As cities seek ways to address emerging urban problems, a growing ractice is to combine the efforts of citizens, local government, and community organizations to revitalize and build strong neighborhoods. The Neighborhood Fight Back Program, administered through the City of Phoenix Neighborhood Services Department (NSD), is viewed as one such practice. The Fight Back program offers designated neighborhoods “specialized support over a limited period of time to assist with resident driven neighborhood improvement efforts. These efforts generally focus on revitalization, sustainability, crime and blight reduction, resident participation, neighborhood leadership, development and community building.” At the request of NSD, an external evaluation of the Fight Back program was conducted by the Morrison Institute for Public Policy, School of Public Affairs, Arizona State University. The evaluation involved more than 100 interviews with residents and city staff and an extensive review and analysis of program documentation.

Aging affects all dimensions of our society, but none so much as health care. Thus, St. Luke’s Health Initiatives (SLHI) decided to dedicate part of its Arizona Health Futures program to exploring Arizona’s capacity to meet the health care demands of an aging population. SLHI asked the Arizona State University School of Public Affairs and Morrison Institute for Public Policy to collaborate on The Coming of Age to inform Arizona’s policy leaders and residents about these critical issues. The Coming of Age engaged demographers, economists, public policy analysts, human service and medical professionals and citizens. Through its research, the team developed a realistic picture of Arizona’s "capacity to care" for an elder population. The results of the research are presented in The Coming of Age: Aging, Health and Arizona’s Capacity to Care.

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.

Tourism is one of 12 industry clusters widely considered to be driving the Arizona economy according to the Governor’s Strategic Partnership for Economic Development (GSPED). The term "cluster" refers to a geographic concentration of interdependent companies, suppliers, products, labor pool, and institutions that together constitute an important competitive advantage for a region. In northern Arizona, tourism ranks as the predominant industry cluster. This paper provides a profile of the tourism cluster in Coconino County, with special focus on the Flagstaff area. It examines the cluster’s composition, relative size and importance to the regional economy. It addresses the cluster’s dynamics and requirements for growth. It reviews important national and worldwide trends affecting tourism in Arizona, as well as the special characteristics of gateway communities. And, finally, it presents a menu of actions to choose from for strengthening the cluster in both Flagstaff and Coconino County.

The Division of Adult Education in the Arizona Department of Education and the Arizona Adult Literacy and Technology Resource Center contracted with the Morrison Institute for Public Policy to develop an evaluation system for Arizona's adult education program. During phase I, the institute analyzed existing program data on Arizona's adult education providers. Interviews were conducted in January and February 1997 of 379 current and past program participants; they were done in English or Spanish, as appropriate. Interviewees were asked 10 questions about reasons for entering the program, amount of time spent in the program, and feelings about what the program did or did not help them accomplish. Past participants were asked an additional question about their reasons for leaving the program. Findings indicated that over 90 percent of interviewees felt their adult education experiences had met their needs and been positive overall. The proportions of participants who mentioned having entered with a specific goal, e.g., preparing to take the General Educational Development tests or to get a job, were closely aligned with the proportions who said their participation in the program had helped them reach that particular goal. More than one-quarter of program participants in 1996 showed improvement on three indicators that suggested they were becoming more self-sufficient: moving off public assistance, gaining employment, and maintaining or improving their job situation. (Appendixes contain 10 references, 3 data tables, and interview forms.)

In the spring of 1998, the Office of Workforce Development Policy (OWDP) of the Arizona Department of Commerce commissioned a statewide opinion poll to assess public attitudes toward the state’s plan for economic development as implemented through GSPED — the Governor’s Strategic Partnership for Economic Development. The poll was designed to assess both the public’s understanding of GSPED and their reactions to using the concept of industry clusters as a tool for organizing both economic and workforce development efforts.

In the spring of 1998, the Office of Workforce Development Policy (OWDP) of the Arizona Department of Commerce commissioned a statewide opinion poll to assess public attitudes toward the state’s plan for economic development as implemented through GSPED — the Governor’s Strategic Partnership for Economic Development. The poll was designed to assess both the public’s understanding of GSPED and their reactions to using the concept of industry clusters as a tool for organizing both economic and workforce development efforts.

One question posed by members of the Governors’ Council on Workforce Development Policy pertained
to whether polling results vary by urban versus rural residency. Specifically, the question was raised as to whether the responses of rural residents differ from those who live in urban areas. Therefore, at the request of the Council, results of the polling were analyzed in order to answer the question: Does urban versus rural residency affect respondents' answers? The answer to this question is, in short, No.

Economic development leaders and public officials throughout the country are tending to the effects of a sour economy and huge state budget deficits when they would rather be creating quality jobs and new economy assets. According to the most prominent thinking on today’s knowledge economy, locally developed and exported technology will be the primary economic differentiator between future winners and losers. Thus, with long-term fiscal and economic health at stake, the 50-state race is on for advantages and leadership in science and technology. This report sheds light on these issues through an overview of Arizona’s standing in science and technology today, short case studies of four competitors in the west, as well as Arizona, and ideas for Arizona’s leaders to consider as they strive to give our state an edge.