career inventories declined over the same period. The role of adults in helping students explore career choices remained relatively stable. Further, the number of students who had some idea of their career interests had not changed significantly. Gender differences still existed and were largely unchanged. Fewer students reported taking courses related to their career interests. The relationship of participation in career-related activities to an ability to state a career interest continued to be strong. Students felt job shadowing, business mentors, and internships would be most helpful. However, fewer students participated in these activities. The participating students were better able to articulate their career interests and, in general, had more frequent and positive attitudes about participation in STW. Statewide programs reported positive student outcomes as a result of STW activities. Evidence of systemic change was beginning to be seen. Most significantly, class projects, computer use, and volunteer projects showed consistent gains over the three years.
One component of a multi-faceted evaluation of the state's STW initiative involves surveying tenth grade students. Thus, the survey was designed to assess the extent to which Arizona tenth grade students have selected career majors, planned a course of study for high school and beyond, and received adult guidance related to careers. As part of the evaluation, the intent was to look at the extent to which career preparation and work experiences truly are system-wide and impact students. In contrast, the purpose was not to evaluate whether STW program participants are receiving school-based learning components.
In spring 1998, 1,057 10th-grade students were surveyed as one component of a statewide evaluation of Arizona's school-to-work system designed by the Morrison Institute for Public Policy. This second survey measured attitudes toward and participation in career activities. Results were compared to baseline data collected from over 2,000 10th-grade students in 1997. Data indicated that, in both years, nearly all students had at least an idea of their career area of interest; gender differences were observed in students' selections of career interests. Student participation in activities increased. Statistically significant differences in participation by sex were evident: more girls reported learning about careers in class and participating in volunteer activities; and more boys participated in internships with pay, worked for pay in a job unrelated to their careers, and had business mentors. The share of students who had selected a career interest increased as participation rose. All 14 activities were at least "somewhat" helpful to students in making career selections. In both years, students ranked family, teachers, and friends most highly as influencing career interests. One-fourth of students in 1998 compared to one-third of students in 1997 indicated they never received career guidance at school. Less than one-half of students were aware of courses related to career interests; even fewer actually took a course related to their interests.
A study of 55 school districts and a group of opinion leaders examined the status of arts education in Arizona. Information from surveys collected and interviews conducted throughout 1995 and 1996 was analyzed to determine whether or not improvement occurred following the 1988 "Vision 2000" program. Survey responses and interviews suggest: (1) signs of improvement appear along with indications of status quo maintenance; (2) four out of ten respondents thought the overall status of arts education was better now than five years ago, another third thought it was about the same; (3) significant support for arts education exists among school personnel and parents; (4) funding, staffing, and curriculum were identified as the most critical need over the next 3 years; (5) arts education remains vulnerable to funding cuts, neglect, and competition from other educational priorities; (6) local sources of external funds are often used to supplement district funds but the potential for private funding of the arts has not been fully tapped; and (7) Arizona schools compare reasonably well with schools nationally in terms of the provision of visual art, music, and other arts programs. Recommendations are made for continued study, establishment of arts education quality indicators, monitoring, and mechanisms for reporting and sharing statewide data regarding the status of arts education.
Believing that voters might support transit if they felt like an integral part of the transit proposal decision-making process, the Phoenix Chamber of Commerce's Valleywide Transit Task Force set out in early 1995 to initiate a bottom-up process which would enable people to say, "here's what we want." The Task Force agreed that the first step in the process was to initiate a new dialogue. the Morrison Institute for Public Policy was asked to write a briefing paper, which would re-invigorate the transit debate. The resulting report, "Transit in the Valley: Where Do We Go From Here?" painted a bleak picture of the Valley's existing transit system and challenged many long-held conventional wisdoms. The dialogue had begun. The report was then presented to the citizens of 17 Valley cities and towns for their consideration in 16 public meetings sponsored by cities and their local Chambers of Commerce. In community forums conducted between October 1996 and February 1997, more than 500 Valley residents discussed the Valley's transit future. This document summarizes the questionnaire responses by 501 people who attended the forums.
In the Valley, developing viable long-term transit from where we are currently will be very difficult if key
components continue to remain unaligned. Thus, before getting to the primary purpose of this report, it is important to first establish the players and basic considerations relevant to the effectiveness of a transit system.
Few would dispute that the Phoenix metropolitan area is severely lacking in terms of mass-transit compared to other similarly sized and configured cities. The Valley’s fleet of roughly 400 buses is about one-third of the service found in San Diego, Atlanta, and Seattle. In addition, most of Phoenix’ peer regions either already have, or are planning rail systems. Of the 30 largest metropolitan areas in the U.S., only six -- Phoenix included -- do not currently have or are not planning to add rail to their transit system.
Presents brief background information on urban growth management and analyzes certain current and differing viewpoints on how best to accomplish this in Arizona. Two competing plans have emerged recently. One is a citizen initiative, while the other is a proposal that could either be passed into law during the current legislative session or could be referred by the legislature to voters in November, effectively placing it in competition with the citizen initiative.
In step with other organizations, the Greater Phoenix Economic Council (the Valley’s regional public-private economic development organization) published a comprehensive 10-year economic development strategy that codified its change in direction to quality economic development in aerospace, bio-industry, advanced business and financial services, technology, and software. In early 2004, the Governor’s Council on Innovation and Technology issued Building Arizona’s Knowledge-Based Economy with scores of recommendations on venture capital, higher education, collaboration, workforce development, and other topics. Separately, each of these items would have been notable. Taken together, they demonstrate a strong commitment to the growth of a knowledge economy and to the multifaceted approaches needed to develop it.
The Governor's Strategic Partnership for Economic Development has identified 12 industry clusters in Arizona that collectively drive the economy. The term "cluster" refers to a geographic concentration of interdependent companies, suppliers, products, labor pool, and institutions that together constitute an important competitive advantage for a region. Tourism is recognized as one of Arizona's 12 industry clusters. In northern Arizona it ranks as the dominant cluster.
Much of the analysis in this report is based on the concept that industry clusters act as primary growth influences on local economies. Strong clusters produce goods or services that can be sold to consumers outside the region, creating a flow of revenue into the region. This influx of revenue stimulates economic activity in other areas of the local economy such as the retail, real estate, or constructions sectors.
This report profiles the tourism cluster in Coconino County with special focus on the Page area. It examines the cluster's composition, relative size, and importance to the regional economy, and it addresses the cluster's dynamics and requirements for growth. In its conclusion, it presents a menu of options for strengthening the cluster in the Page area.