This document is intended to give an overview of the Federal-Aid Program and its impacts on Arizona. There are four major sections in the report: (1) Overview of the Federal-Aid Program; (2) Arizona Federal funding highlights for the fiscal year; (3) Federal-aid Highway Program Characteristics; and (4) Federal-Aid Highway Program descriptions. The first section gives a general overview of how the Federal-Aid Program is financed, the authorization process and a discussion of the apportionment, allocation and obligation authority processes. The second section deals with Arizona Federal funding highlights the for fiscal year. The last two sections are devoted to characteristics of the core programs, including eligibility, limitations, apportionment formulas and descriptions of the funding categories.

Since 1986, the Arizona Department of Transportation has used a comprehensive regression-based econometric model to estimate Transportation Excise Tax revenues for Maricopa County. These revenues, which flow into the Regional Area Road Fund (RARF), are the major funding source for the Maricopa County Freeway Program. This document contains the official forecast of expected values for the Maricopa County Transportation Excise Tax as developed by the Arizona Department of Transportation in cooperation with the Maricopa Association of Governments, Valley Metro and Valley Metro Rail.

The Maricopa County Transportation Excise Tax, often referred to as the “1/2 cent sales tax” is levied upon business activities in Maricopa County, including retail sales, contracting, utilities, rental of real and personal property, restaurant and bar receipts, and other activities. Transportation excise tax revenues are deposited in the Maricopa County Regional Area Road Fund (RARF) which is administered by the Arizona Department of Transportation. These revenues were the principal source of funding for the Regional Freeway System in Maricopa County and were dedicated by statute to the purchase of right-of-way, design and construction of new freeways, widening of existing freeways and highways, improvements to the arterial street system, regional bus service and high capacity transit services such as light rail.

The State of Arizona taxes motor fuels and collects a variety of fees relating to the registration and operation of motor vehicles in the state. These collections include gasoline and use fuel taxes, motor carrier fees, vehicle license taxes, motor vehicle registration fees, and other miscellaneous fees. These revenues are deposited in the Arizona Highway User Revenue Fund and are then distributed to the cities, towns and counties of the State and to the State Highway Fund, which is administered by the Department. These taxes and fees represent a source of revenues available to the state for highway related expenses.

During 1993-94, the Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University conducted a study on behalf of the Arizona Department of Education. This document presents findings of that study, which examined linkages between health services and schools for a comprehensive service delivery to students. Following the introduction, chapter 1 provides a national overview on children's health and the public schools, presenting national and legislative initiatives and a framework for linking health services and schools. Chapter 2 reviews what is known about the major issues in child health in Arizona and its schools, synthesizing health data from several sources.

Survey results from 531 Arizona school principals about school-based/school-linked health and social services are also analyzed. A discussion of the Arizona perspective follows in chapter 3, which examines the philosophy guiding state initiatives, key players, the processes that support school-based/school-linked health services, and a sample of current state activities. The fourth chapter provides a view of how some Arizona schools are attempting to address these issues through the provision of student health services at or near school sites. The last chapter reviews action necessary to facilitate linkages between schools and health services, and the status of Arizona efforts. It concludes with some considerations for the future. A conclusion is that the state is making significant progress toward promoting and, in some schools, implementing such services. Eight tables and seven figures are included.

Between May and July of 1996, members of the council were asked to participate in a series of interviews. The primary purpose of the interviews was to elicit council members' views of and expectations for Arizona's STW initiative. A second reason was to clarify the mission of the council itself. This paper highlights salient points from the interviews. Quotes are used verbatim.

In the fall of 1995, the City of Phoenix Police Department convened a special group of people known to be deeply involved with the social and personal aspects of domestic violence. This group, which came to be called the Phoenix Police Department's Joint Task Force on Domestic Violence, consisted of police and criminal justice personnel, social service and health care providers, and a number of interested community members. Task Force members soon began earnest discussions on how best to reduce the incidence of domestic violence-a crime that is, sadly, the number one call for police service in the City of Phoenix.

Regents to request a study to improve the development and dissemination of grants that are funded by the higher education portion of the Eisenhower Act. The results of that evaluation are presented in three parts. Part 1 reviews the reform efforts in mathematics and science education, the need to improve students' mathematics and science skills, and trends in mathematics and science K-12 education. Part 2 looks at the role of the state's institutions of higher education (IHE) Eisenhower programs, presents the methodology of the study, gives a history of Arizona's IHE Eisenhower Program, and discusses project questions and answers. Part 3 presents and discusses the nine recommendations related to full-time administrative staff; distribution and revision of requests for proposals; revision of the grant application review process; a coherent strategy for state-level IHE program evaluation; dissemination of effective mathematics and science education training programs; grant writing assistance and feedback; and coordination with the Arizona Department of Education. Ten appendices contain names of interviewees, interview and survey responses, perspectives from other states, analysis of Arizona Eisenhower RFPs, a list of Arizona IHE Eisenhower programs (1990-1993), federal regulations governing IHE Eisenhower Programs, and preliminary recommendations.

In preparation for new federal legislation that promotes unprecedented levels of comprehensive planning and service integration at state and local levels, an analysis of state issues relevant to comprehensive service delivery is necessary. This paper examines such state issues, with a focus on Arizona's at-risk population, and presents a framework for comprehensive service delivery. It provides the rationale for such service delivery, summarizes the literature on research-based practices, illustrates district approaches to comprehensive service delivery, and sets forth guidelines for developing a comprehensive plan. System components of an effective plan are discussed in detail--student education, parent/family involvement, social/economic services, health services, and professional development. Five general principles underlie success: philosophy, people, processes, promising practices, and partners. Recommendations for developing comprehensive service delivery programs include the following: (1) build on existing information; (2) consolidate knowledge; and (3) think long-term. Contains 11 figures and over 250 references. Appendices contain information on Arizona practitioners' views and an illustration of a side-by-side program analysis.