The study was conducted in response to concerns from state leaders about the perceived shortage of construction workers and the impact that this shortage may be having on the industry’s ability to meet the growing residential and commercial demand for construction. The purpose of this study is to document the state of the industry, its workforce, and its capacity to prepare skilled workers to meet a growing demand.

The information in this report is based on telephone interviews with 700 registered voters. One random sample of 500 registered voters was selected from all registered voters living in Arizona. This sample was proportionately stratified so that voters in each of Arizona’s 15 counties were included in the sample. An additional sample of 100 interviews with registered voters living in Pima County was also interviewed. A third random sample of 100 registered voters living in the more rural counties also was interviewed. The purpose of selecting the two smaller samples was to create sub-samples of Pima County and rural voters that could be compared with the opinions of voters in Maricopa County.

The purpose of this analysis is to identify supplier gaps in Arizona based on secondary data as well as a statewide buyer survey. The buyer survey includes results from a web-based questionnaire, as well as personal interviews. The analysis is structured around twelve industries of opportunity identified in “Arizona’s Economic Future,” prepared by Economy.com in August 2002.

One of the ways that buyer supplier relationships in Arizona could be strengthened is through a statewide program that would provide resources to allow buyers and local suppliers to identify each other more easily to and provide better feedback to suppliers enabling them to compete more effectively with nonlocal vendors. This study includes reviews of three such programs: AZBusinessLinc used in Tucson; Connectory which is a similar program used in California; and FOCUS which is used for government procurement in California.

The Arizona Department of Commerce has the legislated responsibility to develop a 10 year economic plan for the State of Arizona that wants to accelerate solar adoption, and develop a solar electric industry within the state that would provide economic development. Arizona incentives for solar are mostly provided by the utilities. Technology improvements/cost reductions will allow central solar to compete with conventional baseload and intermediate generation. Implementing the roadmap initiatives will allow AZ to build upon its assets and policies to establish a leadership position in fostering solar.

State trust lands are among the greatest public assets in Arizona’s portfolio. Set aside at statehood, the Arizona State Land Department manages more than 9 million acres of trust lands on behalf of 14 beneficiaries. The largest of which by far is Arizona Public Education K through 12.The mission of the Land Department is to maximize revenues from these trust lands. In FY 2005, state trust lands generated $115 million for all beneficiaries, of which $101 million was designated to support public K-12 schools.These amounts are increasing rapidly as more state trust land becomes attractive for development in Arizona’s urban areas.

The parcel discussed in this report, “Superstition Vistas,” stands out as the jewel among Arizona’s trust lands. Not only is it situated in the path of metro Phoenix growth, but it also borders thousands of acres of public land managed by the Tonto National Forest and U.S. Bureau of Land Management. Estimates of its total value run well into the billions of dollars.

"The Treasure of the Superstitions" sets the stage for a continuing dialogue about the potential for Superstition Vistas, and indeed, all of Arizona’s trust lands. We look forward to listening to and working with our beneficiaries, citizens, counties, municipalities, real estate businesses, and other interested parties to make the most of Arizona’s “treasure.”

Because of the urgency of workforce issues and the desire to begin a statewide discussion about workforce goals and choices, the Governor’s Council on Workforce Policy wanted to understand if, and how, program governance and organization are hampering progress and what changes might be beneficial. The council asked Morrison Institute for Public Policy (School of Public Affairs, College of Public Programs, Arizona State University) to: (1) Explore the strengths and weaknesses of the organization of Arizona’s workforce system, particularly at the state level (2) Review how other states have revamped their systems and connected workforce and economic development (3) Recommend options for improving Arizona’s system During the second half of 2003, Morrison Institute for Public Policy talked with more than 60 workforce professionals, business people, and workforce board members across Arizona either individually or in small groups, researched other states’ approaches through interviews with officials in other states and national organizations, analyzed responses to an online survey of selected local workforce investment board members, and reviewed a wide variety of materials on economic, workforce, and community development. This report is the first of many steps for Arizona to reflect and act on workforce development governance and its system, because as Thurgood Marshall said, "You can’t stand still. You must move, and if you don’t move, they will run over you."

The March 2006 responses to a statewide representative telephone survey show that a majority of Arizonans see science and technology research as a source of high-paying jobs and are every bit as interested in science and technology as leaders are. Arizonans "get" the benefits of a science and technology-based future and the power of science and technology to spawn desirable employment opportunities. Some cautions emerge as well, but even so, most Arizonans look to science and technology as integral to a bright economic future.

The purpose of this brief report is to present a balanced look at current issues surrounding the education reform know as "academic standards." The information contained in this report is intended for a business audience. It does not advocate any particular stance or make policy recommendations, but rather presents a platform from which the business community might choose a position.

The Arizona Head Start--Public School Transition Project is 1 of 31 demonstration projects designed to test whether advances by Head Start children could be maintained by continuing Head Start-type services into kindergarten through the third grade, and to identify, develop, and implement transition practices to bridge the gap between Head Start and public schools. This study evaluated the Arizona project in its fourth year of implementation. Participating were two cohorts of students at three transition and three comparison schools in Phoenix. The program components evaluated were: (1) developmentally appropriate practices, curriculum, and materials; (2) physical health, mental health, and dental services; (3) family services; and (4) parent involvement. Findings indicated that all components had been implemented by the time of the 1995-96 evaluation. Both cohorts had similar public assistance participation, and all groups showed dramatic decreases in public assistance since program entry. The vast majority of parents from all groups reported positive interactions with schools; qualitative data confirmed continuing positive impact on teachers, schools, and the Head Start agency. Transition services, especially those of family advocates, were seen as crucial to smooth transitions. There were observable differences between transition and comparison classrooms; however, quantitative data showed few significant differences in gains made by children between transition and comparison classrooms. Confounding variables of high attrition, variations in student English proficiency, and the existence in comparison schools of transition-like services may have influenced the results. Promising practices and further challenges were identified and recommendations were made for improving the collaboration between the Head Start program and the public schools, and improving the evaluation process. (Three appendices include a summary of data collection instruments. Contains 20 references.)