Matching Items (59)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

Created2013-09
Description

These regulations constitute the legal basis for control of air pollution sources in Maricopa County, Arizona. They are adopted to implement the policy set forth in Title 49 of the Arizona Revised Statutes and to fulfill the State's responsibilities under the Federal Clean Air Act and its amendments to provide

These regulations constitute the legal basis for control of air pollution sources in Maricopa County, Arizona. They are adopted to implement the policy set forth in Title 49 of the Arizona Revised Statutes and to fulfill the State's responsibilities under the Federal Clean Air Act and its amendments to provide a legally enforceable State Implementation Plan for the attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This printing of the regulations incorporates changes adopted by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors through September 2013.

Created2011-01
Description

These regulations constitute the legal basis for control of air pollution sources in Maricopa County, Arizona. They are adopted to implement the policy set forth in Title 49 of the Arizona Revised Statutes and to fulfill the State's responsibilities under the Federal Clean Air Act and its amendments to provide

These regulations constitute the legal basis for control of air pollution sources in Maricopa County, Arizona. They are adopted to implement the policy set forth in Title 49 of the Arizona Revised Statutes and to fulfill the State's responsibilities under the Federal Clean Air Act and its amendments to provide a legally enforceable State Implementation Plan for the attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. This printing of the regulations incorporates changes adopted by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors through January 2011.

42800-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-04
Description

In early 2009, an Exploratory Committee was formed to investigate the potential creation of a Veterans Court in Maricopa County, Arizona. The Committee’s initial efforts have focused on examining existing Veterans Courts and determining the size and scope of the problem (i.e., the number of veterans in the county jail).

In early 2009, an Exploratory Committee was formed to investigate the potential creation of a Veterans Court in Maricopa County, Arizona. The Committee’s initial efforts have focused on examining existing Veterans Courts and determining the size and scope of the problem (i.e., the number of veterans in the county jail). This report provides an overview of information on veterans in the Maricopa County Jail System, drawing on data collected by the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN). This report is intended to assist the work of the Veterans Court Exploratory Committee.

42806-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-08
Description

For the 2008 AARIN study, 2,105 Maricopa County (AZ) arrestees volunteered to complete the survey instrument and to provide a valid urine specimen for testing. In addition, the arrestees responded to a series of questions related to methamphetamine use, including patterns of use, treatment, drug transactions, sales and manufacturing, and

For the 2008 AARIN study, 2,105 Maricopa County (AZ) arrestees volunteered to complete the survey instrument and to provide a valid urine specimen for testing. In addition, the arrestees responded to a series of questions related to methamphetamine use, including patterns of use, treatment, drug transactions, sales and manufacturing, and awareness of the Arizona Meth Project. Among those participants, 435 (20.7%) admitted to having used methamphetamine in the 30 days prior to arrest.

42807-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-01
Description

The purpose of this report is to examine methamphetamine use among adult arrestees and juvenile detainees in Maricopa County, Arizona. We relied on data from the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN) to address the following five questions:
1. What percent of adult arrestees are methamphetamine users and what are their

The purpose of this report is to examine methamphetamine use among adult arrestees and juvenile detainees in Maricopa County, Arizona. We relied on data from the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN) to address the following five questions:
1. What percent of adult arrestees are methamphetamine users and what are their social characteristics?
2. What is the relationship between methamphetamine use and arresting offense?
3. What is the relationship between methamphetamine use by parents and the presence of children in the household?
4. What percent of methamphetamine users are receiving treatment for their drug use?
5. What percent of juvenile detainees are methamphetamine users and what are their social and legal characteristics?

42808-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-12
Description

During 2008, 2,105 adult arrestees participated in the AARIN study. Participants completed the survey instrument and provided a valid urine specimen for testing. In addition to the core AARIN instrument, a supplemental set of question was asked of the arrestees. This Market and Use Addendum consisted of a series of

During 2008, 2,105 adult arrestees participated in the AARIN study. Participants completed the survey instrument and provided a valid urine specimen for testing. In addition to the core AARIN instrument, a supplemental set of question was asked of the arrestees. This Market and Use Addendum consisted of a series of questions related to the arrestees’ acquisition of drugs and specific drug market behaviors.

42810-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2009-02
Description

This special topic report examines the prevalence and characteristics of co-occurring substance abuse and mental health problems among juvenile detainees in Maricopa County. The findings come from the Co-occurring Disorder Addendum used during 2007. The findings reveal that almost 30 percent of juvenile detainees were at risk for a co-occurring

This special topic report examines the prevalence and characteristics of co-occurring substance abuse and mental health problems among juvenile detainees in Maricopa County. The findings come from the Co-occurring Disorder Addendum used during 2007. The findings reveal that almost 30 percent of juvenile detainees were at risk for a co-occurring disorder, and face significantly greater difficulties across a number of critical factors, including incarceration, homelessness, and victimization.

42811-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2012-10
Description

In the present study, researchers used interview data obtained from 1,342 recently booked adult male and female arrestees at the Central Intake booking facilities in Maricopa County, Arizona as part of the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN). The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors sponsored research at Arizona State University

In the present study, researchers used interview data obtained from 1,342 recently booked adult male and female arrestees at the Central Intake booking facilities in Maricopa County, Arizona as part of the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network (AARIN). The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors sponsored research at Arizona State University and established AARIN in January 2007 to monitor drug use trends, treatment needs, and at-risk behavior among recently booked arrestees in Maricopa County. Three times each calendar year, professionally trained local staff conduct voluntary and anonymous interviews with adult males and females and juvenile boys and girls who had been arrested within the past 48 hours. Analysis for this report relied on our adult sample from October 2011 through May 2012.

42812-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2012-09
Description

The analysis plan and the format of this report are derived from numerous meetings held over more than an eighteen month span with the AARIN project advisory board, Maricopa County leadership, and representatives from JPD. Following the guidance of the advisory board, the dissemination strategy for the AARIN project shifted

The analysis plan and the format of this report are derived from numerous meetings held over more than an eighteen month span with the AARIN project advisory board, Maricopa County leadership, and representatives from JPD. Following the guidance of the advisory board, the dissemination strategy for the AARIN project shifted from a single, broadly scoped annual summary report supplemented by smaller topic-specific reports into shorter, individual reports tailored to the specific needs and wants of six key county criminal justice agencies. Meetings with JPD representatives regarding their individualized report indicated they would be most interested in a broad analysis akin to the traditional AARIN annual reports. A key modification to this broad traditional analysis strategy, this report compares juvenile detainees in three categories of probation history – never served probation (or not in the past 12 months), served probation in a county other than Maricopa, and served probation in Maricopa County, each defined for either lifetime or the past 12 months, ultimately yielding six analysis categories. Each of the three probation categories are mutually exclusive within a given time period (i.e. lifetime and past 12 months). Given the JPD’s need for the broadly scoped analysis as opposed to a topically-focused and interpretive report, the report here primarily provides analyses across most of the core instrument elements, presented in tabular form, with a list of key findings and highlights.

42813-Thumbnail Image.png
Created2012-08
Description

This report compares arrestees in three categories of probation history – never served probation (or not in the past 12 months), served probation in a county other than Maricopa, and served probation in Maricopa County, each defined for either lifetime or the past 12 months, ultimately yielding six analysis categories.

This report compares arrestees in three categories of probation history – never served probation (or not in the past 12 months), served probation in a county other than Maricopa, and served probation in Maricopa County, each defined for either lifetime or the past 12 months, ultimately yielding six analysis categories. Each of the three probation categories are mutually exclusive within a given time period (i.e. lifetime and past 12 months). Given the Department’s need for the broadly scoped analysis as opposed to a topically-focused and interpretive report, the report here primarily provides analyses across most of the core instrument elements, presented in tabular form, with a list of key findings and highlights.