This research study addresses the collection, preparation, and use of traffic data required for pavement design by the Arizona Department of Transportation, focusing on data required as inputs for the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials "Mechanistic-Empirical Pavement Design Guide" design procedures. ADOT’s current traffic data collection and preparation processes are not adequate to meet the needs of the MEPDG procedure, and improvements are needed. These improvements include enhanced volume, classification, and weight data collection for vehicles, processing data and performing quality assurance checks, and the preparation/analysis of the data for use in the MEPDG. Use of the MEPDG in Arizona will require (1) an annual flow of updated key traffic data and (2) the ability to collect on-site (MEPDG Level 1) data in a timely manner for key projects.

In the mid‐1990s, the Arizona Department of Transportation initiated the Maintenance Cost Effectiveness study (SPR 371) with the development of plans and an experiment design to evaluate the effectiveness of a variety of asphalt pavement maintenance treatments. During 1999 and 2001, ADOT oversaw the construction of hundreds of experimental sections throughout the state under the Phase I, Wearing Course Experiment (nine treatments and 82 sections at three sites), and the Phase II, Preventive Maintenance Experiment (24 treatments and 137 sections at four sites). Work continued in 2006 and 2007 under the Evaluation of Maintenance Strategies study (SPR 628) for ADOT with a yearlong program of pavement performance monitoring involving manual pavement distress surveys and automated skid, friction, and surface texture measurements at all the experimental sites. The project culminated with a detailed analysis of key pavement performance data to compare the performance of the individual treatments and determine their overall effectiveness. This report documents the independent findings of both the Phase I and II experiments.

RTI International is working on behalf of the Arizona Department of Health Services’ Bureau of Tobacco and Chronic Disease to identify existing tobacco-related data and data needs. RTI interviewed ADHS-BTCD’s partnering organizations by telephone and conducted an environmental scan of existing public use datasets. This report describes the results obtained from the environmental scan and the partner telephone interviews, and it discusses recommendations for addressing the identified data gaps.

The Maricopa County Department of Public Health and the Southwest Interdisciplinary Research Center at Arizona State University initiated an evaluation of ASU’s Tobacco-Free Campus policy, which went into effect on August 1, 2013. The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the impacts of this policy on the ASU community and environment. This report summarizes tobacco consumption patterns, norms and perceptions surrounding tobacco use, tobacco litter on campus, and overall benefits of a tobacco-free campus both before and after policy implementation.

In 2006, the Smoke-Free Arizona Act outlawed smoking within most enclosed public spaces and places of employment primarily to reduce the exposure of individuals to harmful secondhand smoke. The purpose of the Maricopa County Smoke-Free Parks Policy Assessment is three-fold: 1) to evaluate the extent and health impact of tobacco usage in public parks; 2) analyze smoke-free parks policies that have been proposed in cities, counties, and states nationwide; and 3) to assess the feasibility of introducing and implementing similar policies in Arizona, and in Maricopa County in particular.

For decades, Arizona was one of the national leaders in aggregate economic growth, as measured by the percent change in measures such as gross product and employment. However, its growth rate always has been highly cyclical. During expansionary periods, Arizona always has been among the top states on the rate of growth. During recessions, the Arizona economy generally slumped at a rate similar to the national average, but would experience a rapid recovery. This pattern continued through the economic expansion of the mid-2000s.

As Arizona’s population continues to grow, so does the need for electricity. Retail sales of electricity in Arizona have increased along with the population, although sales per person have declined since peaking in 2007, a sign of decreased use and increased efficiency. As we progress in the twenty-first century, action must be taken to increase the sustainability of our energy resources by continuing to conserve and by shifting to the greater use of energy from renewable sources. In addition, we must work to mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Assesses the health of both ends of the P-20 spectrum: early childcare and education and the high school/postsecondary-to-industry nexus. Both are viewed through the lens of Arizona's current competitive position and its trajectory through the broader economic landscape. How well does Arizona regulate, promote and ensure equitable access to quality early childcare and to programs that help children enter Kindergarten ready to learn? Does Arizona's production of graduates and skilled workers align with current and projected industry needs?

An annual statewide report card that is designed to make data actionable. This year's report homes in on the economy and education. It examines Arizona's economic development landscape, the competitive potential of the Sun Corridor, the economic consequences if the state fails to close the Latino achievement gap, and the role of career and technical education in adding skilled workers to Arizona's workforce pipeline.

Per capita earnings in Arizona has been lower than the national average for decades. The 2011 differential of 19 percent is the largest on record; the typical differential has been between 10 and 15 percent. Thus, for residents who have spent some or all of their working life in the state, the state’s historically low per capita earnings help to explain the state’s below-average per capita property income.