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.

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.

Between May and July of 1996, members of the council were asked to participate in a series of interviews. The primary purpose of the interviews was to elicit council members' views of and expectations for Arizona's STW initiative. A second reason was to clarify the mission of the council itself. This paper highlights salient points from the interviews. Quotes are used verbatim.

Governor Jan Brewer signed into law the Fiscal 2012 budget that eliminates all child care subsidies in Arizona. While the full impact of that action won’t be felt for weeks and months after the law takes effect July 1, Budget Trax has measured what sharply reduced funding in recent years has meant to working parents, children and businesses, as well as to the potential impact to matching federal funding.

Digital technology is everywhere, revolutionizing how we live, work and play. Yet, as a tool for educating our children, it is conspicuously absent in K-12 classrooms. Textbooks and lectures are still the norm, making the classroom one of the last frontiers of digital technology. This report seeks to answer some of the key questions about digital learning. What is digital learning? Where are we as a country and, in particular, in Arizona, with digital learning? What opportunities does digital learning present? And how can we make the best use of it to help educate our children?

As you will read in this report, digital learning is not a panacea. At its best, digital technology can be a tool to support students and teachers in the learning process. We don’t yet have all the answers. There are plenty of instances we can point to where digital learning efforts may have had disappointing results. Having said that, we believe that digital learning holds great promise in the field of education. It is where digital technology may achieve its greatest possible benefits and impact.

In preparation for new federal legislation that promotes unprecedented levels of comprehensive planning and service integration at state and local levels, an analysis of state issues relevant to comprehensive service delivery is necessary. This paper examines such state issues, with a focus on Arizona's at-risk population, and presents a framework for comprehensive service delivery. It provides the rationale for such service delivery, summarizes the literature on research-based practices, illustrates district approaches to comprehensive service delivery, and sets forth guidelines for developing a comprehensive plan. System components of an effective plan are discussed in detail--student education, parent/family involvement, social/economic services, health services, and professional development. Five general principles underlie success: philosophy, people, processes, promising practices, and partners. Recommendations for developing comprehensive service delivery programs include the following: (1) build on existing information; (2) consolidate knowledge; and (3) think long-term. Contains 11 figures and over 250 references. Appendices contain information on Arizona practitioners' views and an illustration of a side-by-side program analysis.

The School-to-Work (STW) Opportunities Act of 1994 promotes the development of statewide systems that support workforce and economic development through changes in the ways that students are educated. Jointly funded by the U.S. Departments of Labor and Education, the Act emphasizes school-based and work-based learning and activities designed to connect the two. In order to fulfill the Act’s work-based learning component, employers are recruited to work with students. Recruitment efforts have generated questions from employers concerning their obligations and legal responsibilities should they become involved in STW programs. This paper attempts to clarify these issues.

During 1993-94, the Morrison Institute for Public Policy at Arizona State University conducted a study on behalf of the Arizona Department of Education. This document presents findings of that study, which examined linkages between health services and schools for a comprehensive service delivery to students. Following the introduction, chapter 1 provides a national overview on children's health and the public schools, presenting national and legislative initiatives and a framework for linking health services and schools. Chapter 2 reviews what is known about the major issues in child health in Arizona and its schools, synthesizing health data from several sources.

Survey results from 531 Arizona school principals about school-based/school-linked health and social services are also analyzed. A discussion of the Arizona perspective follows in chapter 3, which examines the philosophy guiding state initiatives, key players, the processes that support school-based/school-linked health services, and a sample of current state activities. The fourth chapter provides a view of how some Arizona schools are attempting to address these issues through the provision of student health services at or near school sites. The last chapter reviews action necessary to facilitate linkages between schools and health services, and the status of Arizona efforts. It concludes with some considerations for the future. A conclusion is that the state is making significant progress toward promoting and, in some schools, implementing such services. Eight tables and seven figures are included.