An update to the Flagstaff Regional Plan 2030 (FRP30), to bring its Road Network Illustration (Map 25) into compliance with Arizona Revised Statute requirements and to resolve inconsistencies between Map 25 and parts of the Flagstaff City Code. This update does not alter the intent of FRP30; it is only concerned with correcting errors, removing legal vulnerability, and improving the readability of FRP30.

In 1996, the Arizona Legislature charged our universities, community colleges, and Board of Regents to collaborate to develop ways for students to seamlessly transfer from community colleges to universities. Meeting the higher education needs of our state was and is a priority of these three bodies. The Academic Program Articulation Steering Committee was formed as the cooperative body to carry out this charge. On behalf of the community colleges and Arizona Board of Regents, it prepares an annual report to the legislature on the progress toward improving articulation and transfer.

In the Arizona University System, research that leads to real innovations translates to technologies and products that improve lives and stimulate the economy. This report provides an in-depth and comprehensive review of Arizona's higher education research enterprise. It is designed to allow the reader to easily locate any single research metric for any of Arizona's three public universities and quickly compare each Arizona university's performance against those of its Board-approved peers.

The TRIF budget provides seed-funding and support for significant research projects at all three universities. The supported research includes projects in bioscience to improve health and projects in sustainability and renewable energy, including water, solar, and forest health. At the UA, TRIF also supports space exploration and optical solutions, while at ASU it supports work with national security systems. TRIF dollars continue to support research critical to the future economic development of the state of Arizona and to a quality educational experience for our students. TRIF supported workforce development projects, especially in Arizona’s high-need areas, including The University of Arizona College of Medicine-Phoenix to train more doctors to address the shortage of physicians in Arizona.

The Arizona Board of Regents presents in this 2020 Vision a framework for the Arizona University System to improve the economic strength of our state and quality of life for Arizonans over the next 12 years. This plan lays out a series of touchstones for this ambition organized around four key themes: Educational Excellence, Research Excellence, Community Engagement and Workforce Impact, and Productivity. This plan builds on a foundation manifested in previous strategic planning efforts of the universities and the Board, including the establishment of a medical college in Phoenix, development of new health professions programs not offered by public institutions in the state, growth in the research enterprise, and increasingly intensive efforts to provide baccalaureate access to all regions of the state.

In the 2009 report entitled "Vision 2020," the Arizona Board of Regents outlined the objective of raising Arizona to the national average of college graduates in the work force and moving Arizona to the status of a large scale center for academic research. This realignment plan outlines how both of these significant goals will be achieved in an era of more modest public investment.

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.)

This report presents the second comprehensive look at the conditions of children and families in Arizona. Building upon information presented in the 1992 Factbook, this document presents and analyzes 48 indicators of child well-being. Following the executive summary and tables, chapter 1 provides an overview of the data for the state as a whole, including a summary of key findings and tables depicting raw numbers, rates adjusted for population growth, and rate changes over time. Racial and ethnic breakdowns are presented when such data are available.

Chapters 2-16 offer individual county profiles, following the general format established in the state chapter. These chapters offer insights into regional variations and identify varying conditions for children across the state. The report charts data within the state and county chapters for each of the following six categories: (1) poverty; (2) child health and safety; (3) child abuse, neglect, and out-of-home care; (4) early care and education; (5) children in school; and (6) teens at-risk. Overall, findings reveal significant improvements for a few indicators since 1990, most notably within birth-related items, such as an increase in the percent of women receiving timely prenatal care and a decrease in low birth-weight births. Findings also suggest there has been a worsening for many indicators, including poverty, firearm-related deaths and hospitalizations, alleged child abuse incidents, and births to teens.

This study was conducted as a progress evaluation of charter schools in Arizona. The study was funded by the Arizona Department of Education and conducted during calendar year 1998 by the Morrison Institute for Public Policy.

A total of 303 parents of charter school students, 171 students, 123 teachers and 54 directors completed surveys about charter schools. Fourteen focus groups were held around the state with parents, students, teachers and directors. Individual interviews were conducted with 23 persons, most of whom either hold policy-making positions related to charter schools or are employed by professional organizations that interact frequently with the schools.