Arizona’s vulnerable populations are struggling on a daily basis but usually do so in silence, undetected by traditional radar and rankings, often unaware themselves of their high risk for being pushed or pulled into full crisis. Ineligible for financial assistance under strict eligibility guidelines, they don’t qualify as poor because vulnerable populations are not yet in full crisis. To be clear, this report is not about the “poor,” at least not in the limited sense of the word. It is about our underemployed wage earners, our single-parent households, our deployed or returning military members, our under-educated and unskilled workforce, our debt-ridden neighbors, our uninsured friends, our family members with no savings for an emergency, much less retirement.

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.

While many potential voters care deeply about local and state issues, 45 percent of Arizona citizens of voting-age population did not vote in the last election, according to a report by Morrison Institute for Public Policy. To address this voter crisis, Arizona Clean Elections commissioned this report, the first in a series, to identify the reasons why only a little more than half of eligible voters actually are casting ballots in Arizona, as well as a first-of-its-kind knowledge bank of information on Arizona government to ensure that voters can vote in an informed manner.

The 2015 State of Our State Conference focused on criminal justice reform and included several white papers from various authors, researchers and legal officials from different perspectives. Here is the latest contribution in the series published by Morrison Institute for Public Policy as part of its ongoing effort to encourage public dialogue on criminal justice issues. America is witnessing a growing national consensus that we should not be incarcerating nonviolent drug offenders, even those with prior drug convictions, who have not committed property crimes. Many other less-serious offenders could receive reduced sentences without threatening public safety. Even when offenders deserve incarceration, they may not have deserved the amount of time imposed – the punishment did not fit the crime. These are among the evidence-based arguments presented by three veteran attorneys in “Fixing Arizona’s Mass Incarceration Dilemma.” The paper’s authors are former Maricopa County Superior Court Judge R.L. Gottsfield, Phoenix attorney Larry A. Hammond, founder and president of the Arizona Justice Project, and former Maricopa County public defender Donna Elm. Touching on all aspects of the justice system, the authors assert that Arizona is behind the curve in addressing its mass incarceration problem. The importance of ignoring the direction the country is going cannot be understated for Arizona, which has one of the highest incarceration rates. It is even more unjustified in light of research indicating that shorter sentences do not jeopardize public safety – with safety being the mainstay basis for Arizona’s heavy sentencing regime.

Mobility is crucial to everyday life in rural and urban settings, and for individuals with disabilities and low-income populations public transportation can be a major obstacle to keeping them socially engaged. For some individuals, public transportation is their sole way to see a doctor, get groceries and maintain employment. A 2015 survey of individuals with developmental disabilities in 28 states found that Arizona is the worst when it comes to reliable transportation. What can Arizona do to increase funding and continually improve its transportation services? This report examines some avenues to mobility.

A recent American Civil Liberties Union report found that Maricopa County elementary and middle school students with disabilities are twice as likely to be suspended compared to kids without disabilities. Another key factor in this discussion is the use of restraints and seclusion on students with disabilities as disciplinary action in schools. In 2016, state lawmakers revised Arizona Revised Statute Title 15-105 on the use of restraints and seclusion, requiring that schools document and report any restraint or seclusion used on students to the parent or guardian within 24 hours. This briefing paper looks at the definition of restraints and seclusion, as well as whether they are overused forms of punishment on students with disabilities.