The age of housing in the Phoenix metropolitan area reflects the mostly steady outward spread of development. Large differences exist across the area in other housing measures. Many of these differences are closely related to geographic variations in household income and in the type of housing. As in the rest of the country, housing affordability in the Phoenix metropolitan area fell substantially in the 1970s. During the 1980s, the change in affordability varied by situation. Affordability rose for the median-income household, especially for homeownership. For those at the low end of the income spectrum, affordability of rental units improved slightly, but affordability of owned units worsened. Data for the 1990s are limited; the affordability of owned units rose for the median-income household, which could afford the median-priced home in 1998. An inadequate supply of very low-cost housing existed in the Phoenix metropolitan area in 1990. Even if low-income households were perfectly matched to low-income housing that they could afford, a little less than 3 percent of all households (about 23,000) could not have found affordable housing. The inadequacy expanded in the 1980s. The percentage of households reporting an unaffordable housing payment was much greater. Considering only low-income households who spent more than 30 percent of their income on housing, about 21 percent of all households had a housing problem related to affordability.

The condition of Arizona’s infrastructure has a direct impact on economic productivity and quality of life. As economic competition expands domestically and globally, and as the knowledge economy evolves, the importance of a strong infrastructure increases. Education, in particular, is of growing importance. Arizona’s infrastructure challenges will require commitment and creativity to meet the needs and potential of 10 million people and to ensure a positive future for the state.

A landmark assessment of infrastructure needs in Arizona was produced by the L. William Seidman Research Institute in May 2008 for the Arizona Investment Council (AIC): "Infrastructure Needs and Funding Alternatives for Arizona: 2008-2032", that addressed infrastructure needs in four categories: energy, telecommunications, transportation, and water and wastewater. The information from the AIC report is a major input to the report that follows. Other types of infrastructure — most notably education, health care, and public safety — also are analyzed here to provide a more complete picture of infrastructure needs in Arizona. The goals of this report are to place Arizona’s infrastructure needs into national and historical contexts, to identify the changing conditions in infrastructure provision that make building Arizona’s infrastructure in the future a more problematic proposition than in the past, and to provide projections of the possible costs of providing infrastructure in Arizona over the next quarter century.

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.

This study summarizes and analyzes the findings of a statewide survey conducted last year of samples of homeless individuals in the Phoenix and Tucson areas and across the state. The aim of this report is to join with other, ongoing efforts to develop effective policies concerning such issues as job training, treatment for the mentally ill and Arizona’s critical need for affordable housing. Hopefully, it will help politicians and policymakers talk more openly and productively about a pervasive social problem that is both glaringly obvious and largely invisible.

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.

Students with AP credit are often able to skip general studies courses and take courses related to their majors earlier in their college careers than students without AP credits. Recent federal and state policies have been aimed at expanding students’ access to AP courses. In this brief, we examine students’ access, participation, and success in AP courses in Arizona’s public high schools.

This follow-up to the 2001 landmark report, "Five Shoes Waiting to Drop on Arizona's Future," focuses on the projected future of the state if Arizona fails to address its Latino educational attainment gap. The publication is more of an economic impact statement than an education report, with indicators pointing out consequences and contributions, depending on action or inaction in closing the gap of Arizona's future workforce.

In February of 1998, the Pima County Board of Supervisors launched what has evolved into the Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan (SDCP) -- a comprehensive effort to protect the Sonoran Desert, guide growth and rationalize land development in the metropolitan Tucson region. Proponents of this planning process maintained that the project would reconcile conflicts between human activities and conservation, providing benefits for both wildlife and economic development. Critics, however, have increasingly alleged that implementing such an initiative will adversely affect land and housing markets, increase taxes and create problems of housing affordability. Over time a pressing need has consequently grown for objective information about the possible fiscal and economic impacts of the conservation programs being assembled by Pima County. This report addresses that need. It is a tool in the form of an impartial framework for assessment that government officials, environmentalists, business people and the general public can use for debate and decision-making.