The purpose of this plan is to provide information and recommendations to guide Arizona State Parks and other agencies in Arizona in their management of motorized and nonmotorized trail resources, and specifically to guide the distribution and expenditure of the Arizona Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Fund, trails component of the Arizona Heritage Fund and the Federal Recreational Trails Program. This plan includes both motorized and nonmotorized trail information, public involvement results and recommendations for future actions regarding trails in Arizona.

This planning document details the results of extensive surveys of Arizonans’ thoughts, preferences and priorities regarding trails and off-highway vehicle routes. Throughout the year 2008, staff at Arizona State Parks and faculty at Arizona State University partnered to solicit information from more than 5,500 Arizonans about what types of motorized or non-motorized trails they use, how often they use trails, what they like or don’t like about trails, and what trail managers should focus their time and dollars on to make the trail experience better.

The purpose of the Arizona Trails 2015 Plan is to gather information and recommendations to guide Arizona State Parks and other land management agencies in the management of motorized and non­‐motorized trails, and guide the distribution and expenditures of the Off‐Highway Vehicle Recreation Fund and the Federal Recreational Trails Program. The Arizona Trails Plan is updated every five years.

The report states that the State Parks system is in imminent danger of complete collapse as a result of financial starvation during most of this decade. A chronic lack of capital funding has led to the devastation of Parks infrastructure. In addition, budget cuts in Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010 so far have forced the closure of several parks and reduced hours at 17 other sites. The Task Force's chief recommendation is that the State should implement a Sustainable State Parks Fund, which would be financed by a $14 to $15 annual contribution to be collected from owners of non-commercial vehicles as a part of the vehicle registration process. The proceeds would be dedicated to the operation, maintenance and capital needs of State Parks. In return, private vehicles bearing Arizona license plates would be admitted free to State Parks.

Phoenix Early Head Start (EHS) is a program for first-time teen parents and their families. It is a family-centered program intended to provide early, continuous, intensive, and comprehensive child development and family support services for vulnerable families and their very young children. This report presents case studies of 12 families, all EHS participants, who agreed to be followed throughout their participation in the program so that their stories could be updated as they unfolded from one year to the next. The case study families were interviewed for the first time in August 1997 and again in August 1998. Common themes in the family's stories regarding EHS's role include: (1) assistance from caring staff; (2) reassurance from home visits and child development; (3) help in becoming good parents; (4) help with personal goals; (5) help with daily life; and (6) socialization opportunities for children and parents.

This publication updates the January 2004 study, New Returns on Investment in the Knowledge Economy: Proposition 301 at Arizona State University, FY 2003. Both works were launched by the report, Seeds of Prosperity: Public Investment in Science and Technology Research (2003), by Morrison Institute for Public Policy. Morrison Institute will periodically publish new material to keep you informed of the status of Proposition 301 investments at Arizona State University.

The Phoenix, Arizona Early Head Start program is a family-centered program providing early, continuous, intensive, and comprehensive child development and family support services for low-income pregnant women and families with children ages birth to three. Analyses were conducted of program and participant data and program processes from Year 3, the second full year of implementation. The program components evaluated were: (1) child development, promoted through weekly home visits, site-based socialization activities, and weekly play groups; (2) family development services, provided by family support specialists to develop effective, supportive relationships, especially with fathers; (3) staff development, incorporating a multi-disciplinary approach reinforced by a relationship-based supervision model; and (4) community building and collaboration, including connections with Phoenix's program for young fathers and other family-focused initiatives.

Evaluation findings suggest that the program is on the right track. Among the program's successes are the launch of all planned child development activities, increased services by and access to the child development/disabilities specialists, and progress made through the male involvement component. The program continues to face challenges, including increasing staff skills in child development and parent-child relationships, helping young parents adjust to dealing with toddlers, reducing disruptive effects of staff turnover, and making the program and participants visible and vital to other family-centered community endeavors and to policy makers. Recommendations for future operations were derived from the evaluation findings. (Contains 49 references.)