The purpose of this document is to provide guidance and detail on implementation of the Flood Control District of Maricopa County Floodplain Regulations and the Maricopa County Drainage Regulations. It presents the County/District philosophy on drainage and floodplain management, and planning for drainage facilities. It contains descriptions of federal, state and county regulations pertaining to such facilities, including links to the various District and County regulations that can be found on the Internet. Most importantly, the policies and minimum standards for implementing the regulations are presented. These policies and standards are based on flood and erosion hazard mitigation strategies that are intended to reduce or eliminate cumulative impacts resulting from development and to enhance public safety.

The 2009 Comprehensive Floodplain Management Plan and Program is intended to be used as a general guide for future decision-making in District activities. The Plan aims to present adequate background information to aid District staff in prioritizing areas for future studies and projects. The Plan identifies historic flooding events, reviews the District's efforts to solve flooding problems, and formulates five-year plans to reduce flooding through flood control project construction, floodplain identification, and planning programs throughout the county.

Approximately 11,000 miles of rivers, streams and washes run through Maricopa County. In order to enhance and maintain the benefits provided by these watercourses, the Flood Control District of Maricopa County engaged in an effort to refine its role in river planning and management. To develop an enhanced river planning and management strategy, District staff adopted a process called C3RPM. The core C3 process addresses complex issues with a blend of comprehensive information collection to solicit diverse opinions; a coordinated and deliberative assessment of that information; and a collaborative decision-making system free of bias to promote a consensus result.

The District's Coordinated, Comprehensive, Collaborative Flood Hazard Mitigation Partnering (C3FHMP) effort addressed Strategic Initiative No.3 of the Flood Control District of Maricopa County 2009 Comprehensive Plan: Increase Collaboration and Partnerships. The District initiated the process to determine how the funding and resources of other entities could be best applied to mitigate flood hazards in Maricopa County, or where mutual benefits would be realized.

The Division of Adult Education in the Arizona Department of Education and the Arizona Adult Literacy and Technology Resource Center contracted with the Morrison Institute for Public Policy to develop an evaluation system for Arizona's adult education program. During phase I, the institute analyzed existing program data on Arizona's adult education providers. Interviews were conducted in January and February 1997 of 379 current and past program participants; they were done in English or Spanish, as appropriate. Interviewees were asked 10 questions about reasons for entering the program, amount of time spent in the program, and feelings about what the program did or did not help them accomplish. Past participants were asked an additional question about their reasons for leaving the program. Findings indicated that over 90 percent of interviewees felt their adult education experiences had met their needs and been positive overall. The proportions of participants who mentioned having entered with a specific goal, e.g., preparing to take the General Educational Development tests or to get a job, were closely aligned with the proportions who said their participation in the program had helped them reach that particular goal. More than one-quarter of program participants in 1996 showed improvement on three indicators that suggested they were becoming more self-sufficient: moving off public assistance, gaining employment, and maintaining or improving their job situation. (Appendixes contain 10 references, 3 data tables, and interview forms.)

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.

Arizona's Serve-America program, administered by the Arizona Department of Education (ADE), began in fiscal year 1992-93 under the auspices of the National and Community Service Act of 1990. Serve-America links community service projects with schools and youths in grades K-12. This second annual report documents the second year of project implementation and updates the policy context in which programs are operating. It focuses on 15 sites--including both schools and community-based organizations--funded to implement community service programs during 1993-94. A pre- and post-test study investigated the relationship between "at-riskness" and "connectedness to the community." Findings indicate that the projects made considerable progress toward accomplishing proposed goals and resulted in positive outcomes for local communities and student volunteers, particularly those at risk. Some projects were more effective than others in positively influencing at-risk participants. The following recommendations are offered: (1) the ADE should continue to support community service programs; (2) the ADE should sponsor more technical assistance and evaluation training; (3) the state should expand training and assistance; and (4) further research about Arizona's effective community service projects is warranted.