This Campaign Effectiveness Study, conducted for the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality, was designed to evaluate the specific effectiveness of the 2013-2014 Clean Air and Clean Stormwater Program Campaigns. This project analyzed and tracked the overall effectiveness of the Clean Air Program after 24 campaign sessions. For the second consecutive year, the survey also measured and tracked attitudes, knowledge, awareness, and behaviors related to stormwater management for the Clean Stormwater Program Campaign.

This Campaign Effectiveness Travel Behavioral Study, conducted for the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality, was designed to evaluate the specific effectiveness of the 2012-2013 Clean Air Campaign, as well as analyze the overall effectiveness of the air quality media campaign after 23 campaign sessions. New to the current study, the survey also measured baseline awareness/knowledge related to storm water and hazardous waste issues.

This report serves as an addendum to the Navajo County Community Health Status Assessment dated January of 2010. In most cases, the original data table from the 2010 report is reproduced here with an updated table below. The scope of the project was to update all data where current secondary sources of information existed. In a few instances, the research team did obtain primary data by telephone calls.

Conducted for the Pima County Flood Control District by the Pima Association of Governments in order to determine if stormflows on the Cienega Creek have changed over time when analyzed in terms of frequency, volume, and seasonallity. In a data search that extends back to the 1950s, they were able to determine the daily mean flow, the flows over base, and the annual peak flows of the Cienega Creek.

Building upon the work of many others who have contributed to quality of life research in Arizona, this report provides a framework for addressing key issues proactively. The data in Arizona Directions are presented in a highly graphic format with must-read information on our competitiveness, individual action steps, opportunities for public-private partnerships, and public policy options – all rooted in a deep understanding that revenue-neutral options are especially important in our current fiscal situation.

In step with other organizations, the Greater Phoenix Economic Council (the Valley’s regional public-private economic development organization) published a comprehensive 10-year economic development strategy that codified its change in direction to quality economic development in aerospace, bio-industry, advanced business and financial services, technology, and software. In early 2004, the Governor’s Council on Innovation and Technology issued Building Arizona’s Knowledge-Based Economy with scores of recommendations on venture capital, higher education, collaboration, workforce development, and other topics. Separately, each of these items would have been notable. Taken together, they demonstrate a strong commitment to the growth of a knowledge economy and to the multifaceted approaches needed to develop it.

This report both updates statistics and perceptions and adds new features. Thus, readers may look at quality of life based on how residents feel or on the trend lines revealed in the numbers. What Matters reports what people think about Greater Phoenix, how they view their own lives, and whether they believe the region is on the right or wrong track. The sections are presented in the order of importance assigned to them by the survey rankings (i.e., Education appears first, Public Safety and Crime second, etc).

What Matters is intended to support decision-making on public issues and to provide a reference for policy makers, civic and business leaders, community activists, and other residents. In response to feedback on previous issues, this edition includes additional indicators for healthcare and more information on higher education. Price and income data have been adjusted for inflation, and more information has been added where appropriate for a fuller picture of trends. Different approaches or completely new sources of data were required in some of this issue’s indicators because of changes in data sources. While every effort was made to choose items that would be stable, there is no way to control for how data are collected or reported over the years. On the whole, however, the 1997 baseline remains intact.

In 1996, ASU’s Morrison Institute for Public Policy began asking residents and leaders in Greater Phoenix, “What does quality of life mean to you, and how do you measure it?” After an 18-month process, the first volume of What Matters was published in September 1997, creating a baseline of opinion and data about “quality of life” and what it means to the people who live here. The report was quickly recognized both within the region and nationally among indicator projects for its simple, yet unique presentation of public perception (survey) data and regional statistical, or indicator, data.