In fiscal year 2012, Clifton Unified School District’s student AIMS scores were lower than both its peer districts’ and state averages. The District’s instructional program needs improvement. For example, some students were not provided the statutorily required number of instructional hours, and one of its four teachers did not have a teaching certificate. The District’s operational efficiencies were mixed, with some costs higher and some costs lower than peer districts’. However, the District lacked proper oversight and adequate controls over nearly all of its operations. In particular, the District lacked basic administrative processes such as monitoring budgets and maintaining proper controls over expenditures resulting in it overspending its legal budget limits in fiscal years 2009, 2010, and 2011. The District also failed to meet several transportation safety requirements. For example, its primary driver was not certified to drive a school bus. Lastly, the District lacked proper supervision of inmate workers on its school campus.

In fiscal year 2011, Chinle Unified School District’s student achievement was similar to peer districts’ averages, and the District’s operational efficiency was mixed, with some costs higher and some costs lower than peer districts’ averages. The District’s per pupil administrative costs were much higher than peer districts’, and it lacked adequate controls over its vehicles, accounts payable processing, and computer systems. The District’s plant operations costs were also much higher than peer districts’ because the District maintained more building space per student, which was likely not needed since Chinle USD operated its schools far below their designed capacities. The District’s food service program was reasonably efficient, and its transportation program had similar per mile costs as peer districts’. However, the District did not meet bus driver and bus preventative maintenance requirements.

This plan is an action agenda that avoids the long-term strategic planning platitudes and broad generalizations that sound good but do not achieve a great deal. The steps presented in this document are ones we can take in the near term, over the next two years or so, that will provide the foundation for long-term economic growth and stability.

In fiscal year 2012, Laveen Elementary School District’s student achievement was similar to peer districts’ averages, and the District operated efficiently overall with lower costs per pupil than peer districts’, on average, in all operational areas. Despite operating efficiently, Laveen ESD spent 21 percent, or $751, less per pupil in the classroom than peer districts, on average, because it received less funding primarily because it had a lower poverty rate and fewer special needs students. In fact, the District had nearly the lowest overall per pupil spending amount in the State. Although the District operated efficiently overall, it needs to better ensure that its bus drivers meet all certification requirements and it may be able to reduce its plant operations costs by further reducing the amount it pays for custodial services.

This paper complements a detailed assessment of job quality, based on analysis of industrial and occupational mix, recently completed by the Seidman Institute’s Center for Business Research. The overall conclusions in this report are consistent with those of the more extensive CBR research. Arizona’s economy grows very rapidly, but per person or per worker measures of wages, compensation, incomes, and gross state product are below the national average. No evidence exists that the situation is improving appreciably (or deteriorating). Indeed, the state appears to be creating income, wealth and quality jobs at rates that are similar to those displayed by other states. Arizona is a job-generating marvel and is among the nation’s leaders in aggregate growth. If the state is successful at improving the quality of its labor force and creating higher-quality jobs, its per worker and per person comparisons will improve.

This paper provides a capsule perspective on the lessons economists have learned from investigating growth and income gaps across countries. After providing the lessons for growth and development across countries, the paper asks whether these lessons can be extended to growth and income differentials between regions or states of the United States. It should be stressed that applying to regional growth what is known about country growth is partly untested at this time, and hence merely suggestive.

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.

Throughout Arizona and the Southwest, the odds are against high achievement in schools with a mostly Latino, mostly poor student enrollment. Some schools, however, "beat the odds" and achieve consistently high results or show steady gains. Why do these schools succeed where others fail? Using the methodology of business guru Jim Collins from his book "Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap...and Others Don't," the authors of this report found 12 elementary and middle schools in Arizona--schools whose students are mostly Latino and mostly poor--that are "beating the odds" on reading and math scores. The authors compared them with similar schools that are performing poorly. The comparisons yielded many insights that are contrary to conventional wisdom. One key result is the unearthing of six elements of success that can translate into broader messages for education policy and strategy. The report recommends the creation of leadership programs for principals and teachers and calls for the creation of a dissemination mechanism to bring "best practices" into every school in Arizona.

The Arizona Republic reported on a Jan. 10 panel discussion regarding Arizona's vulnerable giant data system called the Student Accountability Information System, or SAIS: Arizona's superintendent of schools, John Huppenthal, says the state's K-12 data system is on the "verge of collapse" and is seeking $35 million in state funding over the next two years to fix and improve outdated systems. "We figure we have 200 people in the department who are essentially full-time data wranglers," Huppenthal said. "It's like monks in the medieval ages copying stuff on paper." The state's K-12 data system was the focus of a panel discussion sponsored by Arizona State University's Morrison Institute for Public Policy. The nonpartisan research group released a report the same day calling the data system "antiquated" and "patched together." The report said the lack of a fully functioning system hampers the state's efforts to improve academic performance.