building the community health of maryvale village: a ... · foundation, the united phoenix fire...

Building the Community Health of Maryvale Village: A Roadmap for FireStar Investment

FireStar Fund Community Scan

City of Phoenix Council District 5 Maryvale Fight Back Neighborhood

By:

Richard C. Knopf Professor and Director

Partnership for Community Development

John Burk Lecturer

Department of Communication Studies

Renae V. Tenney Program Coordinator, Senior


Rebecca VanCleave Student Assistant


College of Human Services Arizona State University at the West Campus

Phoenix, Arizona 85069

A Collaboration Among:

ASU Partnership for Community Development City of Phoenix Fire Department

Stardust Foundation United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association

Valley of the Sun United Way

April 15, 2006

FireStar Fund Community Scan 2 ASU’s Partnership for Community Development

TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary……………………………………………………………………. 6 Introduction……………………………………………………………………………… 8 Building Community Health in Maryvale Village through FireStar Investments.. 8 Overview…………………………………………………………………………………. 9 History of FireStar and the Maryvale Village Project…………………………….. 9 Asset-Based Community Building Model………………………………………….. 10 How Does Community Building Work? …………………………………………….10 Predictors of Successful Neighborhood Building…………………………………. 12 The Power of Asset-Based Community Building…………………………………. 13 Assessment of Maryvale Village…………………………………………………….. 15 Assessment Methodologies………………………………………………………… 15 Primary Insights………………………………………………………………………… 17 Assessment Component 1: Statistical Vital Signs Assessment………………... 17 Assessment Component 2: Review of Past Maryvale Village…………………..17 Planning Efforts Assessment Component 3: Key Informant Research…………………………… 20 Assessment Component 4: Neighborhood Focus Groups……………………… 21 Assessment Component 5: Community Organizational Structure…………….. 33 Assessment Component 6: FireStar Planning Committee Neighborhood Stability Factors……………………………………... 37


Assessment Component 7: Review of National Literature and Best Practices..42 Assessment Component 8: Interface with the FireStar Planning Committee… 47 Significant “Lessons Learned” from the Scan……………………………………. 55 Empowering Residents and Organizations……………………………………….. 55 Short-Term versus Long-Term Investments……………………………………… 56 Youth Development………………………………………..………………………… 56 Multi-Sector Partnerships………………………………..………………………….. 57 Building a Healthy and Vibrant Maryvale Village………………………..…………58 Literature Citations…………………………………………………………………….. 59 Appendices………………………………………………………………………..…….. 60 Appendix A: Maps of Maryvale Village………………………………………..….. 60 Appendix B: FireStar Planning Committee……………………………………….. 64 Appendix C: Community Vital Signs………………………………………..……... 66 Appendix D: Previous Reports of Maryvale Area………………………………... 86 Appendix E: Key informant Interview Protocol and Results…………………….. 176 Appendix F: Focus Groups Protocol and Results……………………………….. 208 Appendix G: Neighborhood Stability Factors (FireStar Planning Committee) .. 221 Appendix H: Neighborhood Assets………………………………………..………. 225 Appendix I: Key Indicators of Healthy Neighborhoods………………………….. 241


LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Core Components of Effective Community Building……………………... 10 Figure 2: Human and Organizational Assets………………………………………… 35


LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Differences between Asset-Based & Needs-Driven Approaches……….. 14 Table 2: Core Themes from Youth Focus Groups……………………………………32 Table 3: Core Assets, Challenges, and Opportunities………………………………. 38 Table 4: Key Indicators of a Healthy Neighborhood………………………………… 45 Table 5: FireStar Committee Priority Areas…………………………………………... 48 Table 6: Priority Areas and Intervention Strategies………………………………….. 50 Table 7: Action Plan…………………………………………………………………….. 53


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Background In 2005, the FireStar Fund was established as a collaborative venture between the Valley of the Sun United Way, Stardust Foundation, United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association, City of Phoenix Fire Department, City of Phoenix Mayor’s Office and other community partners. This fund committed $150,000 over the course of a two-year period to “improve the lives of people and communities in the Phoenix-metro region, who are in social and economic distress.” This fresh approach to community building would utilize the volunteer resources of the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association and their connections with other organizations and resources within the Phoenix metropolitan area to conduct revitalization efforts in a specific community. Destined to be a model for future FireStar Fund projects, the first year was dedicated to community building efforts within the City of Phoenix’s Maryvale Village. A FireStar Planning Committee was organized in June 2005 to provide oversight of the FireStar investment within Maryvale Village. The Partnership for Community Development (PCD) of Arizona State University’s West campus was commissioned to conduct the assessment, partner with the FireStar Committee to develop goals for the investment, and create an action plan in conjunction with the FireStar Fund partners. The process focused on the broad question: How might the resources of the FireStar fund best be invested to help the Maryvale Village neighborhood? Methods Working with the FireStar Planning Committee, the PCD implemented eight methodologies to produce a neighborhood assessment and action plan. These included:

• Socio-demographic/economic analyses • Review of prior assessment and planning efforts • Key informant interviews • Neighborhood focus groups/visioning sessions • Community asset mapping • Analysis of FireStar Committee Neighborhood Stability Factors • Review of national literature on community development • FireStar Planning Committee action planning

Results Maryvale residents cherish many aspects of their neighborhood – its history, and its human service organizations, its businesses, and its schools. They carry a vision for the future of their neighborhood, which might be succinctly summarized as: “to have a safe and secure neighborhood where all individuals and families can flourish economically, culturally, and educationally to improve their quality of life.”


At the same time, there are clear challenges that keep this community from reaching its ideal. Residents would like to see their community come together to address issues surrounding community pride, public safety, education, leadership, and inadequate programming for youth and seniors. After analyzing the community’s assets and identifying the challenges facing this neighborhood, the FireStar Planning Committee, guided by the community’s vision, produced an action plan. Three areas of priority investment were identified:

• Housing Quality and Safety (e.g., beautification, safety improvements, and homeowner education).

• Safe Neighborhoods (e.g., capital improvements, neighborhood education, and recognition for neighborhood improvements).

• Enhancing Neighborhood Cohesion and Strong Social Support Systems (e.g., youth development programs, leadership development programs, senior programs and human services programs).

Within each priority area, specific intervention strategies were identified. Moreover, specific community partners and lead individuals were identified to champion plan implementation.

Conclusion The FireStar Fund stands as a significant partner in helping Maryvale residents reach their vision and their potential. While the particular insights from this assessment are rich and varied, four fundamental themes have emerged:

• Healthy communities are built by empowering the residents and organizations within the community – not by outside organizations doing something for the community.

• Effective community development is accomplished by long term investments in structural change – not by short-term investments in cleaning up community “problems”.

• Significant investments in the community’s youth will result in improved life quality for all generations.

• Effective community development happens when many sectors work together in partnership.

By focusing on these themes, FireStar investments will powerfully affect positive change within Maryvale Village. With the vision of FireStar clearly defined, and anchored in the dreams of the community, the impact will be profound. Done well, these investments could serve as a national model of excellence for affecting community change. The residents of all communities will be the ultimate beneficiaries.


INTRODUCTION

Building Community Health in Maryvale Village through FireStar Investments Established in 1957, Maryvale Village has been the birthplace of dreams. Families have been raised there, businesses have been built there, and the hopes of many continue to flourish in its schools, its homes, its community facilities, and its faith communities. Residents cherish its history, its parks, its people committed to its future, its shopping districts, and its opportunities for fresh starts. At the same time, the neighborhood faces some challenges, such as higher than average crime, higher than average numbers of working poor, and tensions among neighbors of differing backgrounds. In fact, the challenges are so great that Maryvale Village has merited designation as a “Neighborhood Fight Back” area for City of Phoenix Council District 5. For all of its challenges, Maryvale Village has amazing potential. Many community organizations, working arm in arm with neighborhood residents and small businesses, are creating pathways for empowerment. Fresh visions for the neighborhood are being developed, strategic plans are being crafted, and plans for new neighborhood programs and services are being designed. In this field of visions, one of the most promising is that of the potential of the FireStar Fund. The fund, which is a joint venture of the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association, the Stardust Foundation, the Valley of the Sun United Way, the City of Phoenix Fire Department, and the City of Phoenix Mayor’s Office, has committed $150,000 over the course of a two-year period to assist the Village in its revitalization efforts. Equally of importance, the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association has pledged the volunteer resources of its members and existing education programs offered through the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association for these revitalization efforts. These assets, coupled with the connections the Association has with other organizations and resources within the Phoenix metropolitan area, hold great promise for the aspirations of Maryvale residents. If the investments surrounding the FireStar project are to be successful and enduring, they must be based upon a model of effective community building. Effective community building transpires when investments are made into a neighborhood’s strengths (or assets) rather than simply focusing these investments on eliminating a neighborhood’s weaknesses. Toward this end, this assessment is oriented to discovering ways in which the financial and human resource investments of FireStar can provide an asset-building strategy that will maximize its positive and sustainable impact on the Maryvale Village community.


OVERVIEW History of FireStar and the Maryvale Village Project The FireStar Fund was established in 2005 as a collaboration between the Stardust Foundation, the United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association, the Valley of the Sun United Way, the Phoenix Fire Department, the City of Phoenix Mayor’s Office and other community partners. The mission of the Fund is to “improve the lives of people and communities in the Phoenix-metro region, who are in social and economic distress”. To carry out this mission, the Fund has established three goals:

1. To assist community members encountered by firefighters with unanticipated emergency situations through an Emergency Assistance Program.

2. To provide opportunities to assist community issues in selected fire station service areas through a Community Building Program.

3. To provide support for Existing Program Enhancements to existing Firefighters Charities programs through the Fire Fighters Association focus on community building activities.

This scope of work pertains to a sub-component of Objective 2 – establishing a Community Building Program. As specified in the FireStar Fund prospectus, Community Building funds are to be used to identify, target and improve a local neighborhood by focusing and utilizing services from a wide variety of providers including community members, schools, faith-based, social service, government and business representatives. The first neighborhood selected was identified in June of 2005 as Maryvale Village – a designated City of Phoenix “Neighborhood Fight Back” area. Geographically, it is bounded between Indian School Road on the north, Osborn Road on the south, 67th Avenue on the west, and 51st Avenue on the east. A map of this area is found in Appendix A. As with all future FireStar communities, the program in Maryvale Village is to assemble new and existing partnerships, programs, volunteers and local neighborhood representation to develop a collaborative approach to community development. A Planning Committee (see Appendix B) was organized in June, 2005 to provide oversight for a four-point process of (1) conducting an assessment and developing outcome measurements, (2) developing an implementation plan, (3) gathering collaborative partners, and (4) implementing the program strategies. Arizona State University’s Partnership for Community Development was commissioned to conduct the assessment, develop outcome measurements, and create an implementation plan in conjunction with the FireStar Fund partners to accomplish steps three and four of the four-point process.


ASSET-BASED COMMUNITY BUILDING MODEL How Does Community Building Work? The purpose of community development is to advance the quality of life of a community economically, socially and environmentally. The professional literature on how to build healthy new communities and revitalize deteriorating old neighborhoods is voluminous. Yet, at its core, the literature suggests that the process of effective community development involves six essential components (see Figure 1 – adapted from Green & Haines, 2002). While each component can be understood as an independent element

4

Community Building

IdentifyingAssets

* Creating an action plan at the simplest to a comprehensive plan at the most ambitious

* Establishing benchmarks and indicators

* Bonding, bridging and linking* Developing infrastructure: who, what, when* How to mobilize assets

* Individuals* Associations* Institutions

* Internal* External

* EstablishingCommunity Goals

* Vision Statement* Evaluateindicators

* Encourage social capital

* Process andproduction

Visioning

Community Organizing

Action Planning

Production

Evaluation

Figure 1. Core Components of an Effective Community Building Process. Adapted from Green and Haines (2002). Details of the six components of community building depicted in Figure 1 are offered by Green and Haines (2002). Briefly, they are:


Community Organizing. In this element, the focus is on developing broad scale participation of residents in the community building activities. There is an intentional strategy to value and involve all residents regardless of interests, ages and backgrounds. Efforts are made to clarify issues and build communication networks throughout the community. Community Visioning. The community creates a vision of where it wants to be in the future. A visioning process establishes a desire end state for the community, a vision of the future toward which it wishes to strive. Implicit in the visioning process is the notion that the community can not only design its own future, but create it. In the context of neighborhood development, visioning processes typically focus on generating answers to three fundamental questions: (1) what do people want to maintain or preserve within their neighborhood, (2) what do people want to create in their neighborhood (features that may not exist now), and (3) what do people want to change in their community? Answers to these questions set a destiny around which strategic action can be organized. Identifying Assets. Here, the notion is that effective community development happens when assets are mobilized to move the community toward its vision. Assets exist at three levels within a community or neighborhood. First, there are the assets of individuals -- each resident is understood to have a gift that can be utilized to grow the community toward its desired state. A particular senior citizen can have the ability and skill set to tutor a high school student in math, and therefore, increase his capacity to secure a higher paying job. A high school student can have the ability to pay a visit to a home-bound senior, and thus, increase her desire to share artistic skills with other students in the neighborhood. Second, there are the assets of associations, organizations and informal kinship networks – such as parent-teacher-student organizations, service clubs, block watch groups and the like. Each of these associations, organizations and social networks have much to offer to community development -- but are often disconnected with each other, and under-developed relative to their capacity. Third, there are institutions – such as schools, non-profit organizations, government agencies, businesses, and faith communities – all of which have tremendous resources to offer to the community but also tend to be disconnected in the context of serving a common vision for the community. The ultimate quest of community building activities is to organize these assets into a coherent and synergized whole to focus on the initiatives that the community self-identifies as the most important. There are also assets external to a community – government, non-profits, foundations, educational systems and businesses. Strategies need to be developed to help residents gain access to these resources. Action Planning. In this element, an action plan is developed to provide a road map of how the desired vision will be achieved by mobilizing the assets. Put another way, an action plan is the description of the activities needed to move the community toward its vision. It answers the following questions: what needs to be done, how will success be measured, what assets must be mobilized to accomplish this success, who is responsible for accomplishing success, and when will it be done? They can range from


very specific actions (such as organizing a neighborhood clean up day) to very comprehensive neighborhood development plans (such as developing new streetscapes and parks). Specific benchmarks and indicators need to be established for each action item – so progress can be monitored and success can be gauged. Strategies need to be developed for bonding and bridging assets within the community, and making linkages to resources external to the community. Action plans should be prepared that are based upon agreed-on strategies and goals established through broad based community visioning processes. Production. This component describes the outcomes that occur when action plans are implemented. Successful community building focuses on producing not only tangible outcomes, but on the development of relationships among community residents (often referred to as social capital). Thus, there is a focus on building a good process that engages residents with each other, as well as good outcomes that move the community toward its expressed vision. Evaluation. This element implies that there is constant monitoring of community processes to ensure that identified actions are moving the community toward success, and that the movement being generated is inclusive of the broad ranging interests of the community as a whole. Sound evaluation includes both process and product evaluation. It is also continuous, and provides feedback to community organizers about the degree to which the interests of all residents are being incorporated into the community building process. These six components must all interact to ensure effective community building in Maryvale Village. Every action to be taken must be anchored in a community visioning process. Every community visioning process must be anchored in broad scale resident engagement. Action plans must focus on building, mobilizing and connecting existing assets with the community. Internal assets must be organized first, before connections to the resources of the external community are made. Community building activities only become effective when the community itself defines the destiny, and its own people and organizations become the assets for creating the destiny. Predictors of Successful Neighborhood Building There has been an abundance of research on neighborhoods that have been revitalized through community building efforts. In fact, a recent assessment by the Amherst Wilder Foundation identified 525 studies in the written neighborhood-building evaluation research literature (Mattessich, Monsey, & Roy, 2004). The Foundation’s analysis of the research identified twenty-eight specific factors that separated successful community building efforts from non-successful ones. These twenty-eight factors could be summarized into six core themes. From a general perspective, success happens in neighborhood building efforts when these six conditions are present:


• The neighborhood has motivation from within the community, with identifiable leadership and broad scale awareness of issues.

• There is widespread participation in the neighborhood building activities. • There is a good record of fact-finding, including systematic gathering of

information and analysis of issues. • Neighborhood building activities are built with an eye on both process and

product. There is a focus on building self-generating problem-solving activities within the neighborhood.

• People who wish to help the neighborhood must be perceived by residents as sincerely committed to the neighborhood’s well being over the long haul, and must be willing to develop trusting relationships with neighborhood residents.

• People who wish to help the neighborhood must be listeners, with an open mind and heart to the neighborhood, and the capacity to be flexible and adaptable to constantly changing situations.

This basic premise – of building communities by working within by growing its assets – is the cornerstone of a movement called Asset-Based Community Planning. It is a paradigm that has been the focus of much writing in the community development literature (e.g., Kretzmann & McKnight 1993; Green & Haines, 2002), and is generally understood as the most effective model for driving neighborhood revitalization processes in core urban environments. The Power of Asset-Based Community Building Under the asset-based model, the work of an outside organization desiring to be of help is to view a neighborhood as full of assets, to find ways to “invest” in these assets to help them grow, and to “empower” a community to manage the growth of these assets on their own. People are seen as the source of solutions to what a community wants (as opposed to programs being seen as the source of solutions to what a community needs). Community organizations are seen as the vehicles for assembling community assets – not outside agencies that only offer programs. If these community organizations are empowered, the impacts are sustainable. If reliance on outside agencies is produced, the impacts disappear when their programs disappear. In short, the asset-based community development approach produces better results in neighborhood revitalization than the commonly accepted needs-driven approach. Key differentiating features of the two approaches are summarized in Table 1.


Table 1. Differences between asset-building and needs-driven approaches to community development.

Asset-Building Model Needs-Driven Model Focus on ASSETS Focus on NEEDS

Builds from OPPORTUNITIES Responds to PROBLEMS INVESTMENT Orientation CHARITY Orientation Goal is EMPOWERMENT Goal is SERVICE

Emphasis on COMMUNITY ASSOCIATIONS Emphasis on AGENCIES People are CITIZENS People are CLIENTS

PEOPLE are the Answer PROGRAMS are the Answer Help comes from RELATIONSHIPS Help comes from CREDENTIALS

Impacts are SUSTAINABLE Impacts DISAPPEAR with Programs For the FireStar Fund investment in Maryvale Village, the most successful strategy will be to follow an asset-based approach. While FireStar might be helpful in organizing some short-term programs for the community, it will produce more sustainable impacts by working with the community to assemble its own assets in ways that will move the community forward utilizing long-term outcomes. To provide maximum effectiveness, a FireStar “investment” should be built upon the following principles:

• Gifts abound within the community. Gifts exist among individual citizens, neighborhood organizations, businesses, faith communities, schools, and non-profit organizations. These gifts must be discovered, and gift-giving opportunities must be offered. Strong communities know that there is unrecognized capacity and assets in every neighborhood, and that all gifts must be cultivated, acknowledged and valued.

• All people and organizations care about something. People in neighborhoods are motivated to act about things that concern them. If provided with the right opportunities, people will respond and solve problems on their own.

• Relationships build a community. One of the central challenges for FireStar will be to constantly build and re-build the relationships between and among local residents, local associations and local institutions.

• People from outside of the community, such as FireStar participants, who want to help must work with the people living and working in the community – not for them. The development strategy must concentrate on building the problem-solving capacities of local residents, local associations and local institutions. It must focus on encouraging hope, control and resourcefulness from within – as opposed to developing dependency on people and resources external to the community. Assistance that encourages reliance on external resources will only result in the waning of accomplishments when the resources are removed.


Assistance that leads to relationship building and the blossoming of internal assets results in perpetual processes of growth.

ASSESSMENT OF MARYVALE VILLAGE Assessment Methodologies The assessment methodologies utilized for the FireStar Assessment in Maryvale Village were constructed under the asset-based community development model. Data for the assessment emerged from eight basic methodologies commonly associated with “best practices” in asset-based planning:

1. Statistical Vital Signs Assessment. At the core of every neighborhood assessment is an analysis of available data on socio-demographic and economic indicators that define the neighborhood, its residents and its organizations. This methodology calls for summarizing what is known about general demographic and social trends in the neighborhood (see Appendix C).

2. Review of Past Maryvale Village Planning Efforts. Maryvale Village has been the

focus of assessment and planning efforts in the past, and has been analyzed as a part of larger regional assessments. Each of these past efforts provides a partial glimpse of the goals, hopes and challenges of the study area. This methodology provides for an assessment of significant insights gleaned from those studies (see Appendix D).

3. Key Informant Research. Strategically selected community members were

asked to participate in interviews to determine their perceptions of the neighborhood based on how well government, non-profit, business, schools, and faith communities are serving the community. Seven key informants were selected for their capacity to have detailed insight about the neighborhood. They were also selected to represent the various sectors of the community: business, government, non-profit, faith-based, and community members. These individuals were asked, through 90-minute interviews, specific questions about neighborhood challenges, visions, points of pride, assets, social networks, and prospects for the future from an asset-based planning perspective (see Appendix E).

4. Neighborhood Focus Groups. Six neighborhood focus groups were conducted to

gain insights from the neighborhood residents about their visions, neighborhood points of pride, perception of neighborhood assets, challenges, and possible action plans for FireStar initiatives. The groups represented a diversity of residents comprising the neighborhood (family structures, cultures, age, employment), and were held at various locations -- including schools and community centers (see Appendix F).


5. Community Organizational Structure. An assets-based planning model calls for the notion of building investments upon successful, existing neighborhood structures. Accordingly, the purpose of this assessment was to identify strong platforms upon which future FireStar investments could be successfully constructed. First, an inventory of existing non-profit organizations, faith communities, government agencies, educational organizations and businesses serving the community was completed. Second, insights from Key Informant and Focus Group methodologies were extracted to identify information on what community organizations were working particularly well in responding to community needs. Third, informal interviews with residents and community leaders were conducted to identify existing leadership networks within the community. This information was assembled to create a visual picture of the “Community’s Organizational Structure”, which provides insight as to strategically invest activities of the FireStar Program.

6. Assessment of FireStar Planning Committee Neighborhood Stability Factors. The FireStar Planning Committee generated 17 specific Neighborhood Stability Factors (see Appendix G), and requested the ASU assessment team to evaluate existing neighborhood conditions in light of each factor. Thus, these Factors provided a framework for interpreting key informant and focus group results. Data were collected with the intent of describing primary findings in the context of the Neighborhood Stability Factor Framework.

7. Review of National Literature and Best Practices. This assessment is anchored

in nationally-recognized “best practices” for community development. One of the key methodologies was to ensure that (a) core insights of asset-based community planning methodology was reflected in the preparation of this report, (b) nationally-accepted approaches to assessment were followed, and (c) core insights about effective action plan development and asset-based intervention strategies were considered. This methodology called for incorporation of national “best practices” in neighborhood development into the FireStar investment strategy.

8. Interface with the FireStar Planning Committee. This methodology called for the

engagement of the FireStar Planning Committee as the final action plan for the FireStar initiative in Maryvale Village was developed. After primary insights from methodologies 1 through 7 were presented to the Committee, an externally facilitated visioning process was employed to guide the Committee through a priority-setting action planning process. The results of that process framed the conclusion of this assessment, and set the stage for a two-year action plan for the FireStar project.


PRIMARY INSIGHTS

In this main body of the report, we summarize only some of the more pervasive themes emerging from each assessment. The reader is directed to Appendices C through G for detailed accounting of the results for each of the eight methodologies listed above. Even with this brief overview, the vision of Maryvale Village residents becomes quickly grasped. As stated at the outset of this report, it is a neighborhood rich in history, accomplishment, vision, and energy. While the challenges are real, the promise for a neighborhood increasingly defined by strength, health, determination, and success is even more real. Assessment Component 1: Statistical Vital Signs Assessment Most of the residences within the Village were constructed in the early to mid-1970s. The original houses were constructed at selling prices within the $9,000 to $11,000 range, and the earliest neighbors were predominately white. While several of the original homeowners, and children of original homeowners, still call the Village their “home”, a wave of new residents purchasing homes on a re-sale basis has kept the overall composition of the Village comprised of relatively young families. In fact, the highest household unit proportionately is “couples with children”. Over forty percent (42%) of the household units fall within this category. Over half (51%) of the population is between 18 and 54 years of age. There has been a significant ethnic shift over the past ten years, with the latest census reports (2000), showing nearly two-thirds (62%) of the residents having an Hispanic heritage. Household income levels are relatively low -- the annual household income rests below $35,000. Among adults, well over two-thirds (69.3%) do not possess a high school diploma (or equivalent). A full Vital Signs assessment is provided in Appendix C, compiled from the Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment Report completed in 2004. Assessment Component 2: Review of Past Maryvale Village Planning Efforts A search of recent planning and assessment activities pertaining to Maryvale Village revealed five specific documents:

• Council District 5 Fight Back Assessment Pre-Survey and Full Report • Choices on the Edge: Maryvale Community Assessment (Arizona Building

Blocks Initiative) • Attitudes toward Programs, Identification of Barriers, and Suggestions to

Improve Parent Involvement (Cartwright Elementary School District) • Concept Paper for the Organization and Structure of the Maryvale Alliance for

Community Initiatives (Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives) • West Phoenix Revitalization Discussion Findings


Council District 5 Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment Pre-Survey and Full Report The Council District 5 Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment Pre-Survey provides Maryvale residents’ perceptions of their community. This document gathered residents’ characteristics, their view of the neighborhood’s problems (safety/crime, streets/infrastructure, property conditions, and community/support services) their perceptions on whether problem areas were getting worse, and their willingness to become involved in bettering their community. This pre-survey provided a basis for conducting the Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment. Residents indicated that their main areas of concern were drugs/gangs, property crimes, speeding, neighborhood appearance (trash, graffiti, cars in yards), and lack of communication between neighbors. The pre-survey assessment results and comments as well as the full report are reproduced in Appendix D. Choices on the Edge: Maryvale Community Assessment The Choices on the Edge: Maryvale Community Assessment sought to determine if knowing more about the inner workings of the Maryvale community would reveal potential changes that could have a positive affect on youth and juvenile justice. This report provides an organizational structure for identifying the community’s strengths as well as bringing forward the needs surrounding youth, family, community and juvenile justice issues in Maryvale. The Choices on the Edge report provided key insights clustered into the following categories: Youth, Families, Community, and Juvenile Justice. Common themes for youth involved high truancy rates, the lack of positive youth activities and services, youth perceiving that the police stereotype them, and a severe lack of strong role models. In fact, youth stated they felt “forgotten” and “ignored” by adults who should be providing them with guidance. Family themes emerged around feelings of isolation due to language barriers, and immigrant parents having trouble relating to their children due to a lack of understanding of U.S. culture. Community themes included the inability to attract Latino involvement leading to community segmentation, the underutilization of the faith-based community, the lack of collaboration among the various community counterparts – government, community organizations, residents, businesses; and a lack of trust between residents and the police. Surrounding Juvenile Justice, emerging themes included lack of cultural competency of workers in the juvenile justice system, need for increased communication and cooperation throughout the system, and the need for community-based programs to assist youth as they re-enter the community. The Executive Summary for this assessment may be viewed in Appendix D. Attitudes toward Programs, Identification of Barriers, and Suggestions to Improve Parent Involvement The Attitudes toward Programs, Identification of Barriers, and Suggestions to Improve Parent Involvement report focuses on identifying barriers and concerns surrounding parent involvement in the educational achievement of their children attending school in


the Cartwright Elementary School District. This report provides an organizational structure for interviewing and surveying school district administrators, board members, and community representatives to gather information on the satisfaction and importance of parent involvement, and strategies for improving parents’ involvement. The report provided key insights into the barriers and constraints facing parents in the Maryvale community: 1) Language barrier between parents and school district, 2) Difficult for lower socio-economic status parents to make involvement a priority when they are struggling to make ends meet, and 3) Communication and expectation disconnect between schools and parents. The report states the need for the Cartwright Elementary School District to foster multi-language communities, develop a shared definition and expectations of parent participation, and encourage parents to become involved by communicating the various opportunities available to do so. The Executive Summary may be located in Appendix D. Concept Paper for the Organization and Structure of the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives The Concept Paper for the Organization and Structure of the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives explains the process by which the Maryvale Alliance was created, the purpose of the Alliance, and its primary goals. The Alliance was formed by merging several workgroups created after the Maryvale Community Assessment in 2005. This group addresses the recommendations of the assessment as well as other community concerns, including juvenile delinquency, truancy, drop out rate, community health and safety, housing, poverty, and access to jobs. Overall, this report provides specifics on the Alliance’s organizational structure and its processes. However, it is important to note that this paper provides a history of several community groups created in the past decade. In 1992, Maryvale UNITE was formed, followed by the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation in 2004. The Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives was created as a direct result of the Arizona Building Blocks Initiative in 2000, and formed a partnership with the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation, in which the corporation acts as the Alliance’s fiscal agent. Today, the Maryvale Alliance and the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation continue to work together to improve the Maryvale community. This assessment may be viewed in Appendix D. West Phoenix Revitalization Discussion Findings The West Phoenix Revitalization Discussion Findings consist of information gathered from group discussions conducted by the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation with the Maryvale Block Watch Alliance and the Maryvale UNITE Neighborhood Association in July 2005. Participants were asked to visualize what they would like the Maryvale neighborhood to look like five years into the future. During the Maryvale Block Watch Alliance discussion, primary areas of concern surfaced: health care (affordability, health education); safety and security (increased police visibility), transportation (circular bus), quality education (youth, ESL classes). The Maryvale UNITE Neighborhood Association’s discussion focused on many of the same topics, including safety & security and education. However, this group also voiced their concerns surrounding


property maintenance and cleanliness (removing junk cars, not parking cars in yards, moving garbage cans off of the streets after pickup) and pride of ownership. The findings may be found in Appendix D. Assessment Component 3: Key Informant Research The seven community leaders selected for the Key Informant methodology were interviewed in August and September of 2005. A list of the key informants, the dates they were interviewed and their role of interest in Maryvale Village may be viewed in Appendix E. Complete results from these interviews are also presented in Appendix E, and are summarized below:

Neighborhood Assets

Maryvale Village has a number of facilities, organizations, services and people contributing to the vitality of the community. “Points of Pride” were listed as the Maryvale Baseball Complex, and the dedication of current City of Phoenix programs, including the councilman’s office for their commitment to improving the neighborhood. Interviewees had accolades for the City of Phoenix’s Neighborhood Services Department, the Neighborhood Fight Back Program, and the local police department for their role in enhancing their community. They also listed organizations and programs that “work well” in serving the Maryvale area including the YMCA, Boys and Girls Club, New Beginnings Church, the Block Watch Program, and the Maryvale Multi-generational Center. Residents were generally seen by the key informants as among the Village’s greatest assets. There was a sense that many are willing to contribute, and would contribute to the growth of the Village if asked to do so.

Neighborhood Challenges Most of the expressed concerns focused upon the Village’s language and cultural barriers, the insufficient amount of activities and programming for youth, and crime. Crime was often seen as a manifestation of the cultural barriers and inadequate youth programming. There was concern about not only the number of positive activities for youth, but the accessibility of these programs in culturally relevant ways. The concerns revealed a need to bridge language and cultural barriers, to increase parental involvement and support, and to empower youth to create goals for themselves with a future-oriented mindset. Concerns were expressed that families and single adults need additional social and recreational resources as well. A common theme was the need for additional ESL education to assist in bridging the divide between English and Spanish speaking populations. Transportation and educational programming (especially ESL education) seemed to be chief concerns for seniors in Maryvale Village.


In addition to developing programs to engage youth, seniors and families, the key informants pointed to the need to gain community involvement of local businesses. In general, there was an expressed need to gather all elements of the community under a cohesive, united identity to foster a sense of inter-connectivity and community pride.

Opportunities for the Future

Through a grounded understanding of the community’s existing assets and heartfelt concerns for the challenges facing the neighborhood, interviewees voiced opportunities for collaboration among residents of all ages to build a stronger, healthier Maryvale. Their vision included empowering residents to become leaders in the community by extending more invitations to community meetings, providing ‘new’ leaders with small tasks, and building their confidence by celebrating their successes. These invitations need to be inclusive of the Hispanic population by welcoming their participation and translating meetings into Spanish. Many opportunities mentioned involved the community’s large population of youth. They felt that youth assets were being underutilized causing teens to feel as if outcasts in their own community. Opportunities for youth included providing positive activities to build their leadership skills and bind them to the other members of their community. Teens need to feel a sense of ownership and pride to assist in decreasing negative behaviors and redirecting their activities to those that build their community. This increased sense of empowerment and confidence also needs to be harnessed and directed toward creating their own personal future goals. Collaboration and resource sharing among the various segments of the community is vital to growing the strength of a neighborhood. Typically, local businesses are not being invited to participate in community meetings and the various sectors are not communicating with each other. Opportunities to develop lines of communication across government, faith-based, non-profit, business, schools, and local community organizations would help with the leveraging of resources and build stronger connections throughout the community as a whole. Other opportunities mentioned included sharing information with residents regarding the many services and programs currently available to them and their families, framing community meetings around a more social setting to encourage public participation, and developing personal relationships among neighbors so that these ties also bind individuals to the community.

Assessment Component 4: Neighborhood Focus Groups The six focus groups were conducted during August and September, 2005. The groups included families utilizing the services of the Stewart Branch of the Boys and Girls Club, the Fight Back Neighborhood Group, the Maryvale Block Watch Alliance, the Cartwright School District, and two groups at Maryvale High School (youth and parents). On


average, 15 people were in each group. A total of 93 Village residents were involved in the process (see Appendix F). The focus group methodology followed normal protocol in the community building literature, sequentially following four fundamental conversation themes:

• What is your vision for the Maryvale neighborhood in 2020? • What are the neighborhood’s greatest assets (what’s working well)? • What are the neighborhood’s greatest challenges? • How could firefighters help the community continue to develop?

The facilitators guided the focus groups into several sub-conversations around these four major themes. Confidentiality of response was ensured, and the facilitators guided the conversations to ensure the diversity of expression, and to maximize the contributions of all individuals present. The conversations, on average, lasted ninety minutes. (Major themes were recorded on flip charts, and summarized in Appendix F). Core themes are summarized below:

The Vision for Maryvale Responses to the question “What would you like your neighborhood to look like in the year 2020?” yielded a wide array of answers. At the heart of it all, a dominant and pervasive theme emerged across all focus groups. If this theme were to be expressed in a single vision statement, it would be:

“Our vision is to have a safe and secure neighborhood where all individuals and families can flourish economically, culturally, and educationally to improve their quality of life.”

Community safety was a common conversation point – effective police presence, safe streets, and safe homes. In many ways, residents were speaking to the need for programs and opportunities to build community cohesion, and to deal with issues of cultural and ethnic diversity. In many different ways, they were speaking to the need to build programs and opportunities to empower youth. They envisioned expanded community facilities and recreation programs, and extended hours and programs for current community facilities and programs. They envisioned displaying Maryvale’s community pride through neighborhood beautification and positive publicity. Appendix F, Table 5 details specific themes that were developed by residents during the focus groups pertaining to their ideals. The vision statements generated include:

• Clean, safe, well-lit streets and sidewalks with landscaping throughout the

neighborhood • Well-kept homes and yards that are in compliance with city ordinances

o No trash


o Yards maintained o Fences maintained/properly installed

• Laws enforced with adequate police response and presence that is supported by the Phoenix Neighborhood Patrol and Block Watch groups.

o No graffiti o No gunshots o No gangs o No loud music/noise o Active animal control o Traffic controls (to slow down cars in neighborhoods)

• Safe parks, pools, and recreational centers/areas where children and families can play and interact with others

• High-performing K-12 schools with after-school programs for all the neighborhood’s children

o Active parental involvement o ESL classes provided o Modern school facilities

• Transportation that serves the needs of the elderly, home-bound, youth and adults who do not have their own transportation and rely on public transit to shop, attend school, get to work (all hours of the day), seek medical care, etc.

o Maryvale circulator bus o Connection to light rail

• Multi-generational and cultural centers that service the needs of seniors, singles, families, and youth.

• Jobs nearby that provide a living wage (not minimum wage) • High quality retail stores nearby • A diverse neighborhood that is positively portrayed by the local media

Neighborhood Assets

According to residents, there are many things “working well” in the Maryvale Village neighborhood (people, programs, services, and organizations). These assets should be nurtured for continuity, and they can serve as platforms for enabling the neighborhood to move toward its vision. When asked “what is working well?”, focus group participants provided a lengthy list of facilities, businesses, and community services that they felt were enhancing their quality of life. Chief among them: the J.F. Long Family Center, the community pool, the senior center, Cartwright School District, Family Resource Center, parks, and the golf course. They also pointed to many nearby retail businesses that were serving as assets to their neighborhood -- including Wal-Mart, Ranch Market, CVS, Walgreen’s, fast food restaurants, dollar stores, and other small businesses. They also noted a myriad of community partners and services that had helped develop the neighborhood. These included ASU, neighborhood


block watch programs, City of Phoenix neighborhood patrols, CAP officers, the involvement of the Phoenix Suns and Cardinals, the John F. Long Foundation and its programs, the food bank, and the support of Sizzler’s restaurant. While abundant with perceived assets, it is important to note that the residents rarely mentioned safety, community activities, local leadership, and beautification as areas of community strength. Appendix F, Tables 1 and 2 detail specific themes that were developed about community assets by the residents during the focus groups. The stated assets include: Facilities • Maryvale pool and park • Golf course at 59th Ave. and Indian School • Cricket Pavilion, which was a community effort • Maryvale Baseball Complex, which was a community effort • Maryvale High School • Rollero (roller skating) • Glendale Drive-in (remodel needed) • New library/multi-generation center • New Super Wal-Mart and Walgreen’s • Cartwright School District’s Family Resource Center • New grade school, middle school and high school • Police precinct and fire station • John F. Long Center • Desert West Center • Pizza Palace • Maryvale Hospital Programs and Services • Youth partnerships and reaching out to area churches that include

programs such as resumes/interview assistance, homework assistance, youth ministry, and other volunteer groups that help the community

• Community Development Block Grant funding • Strongest Block Watch programs in the City • Neighborhood redevelopment • City services are very good • Area beautification projects • Greenbelt project • Cartwright School District • Little League


• Free swimming at public pools Monday thru Friday • Sunset School after-school program • Desert Reach after-school program • Desert Sands after-school program • Phoenix Neighborhood Patrol (PNP) • Social programs at John F. Long Center • Youth school sport teams – e.g., football • Good high school band • St. Vincent de Paul • Little League teams • Phoenix Suns and Arizona Cardinals involved in elementary school • Spanish theater in high school • Westcor shopping has reading programs • Food bank • July 4th celebration at Maryvale Stadium People • Councilman Mattox, who is trying to improve the neighborhood • David Begs, Garbage Services, who helps with neighborhood clean-up • Residents • Good neighbors who look out for each other, have a level of trust with

Spanish speakers and are proud, hardworking parents who want the best for their children

• Different people – diversity • Mr. Long • Homeowners, who keep up their house and yard • Martha Garcia • Dwight Emery • Josie Romero • Volunteers – graffiti busting – Pioneer Ford • City staff/firefighters and police-resource officers • Hospital volunteers at Maryvale Hospital • Community Action Officers (CAO) • People helping out high school youth • Caring teachers • Most people in general, they are good and get along • People’s own initiative


Organizations • The Salvation Army • Jewish organization providing help with citizenship • St. Vincent del Paul • St. Augustine Food Bank • Boys and Girls Club • Libraries • SRP – good power/infrastructure • Police department – extraordinary support • Calvary United Methodist Church to build a community center– a

collaboration • Church of the Nazarene – free medical clinic • New Beginnings Church • Businesses that donate money to block watch or allow meetings there • John F. Long Foundation • St. Vincent de Paul • Small businesses • Dollar stores • Food bank Other Points of Pride • History of community • Proud of potential for the future • Commitment of the community continues to improve • Ability to incorporate residents in an inclusive process • Diversity and culture; it is a neighborhood that is evolving • Civic pride, mobilizing to clean-up, get better, improve • Heritage and historical significance (proud history) with J. F. Long

providing first affordable housing subdivision in the City • Maryvale is a distinctive urban village • Ability to come together on issues: Communicative and supportive • Camaraderie of a few leaders, who work to break down barriers for

residents • Pizza Palace • New businesses, CVS, Walgreen’s • Remodeled shopping plazas • Ponchos • Clean streets


Neighborhood Challenges While the residents take heart in the range of facilities, local business services, and human services available to them, they were quick to identify challenges faced as residents of the neighborhood (Appendix F, Table 3). Most frequently expressed challenges centered on the themes of public safety, developing a strong education base, building a sense of cohesion among diverse populations residing within the neighborhood (age, race, culture), and the need for community beautification. Safety concerns related to issues involving crime (car theft, speeding, drug dealing, guns), water safety (pool fences, distribution of information), domestic violence, and bullying behavior. Education concerns related to crowded schools, quality of education being provided to their children, truancy, the need for dedicated teachers and coaches, the need for a lighter school tax base, and the need for sex and drug education. Community cohesion concerns were directly linked to challenges in finding volunteer, parent, and resident involvement in community activities. Youth shared their frustration with clique conflicts in school, racism, disrespect for youth, and the apathy of adults in their community. Beautification concerns related to the lack of “curb appeal” in the neighborhood. Much concern was expressed about the presence of graffiti, unsanitary restrooms in public facilities, littering, animal control enforcement, and vacant homes in the neighborhood. Appendix F, Table 3 details specific themes that were developed as residents discussed neighborhood challenges. They include: Public Safety • Police responses – long wait, unless critical (911 = decisions about

emergency), take reports over phone, not visible/present, controlled zones for schools, non-emergency line not helpful, no curfew enforcement

• Halfway houses – 71st and Flower, by schools and homes with kids, alcohol rehab, always watching neighborhood, no regulation

• Neighborhood safety – gunfire constantly, broken lights (especially at night), no curfew, no vehicle control/traffic controls (canal), street racing – no police action

• Racing cars • Traffic safety (kids hit in crosswalks) • More police community involvement (presence) • Get rid of prostitution • Get rid of speeders/racers/cruisers • Gunshots and fireworks • Meth labs • Graffiti, tagging • Stolen cars


• Speeding • Cruising • Truancy • Theft, break-ins • Zip codes in Maryvale – crime rate, weapons, burglary, drugs, teenage

pregnancy, adjudicated youth • Restroom stalls don’t have doors • 43rd Ave. and Encanto – drug sellers in parks • People urinate in sink in park restrooms • Lots of bums - asking for money • Security in parking lots • Need more cross walks • Shootings • Racism • Bullying • Groups not getting along • Drugs • Parents who aren’t tolerant • Lack of respect for youth

Education • Lots of schools (overcrowded), even new schools with lots of children

have high density • Schools better education standards – not high enough, especially high

school, school safety (resource offices), AIMS test kids not held back, learning more in junior high than in high school. Grade schools better – different standards, different districts, low standards in high school for diploma

• Traffic issues (foot traffic), photo radar, speed bumps, out of state plates • Youth programs, not enough positive programs (10 – 13), basketball,

Maryvale Park not safe, keep occupied/active, need transportation to and from, not all sports, band, computers, YMCA needs to be accessible, pick up and drop off

• Schools-fire safety • Older kids (6th grade and up) need gun/fire safety • Lack of water safety information • Domestic violence prevention • Education – poor parenting • Teaching CPR • More parenting classes


• More Head Start, youth development programs • Bad media images/influences on children • Seniors can’t read – no education to read • Teachers have problems • Need dedicated coaches and teachers • Need better attendance in schools • 3 absence rule isn’t enforced • Teachers complain about tardy enforcement – they don’t report tardiness • Parent involvement • Education for sex, drugs • Involvement in school activities • Day care centers • Kid clubs

Socio-economics • Poverty/quality jobs lacking • Maintain quality shopping (big stores going west) • Poverty • Lack of entry-level jobs, emphasis on teens • West Phoenix Business Alliance – get refocused on Maryvale • Language barrier • Lack of higher paying jobs • Lack of civic clubs • Families are poor Transportation • Public transportation (scarce), school (challenged to get to Boys and Girls

Club), not enough buses (long times 30 to 45 min), high school students have to wait to get to take public buses, destination

• Local bus (transportation) lacking – “GUS” or “ALEX” • Lots of traffic, parking issues at high school • More speed bumps • Clarendon and 59th Ave. needs a traffic light

Neighborhood Appearance • City not kept up – trash, take longer to get to clean-up (trees etc.),

recycling, bulk trash • Need – new theatre, jobs, skate park, bike park, water park • Public perception – image of Maryvale (press) • Graffiti


• Blight (appearance) • Congestion with stadium • House numbers • Yard clean up • Pool fences • Curb renews • Intersections in neighborhood • Vacant homes • Vacant businesses • Image of Maryvale – needs to be improved, not all shootings are in

Maryvale • Swings at park broken • Cold water fountains needed in parks • Green ponds • Dirty restrooms • Dirty parks • Restroom stalls don’t have doors • Littering – lots of beer bottles • More public phones The Potential of FireStar Involvement As part of the focus group conversations, community members were asked to reflect on the question: What can firefighters do to help this neighborhood? As one might expect, many of the responses focused on roles that would be expected for professionals with expertise in public safety (see Appendix F, Table 6). Themes ranged from providing pool safety assistance, CPR training, providing background checks for youth services, car seat safety, equipment displays, fire truck “ride-alongs”, and general assistance with fire prevention. Importantly, however, community members also expressed their interest in having firefighters play a vital role in more basic forms of community development that transcended their specific skill sets in the management of public safety. Community members envisioned that firefighters could play a role in communication education, the instillation of positive values in youth, helping neighbors organize events, and helping build better community networking and communication. Overall, these kinds of responses could be categorized as falling into one of three broad categories: Prevention Education, Community Involvement and Communication, and Facilitating Community Projects. Specific suggestions included: Prevention Education • Water safety - parents aren’t getting it, bilingual programs


• Open house for CPR classes • Teach children to have respect for emergency vehicles • Teaching awareness of West Nile and other wellness issues • CPR lessons • Drowning prevention Community Involvement and Communication • Fire Department information in Spanish and English • Showing up when called and invited them; unless we have a fire, they are

non-existent • Coalition of neighborhood people find out what their talents are – these

are the challenges, what can you do? • Assign community action office to fire department • Mentors and coaches – kids/community centers, kids going off edge • Open their doors for programs • A station in Laveen has wonderful model of fire involvement • Have liaison for fire department to bring updated information to Block

Watch • Be Big Brothers/Big Sisters • Volunteer at schools who don’t have programs • Build career knowledge programs • Host and facilitate town hall meetings Facilitating Community Projects • Helping people, seniors, families to meet their needs - mowing lawns,

repairs, looking to be helped for something that is too much for one person to do

• Take blood pressure for people who can’t afford it, vital assessment • Repair bikes, houses • Fire hydrants – having them paint over graffiti • West Nile check for sources of mosquitoes, swimming pools • Report graffiti • Serve as umpires for sports • Clean up ball fields/parks • Boy scouts/girl scouts programs – used to have many • Need strong school associations • Traditions like flag raising at parks • Increase sense of pride • Good neighbor programs – how to respect kids


Community youth had a particularly illuminating perspective that demands consideration in this regard. The basic themes emerging from the youth focus groups are summarized in Table 2. While some themes relate to the skills of firefighters as professionals in the public safety arena, most relate to the capacity of firefighters to teach, empower, communicate, instill values, and build growth and connectedness within the community. The data powerfully point to the need for all community enablers working under the FireStar rubric to focus both on short term projects with immediately tangible outcomes (e.g., neighborhood clean-ups, fire safety programs) and long term investments more intangible outcomes (e.g., diversity training, leadership development classes, developing sports programs). As the voices of the youth are considered, it is important to remember that a dominant theme that ran through the adult focus groups was to invest heavily in youth programs and services (Appendix F, Tables 3-7). Clearly, community members of all ages perceive that added investments are needed in the area of youth programs and services in order to build a strong and healthy Maryvale Village.

Table 2. Core themes emerging from youth focus groups in Maryvale Village. They can coach

our sports They can visit our

schools They need to talk/ listen to us and get to know us before they do anything

They need to come as normal people – not parent-like or in

uniforms

They need to be relaxed and not

authoritarian

They need to observe – see what’s going on

They need to be open-minded about

how to help us

They need to be good communicators

They could help us work as

groups

Teach us Organize activities to help us grow

Serve as coaches

Help us in life problem-solving

Teach us about career options/pathways – not

just in their own careers

Help us build business skills

Take us in rides in fire truck

Teach us how to act in case of emergencies

Bring us equipment, and show us how it is

used

Talk about things beyond their own

interest area – give us variety, life coaching, etc.

Talk to us about consequences of choices we might

make


Give us different points of view

Show us GPS equipment

Be like our favorite teacher – down to earth, opening up doors, saying yes, giving us a sense we are important

If people care about us, we will respond

Don’t do a survey, talk to

us

Help different factions in high school work

together

Assessment Component 5: Community Organizational Structure If FireStar investments are to be successful, they must utilize existing organizational structures and processes already in place, and successfully contributing to neighborhood vitality. As part of the community assessment process, an inventory of existing educational organizations, faith communities, governmental organizations, non-profit organizations, and businesses serving the community was completed. This inventory is presented in Appendix H. From an educational perspective, the neighborhood is anchored by Sunset Elementary, Frank Borman Middle School, and Maryvale High School – offering direct educational services, social service support systems and selected after-school recreation programs (Appendix H, p. 1-2). The neighborhood is also directly serviced by the Cartwright School District’s Family Resource Center, dedicated to assisting families in support of the education of their children. An additional fourteen educational entities, including charter schools, support the K-12 needs of Maryvale Village (Appendix H, p. 2-5). There are two faith communities within the boundaries of the neighborhood, one of which offers preschool and kindergarten classes. In addition, four other faith communities provide direct services to Maryvale Village residents (Appendix H, p. 5-6). A wide range of government social service programs are delivered through City of Phoenix, Maricopa County, and State of Arizona agencies. The neighborhood is serviced by City of Phoenix Fire Station #25, Phoenix Police Department – Maryvale Precinct, City of Phoenix Council District #5, City of Phoenix Parks and Recreation Department – Central West District, City of Phoenix Palo Verde Branch Library, the Maricopa County W.I.C. office, and the Arizona Department of Economic Security. (Appendix H, p. 6-7). Medical support is provided by the proximate Maryvale Hospital Medical Center, and it’s Family Assistance Programs (Appendix H, p. 7) Eleven non-profit organizations identified provide direct services to Maryvale Village, including the Stewart Branch of the Boys and Girls Club of Metropolitan Phoenix, which is situated within the western boundary of the neighborhood, and the John F. Long Family Services Center, anchoring the southeast corner of the neighborhood (Appendix H, p. 7-9). Seven City of Phoenix Park and Recreation facilities provide direct services


to the neighborhood, but only one (Maryvale Baseball Park) is located immediately within the neighborhood (Appendix H, p. 9-10). Over fifty businesses are located within the neighborhood, and over fifty additional businesses are located proximate to the neighborhood boundaries (Appendix H, p. 10-15). The majority of these enterprises are small businesses, or small retail outlets or franchises of regional or national chains. During the key informant and focus group processes, neighborhood residents were asked to report on what organizations, agencies, programs and services were “working well” for the neighborhood (Appendices E and F). In other words, the residents were asked to identify community organizations and programs that were working particularly well in responding to community needs. The purpose was to identify strong platforms upon which future FireStar investments could be successfully constructed. In addition to the key informant and focus group analyses, a “network analysis” methodology was utilized to identify successful organizations and programs currently existing within the community. “Network analysis” involves the use of informal interviews with residents and community leaders to identify existing leadership networks within the community. The results of this process are presented in a visual manner within Figure 2. Eight “spheres” of influence appreciated by community members were identified through the assessments. These eight spheres represent core community assets upon which successful FireStar investments could be made. It is important to recognize that there are many other assets within the community (see Appendices E, F and H), such as City of Phoenix Park and Recreation Programs, and Maryvale Hospital Family Services Programs. Yet, the eight particular spheres identified in Figure 2 have been identified through this assessment as having particularly strong operational platforms within the community. Figure 2, then, represents key organizational structures with which FireStar could partner to implement its action plans.


Figure 2. Human and organizational assets in Maryvale Village. At the top center of Figure 2 is the first organizational sphere to be considered. In the spirit of every asset-based community development model, the sphere suggests that the neighborhood’s Residents must serve as a core asset base around which FireStar investments must be made. A key theme that ran throughout all focus groups and key informant surveys was the inherent gifts and capacities of the residents -- across all generations, across all cultures, and regardless of the time of residency in the neighborhood. Moving clockwise, the next organizational sphere is the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation. It was also recognized by residents and key informants as playing a central role in neighborhood re-development efforts -- providing a strong organizational structure for coordinating economic and life quality development for the neighborhood (Appendices E and F). The Corporation has incubated the Maryvale Alliance, which serves as a well-networked advocacy group for community issues (Appendix D). The Alliance provides oversight to four Community Action Teams (CATs) that bring focus to the issues of Health, Employment, Public Safety, and Youth and Family. FireStar investments would be well served by integrating into the organizational structure and action planning processes currently underway by these Teams.

City of Phoenix

Council Dis 5 Neigh. Servs JF Long CC

FireStar

Fund

Schools Cartwright

ESD Phoenix Union

Boys &

Girls Club

Faith Communities

Hispanic

Leadership Institute

Residents Youth

Families Seniors

Maryvale

Revitalization Corporation

Maryvale Alliance

Community Action Teams


Continuing to move clockwise in Figure 2, the Hispanic Leadership Institute was recognized for its effectiveness in delivering programs that focus on the cultivation of leadership and community development skills within the neighborhood’s predominately Hispanic population. Faith communities were recognized for their capacity to offer spiritual support, educational support systems, life skills training, basic safety net services, and youth, family and senior programming. The Boys and Girls Club of Metropolitan Phoenix was recognized for its effectiveness in delivery programs in art, education and career development, health and life skills, character and leadership development, and sports, fitness and recreation. Local School Districts (Cartwright and Phoenix Union) were noted for their effectiveness in providing educational offerings, extra-curricular offerings, and after-school activities within the neighborhood (Sunset Elementary, Frank Borman Middle School, Maryvale High School). The City of Phoenix was noted for its ability to provide a number of services well regarded by the community. Particularly noteworthy are services provided by the office of Phoenix Council District #5, the Neighborhood Services Department, and the John F. Long Family Services Center. In summary, Figure 2 offers a road map of what is working particularly well within the Maryvale neighborhood. It presents a structure for channeling FireStar investments into processes, systems and organizations that are already working well in the neighborhood. By partnering with these processes, systems and organizations, FireStar activities would maximize the potential for creating the changes that the community desires. Beyond this basic roadmap of what is working well within the neighborhood, the residents (through the focus groups) offered specific suggestions on how to build human capacity and empower Maryvale Village citizens to make their own community a better place to live (Appendix F, Table 4). Some of the central themes include: Communication

• Neighborhood newsletter • Send art flyers – exchange among agencies, better information • Classes for adults and kids • Postings at local businesses, clubs, etc. • Not a lot of computers for internet access • Inform adults • “Meet your neighbor” program • Neighborhood community fair • City of Phoenix flyers help • Desert West Center flyers • Get people together for information sharing • Block Watch – networks • Add annual event – networking, education material


Involvement • Getting people to care and get to know their neighborhood • Renters don’t speak English and don’t care about neighborhood • Faith community could help • Later hours for Boys and Girls Club • Phoenix neighborhood patrols • Pro-active police in community and zero tolerance • Neighborhood organization – Maryvale UNITE • The Block Watch Alliance and Maryvale UNITE groups need to grow and have

more visibility. They should develop programs they can implement. • Finding out who are leaders • Get groups pulled together in a collaborative effort to help neighborhood

(parents, schools, business, & government) • A more formalized approach to get leaders together for on-going group

discussion about the community development process. Town hall meetings to identify key issues as one whole group so they can decide on ‘one’ thing and get it done to show success. Facilitated by neighborhood associations, or a larger entity.

• Start community meetings with food and make it a social function (especially for the older citizens). Develop personal relationships so that “I’ll do it because it is you” becomes a commitment to participate.

• Leadership training would build confidence among citizens with leadership potential.

Other

• Community service – court ordered could help clean up neighborhood • Neighborhood initiative designation – redevelopment • A West side mayor

Assessment Methodology 6: FireStar Planning Committee Neighborhood Stability Factors The FireStar Planning Committee’s Neighborhood Stability Framework identifies 17 specific factors that need to be considered in “any plan for the rejuvenation of a distressed neighborhood”. A detailed description of each factor, together with an analysis of how they affect neighborhood stability – including market value – is provided in Appendix G. These factors provided a basis for discussion in the key informant surveys (Appendix E) and played a key role in interpreting focus group results (Appendix F). Indeed, all assessment data were collected with the intent of describing primary findings in the context of the Neighborhood Stability Factor Framework. Table 3 provides a summary of the conditions surrounding each factor using the asset-based planning model framework. The conditions are described by highlighting: (1)


core assets of strengths in the neighborhood pertaining to the factor, (2) core challenges that undermine the strength of the factor, and (3) what opportunities exist to address the challenges. During the analysis, it was determined that the need to consider the vitality of “Senior Programs” was a recurring theme in the key informant surveys and focus groups. Given the saliency of the issue, it was framed as an additional factor for consideration, and incorporated into Table 3 as Factor 18. Table 3. Core assets, challenges, and opportunities utilizing the FireStar Neighborhood Stability Framework.

Stability Factor Core Assets Core Challenges Core Opportunities 1. Public Safety

Police supportive of Block Watch

Police do their best

Firefighters viewed positively

Not enough police presence in neighborhood

Police are many calls behind the demand.

Reduce crime: gangs, guns, drugs, traffic violations

Increase water/fire safety education

2. Housing Conditions

Pride of ownership reflected in many homes.

Some homes not in compliance with city ordinances

Blight in some areas

Residents’ apathy to change

Bring all homes in neighborhood in compliance

Continue affordable housing initiatives to reduce occupancy of single-family dwellings

3. Education Cartwright Elementary School District programs for youth and parents (ESL)

Phoenix Union School District

Maryvale High School

Family Resource Center

Many students and parents speak Spanish only

Lack of parental involvement

Lack of after-school programs

Add more after-school programs for the youth aimed at reducing juvenile delinquency

Teach more ESL classes for parents

4. Infrastructure/ Appearance

City services for power and water

Maryvale Revitalization Corporation

Maryvale Alliance

Multi-family dwellings push city services to capacity (sewer)

Lack of funds to repair streets

Request additional funds for street repairs

Neighborhood clean-up

Pride of ownership


City Council District #5 leadership

Neighborhood improvement programs: sidewalks, graffiti reduction, landscaping

5.Transportation Current bus

routes School district

drop-off at Boys & Girls Club

Lack of transportation to after-school programs

Lack of neighborhood bus

Add circulator bus

Work with school district to provide transportation to after-school programs

6. Employment

New businesses have moved into the neighborhood (e.g., Wal-Mart and Walgreen’s)

Increased job opportunities


Most jobs in the neighborhood are minimum wage; do not provide a living wage to support a family

Attract business that can provide residents with living wage/middle-class income

7. Faith Communities

Most faith communities in the neighborhood have active programs for youth and families

Some faith communities only serve their congregation

More community outreach is needed

Faith communities need to provide broader outreach by working together to meet community needs

8. Youth Services

After-school programs provided by many agencies (Boys & Girls Club, schools, and faith communities)

Many after-school programs at capacity

Many students still left with nothing to do after school contributing to juvenile delinquency

More after-school programs are needed at more facilities

Provide programming that captures and maintains youth’s interest

9. Land Use A balanced mixture of residential, parks, open space, and businesses

Lack of rehabilitation of unmanaged open spaces

Incentives for bringing new businesses to strip malls

Rehabilitation of strip malls


10. Shopping and Services

New retail stores moving into community (e.g. Wal-Mart, Walgreen’s, Dollar Store)

Not enough shopping options; mostly lower scale

Attract shopping and services that diversify available options.

11. Entertainment Venues

Some older venues in neighborhood for youth, families, and seniors

Venues are run-down

Transportation is needed to access venues outside the neighborhood

Renovation of current venues (especially theatres)

Transportation to venues outside the neighborhood

12. Public Amenities

Parks Pools Recreation

areas

Parks considered unsafe

Additional gathering areas needed for youth and families

Better public safety measures for public amenities

More areas to accommodate neighborhood density

13. Civic Infrastructure

Block Watch groups

Churches Schools City

organizations Maryvale

Alliance Maryvale

Revitalization Corporation

Few (if any) civic organizations like Rotary at which neighborhood organizations can meet to address neighborhood issues

Develop additional civic organizations targeting business leaders

Provide outlet for development of leadership skills

14. Social Services

Provided at J. F. Long Center (City)

City of Phoenix Neighborhood Services Department

Faith communities provide many human services to the neighborhood

Effectively communicating availability of services

Prop 200 scares away many neighbors in need for fear of turn in to INS

Continuous notification of available services to residents

Educate undocumented residents of services available to them without fear of INS

15. Tax Structure

Taxes are low Little/no bonding capacity given property types and values

Seek joint bonding opportunities like West-MEC School District to increase capacity


16. Local Neighborhood Leadership

Few community leaders, mostly agency heads, are committed to making a difference in the Maryvale neighborhood

Hispanic Leadership Institute

Very few Hispanic leaders (Martha Garcia, Mike Martinez, & Eli Menez notably) from the neighborhood lead community improvement efforts

Cultivate diversified leadership

Increase number of Hispanic leaders in community

17. Healthcare Maryvale Hospital

Long wait times in Emergency Room

Integrating health education programs into community

18. Senior Services

Services provided at senior centers in the neighborhood

Many seniors are homebound and isolated

Many seniors live on fixed incomes and have trouble paying bills

Many struggle with language barrier

Transportation to senior centers

Additional ESL education programs

In general, the conditions revealed for most factors in Table 3 show significant challenge for the neighborhood. But more importantly, they reveal significant assets, which can be built upon to move the neighborhood toward greater vitality. And, community members have expressed clear pathways for building opportunity. Of the eighteen stability factors, ten can be identified as the most salient based upon where conversation points rested during the key informant and focus group experiences. Public Safety was a dominant theme from many perspectives – crime, guns, drugs, traffic, personal safety, inadequate police presence, and appreciation for firefighters and public education efforts, such as block watch programs. In regard to Housing Conditions, residents were concerned about emerging blight and code non-compliance, but were optimistic about the capacity of the neighborhood to self-organize clean-up programs and encourage their neighbors to maintain homes. Residents and key informants were generally positive about the capacity of local school districts to provide Education, but were very concerned about the lack of parental involvement, cross-cultural communication issues, and dearth of after-school programs. They generally appreciated the quality of existing city services for Basic Infrastructure/ Appearance and appreciated the work of the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation and Maryvale Alliance. At the same time, they saw the need to build even more aggressive neighborhood-specific initiatives (including the pursuit of grants) in this area.


Transportation emerged as a core concern, particularly in the context of providing access for youth and seniors to recreation programs, community center programs, and after-school activities. Transportation also emerged as a central factor in providing access for residents to health care. The need for expanded Youth Service programs was a common theme among all age groups. While several programs are offered by many organizations, they are perceived to be dramatically underdeveloped in relationship to need. Investments in youth services are perceived not only to provide powerful alternatives to depreciative behavior, but are seen as the most important way to form the leadership base necessary to move Maryvale forward to its vision. Public Amenities such as parks, community pools, and recreation programs are appreciated by residents, but concerns about safety while using them abound. There is a desire for more public spaces and gathering areas, and programs for building a sense of community within the neighborhood. While many opportunities for building Civic Infrastructure already exist within Maryvale Village, civic organizations such as the Rotary or Kiwanis Club are not directly active within the community. Residents and key informants alike see the need for more community-based organizations or networks to build self-generating mechanisms for community problem-solving, leadership development, and resource development to tackle community issues. In a similar vein, Local Leadership is seen as a priority need. There are a few effective neighborhood leaders, but the number is relatively small. In particular, there is a sense that a greater number of Hispanic leaders should be cultivated within the neighborhood to provide leadership for community improvement efforts. Finally, the need for increased capacity in Senior Services was a dominant theme in focus group and key informant conversations. There are concerns about the potential for loneliness, isolation and depression, language barriers, and constraints due to fixed incomes. Increased recreation and socialization activities, and better access to transportation were seen as viable solutions to these challenges. Assessment Component 7: Review of National Literature and Best Practices As the introduction to this report makes clear, all forms of assessment for this community scan were anchored in nationally-recognized “best practices” for community development. One of the key orientations was to ensure that:

• core insights of asset-based community planning methodology was reflected in the preparation of this report,

• nationally-accepted approaches to assessment were followed, and • core insights about effective action plan development and asset-based

intervention strategies were considered. In the national literature, much has been written about what constitutes key components of a healthy and vital neighborhood – and what can be done from an intervention perspective to help a neighborhood achieve maximum health and vitality (Kretzmann &


McKnight 1993; Green and Haines 2002; Anderson, Scrimshaw, Fullilove, and Fielding 2003; Mattessich, Monsey, & Roy, 2004). Key insights from the national perspective are most succinctly captured by the work of Anderson, Scrimshaw, Fullilove, and Fielding (2003). Their work describes the results of a national Task Force on Community Preventive Services organized under the auspices of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services to summarize what is known about the effectiveness of community-based interventions to improve the health of communities. Their comprehensive review revealed six primary characteristics of a healthy community:

• Quality Neighborhood Living Conditions • Opportunities for Learning and Developing Personal Capacity • Quality Employment • Strong Civic Engagement • Positive Community Norms, Customs, and Processes • Adequate Health and Human Service Programs

In general, the characteristics that define Quality Neighborhood Living Conditions include housing quality and safety, safe neighborhoods, affordable housing, strong social support systems, and strong business and community organizations. Opportunities for Learning and Developing Personal Capacity include early childhood learning opportunities, strong K-12 systems, good recreation and socialization activities, and life-long learning opportunities. Quality Employment Opportunities include economic viability for local businesses and workforce training and support for residents. Strong Civic Engagement is essential to promote community identity and individual action for the common good. Similarly, Strong Community Norms, Customs, and Processes are important for building community cohesion, and, for individuals, a sense of effectiveness in contributing a larger whole. Finally, Adequate Health and Human Service Programs are necessary to provide basic life quality support systems for community residents. Importantly, Anderson, Scrimshaw, Fullilove, and Fielding (2003) addressed the question of how to work with each of these six characteristics to build stronger communities. For each of the six characteristics, they identified key indicator variables that would define “success” if the characteristic was fully present. Then, drawing on the work of the National Task Force on Community Preventive Services, they identified over 200 community-based intervention strategies that could be employed to move a community toward such “success”. Appendix I presents an extensive summary of the link between desired characteristics, key indicator variables, and potential intervention strategies in a matrix format. An abbreviated version of the matrix is shown in Table 4.


This national framework is important for two reasons: First, it provides a structure for identifying specific action strategies that could be implemented by the FireStar program in light of the visions, assets, needs and opportunities highlighted within this report. Under the asset-based community planning model, it should be recognized that many of the intervention strategies documented in Appendix I are already underway, and action strategies developed by FireStar should be organized to bolster these successful performers. Other forms of intervention strategies might be identified as important but absent or underdeveloped (e.g., multi-cultural special events, senior mentors in schools). In such cases, the FireStar program could facilitate the creation of new energies within the neighborhood. At the same time, new initiatives are not to be built from scratch. They would be built upon the capacities of existing neighborhood assets (e.g., faith communities, the talents of individual residents) to maximize community involvement and long-term sustainability of the intervention. Second, the information underscores the need to focus on building intervention strategies targeted to long-term structural change in the community – as opposed to short-term activities that focus on short-term gains. Short-term activities include those that produce a very real and tangible benefit to the community – but do not strike at the heart of the conditions which precipitated the need for the activity. Examples might be neighborhood clean-ups, fire code enforcement, and housing hazard elimination. Long-term investment strategies seek ways for outside resources (such as FireStar) to work with existing community assets (organizations, businesses, education systems, and residents) to create enduring change in the way community assets are organized to serve the community well. Primarily, the matrix of Appendix I points FireStar investments away from short-term “in and out of the community action” and more toward long-term investments in community change that result in:

• Improved Neighborhood Living Conditions • Improved Opportunities for Learning and Developing Personal Capacity • Better Employment • Improved Civic Engagement • Coalesced Community Norms, Customs, and Processes • Better Access to Health and Human Service Programs

If organized in this way and in full partnership with the community assets identified in this scan, FireStar investments in Maryvale village would be strategically positioned to best empower the neighborhood to move toward its vision.


Table 4. Key indicators of a healthy neighborhood, and corollary intervention strategies (adapted from Anderson et al., 2003)

Healthy

Neighborhood Indicator

Example of

Intervention Strategy

Component 1. Quality Neighborhood Living Conditions Housing quality and safety • Programs to abate housing hazards (lead paint

removal, rodent extermination) • Fire safety protection (e.g., inspections, detector

checks) Safe neighborhoods • Neighborhood Watch programs

• Rapid access to emergency personnel (e.g., fire, police, and EMT)

Affordable housing • Support for subsidized housing • Housing units for low-income, single adults

Building, improving, & retaining neighborhood assets

• Increase neighborhood businesses and home-based enterprises

• Increase cultural organizations and citizen associations

Neighborhood cohesion and strong social support systems

• Mentoring programs (e.g., Big Brothers/Big Sisters, youth business mentoring, adopt-a senior programs)

• Neighborhood planning to increase public meeting spaces (e.g., plazas, parks, trails, local open space/ centers).

Component 2: Opportunities for Learning and Developing Personal Capacity Early learning and child development opportunities

• Child development programs (e.g., Head Start)

• High quality foster care programs

High quality educational systems • Schools as sites for human service support systems (e.g., after-school programs, parenting programs, or community support programs)

• Senior citizens serving as models and mentors in

schools Recreation and leisure activities for all ages

• Increased non-profit organizations (e.g., YMCA/YWCA programs, Boys and Girls Clubs

• Community sports for youth


Life-long learning environment • Leadership development for all ages

• Adult education programs

Component 3: Quality Employment Opportunities Economic viability • Small loans to support locally owned businesses

• Local business clubs as resource for business owners

Job training, workforce development and employment opportunities

• Volunteer programs to mentor students in diverse occupations

• Quality, affordable child care for workers Component 4: Strong Civic Engagement Civic engagement in communities • Voter registration drives

• Active civic clubs (e.g., Rotary, volunteer firefighters, parent-teacher associations)

Social engagement in communities • Neighborhood social clubs • Community centers or facilities for group meetings

Community infrastructure to maximize local decision-making

• Training in negotiation/mediation skills for community groups

• Re-enforcement of cultural heritage to build common interests (e.g., language courses or Saturday schools to teach ethnic group customs and art)

Component 5. Positive Community Customs, Norms, and Processes Social solidarity and understanding across diverse groups

• Anti-stigma campaigns (AIDS, mental illness, etc.) • Diversity training in schools and workplaces

Focal point for community growth and social support activities through religious organizations

• Provide locations for social support, leisure and spiritual fulfillment

• Provide outlets for members to provide community service

Embracing multi-cultural beliefs and customs

• Neighborhood multi-cultural festivals • Multi-cultural training for care providers

Support for community centers for socialization

• Opportunities for after-school programs • Provide senior and youth programs that provide

alternative to unsupervised leisure (e.g., music, sports, and art)


Democratic norms for equal voice and influence for all community members

• Increased community voice in local government • Encouragement of accountability of public

agencies Component 6. Adequate Health and Human Services Programs Community-defined goals for health and human service programs

• Community participation in health and human service decision-making

• Continuous access to health and human service information for decision-making

Accessible health and human service programs accessible

• Collaboration between health and human services and broader social, economic, and political sectors

• Use of media for community health education and raising of awareness of health and human service programs

Culturally appropriate health and human services

• Multi-cultural providers • Health education materials in multiple languages

Promoting health and disease prevention in the workplace

• Mental health promotion and care • Opportunities for exercise and healthy eating

Monitoring community health indicators

• Health indicators (e.g., preventable morbidity and mortality or health disparities)

• Socio-economic indicators (e.g., rates of employment, crime, or housing availability; surveys of quality community life)

Assessment Component 8: Interface with the FireStar Planning Committee The FireStar Planning Committee (Appendix B) was presented with an overview of the primary insights from the Community Scan, and then participated in an externally-facilitated process to: (a) set a vision for its investments in Maryvale Village and (b) establish priorities for action. The results of that process set the stage for articulation of a two-year action plan for FireStar investments. The process transpired during two action planning workshops conducted on February 8 and February 27, 2006. First, the primary findings determined through the various Scan methodologies were presented. Then, the Committee was charged with prioritizing the FireStar Fund goals for the Maryvale neighborhood, defining an action plan around these priority areas, and identifying local leadership to implement and guide the action plans. The action planning prioritization process began by presenting the Committee with an overview of potential intervention strategies as described in Appendix I and summarized in Table 4 (above). As the matrix in Appendix I depicts, the potential action strategies were organized within the context of 17 specific indicators of a healthy neighborhood identified by the National Task Force on Community Preventive Services (Anderson,


Scrimshaw, Fullilove, and Fielding 2003) along with an additional indicator that surfaced during the Community Scan. The Committee was asked to reflect upon the primary findings of the assessment, and to identify specific indicator variables (from the matrix in Appendix I) that should frame the focus for FireStar investments over a two-year period. Prioritization was accomplished by a method known as the “dot” technique. Each of the neighborhood health indicators was written on a separate large sheet of paper and set up around the room. The corollary intervention strategies shown in Appendix I were recorded on each “indicator sheet”. The Committee members were told that the listed intervention strategies could serve as examples of the kinds of actions that could transpire in Maryvale Village to positively affect each indicator variable. The Committee members were asked to consider each of the 18 indicator variables and in the context of the findings of the Community Scan choose the top three indicator variables deserving of FireStar investment focus. Each committee member was given three colored dots, and asked to place one sticker on each sheet to indicate their top priority choices. The three neighborhood indicators receiving the most votes were:

• Housing quality and safety • Safe neighborhoods • Enhancing neighborhood cohesion and strong social support systems

Table 5 replicates the information from Appendix I that depicts the specific intervention strategies correlated with these four neighborhood indicators. Table 5: Priority areas for FireStar investments in Maryvale Village, and exemplary intervention strategies (from Appendix I). Housing quality and safety

o Tenant organizations & support o Public programs to abate housing hazards (lead paint removal, rodent

extermination) o Child-proof homes (e.g., safety locks, poison symbols, scald-proof water

controls) o Protection against extremes in the climate o Removal of unsafe or abandoned building and debris in vacant lots o Fire safety protection (e.g., inspections, detector checks) o Neighborhood beautification

Safe neighborhoods

o Neighborhood Watch programs o Rapid access to emergency personnel (e.g., fire, police, and EMT) o Home security systems o Animal control


o Neighborhood policing by residents o Reduction of gang activity o Reduction of street racing o Reduction of drug trafficking and neighborhood “shooting galleries” o Increased sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting o Reduction in liquor store density o Instruction of CPR/ First Aid


o Informal neighborhood social activities (e.g., sewing, book or gardening clubs) o Mentoring programs (e.g., Big Brothers/Big Sisters, youth business mentoring,

adopt-a-senior programs) o Involvement in community organizations (e.g., Kiwanis or Scouts) o Senior centers o After-school programs o Accommodations for the disabled o Elder day care o Park, recreation and exercise programs o Architecture designed to facilitate interaction (e.g., front porches, open spaces

and access pathways) o Neighborhood planning to increase public meeting spaces (e.g., plazas, parks,

trails, local entertainment centers) Once the neighborhood indicator prioritization process was completed, the Committee participated in a brainstorming session to identify specific intervention strategies that would be most appropriate for Maryvale Village, given the results of the Community Scan. The intervention strategies depicted in Table 5 were understood as exemplars, and the Committee was charged with the task of identifying specific intervention actions that focus on the unique issues within Maryvale Village that would merit FireStar investment. The Committee began by focusing on the neighborhood indicator variable “Housing quality and safety” (Row 1 of Table 5). Committee members were asked to reflect upon two questions:

• “What could the FireStar Fund do to enhance existing resources or programs in the community towards achieving this goal?

• “What new resources or programs could the FireStar Fund introduce to the neighborhood to fill gaps and help to achieve this goal?”

The Committee broke into several small groups to discuss these questions, how they related to the topic of “Housing quality and safety”, and then recorded their ideas for intervention strategies that would be worthy of FireStar support given the results of the Community Scan. Once the process was completed, the Committee re-assembled as a whole, and the small groups reported their results. The facilitator then led the


Committee through a process of assembling the many ideas into core themes. Once the core themes were identified, the specific interventions that the Committee agreed would be important for each theme were identified. The entire process was repeated for each of other two identified priority neighborhood indicators: “Safe neighborhoods” and “Enhancing neighborhood cohesion and strong social support systems”. Table 6 summarizes the specific intervention strategies recommended for each of the priority neighborhood health indicators. For Housing Quality and Safety, eighteen specific intervention strategies were identified – clustered around three broad themes:

• Beautification • Safety Improvements • Education

For Safe Neighborhoods, twenty-five specific intervention strategies were identified – clustered around three themes:

• Capital Improvements • Education • Recognition and Outreach Programs

For Enhancing Neighborhood Cohesion and Strong Social Support Systems, twenty-six specific intervention strategies were identified – clustered around four themes:

• Community Leader Development • Youth Programs • Human Services Department • Senior Programs

In total, sixty-nine intervention strategies were developed as priorities for FireStar investments in Maryvale Village. Table 6. Priority areas for FireStar investments in Maryvale Village, with specific recommended intervention strategies based upon Community Scan results. Neighborhood Health Indicator 1: Housing quality and safety Theme 1: Beautification

Streetscaping Graffiti abatement Beautification of homes


Curb appeal enhancement Anti-blight interagency program Quarterly curb appeal & neighborhood rehabilitation programs Neighborhood building awards

Theme 2: Safety Improvements

Pool fence program Child-proof locks program Vehicle safety Smoke alarm program

Theme 2: Education

Resident education about existing programs CPR education Educate 10 to 20 community leaders in fire and life safety Bilingual PSA campaigns Public and private sector mentoring programs Develop “train-the-trainer” programs Develop additional resources through professional athletes, merchant

associations, and civic organizations

Neighborhood Health Indicator 2: Safe neighborhoods Theme 1: Capital Improvements

Motion lights Automatic gates (TOMAR) Make-a-Difference Day Mid-block lighting – SRP Dusk to Dawn alley lights More sidewalks Activate resources of streets department Paint curb numbers – Fire Station #25

Theme 2: Education

Enhance animal care & control educational services Utilize Kids-at-Hope organization Chase Bank – financial resources and investment Boys & Girls Club (seek long-term commitment) Good Neighbor program – C.O.P. / N.S.D. Engage police


Neighborhood education process – school, street meetings & others Develop Speaker Bureau for block watch meetings

Theme 3: Recognition and Outreach

Neighborhood Improvement awards Incentives and recognition for residents and businesses Engage major businesses – e.g., Home Depot, Lowe’s Develop direct connections to Neighborhood Watch Programs Increase already active involvement of Phoenix Council District 5 office Home safety inspections “V” program for medications Institute block parties Have on-duty fire companies attend community meetings

Neighborhood Health Indicator 3: Enhancing neighborhood cohesion and strong social support systems Theme 1: Community Leader Development

Cultivate Maryvale community leadership Support Hispanic Leadership Volunteer recognition Greater involvement of St. Vincent de Paul church Increased cultural activities Maryvale Association of Churches Enhance involvement of faith-based communities in general Resident education and awareness of current programs

Theme 2: Youth Programs

Expand programs and hours at Maryvale and Marivue pools Expand hours and programs at Maryvale Community Center Support programs at New Beginnings Church – Desert Reach program Expand Big Brothers and Big Sisters school-based programs Future YMCA Support Stewart Branch of Boys & Girls Club Develop more after-school programs Expand mentoring programs Expand Palo Verde Library programs Expand programs at Desert West Multi-generational Center Workforce Development


Theme 3: Human Services Department

Expand programs at J.F. Long Family Services Center URRP Education New Commercial Impact Fee to leverage ACM grant

Theme 4: Senior Programs

Increase senior adult health screenings Increase senior health checks in community room or senior center New senior center (40th Ave & Thomas) Expand senior outreach – living assistance and care giving

Having completed the intervention planning process, the external facilitator guided the Committee through an Action Planning Process. The primary focus of the action planning process was to have the Committee – for each neighborhood indicator priority area identified in Table 6 – provide answers to three questions:

• What additional community partners need to be brought to the table to assist the FireStar Committee in implementing the identified intervention strategies?

• Who specifically should take the lead for ensuring action is accomplished for each identified intervention strategy?

• What the timeline should be for completing a full action plan for each of these strategies?

Table 7 provides a summary of the results, and a framework for required action for the Committee over the first ninety days of the two-year FireStar Fund investment period. Table 7. Action plan for the first ninety days of FireStar investment in Maryvale Village.


Needed Community

Partners

Primary Lead

Time Line

Neighborhood Health Indicator 1: Housing quality and safety

Beautification

-Graffiti Busters (NSD) -Valley Forward -Police Department -Parks & Recreation -Home Depot & other local home improvement stores

Dwight Amery (Maryvale Revitalization Corporation) & Josie Romero (City of Phoenix, Neighborhood Services)

90 Days


Safety Improvements

-Phoenix Fire Dept. and related associations

Tim Knobbe (United Phx. Fire Fighters Assn.)

90 Days

Education -Bomberos -Maryvale Hospital -Community centers -Marketing groups (local in the area)

Paul Knobbe, Capt. (Phoenix Fire Dept.)

90 Days

Neighborhood Health Indicator 2: Safe neighborhoods

Capital Improvements

90 Days

Education

Tony Matola (United Phx. Fire Fighters Assn.) & Paul Knobbe, Capt. (Phoenix Fire Dept.)

90 Days

Recognition/ Outreach

Dwight Amery (Maryvale Revitalization Corporation) & Josie Romero (City of Phoenix, Neighborhood Services)

90 Days

Neighborhood Health Indicator 3: Enhancing neighborhood cohesion and strong social support systems

Community Leader Development

United Way

90 Days

Youth Programs

Mark Englehart

90 Days

Human Services Department

-Mayor’s Office -SRP Community Outreach -Boy/Girl Scouts

Jesus Sapien (City Council Office of Claude Mattox, Councilman, District 5)

90 Days

Senior Programs

City of Phoenix, Human Services & City of Phoenix Mayor’s office

90 Days


This visioning and action planning process of the FireStar Committee has provided necessary first steps to guide FireStar investments in Maryvale Village. Priority neighborhood health indicators were identified, as were key intervention strategies for moving the community forward on these indicators. And, additional community partners were identified to bring into the action planning process, as well as specific individuals to guide the first phase of FireStar investments.

SIGNIFICANT “LESSONS LEARNED” FROM THE SCAN

Maryvale Village has a cherished past and a promising future. Established in 1957, this neighborhood has a rich history. It is growing and changing, with a wonderful mix of original residents and relatively newly arrived, young families. While there are many challenges, there are even more assets and opportunities. FireStar stands as a significant partner in helping neighborhood residents and organizations reach their vision and their potential. The potential, as expressed by those within the community, is to “have a safe and secure neighborhood where all individuals and families can flourish economically, culturally, and educationally to improve their quality of life.” The potential is to become one of the best neighborhoods in the Phoenix metropolitan area. While the voices of the community expressed through this Community Scan are rich and varied, it appears that four fundamental themes of this scan are particularly noteworthy of highlighting:

• Healthy communities are built by empowering the residents and organizations within the community – not by outside organizations doing something for the community.

• Effective community development is accomplished by long-term investments in structural change – not by short-term investments in cleaning up community “problems”.

• Significant investments in the community’s youth will result in improved life quality for all generations.

• Effective community development happens when many sectors work together in partnership.

Empowering Residents and Organizations It is clear from the scan that neighborhood residents have many hopes and aspirations, and that they are seeking ways to build even better lives for themselves, their families and their neighbors. It is also clear from the literature on community building that true community development happens only when assets within the community are mobilized to create change. While external resources are important, these resources – in order to be effective – need to be invested in ways that produce leadership within the community to create enduring solutions to the challenges the community faces.


With important exceptions, there is an opportunity within Maryvale Village for making investments in the cultivation of local neighborhood leaders from various cultural backgrounds and groups. The need for diversified, multi-cultural leadership has made the integration of activities and services among the various sectors difficult and rarely attempted. This need for leadership development was expressed repeatedly by community members and key informants as well as by those involved in business, non-profits, government, and faith-based organizations serving the neighborhood. A recurring theme was the need to mentor and encourage the development of leadership skills within the Hispanic community, and to engage more civic organizations (e.g., Rotary) and service organizations (e.g., Kiwanis) in the neighborhood. At the same time, the potential of expanding the existing organizational assets in the neighborhood (e.g., schools, faith communities; Boys and Girls Club, City of Phoenix Neighborhood Services) must be a priority of any program of external investment, such as FireStar. Short-Term versus Long-Term Investments There are many ways in which to invest in the development of a neighborhood. Some investments are immediate, highly visible activities conducted over a relatively short time-frame that produce a specific outcome -- such as a neighborhood clean-up activity. While these investments are important, they may not result in the necessary structural change in a community to perpetuate the desired outcome. Other investments are to create fundamental changes within a community to bring about long-term solutions to community challenges and long-term opportunities to assist residents in achieving their vision of the ideal. In the context of a FireStar investment in Maryvale Village, it follows that the most successful strategy will follow an asset-based, long-term investment approach. While FireStar investments might be helpful in organizing some programs for the community, it will produce more sustainable impacts by working with the community to assemble its own assets in ways that will move the community forward. For example, a short-term needs-based problem-solving approach would have the FireStar investments work for the neighborhood by creating a neighborhood clean-up day and engaging volunteer firefighters in the task of neighborhood clean-up. A long-term asset-based investment strategy would have the same volunteer firefighters working with neighbors to help them create a neighborhood event that would encourage their own clean-up activities and a subsequent celebration of what was accomplished. The former would create a “project” with short-term success. The later would create a “format” for having the neighbors repeat the process on their own accord in the future. From a long term perspective, it is the “format” that will be more successful than the “project” in creating true community development. Youth Development Well over one quarter of the residents of Maryvale Village are between 5 and 17 years of age. As the community focus groups revealed, the youth of Maryvale Village have a keen awareness of the challenges that face their neighborhood and have many


significant ideas on how to build an improved community. While they carry tremendous insight, it is clear that they that feel generally excluded from community activities and decision-making. Their ideal neighborhood would engender respect for people of all ages and cultures, and openness to diversity. They envisioned Maryvale as a place where “everyone was welcomed and belonged” – a safe place where people are trustworthy, comfortable, communicated openly, and welcome people from diverse ethnic backgrounds. Developing opportunities to encourage youth to provide leadership toward these ideals would be a worthy focal point for FireStar investment. Youth responses reflected years of hearing, living, and breathing the negative aspects of being young adults growing up in a neighborhood with challenges. Empowering each one of them with the knowledge of how he/she could contribute their unique gifts to assist their neighbor and build a stronger sense of community would rally a tremendous force for positive change. These sentiments were reflected during focus group conversations with neighborhood adults, who expressed with equal conviction that more opportunities were needed to develop the capacity of youth and shape them into leadership roles within the neighborhood. Multi-Sector Partnerships The Community Scan revealed many facilities, programs and services being provided from many organizational sectors serving the Maryvale community. A broad range of governmental agencies, faith communities, educational organizations, non-profit organizations, and other community organizations are contributing to neighborhood vitality (Appendix H). Although these organizations are working well independently, it is clear that there are many opportunities for the various entities to join forces to create a synergy to provide a more effective, holistic approach to meeting neighborhood needs and creating structure for the cultivation of leadership toward the community’s ideal. For each identified ideal (e.g., community safety, youth development, multi-cultural leadership development), all entities could consolidate resources and vision to bring sharp focus to the most salient community needs. From this perspective, the greatest power from FireStar investments would accrue from helping to consolidate existing assets that currently do not work together – as opposed to creating new programs that are not anchored in existing organizational assets within the community. A multi-sector approach to community development would bring more constituents into the community building process, sharpen the efficiency and strategic focus of resource allocation, produce synergy among resources, help unify the community, and create formats for enduring change long after the financial resources of the original FireStar investment are expended.


BUILDING A HEALTHY AND VIBRANT MARYVALE VILLAGE

This assessment provides a glimpse of the amazing possibilities for Maryvale Village, and the potentially powerful role of FireStar investments in affecting positive change within the neighborhood. With the vision of FireStar set clear, and anchored in the dreams of the community, the impact will be profound. The accomplishments of the investments could be heralded as a national model of excellence for strategically empowering a neighborhood to achieve its ideal through the development of sustainable actions. There is much work to do, but the rewards will be great. The residents of all communities will be the ultimate beneficiaries.


LITERATURE CITATIONS

Green, G.P. & A. Haines. 2002. Asset Building & Community Development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Mattessich, P., B. Monsey & C. Roy. 2004. Community Building: What Makes It Work. St. Paul, MN: Amherst H. Wilder Foundation. Kretzmann, J.P. & J.L. McKnight. 1993. Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community’s Assets. Chicago, IL: ACT Publications. Anderson, L. M., S.C. Scrimshaw, M.T. Fullilove, J.E. Fielding & the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. 2003. The Community Guide’s Model for Linking the Social Environment to Health. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 24, 12-20.


Appendix A

Maps of Maryvale Village

• Regional Map • Fight Back Neighborhood – Existing Land Use • Fight Back Neighborhood – Zoning Boundary


Maryvale Regional Map


Appendix B

FireStar Planning Committee


FireStar Planning Committee

Sherry Ahrentzen, Ph.D., ASU - Stardust Center for Affordable Homes and the Family Dwight Amery, Maryvale Revitalization Corporation Steve Beuerlein, United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association Local #493 Michael Bielecki, Lewis and Roca John Burk, Department of Communication Studies, ASU at the West campus Gregg Holmes, Stardust Foundation Chris Ketterer, City of Phoenix, Fire Department Tim Knobbe, United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association Local #493 Richard C. Knopf, Ph.D., Partnership for Community Development, ASU at the West campus Paul Luna, Valley of the Sun United Way Tony Matola, United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association Local #493 Michael Pyatok, ASU - Stardust Center for Affordable Homes and the Family Josie Romero, City of Phoenix, Neighborhood Services Jesus Sapien, City Council Office, Councilman Claude Mattox, District 5 Bill Shields, United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association Local #493 Shelly Vasquez, Office of the Mayor Staff Support for Stardust Activities: Paul Knobbe, City of Phoenix, Fire Department Joyce Lopez-Powell, Valley of the Sun United Way


Appendix C

Community Vital Signs


Demographics Much of the information in this section was extracted from the Council District 5 Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment (Appendix D). Social Characteristics

From 1990 to 2000, the neighborhood population increased by 14% and the number of persons per household increased by 12%, however the number of households decreased by 13%.

Table 1: Population and Households

1980

1990

2000 Change

1980-1990 Change

1990-2000 Change

1980-2000 Population 4,395 4,049 4,633 -8% 14% 5% Households 1,242 1,333 1,154 7% -13% -7% Persons per Household 3.54 3.03 3.51 -14% 12% -1% Source: 1980 US Census, 1990 US Census, 2000 US Census, Landiscor Aerial Photographs, and City of Phoenix Planning Department

The number of households increased from 1,242 in 1980 to 1,333 in 2000 for a

change of 7% during the 20-year period.

This population change reflects an overall increase of 5% during the 20-year period between 1980 and 2000. This rate of growth is significantly less than the city’s overall growth rate of 67% during the same time period.

The average household size (persons per household) decreased 1% during the

same 20-year period from 3.54 persons to 3.51 persons. The neighborhood’s average household size was above the 2000 city average of 2.84 persons.


Household Type

71% 83%88% 86%

66% 66%

9% 23% 11%

26%12%

25%

3% 6% 6% 8% 2% 9% 0%

20% 40% 60% 80%

100%

Neighborhood

1980

City1980

Neighborhood

1990

City1990

Neighborhood

2000

City 2000

Family Single Person Other Non-Family

The percentages of family households, single-person households, and other non-

family households in the neighborhood have remained fairly consistent during the twenty-year period from 1980 to 2000.

The percentage of family households decreased from 88% in 1980 to 83% in

1990. This percentage then increased 3% to reach 86% in 2000. Since 1980, the neighborhood has maintained a higher percentage of family

households and lower percentages of single-person and other non-family households compared to the city as a whole.

Family Householdsas a Percentage of All Households

12%6%

4%6%

50%

24%

11% 10% 13%13%13%8%

3% 3%

42%31%

36%

25%28%

23% 23% 25%27%

24%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Neighborhood

1980

City 1980

Neighborhood

1990

City 1990

Neighborhood

2000

City 2000

Females without Husband Males without WifeCouples with Children Couples without Children

Since 1980, the neighborhood has had a greater percentage of couples with

children than the city. In 2000, the neighborhood had 42% of couples with children while Phoenix had only 24%.


Of the neighborhood’s total households, the percentage of female-headed households has increased from 11% to 13% in 2000, as well as the percentage of male-headed households from 3% to 8% in 2000.

The percentage of married couples with children households in the neighborhood

has decreased from 50% in 1980 to 42% in 2000. Like the neighborhood, the city as a whole has experienced a decrease in the percentage of couples with children from 31% in 1980 to 24% in 2000.

The percentage of married couples without children households in the

neighborhood has decreased from 24% on 1980 to 23% in 2000 to fall even with the 2000 city rate.

The age distribution in the neighborhood has remained fairly stable across most age groupings since 1980.

Since 1980, the neighborhood populations under 5 years of age, and 75 and over

have increased their percentages slightly, from 10% and 1% in 1980 to 11% and 2% in 2000.

In contrast, the percentage of residents between 18 and 54, and between 55 and

74 decreased from 52% and 11% in 1980 to 51% and 10% in 2000. In 2000, the percentage of residents between 5 and 17 years of age was equal to

its 1980 percentage of 26%.

In 2000, neighborhood percentages of residents under the age of 5, between 55 and 74, and 75 years and over were similar to those of the city. However,

Age Distribution

8% 9% 11%8%10%10% 20%

26%

19%21%21%

26%

53% 52% 52% 56% 51% 56%

11% 15% 13% 10% 11%

15%

2% 4% 2% 4%3%1% 0%

20%

40%

60%

Neighborhood1980

City 1980 Neighborhood1990

City 1990 Neighborhood2000

City 2000

Under 5 years Between 5 & 17 Years Between 18 & 54 Years Between 55 & 74 Years 75 Years and Over


compared to the city, the neighborhood has a higher percentage of residents between 5 and 17 and a lower percentage of residents between 18 and 54.

The larger percentage of youth in the neighborhood corresponds with the area’s

larger household size.

Significant ethnic shifts in the neighborhood between 1980 and 2000 include an increase in the Hispanic population (from 19% in 1980 to 62% in 2000) and in the other minorities population (from 2% in 1980 to 5% in 2000).

A significant decrease occurred in the White (non-Hispanic) population (from

76% in 1980 to 31% in 2000) and the Black population (from 3% in 1980 to 2% in 2000).

The 2000 percentages of Black and other minority populations in the

neighborhood (2% and 5% respectively) were less than or equal to citywide percentages (5% for both).

The neighborhood’s Hispanic population (62%) was significantly higher than the

city’s (34%), while the neighborhood’s White (non-Hispanic) population (31%) was much lower than the city’s (56%).

According to the 2000 U.S. Census, approximately 14% of all persons 5 years of

age and over in the neighborhood did not speak English well or at all.

Ethnic Distribution

76%

78%

66%

72%

31%

56%

3%

5%

6%

5%

2%

5%

19%

15%

27%

20%

62%

2%

2%

1%

3%

5%

5% 34%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Neighborhood 1980

City 1980

Neighborhood 1990

City 1990

Neighborhood 2000

City 2000

White (Non-Hispanic) Black Hispanic Other


Education and Schools

The percentage of the adult population that has graduated from high school is often used as a measure of educational attainment. The city’s educational attainment rate increased from 73% in 1980 to 79% in 1990 and then decreased to 69.3% in 2000.

In 2000, an estimated 56.3% of the adult residents of the neighborhood had

graduated from high school, a decrease from 71.2% in 1990 and 70.9% in 1980. (Due to the unavailability of educational attainment rates at the census block level, the estimated percentages exclude areas of the neighborhood east of 59th Avenue in 1980 and east of 55th Avenue in 1990 and 2000).

% Sunset

Elementary %

Arizona K-6

% Frank Borman

% Arizona

7-8

% Maryvale

H.S.

% Arizona

9-12 Attendance Rate

96 95 94 94 95 96

Transfers Out 25 20 23 20 27 20 Transfers In (Within District)

4 2 2 2 2 2

Transfers In (Out of District)

4 10 6 10 4 9

Promotion Rate

100 99 100 98 99 95

Retention Rate

0 1 0 2 1 5

Dropout Rate -- -- -- -- 4 8 Status Unknown

-- -- -- -- 2 6

Graduation Rate

-- -- -- -- 71 76

Sunset School

Sunset School reports an enrollment of 865 students, which is above its

capacity of 717 students.

For the 2002-2003 school year, Sunset School met all applicable federal AYP (adequate yearly progress) requirements.

Sunset School received an excellent rating in the Choda Elementary/

Junior High Choral Festival in 2002 and 2003.

The school also received the Bullies & Victims Anti-Violence Program Award in 2002.

Sunset School achieved an increase in parent participation at school

events during the 2002-2003 school year.


The 2002-03 test scores for 2nd through 6th grade in reading, language, and mathematics were below state averages.

Local, state or federal law

enforcement intervention was never required during the Sunset 2002-2003 school year.

Sunset School activated a Student Discipline Program where students

receive counseling services resulting in a decrease of suspensions by 50% during the 2002-2003 school year.

Frank Borman Middle School

Frank Borman Middle School, which has enrollment capacity of 745 students, reports an enrollment of 989 students.

For the 2002-2003 school year, Frank Borman Middle School met all

applicable federal AYP requirements.

A Frank Borman faculty member received the Toyota Teacher of the Month Award in 2002.

In 2003, the school won the following awards: Pom & Cheer Coach of the

Year; Girls Basketball Conference Champions; and, Pom & Cheer Sportsmanship Hall of Fame.

The 2002-03 test scores for both 7th and

8th grades were below the state scores for reading, language and mathematics.

Local, state or federal law enforcement

intervention was required 20 times on school grounds during the 2003-2004 school year at Frank Borman Middle School.

During the 2002-2003 school year, Frank Borman Middle School

implemented intervention programs to provide support to students in literacy.

According to the AIMS achievement test, students accomplished an

increase in writing skills during the 2002-2003 school year.

Percent of Students Achieving One Year’s Growth

Reading Math Grades 2-3 60 49 Grades 3-4 80 75 Grades 4-5 59 44 Grades 5-6 84 75

Percent of Students Achieving One Year’s Growth

Reading Math Grades 6-7 64 67 Grades 7-8 83 67


Maryvale High School

Maryvale High School reports an enrollment of 2,450 students, which is below its enrollment capacity of 2,819 students.

The 2002-03 test scores for 9th grade were significantly below the state

scores for reading, language and mathematics. Maryvale High School received a U.S. Congressional Student Art Award in

2001 and a National DECA President Award in 2002.

Local, state or federal law enforcement intervention was required 72 times on school grounds during the 2003-2004 school year at Maryvale High School.

During the 2002-2003 school year, Maryvale High School increased the

attendance rate to 96.8% and decreased the dropout rate to 3.2%.

Economic Characteristics

City residents reported having an average household income of $55,408 in 1999. In contrast, neighborhood residents reported having an average household income of $40,757 in 1999, which was approximately 74% of the city average.

This figure compares to an average neighborhood household income of $33,597

in 1989, which was below the 1989 city average of $37,159. The neighborhood’s household income did not grow as much as the city average between 1989 and 1999.

In 1999, more than half of the neighborhood’s households (51%) reported having

incomes below $35,000, compared to 42% of city households.

Nineteen percent reported annual incomes between $35,000 and $49,999.

Twenty-two percent of neighborhood households reported incomes between $50,000 and $99,999, less than the percentage of city households (29%).

Eight percent of the neighborhood’s households reported incomes in excess of

$100,000.


As defined by the U.S. Census, the poverty threshold for a family of four persons

was $17,029 in 1999. At that time, 18.8% of the neighborhood’s population was living below the poverty threshold. This percentage was greater than the 1999 city average of 15.8%.

The neighborhood had an unemployment rate of 9.5% in 1999, which was higher

than the city’s unemployment rate of 5.7% at that time. Land Use and Zoning

The majority of the neighborhood consists of single family residential zoning, predominantly R1-6, which permits single family residences with a density ranging to 5.3 du/acre. Areas permitting higher density and multiple-family residential are zoned R-5 (up to 43.5 du/ac).

Commercial zoning in the neighborhood is primarily located along 51st Avenue and at the intersections of Indian School Road with 51st and 67th Avenues. These commercial districts include C-2 (intermediate commercial) and PSC (planned shopping center).

There has been no rezoning in the

neighborhood during the past ten years.

There have been no special permits issued in the neighborhood during the past five years.

Property Violation Percent of Properties

Minor yard neglect 20.0 Parking violations 18.4 Poor exterior conditions (paint, broken/boarded windows)

13.1

Fences in need of repair or replacement

11.9

At least one abandoned or inoperable vehicle on site

8.9

Graffiti 3.7 Poor roof conditions 3.1 Major yard neglect 2.1

Households Grouped by 1999 Income

19%

29%

22%

8%

35%

16% 18%

28%

11% 14%

0% 5%

10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Under $15,000

$15,000-$34,999

$35,000-$49,999

$50,000-$99,999

$100,000 +

Neighborhood City


In 2004, 2.3% of the properties in the neighborhood were either vacant or had an

unoccupied structure.

52.0% of the neighborhood’s properties had one or more maintenance violations in August 2004.


Housing*

The neighborhood experienced an estimated 11% increase in the number of housing units during the 20-year period between 1980 and 2000.

From 1980 to 2000, the number of single-family units increased by 168, multi-

family units decreased by 32, and mobile homes and other dwelling units remained the same.

Table 4: Number and Type of Housing Units 1980 (estimated) 1990 2000 Number % Number % Number % Single-family Homes

1,189 95.7% 1,196 85.8% 1,161 84.3%

Multiple-family Units

54 4.3% 198 14.2% 217 15.7%

Mobile Homes and Other

0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total Units

1,243 100.0% 1,394 100.0% 1,378 100.0%

Source: 1980 US Census, 1990 US Census, 2000 US Census

The housing in this neighborhood dates from as early as the 1930’s, although the median age is 45 years. The city’s median age of housing dates from the citywide construction boom of the early to mid-1970’s. Thus the median age of the neighborhood’s housing stock is approximately 20-25 years older than that of the city as a whole.

For 2000, the average home value in the neighborhood was $77,221. Average

rent for 2000 was $698. These figures compare to the 2000 average home value and rent for the city of $146,525 and $643 respectively.

In 2000, average neighborhood home values were 47% lower than the city

average, but neighborhood rents were 9% higher.

This data represent an increase of 31% in the neighborhood average home value of $59,119 and a 27% increase in the neighborhood average rent of $548 since 1990.

The average neighborhood rent is higher than the city’s, because the rental units

are single-family homes.


The percentages of owner-occupied units in the neighborhood were 83% in 1980, 72% in 1990, and 76% in 2000. These data reflect a 7% decrease in ownership rates during this 20-year period.

Percentages of owner-occupied units in the neighborhood were above city

averages in 1980, 1990, and 2000. The percentage of owner-occupied units in the city’s housing stock during this same period decreased from 65% in 1980 to 61% in 2000, or 6% overall.

The percentage of renter-occupied units in the neighborhood in 2000 was 24%,

well below the city average of 39%.

The percentage of vacant housing units in the neighborhood decreased from 7.2% in 1990 to 1.5% in 2000, which partially accounts for the neighborhood’s increase in population over this time period.

In 2000, the neighborhood’s vacancy rate was less than the city’s vacancy rate of

6%.

In 2000, approximately 45% of the residents had lived in the neighborhood for 10 or more years. This percentage was well above the city average of 23%.

In 2000, the overcrowding rate (more than one person per room) in the

neighborhood was 18.1%. This rate was above the city’s overcrowding rate of 12.5%.

Streets and Traffic Streets, Sidewalks and Alleys

There are no unpaved streets in the neighborhood. Roads in the following areas have received asphalt treatment: Osborn to Indian School Roads, 67th to 64th

Housing Occupancy

83%61%

76%59%65% 72%

39%24% 41%28%35%17%

0%20% 40% 60% 80%

100%

Neighborhood 1980

City 1980

Neighborhood1990

City 1990

Neighborhood 2000

City 2000

Owner Renter


Avenues (1992); Osborn Road to Grand Canal, 64th Avenue to 59th Avenue (1991); Grand Canal to Indian School Road, 64th to 59th Avenues (1992); Osborn to Indian School Roads, 59th to 55th Avenues (1991); Osborn to Indian School Roads, 55th to 51st Avenues (new construction for ballpark).

There are alleys throughout the neighborhood. Alley conditions were included as

part of the neighborhood housing conditions survey conducted by the Neighborhood Preservation Division in August 2004. This survey indicated that 16.8% of the alleys in the neighborhood showed minor weed, grass, and trash violations.

The City of Phoenix Street Light Policy generally recommends that street lights

be placed approximately 250 feet apart. In areas where there are crime, security and/or traffic concerns, the Street Transportation Director may determine that street lights may be spaced at less than 250 feet or that existing street lights may be upgraded to a higher intensity than the typical residential street lights.

According to the Streets Transportation Department, there are some sidewalks in

need of repair in the neighborhood, but the general condition of the area is good. Traffic Patterns and Volumes

A study of 64th Drive between Amelia Avenue and Picadilly Road was conducted in October 2003. This study showed that 64th Drive carries 2,391 vehicles per day, which exceeds the maximum desired threshold for a local street of 1,000 vehicles per day. Two speed humps were installed in April 2004.

A study of Clarendon Avenue between Indianola Avenue and 57th Avenue was

conducted in December 2002. This study showed that 64th Drive carries 1,031 vehicles per day, which exceeds the maximum desired threshold for a local street. Two speed humps were installed in June 2003.

It is often an indication that a local street is experiencing unusually high levels of

cut-through traffic when total traffic exceeds 100 vehicles per hour or 1,000 vehicles per day. The Street Transportation Department has documented local street traffic volumes above this level on 64th Drive and Clarendon Avenue.

There are no documented unusual levels of truck and/or commercial traffic in the

neighborhood.

There is no residential parking program in effect or proposed for the neighborhood.


Infrastructure Water

According to the Water Services Department, City of Phoenix water service is available throughout the neighborhood.

There are currently no funds targeted for the city’s Water Main Replacement

Program (WMRP).

There are no Capital Improvement Program (CIP) water main replacement projects within the neighborhood.

Sanitary Sewer

According to the Water Services Department, sanitary sewer service is available in the streets/alleys throughout the neighborhood.

There are no areas in this neighborhood targeted for the Small Diameter Sewer

Pipe Rehabilitation Program. Storm Drainage

Areas of the neighborhood north of the Grand Canal and north of Osborn Road are located within the 100-year floodplain.

A Fairmount Avenue residence set below street-level grade has experienced

flooding and drainage problems. Maricopa County Flood Control District (FCDMC) constructed a detention basin as a first phase approach for addressing flooding issues in the area. No recent complaints have been filed since the construction of the detention basin.

There are no other documented unique storm drainage issues that are a problem

in the neighborhood. Public Safety Police Protection

The neighborhood is served by the Maryvale Precinct, located at 6180 W. Encanto Blvd.


The number of reported crimes in the neighborhood has decreased overall by 5% since 2001. The total number of crimes committed in the neighborhood during each of the past three years was 650 in 2001, 671 in 2002 and 616 in 2003.

The crime rate is the number of crimes per 1,000 persons. The following crime

rates are based on estimated city and neighborhood populations for 2003. The neighborhood’s 2003 crime rate of 113.3 per 1,000 persons was 30% higher than the city crime rate of 87.2 per 1,000 persons.

In 2003, the neighborhood crime rates exceeded the city crime rates for the

following crimes by 10% or more: homicide (100%), sexual assault (40%), aggravated assault (126.3%), robbery (136%), theft (57.6%), auto-theft (43.8%), drug crime (29.7%), gang crime (50%) and domestic violence (62%).

On the other hand, neighborhood crime rates were more than 10% below city

crime rates for burglary (-27.1%).

Crimes reported by the Police Department are recorded for each applicable category. For example, a robbery that is determined to be gang-related would be recorded as both a robbery and a gang crime.

The Maryvale Precinct reports that the following crime prevention programs have

been established in this neighborhood: Sunset Knoll Neighborhood Association, Maryvale UNITE and Marivue Neighborhood Association.

2003 Crimes per 1,000 Population

8.3

0.5 3.8

22.4 23.3

5.9

20.416.2

33.5

0.4 0.7

8.6

35.3

0.9 0.2 2.5

28

6.410

0.6 0.0 5.0

10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

Homicide Sexual Assault

Aggravated Assault

Robbery Burglary Theft AutoTheft

DrugCrime

Gang Crime

DomesticViolence

Type of Crime

Crim

es P

er 1

000

Neighborhood City


The citizens in the neighborhood West of 6300 W. Indian School Rd. have requested additional street lighting, as well as the replacement of older fixtures, to assist in reducing criminal activity in the area.

There has been a gang problem in this community for several years. The “West

Side Chicanos 64th” have blighted the area for several years with graffiti and other activities. Currently, a gang squad is working in the area to address the problem.

The low income housing area, Cypress Gardens, encompassing 67th Ave. to 71st

Ave. from W. Osborn to W. Clarendon, continues to have issues with burglaries, car thefts, and narcotics.

Three homes on 3100 N. 69th Drive continue to operate as half-way homes for

recovering drug addicts and alcoholics. The homes are less then a block away from Davidson Elementary School, 6900 W. Flower and Osborn Streets.

Neighborhood concerns west of 5100 Indian School Rd. include: abandoned

vehicles, vehicles for sale on residential streets and private parking lots, graffiti, and drug houses. Mobile vendors in the neighborhoods and shopping centers are also a huge concern.

Fire Protection

This area is primarily served by Fire Station 25 (FS25), located at 4010 North 63rd Avenue. FS25 is staffed with a total of 12 personnel operating a Basic Life Support (BLS) Engine Company (E25) and an Advanced Life Support (ALS) Engine Company (E725), and Ambulance (R25), and a Command Officer (BC3).

The average first unit response time in this area for FY2003-04 was four minutes

and 41 seconds, which is slightly lower than the City-wide average of four minutes and 56 seconds. The Fire Department goal is a mean response time of three minutes.

The Fire Department is not aware of any water pressure or water supply

problems in the neighborhood.

The Fire Department is not aware of any unusual fire hazards in the neighborhood.

In FY2003-04, calls for service in the neighborhood were made at a rate of 209.4

emergency calls per 1,000 persons (as enumerated in the 2000 census). This rate was 118% above the city average of 95.7 calls per 1,000 persons.


There were 970 calls for service within the neighborhood. Of these calls, 613 were emergency medical with vehicle accidents accounting for 181 calls, 67 were fire calls with 7 reported structure fires and 11 car or vehicle fires.

In FY2003-04, the Fire Department responded to 17 assaults, 11 gunshot

wounds, and 14 overdoses within this Fight Back area. Public Transportation

The Park-and-Ride lot located at the Maryvale Commercial Center, which is located at the northwest corner of 53rd Avenue and Indian School Road, serves the neighborhood.

Dial-a-Ride usage by area is not available. If ridership were distributed evenly by

geographic area, only one or two boardings would be expected daily in the neighborhood. Dial-a-Ride service is provided throughout the neighborhood to seniors and persons with disabilities. Weekday services hours are 5 am to midnight. On weekends and holidays, service is available from 5 am to 10 pm. Service for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) eligible persons is provided during the same hours as the regular Dial-a-Ride.

Bus Route 41 operates daily along Indian School Road from Dysart Road to

Granite Reef Road. Major destinations along this route are Estrella Mountain Community College and Desert Sky Mall. The bus runs weekdays from 5:00 am to midnight, every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 4:45 am and 10:15 pm, every 60 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 6:10 am and 8:35 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 430 on weekdays, 190 on Saturdays, and 130 on Sundays

Bus Route 51 operates daily along 51st Avenue from Roosevelt Street to

Thunderbird Road. A major destination along this route is Arizona State University West. The bus runs weekdays between 5:00 am and 8:45 pm with a frequency of every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 5:50 am and 7:25 pm, every 60 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 5:50 am and 7:35 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 60 on weekdays, 20 on Saturdays, and 14 on Sundays.

Bus Route 59 operates daily along 59th Avenue from Buckeye Road to Utopia

Road. A major destination along this route is Glendale Community College. The bus runs weekdays from 5:35 am to 9:35 pm, every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 6:05 am and 9:25 pm, every 30 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 5:55 am and 8:55 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 80 on weekdays, 35 on Saturdays, and 16 on Sundays.


Bus Route 67 operates daily along 67th Avenue from Buckeye Road to Bell Road. A major destination along this route is Arrowhead Towne Center. The bus runs weekdays from 6:15 am to 9:55 pm, every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 6:10 am and 9:55 pm, every 30 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 6:20 am and 9:20 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 100 on weekdays, 50 on Saturdays, and 25 on Sundays.


Appendix D

Previous Reports of Maryvale Area

• Council District 5 Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment Pre-Survey and Full Report

• Choices on the Edge: Maryvale Community Assessment

• Attitudes toward Programs, Identification of Barriers, and Suggestions to Improve

Parent Involvement • Concept Paper for the Organization and Structure

of the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives • West Phoenix Revitalization Discussion Findings


Council District 5 Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment

Pre-Survey


District 5 Fight Back 2004-2005 Pre-surveys comments 1. I think this program is a good idea. I would like to see the City install sidewalks in our area and also install high wattage streetlights instead of the dim ones. There is a lot of gunfire and drugs in this neighborhood and also loose, unlicensed dogs that roam every day. (2) 2. I have waited for a program like this for 20 years. I would love to know more and help out, I currently teach in the Cartwright District- and I grew up in the Maryvale area. (10) 3. We would like speed humps on our street- Britton, because they drive 50 miles per hour while kids are outside playing. (11) 4. Trash in alleys. Need speed humps. It still does not feel like a safe neighborhood to walk around 1n. (12) 5. Speeding all the time, loud pipes on the trucks and cars. Loud music and drinking all night long, the other day till 5:00 AM, We have a lot of small children in the area, and these people do not care. We need help with the guns going off at night. (13) 6. This is a joke? Common sense will let you know and answer your questions, thank you. I do not want to do your work for you. The neighborhood people are spending more time destroying the good parts of the neighborhood like the beautiful fences that were in our neighborhood have now been taken down. What is going on? (15) 7. I am a single parent with a disabled child, am willing to help, but only if it keeps the neighbors nice to each other. I do not believe in ticketing people to get it done. (16) 8. Dead/dying trees/shrubs, not replacing them. (17) 9. Loose dogs. Broken fences. Parking on sidewalks, Front yard parties, very loud music till late hours. These are very rude actions and should be controlled. (21) 10. Where are the Police? What are we paying taxes for? Do your job. (22) 11. Trash is everywhere. Loud music every night. Gun shots every night. (24) 12. Graffiti: Neglect. Specifically, I hope attention is given to W. Britton Ave.-5900 and west. Virtually all houses are neglected, shabby, and the yards are ignored. That street alone depresses property values which is a shame. (25) 13. Lack of Police presence. Code violations. Thanks for an apparent interest in this neighborhood, conditions at a time the western outlying areas of Phoenix are in a state of diminishment. (26)


14. Dogs running loose. Motor scooters being ridden w/o helmets and noisy. We need traffic control; we have 20 children on our little Crittendon Ln. They range from 1 year to 16 years old. We live west of 59th Ave. north of Osborn. (30) 15. Drop houses. Loud music. I think this program is great! (32) 16. Sidewalks would be a great investment since the children are always in the street. (34) 17. Cars in yard at my house. Need to decrease speeding and drag racing at 11:00 PM and anytime. The owner of my house refuses to take his car out of the yard and it is junk. (36) 18. Chickens. To be affective in this area you should speak Spanish, I do not. (37) 19. Grocery calls. We need lots of help. (38) 20. Loud music. People throw liquor cartons along the streets or park and leave trash. Some people do not cut the grass along the sidewalks and the alley. Alley is too trashy. (40) 21. Trash cans on sidewalks all week. Need speed humps. Dogs running loose. Neighbors do not speak English. (41) 22. We know of some gangs in the neighborhood and neighbors who sell drugs. (42) 23. We have a current running Block Watch, but we want our whole community to be safer and more pleasing to the residents. (45) 24. Rental property owners are not held accountable for appearance of homes, yards, cars, etc. (47) 25. Drive by shootings. Holes in streets, hardly paved. Streetlight turns off and on. Health hazard due to property owner not having or wanting to pay maintenance persons for repairs. As of7-3-04 Dominoes Pizza delivery will not even deliver here because they were robbed. (49) 26.1 am a business owner in Phoenix and would like to help in any way I can. (51) 27. Lack of event parking. We are moving out of here. (53) 28. Speed limit of30 MPH on a residential street? Semi's. Retired, old and disabled; lived here.48 years! (57) 29. During school year there are a lot of drive by shootings. (58)


40. Person operating a garage at home on end of service road at 59th 11 Ave. and Indian School. Trucks and cars there always parked in driveway and in the street where it was blocked off. (77) 41. Racing. Apathy. (78) 42. We would especially like to have speed humps on 57th Ave. which often has speeders and is a cut through street between Clarendon and Indian School. (83) 43. Kids racing motorized scooters, etc. (84) 44. Loud music. People sitting on their cars drinking. I will take care of my own! (86) 45. Parents need to watch their kids all of the time, not only around water. This ad on TV is very wrong. (87) 46. There is a lot more people walking the street, loud, speeding, throw cartons. Need humps. Gun shots from school for track, try air horn. You guys say no guns at school. Well, starter pistol is the same when you hear it but don't see where it came from. You hear a shot and unless you hear kids cheering you just hear a shot. Maryvale Ball Park got an air horn, why can't schools? (90) 47. Gun shots in air, especially holidays. 18 wheelers parked in neighborhood. High weeds in yards. Trash cans left on streets and illegal height of fences, to name a few infractions. Boys/Girls facility creates a hazard due to illegal parking on street, causes traffic hazards on Clarendon from 67U1 Ave. Past 15 years or more, have contacted Mayor, zoning, Neighborhood Preservation, Police Dept., and Councilman regarding all area of violations and have received little to no response to problems. If we see a noticeable change in area, then we may get involved! (91) 48. Loud cars and loud music. Last Saturday night the neighbors had a very, very loud party. I called the Police at 1:15, 2:15, 3:15 and at 3:37 AM the party finally ended and I called to cancel the Police. My husband was ill and I am 72 years old. We were shaking from the "boom-boom" sounds. The neighbors also were upset. So now we are moving to Sun City for quiet! My main complaint is the gun shots every Saturday night. I loved living here until 10 years ago. I felt we had a small town feeling. We were active and our children were raised here but are now embalm has to tell people where we live. (92) 49. Vandals. (95) 50. Noise from loud music. (95) 51. Hope this program: has a good impact. (97) 52. Noise. I am looking forward to the time this program affects our neighborhood. (99)


up to the dead end. My fence gets run into almost every year and always my insurance has to pay. They do their damage and speed away. (130) 72. Seems like some people can get away with fences higher than 3' in height and on the ROW (right of way) than others. And cars being parked in front yard areas needs to be addressed. (132) 73. Stolen car parts. (133) 74. Little kids causing trouble (under 10). Inoperable outside lights at rental property. (135) 75. We need more Police presence. Utilize laws to clean up neighborhood properties, enforce driveway laws, tow cars. (136)


Council District 5 Neighborhood Fight Back Assessment

Full Report


Introduction

What is the purpose of the Neighborhood Fight Back Program?

The Neighborhood Fight Back Program offers designated neighborhoods specialized City 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.

What is the purpose of the Fight Back Assessment?

This assessment provides background information to residents in order that they may form a more complete picture of their neighborhood and make informed decisions. The assessment serves as a baseline for measuring neighborhood improvements that occur as a result of Fight Back efforts. Although this report is comprehensive, it does not provide in-depth analysis.

Where is the neighborhood located?

The District 5 Fight Back Neighborhood is bounded by Indian School Road on the north, Osborn Road on the south, 67th Avenue on the west, 51st Avenue and on the east (see boundary map on page 2). The neighborhood is located entirely within the boundaries of City Council District 5 and the Maryvale Village.

Have there been any special or specific plans prepared for the neighborhood in the past?

The District 5 Fight Back Neighborhood is not impacted by any special or specific plans.

Demographics The information found in this section, with the exception of school information, is based on data from the 1980, 1990, and 2000 United States Censuses. The neighborhood is located within Census Tracts 1098.01, 1098.02 and 1099 and is made up of Block Groups 1098.01-4, 1098.02-1, 1099-1, and 1099-2. Neither the census tract nor the block group boundaries match exactly those of the District 5 Fight Back neighborhood, as they cover a larger geographical area than does the Fight Back. In 1980, 1990, and 2000, Block Group 1099-1 extends to Thomas Road on the south between 51st and 55th avenues. In 1980, Block Group 1099-2 extends to Thomas Road on the south between 55th and 59th avenues. As indicated by aerial photography the larger geographical area is predominantly developed with detached single-family residences. Therefore, to ensure that data was representative of the neighborhood, the respective 1980, 1990, and 2000 block groups covering the larger geographical area were broken down to census blocks matching the exact boundaries of the District 5 Fight Back Neighborhood. School information is provided by Arizona School Report Cards (2003-2004), the State of Arizona Department of Education, the City of Phoenix Youth and Education office, and various school districts and individual schools.


Social Characteristics Is the neighborhood gaining or losing population and households?

The neighborhood experienced an increase population between 1980 and 2000 (Table 1). The population of the neighborhood decreased 8% from 4,395 persons in 1980 to 4,049 persons in 1990. Population growth of 14% occurred between 1990 and 2000, as the neighborhood’s population increased to 4,633. This population change reflects an overall increase of 5% during the 20-year period between 1980 and 2000. This rate of growth is significantly less than the city’s overall growth rate of 67% during the same time period.

The number of households increased from 1,242 in 1980 to 1,333 in 2000 for a change of 7% during the 20-year period. The average household size (persons per household) decreased 1% during the same 20-year period from 3.54 persons to 3.51 persons. The neighborhood’s average household size was above the 2000 city average of 2.84 persons.

Table 1: Population and Households

1980

1990

2000 Change

1980-1990 Change

1990-2000 Change

1980-2000 Population 4,395 4,049 4,633 -8% 14% 5% Households 1,242 1,333 1,154 7% -13% -7% Persons per Household 3.54 3.03 3.51 -14% 12% -1%

Source: 1980 US Census, 1990 US Census, 2000 US Census, Landiscor Aerial Photographs, and City of Phoenix Planning Department


How does the household composition in the neighborhood compare to that in the city, and how has it changed over time relative to the change in the city?

The percentages of family households, single-person households, and other non-family households in the neighborhood have remained fairly consistent during the twenty-year period from 1980 to 2000 (Figure 1). The percentage of family households decreased from 88% in 1980 to 83% in 1990. This percentage then increased 3% to reach 86% in 2000. Since 1980, the neighborhood has maintained a higher percentage of family households and lower percentages of single-person and other non-family households compared to the city as a whole.

Household Type

71%83%

88% 86%

66% 66%

9%23%

11%26%

12%25%

3% 6% 6% 8% 2% 9%0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d19

80

City

198

0

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d19

90

City

199

0

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d20

00

City

200

0

Family Single Person Other Non-Family

Figure 1


Several types of families are included within the broad title of “family households,” including female-headed families without a husband, male-headed families without a wife, married couples with children, and married couples without children. The figures presented in Figure 2 show only types of family households as a portion of total households in 1980, 1990, and 2000.

Of the neighborhood’s total households, the percentage of female-headed households has increased from 11% in 1980 to 13% in 2000. The percentage of male-headed households has also increased from 3% in 1980 to 8% in 2000. The percentage of married couples with children households in the neighborhood has decreased from 50% in 1980 to 42% in 2000. Like the neighborhood, the city as a whole has experienced a decrease in the percentage of couples with children from 31% in 1980 to 24% in 2000. The percentage of married couples without children households in the neighborhood has decreased from 24% in 1980 to 23% in 2000 to fall even with the 2000 city rate.

Family Households as a Percentage of All Households

12%6% 4% 6%

50%

24%

11% 10% 13%13%13%8%3%3%

42%

31%36%

25%28%23% 23%25%27%24%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d19

80

City

198

0

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d19

90

City

199

0

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d20

00

City

200

0

Females without Husband Males without WifeCouples with Children Couples without Children

Figure 2


How does the age distribution of the neighborhood's population compare to the age distribution of the city's population? How has the neighborhood's age distribution changed relative to the city?

The age distribution in the neighborhood has remained fairly stable across most age groupings since 1980. Since that time, the neighborhood populations under 5 years of age and 75 and over have increased their percentages slightly, from 10% and 1% in 1980 to 11% and 2% in 2000. In contrast, the percentage of residents between 18 and 54 and between 55 and 74 decreased from 52% and 11% in 1980 to 51% and 10% in 2000. In 2000, the percentage of residents between 5 and 17 years of age was equal to its 1980 percentage of 26%. In 2000, neighborhood percentages of residents under the age of 5, between 55 and 74, and 75 years and over were similar to those of the city. However, compared to the city, the neighborhood has a higher percentage of residents between 5 and 17 and a lower percentage of residents between 18 and 54. The larger percentage of youths in the neighborhood corresponds with the area’s larger household size. These neighborhood and city age profiles from 1980 to 2000 are depicted in Figure 3, below.

Age Distribution

8% 9%11%8%10%10%

20%26%

19%21%21%26%

53%52% 52%56%

51%56%

11%15% 13%

10% 11%15%

2% 4% 2% 4%3%1%0%

20%

40%

60%

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d19

80

City

198

0

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d19

90

City

199

0

Nei

ghbo

rhoo

d20

00

City

200

0

Under 5 years Between 5 & 17 Years Between 18 & 54 Years

Between 55 & 74 Years 75 Years and Over

Figure 3


What is the ethnic distribution of the population in the neighborhood? How has it changed over time relative to the change in the city?

Significant ethnic shifts in the neighborhood between 1980 and 2000 include an increase in the Hispanic population (from 19% in 1980 to 62% in 2000) and a decrease in the White non-Hispanic population (from 76% in 1980 to 31% in 2000). The Black population decreased from 3% in 1980 to 2% in 2000, and the Other Minorities population increased from 2% in 1980 to 5% in 2000.

The 2000 percentages of Black and other minority populations in the neighborhood (2% and 5% respectively) were less than or equal to citywide percentages (5% for both). The neighborhood’s Hispanic population (62%) was significantly higher than the city’s (34%), while the neighborhood’s White non-Hispanic population (31%) was much lower than the city’s (56%).

Ethnic Distribution

76%

78%

66%

72%

31%

56%

3%

5%

6%

5%

2%

5%

19%

15%

27%

20%

62%

2%

2%

1%

3%

5%

5% 34%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Neighborhood 1980

City 1980

Neighborhood 1990

City 1990

Neighborhood 2000

City 2000

White (Non-Hispanic) Black Hispanic Other

Figure 4

What percentage of persons in the neighborhood did not speak English well or at all in 2000?

According to he 2000 U.S. Census, approximately 14% of all persons 5 years of age and over in the neighborhood did not speak English well or at all.


Education and Schools How do the neighborhood's educational attainment rates compare to the city's educational attainment rates, and how have the rates changed relative to the city since 1980?

The percentage of the adult population that has graduated from high school is often used as a measure of educational attainment. The city’s educational attainment rate increased from 73% in 1980 to 79% in 1990 and then decreased to 69.3% in 2000. In 2000, an estimated 56.3% of the adult residents of the neighborhood had graduated from high school, a decrease from 71.2% in 1990 and 70.9% in 1980. Due to the unavailability of educational attainment rates at the census block level, the estimated percentages exclude areas of the neighborhood east of 59th Avenue in 1980 and east of 55th Avenue in 1990 and 2000. The 2000 educational attainment rate of the adult residents of the neighborhood was below the citywide average.

Which schools serve the neighborhood?

Elementary school students from the neighborhood attend John F. Long School (located at 4407 N 55th Avenue), Sunset School (located at 6602 W Osborn Road), Bret Tarver School (located at 4308 N 51st Avenue), Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center (located at 5480 W Campbell Avenue) and Flor Del Sol (located at 3818 N 67th Avenue). All of the elementary schools provide kindergarten through grade six except Flor del Sol which offers kindergarten through grade eight, and Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center which offers preschool and kindergarten. Frank Borman Middle School (located at 3637 N 55th Avenue) and Desert Sands Middle School (located at 6308 W Campbell Avenue) offer grades seven and eight. Neighborhood students attend six different high schools. Maryvale High School (located at 3415 N 59th Avenue), Trevor Browne High School (located at 7402 W Catalina Drive), Desiderata School (located at 512 E Pierce Street), and Metro Tech Vocational Institute of Phoenix (located at 1900 W Thomas Road) serve neighborhood high school students attending grades nine through 12. Bostrom Alternative Center (located at 3535 N 27th Avenue) and Suns-Diamondbacks Education Academy (located at 1505 N Central Avenue) offer grades from 10 through 12. All elementary and middle schools are located in the Cartwright Elementary District. All the high schools are part of the Phoenix Union High School District.

How many children are enrolled in these elementary schools?

John F. Long School reports an enrollment of 1,048 students, which is above its capacity of 752 students. Sunset School reports an enrollment of 865 students, which is above its capacity of 717 students. Bret Tarver School reports an enrollment of 783 students, which is below its capacity of 909 students. Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center reports an enrollment of 188 students, which is below its capacity of 302 students. Frank Borman Middle School, which has enrollment capacity of 745 students, reports an enrollment of 989 students. Desert Sands Middle School, which has enrollment capacity of 773 students, reports an enrollment of 946 students. Maryvale High School reports an enrollment of 2,450 students which is below its enrollment capacity of 2,819 students. Trevor Browne High School reports an enrollment of 2,654 students which is below its enrollment capacity of 2,853 students. Bostrom Alternative Center reports an enrollment of 400 students, which is higher than its capacity of 322 students. Metro tech Vocational Institute of Phoenix which


has a capacity of 3261 students reports an enrollment of 1,306 students. Desiderata School reports an enrollment of 67 students which is lower than its capacity of 118 students. Suns-Diamondbacks Education Academy reports an enrollment of 52 students which is slightly higher than its capacity of 50 students.

How do the test scores of these schools compare to national and state scores?

Since 1997, students in grades three through 12 have been tested using standardized, nationally norm-referenced achievement tests known as the Stanford Achievement Test, Ninth Edition (Stanford 9). Beginning in 1998-1999, students in grades 2 through 11 were tested on their learning achievement. Results for the 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 school years are reported according to the school’s percentile rank achieved in the subject areas of reading, language, and mathematics (see Table 2). The corresponding state scores for 2002-03 are provided for comparison purposes. The national score for all subjects in all grades is 50. Arizona state test scores for grades 10 and 11 are not available. John F. Long School As indicated by Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for reading, language, and mathematics were significantly below state averages for grades two through six.

Sunset School As indicated by Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for reading, language, and mathematics were below state averages for grades two through six. Bret R. Tarver Elementary School As indicated by Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for reading, language, and mathematics were below state averages for all grades. Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center As indicated by Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for reading, language, and mathematics were below the state averages for all the grades. Flor Del Sol School As indicated by Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for reading, language, and mathematics were not calculated. Frank Borman Middle School The 2002-03 test scores as shown in table 2 for both 7th and 8th grades were below the state scores for reading, language and mathematics.

Desert Sands Middle School As indicated in Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for both 7th and 8th grades were below the state scores for reading, language and mathematics. Maryvale High School As indicated in Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for 9th grade were significantly below the state scores for reading, language and mathematics.


Trevor Browne High School As indicated in Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for 9th grade were significantly below the state scores for reading, language and mathematics Bostrom Alternative Center As indicated in Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for 9th grade were not calculated for reading, language and mathematics. Metro Tech High School As indicated in Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for 9th grade were below the state scores for reading, language and mathematics. Desiderata As indicated in Table 2, the 2002-03 test scores for 9th grade were below the state scores for reading, language and mathematics.

Suns-Diamondbacks Education Academy The Sat-9 test scores for the school were not available.


State (AZ)

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

01/

0202

/ 03

02/

03

Gra

de 2

Read

ing

2026

3438

3141

2332

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

50La

ngua

ge20

2327

2623

3721

24NC

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

--43

Mat

hem

atic

s38

2535

3337

4830

33NC

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

--57

Gra

de 3

Read

ing

2124

3132

2827

1923

NCNC

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

47La

ngua

ge40

3539

3745

4226

33NC

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--54

Mat

hem

atic

s41

3537

3241

4119

28NC

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--54

Gra

de 4

Read

ing

2631

3033

2833

2629

NCNC

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

52La

ngua

ge35

3436

4132

3430

30NC

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--48

Mat

hem

atic

s45

4246

4342

4433

33NC

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--57

Gra

de 5

Read

ing

2626

2433

3029

3234

NCNC

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

50La

ngua

ge23

2930

3439

3329

39NC

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--46

Mat

hem

atic

s45

3338

3837

4637

49NC

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--57

Gra

de 6

Read

ing

2538

3131

3338

2435

20NC

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

53La

ngua

ge21

3025

2626

3118

288

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--45

Mat

hem

atic

s37

4339

3752

5832

4119

NC--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--62

Gra

de 7

Read

ing

----

----

----

----

NC--

2426

3133

----

----

----

----

----

51La

ngua

ge--

----

----

----

--NC

--31

2834

38--

----

----

----

----

--54

Mat

hem

atic

s--

----

----

----

--NC

--32

4043

40--

----

----

----

----

--58

Gra

de 8

Read

ing

----

----

----

----

18--

2433

2934

----

----

----

----

----

53La

ngua

ge--

----

----

----

--11

--20

2727

31--

----

----

----

----

--49

Mat

hem

atic

s--

----

----

----

--20

--31

3432

38--

----

----

----

----

--58

Gra

de 9

Read

ing

----

----

----

----

----

----

----

1619

1822

NCNC

1921

--9

41La

ngua

ge--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--16

1819

21NC

NC20

23--

642

Mat

hem

atic

s--

----

----

----

----

----

----

--35

3635

37NC

NC38

37--

2160

Tabl

e 2:

Sta

nfor

d 9

Perc

entil

e R

ank

Scor

es

Fran

k Bo

rman

M

iddl

e Sc

hool

Dese

rt Sa

nds

Mid

dle

Scho

olM

aryv

ale

High

Sch

ool

John

F.

Long

Sch

ool

Suns

et

Scho

ol

Bost

rom

Alt.

Ce

nter

Sour

ce: A

rizon

a Sc

hool

Rep

ort C

ard

2003

-200

4Bret

R.

Tarv

er

Cartw

right

Pr

esch

ool

and

Gift

ed

Cent

erFl

or D

el S

ol

Scho

olM

etro

Tec

h Hi

gh S

choo

l

Trev

or

Brow

ne

High

Sch

ool

Desi

dera

ta

Scho

ol


How many "at risk" students are enrolled in these schools?

The Arizona Department of Education, Research and Development Division, in their report entitled the “At Risk” Status of Arizona School Districts, FY 1990 and Revised FY 1987 Date Tables, states that “…a growing number of students are identified as being ‘at risk’ of failing to achieve in school and ultimately failing to graduate. Furthermore, with the growing sophistication of workplace skills and the increasing competition for available jobs, dropping out puts a young person ‘at risk’ through the rest of his or her adult life.”

Some of the indicators used to measure “at risk” students are absenteeism, mobility rate (transfer schools during an academic year), limited English proficiency (LEP), socioeconomic status, and processing through the Maricopa County Juvenile Court system. Students who miss valuable learning and instructional information from chronic absenteeism or due to transferring in and out of school are at a higher degree of being “at risk.” Similarly, the ability to speak and read English determines student academic performance and the ability to compete in a predominately English-speaking society. Participation in the free and reduced-cost lunch program is a reflection of socioeconomic status; the income guidelines for this program indicate that participants are living below federal poverty levels. The more, the students exhibit these indicators, the more likely it becomes that the student will be “at risk.” “At risk” indicators for the 2002-2003 school years are presented in Table 3.


John

F.

Long

Sch

ool

Sun

set

Sch

ool

Bre

t R.

Tarv

er

Car

twrig

ht

Pre

scho

ol

and

Gift

ed

Cen

ter

Flor

Del

Sol

S

choo

l

Fran

k B

orm

an

Mid

dle

Sch

ool

Des

ert

San

ds

Mid

dle

Sch

ool

Mar

yval

e H

igh

Sch

ool

Trev

or

Bro

wne

H

igh

Sch

ool

Bos

trom

Alt.

C

ente

rD

esid

erat

a S

choo

l

Met

ro T

ech

Voc

atio

nal

Inst

itute

of

Pho

enix

Sun

s -

Dba

cks

Edu

catio

n A

cade

my

Abs

ente

e R

ate

6.0%

5.0%

6.0%

0.0%

12.0

%8.

0%7.

0%4.

0%6.

0%4.

0%12

.0%

5.0%

21.0

%M

obilit

y R

ate

24.4

%24

.1%

32.7

%14

.6%

26.0

%21

.7%

26.5

%24

.0%

26.5

%20

.7%

33.1

%21

.4%

19.4

%Li

mite

d E

nglis

h P

rofic

ienc

y40

.0%

34.0

%n/

a0.

0%n/

a34

.0%

29.0

%19

.8%

12.4

%6.

0%n/

a17

.0%

n/a

Stu

dent

s on

fre

e/ re

duce

d -

cost

lunc

h pr

ogra

m85

.0%

32.0

%78

.0%

60.0

%97

.0%

87.0

%70

.0%

52.6

%41

.0%

80.0

%92

.0%

83.0

%90

.0%

Pro

cess

ed

thro

ugh

the

Mar

icop

a C

ount

y Ju

veni

le

Cou

rt sy

stem

(th

is c

an b

e on

e st

uden

t w

ho is

pr

oces

sed

thro

ugh

the

cour

t sys

tem

m

ultip

le

times

)5

0n/

a0

716

976

357

412

8831

105

n/a

Sou

rce:

Info

rmat

ion

on P

EY

S 2

003-

2004

Tabl

e 3:

" A

t Ris

k "

Indi

cato

rs


What types of city and school programs are available at these schools? JOHN F. LONG SCHOOL Instructional Programs: on-site special education, structured English immersion, after- school instruction, arts and physical education. Extracurricular Activities: student council, Epworth Church After-School Program, chorus, and yearbook. Special Facilities: media center/studio and computer stations in library. Social and Community Resources: lunch program, school-based health clinic, breakfast program, and after-school program. SUNSET SCHOOL (CARTWRIGHT) Instructional Programs: School-Wide Title I Program, literacy and math focus, Reading Recovery, and computer lab. Extracurricular Activities: after-school academic/sports programs, band, chorus, and student council. Special Facilities: computer lab and modern music facility. Social and Community Resources: recreational activities and City of Phoenix after-school program. BRET R. TARVER SCHOOL Instructional Programs: Title I Reading and Math programs, after-school tutoring, Spalding Total Language Arts Program, and ELL programs for all grade levels. Extracurricular Activities: student council, after-school tutoring and quality time, peer mediation, and pom and cheer. Special Facilities: computer lab - internet accessible and library - internet accessible. Social and Community Resources: urban survival program, Christmas Angel Program, food boxes, and parenting classes. CARTWRIGHT PRESCHOOL AND GIFTED CENTER Instructional Programs: on-site special education, structured English immersion, after-school instruction, and arts and physical education.


Extracurricular Activities: student council, Epworth Church After-School Program, chorus, and yearbook. Special Facilities: media center/studio and computer stations in library. Social and Community Resources: lunch program, school-based health clinic, breakfast program, and after-school program. FLOR DEL SOL SCHOOL Instructional Programs: teaching of emotional control, decision-making skills, self-esteem, and learning to respect. Extracurricular Activities: no extracurricular activities have been reported. Special Facilities: garden and library. Social and Community Resources: Family Resource Center, contacts with value options, social workers, and use of school resource officers (SROs). FRANK BORMAN MIDDLE SCHOOL Instructional Programs: Connected Mathematics Program, honors classes, special education, and ELL. Extracurricular Activities: student council, after-school games, art, National Junior Honor Society, and after-school sports. Special Facilities: computer labs and library. Social and Community Resources: after-school programs, Character Education Program, breakfast/lunch program, and parent resource room. DESERT SANDS MIDDLE SCHOOL Instructional Programs: blocked instruction, honors classes, on-site special education, and ELL. Extracurricular Activities: student council, publications, peer mediation, and interscholastic athletics. Special Facilities: two computer labs and media studio. Social and Community Resources: breakfast/lunch programs, counseling services, West Phoenix Business Alliance, and health services. MARYVALE HIGH SCHOOL


Instructional Programs: honors classes, advanced placement classes, ESL Program, and Estrella Community College Co-Enrollment. Extracurricular Activities: JROTC, boys varsity/JV/freshman athletics 9-12, National Honor Society, and girls varsity/JV/freshman athletics 9-12. Special Facilities: two computer labs and media studio. Social and Community Resources: breakfast/lunch programs, counseling services, West Phoenix Business Alliance, and health services. TREVOR HIGH SCHOOL Instructional Programs: honors classes, advanced placement, on-site special education, and co-enrollment with community colleges. Extracurricular Activities: vocational clubs--DECA and COE, Close-Up, student government, and National Honor Society. Special Facilities: 14 computer labs and CBT Instructional Program. Social and Community Resources: crisis intervention, recreational activities, counseling services, and Spanish Language Radio Parent. BOSTROM ALTERNATIVE CENTER Instructional Programs: core academic and elective classes, special education resource and inclusion, Focus on Reading, writing and mathematics, academic tutoring in ACE period. Extracurricular Activities: student government, yearbook club, enrichment activities, and multi-cultural workshops. Special Facilities: shared-use computer lab and fitness center. Social and Community Resources: substance abuse counseling, anger management counseling, student career and job fair, and college financial aid counseling. DESIDERATA Instructional Programs: alternative education, small classes - up to 12 students, social worker and counselor support, and special education and core academics. Extracurricular Activities: lunchtime activity program, student government, and athletic participation at home school. Special Facilities: student computers in all classrooms and shared use computer lab.


Social and Community Resources: referrals to outside agencies, counseling services, home visits, and crisis intervention. METRO TECH HIGH SCHOOL Instructional Programs: integrated career and academic curriculum, school-to-work, core academic classes, and honors credit. Extracurricular Activities: National Honor Society, MECHA, VSOs (VICA, FBLA, DECA), and art club. Special Facilities: technology center and 30 specific career labs. Social and Community Resources: child care center, job placement services, wellness center/health services, and CUTS.

SUNS-DIAMONDBACKS EDUCATION ACADEMY

Instructional Programs: inclusion resource program, technology-based instruction, curriculum integration, and six-week credit periods. Extracurricular Activities: student government. Special Facilities: computer-assisted learning lab and classroom learning labs. Social and Community Resources: partnerships with the business community, substance abuse counseling, student career and job fair, and anger management counseling.

Have these schools received any honors and/or awards?

John F. Long School has not received any special honors or awards during the past years. Sunset School (Cartwright) received an excellent rating in the Choda Elementary/ Junior High Choral Festival in 2002 and 2003. The school also received the Bullies & Victims Anti-Violence Program Award in 2002. Bret R. Tarver School received the AZ Commission Gold Star Road to Excellence in 2003. In 2002, the school received the Arizona Arts Commission Grant and numerous awards for Papa John's grants. In 2001, the school received Wells Fargo grants. Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center did not report of receiving any award or honor A Flor Del Sol School student received the Youth Garden Grants Award in 2001. A Frank Borman Middle School faculty member received the Toyota Teacher of the Month Award in 2002. In 2003, the school won the following awards: Pom & Cheer Coach of the Year; Girls Basketball Conference Champions; and, Pom & Cheer Sportsmanship Hall of Fame.


Desert Sands Middle School’S principal received the prestigious Arizona’s Assistant Principal of the Year Award in 2003 and Golden Bell awards in both 2000 and 2003. In 2002, the school’s principal won the distinguished Middle School Administrator (Principal) Award. Maryvale High School received a U.S. Congressional Student Art Award in 2001 and a National DECA President Award in 2002.

TREVOR HIGH SCHOOL won the State Cross- Country Championship in 2000. In 1998 the school won three different awards: Co-ed Regional Teacher of the Year; NABT Teacher of the Year; and, JROTC national champions.

Bostrom Alternative Center received special recognition for having 71 graduates during the 2002-03 school year. In 2002, the school’s principal was chosen as the Administrator of the Year. And, the school’s special education teacher was named the District Teacher of the Year in 2000. Metro Tech High School received the C-CAP Scholarship Award in 2001, 2002 and 2003. The school also received the award for most promising career program (carpentry) in 2003.

Desiderata School did not report of receiving any special award or honor. Suns-Diamondbacks Education Academy received special recognition for graduating 64 students in 2003. In 2002, the school’s principal was chosen as the Administrator of the Year and a student leader was selected to speak at a national conference.


Economic Characteristics How does the average household income of the neighborhood compare to that of the city?

City residents reported having an average household income of $55,408 in 1999. In contrast, neighborhood residents reported having an average household income of $40,757 in 1999, which was approximately 74% of the city average. This figure compares to an average neighborhood household income of $33,597 in 1989, which was below the 1989 city average of $37,159. The neighborhood’s household income did not grow as much as the city average between 1989 and 1999.

What is the distribution of major income groupings in the neighborhood?

In 1999, more than half of the neighborhood’s households (51%) reported having incomes below $35,000, compared to 42% of city households. Nineteen percent reported annual incomes between $35,000 and $49,999. Twenty-two percent of neighborhood households reported incomes between $50,000 and $99,999, less than the percentage of city households (29%). Eight percent of the neighborhood’s households reported incomes in excess of $100,000. The complete breakdown of income groupings and comparisons to the city are depicted in Figure 5.

Households Grouped by 1999 Income

19%

29%

22%

8%

35%

16%18%

28%

11%14%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%

Under$15,000

$15,000-$34,999

$35,000-$49,999

$50,000-$99,999

$100,000 +

Neighborhood City

Figure 5 What percentage of persons in the neighborhood is below the poverty threshold as defined by the census? How does this compare to the city?

As defined by the U.S. Census, the poverty threshold for a family of four persons was $17,029 in 1999. At that time, 18.8% of the neighborhood’s population was living below the poverty threshold. This percentage was greater than the 1999 city average of 15.8%.


How does the percentage of unemployed persons in the neighborhood compare to the city?

The neighborhood had an unemployment rate of 9.5% in 1999, which was higher than the city’s unemployment rate of 5.7% at that time.

Land Use and Zoning

What are the existing land uses in the neighborhood?

The District 5 Fight Back Neighborhood consists of residential, commercial, office, recreational open space, educational, institutional, and public facility land uses. The primary land use throughout the neighborhood is single-family residential. Multi-family residences are located at the northeast corner of 55th Avenue and Clarendon Avenue. Existing land uses in the neighborhood are depicted on the map on page 20. Commercial land uses are located along Indian School Road, primarily with the intersections of 51st and 67th avenues. The neighborhood contains an elementary school, middle school, and high school. The Maryvale Sports Facility is located along 51st Avenue, north of the Grand Canal. Office and public facility uses are located throughout the neighborhood, north of the Grand Canal. Institutional uses, such as churches, are scattered throughout the neighborhood. Vacant parcels are located along Indian School Road east of 55th Avenue, at the intersections of 59th and 65th avenues with Indian School Road, and along 67th Avenue north of Clarendon Avenue. These parcels are located in commercial (C-2), planned shopping center (PSC), or multi-family residential zoning districts.

What is the existing zoning in the neighborhood?

The majority of the neighborhood consists of single family residential zoning, predominantly R1-6, which permits single family residences with a density ranging from up to 5.3 du/acre. Areas permitting higher density and multiple-family residential are zoned R-5 (up to 43.5 du/ac).

Commercial zoning in the neighborhood is primarily located along 51st Avenue and at the intersections of Indian School Road with 51st and 67th avenues. These commercial districts include C-2 (intermediate commercial) and PSC (planned shopping center). Existing zoning in the neighborhood is presented on the map on page 21.

Have there been any rezonings in the neighborhood during the last ten years?

There has been no rezoning in the neighborhood during the past ten years. Have any special permits been issued in the neighborhood during the last five years?

There have been no special permits issued in the neighborhood during the past five years.


Are there any zoning or property maintenance problems in the neighborhood?

Neighborhood Services, Neighborhood Preservation Division surveyed neighborhood housing conditions during August, 2004 to determine if there are any zoning or property maintenance violations in the Fight Back area. In particular, the following conditions were surveyed: vacant property, fences, yards, paint, roofs, graffiti, abandoned or inoperable vehicles and illegal parking. The results of this survey indicate that 2.3% of the properties in the neighborhood were either vacant or had an unoccupied structure on site at the time of the survey. Although vacant property is not considered a violation, these properties are often cited for property maintenance violations. The survey indicates that 52.0% of the neighborhood’s properties had one or more maintenance violations in August 2004. Specifically, the following violations were present in the neighborhood. Property Violation % of Properties Fences in need of repair or replacement 11.9% Minor yard neglect 20.0% Major yard neglect 2.1% Poor exterior surface conditions (paint, broken/boarded windows

13.1%

Poor roof conditions 3.1% Graffiti 3.7% At least one abandoned or inoperable vehicle on site 8.9% Parking violations 18.4%


Housing

The information found in this section is based on data from the 1980, 1990, and 2000 United States Censuses. The neighborhood is located within Census Tracts 1098.01, 1098.02 and 1099 and is made up of Block Groups 1098.01-4, 1098.02-1, 1099-1, and 1099-2. Neither the census tract nor the block group boundaries match exactly those of the District 5 Fight Back neighborhood, as they cover a larger geographical area than does the Fight Back. In 1980, 1990, and 2000, Block Group 1099-1 extends to Thomas Road on the south between 51st and 55th avenues. In 1980, Block Group 1099-2 extends to Thomas Road on the south between 55th and 59th avenues. As indicated by aerial photography the larger geographical area is predominantly developed with detached single-family residences. Please see pages 1-3 for information on the use of census population and housing data. To ensure that data was representative of the neighborhood, the respective 1980, 1990, and 2000 block groups covering the larger geographical area were broken down to census blocks matching the exact boundaries of the District 5 Fight Back Neighborhood. However, due to the unavailability of housing unit type data at the census block level, estimates for 1980 housing unit types were calculated by multiplying the total number of housing units within the Fight Back Area by the respective percentage for each housing unit type at the block group level. Have the number and type of housing units in the neighborhood changed since 1980?

The neighborhood experienced an estimated 11% increase in the number of housing units during the 20-year period between 1980 and 2000. Over that span, the number of single-family units increased by 168, multi-family units decreased by 32, and mobile homes and other dwelling units remained the same. Variations in types of housing over time reflect, in part, census classification differences in each of the three censuses.

Table 4: Number and Type of Housing Units 1980 (estimated) 1990 2000 Number % Number % Number % Single-family Homes

1,189 95.7% 1,196 85.8% 1,161 84.3%

Multiple-family Units

54 4.3% 198 14.2% 217 15.7%

Mobile Homes and Other

0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total Units 1,243 100.0% 1,394 100.0% 1,378 100.0%

Source: 1980 US Census, 1990 US Census, 2000 US Census What is the median age of housing units in the neighborhood compared to the city?

The housing in this neighborhood dates from as early as the 1930’s, although the median age is 45 years. The city’s median age of housing dates from the citywide construction boom of the early to mid-1970’s. Thus the median age of the neighborhood’s housing stock is approximately 20-25 years older than that of the city as a whole.


How do the average home values and rents of the neighborhood compare to those of the city? How have they changed comparatively since 1990?

For 2000, the average home value in the neighborhood was $77,221. Average rent for 2000 was $698. These figures compare to the 2000 average home value and rent for the city of $146,525 and $643 respectively. In 2000, average neighborhood home values were 47% lower than the city average, but neighborhood rents were 9% higher. These data represent an increase of 31% in the neighborhood average home value of $59,119 and an 27% increase in the neighborhood average rent of $548 since 1990. The average neighborhood rent is higher than the city’s, because the rental units are single-family homes.

How do the percentages of owner-occupied and renter-occupied units in the neighborhood compare to those of the city? How have they changed since 1980?

The percentages of owner-occupied units in the neighborhood were 83% in 1980, 72% in 1990, and 76% in 2000. These data reflect a 7% decrease in ownership rates during this 20-year period. Percentages of owner-occupied units in the neighborhood were above city averages in 1980, 1990, and 2000. The percentage of owner-occupied units in the city’s housing stock during this same period decreased from 65% in 1980 to 61% in 2000, or 6% overall. The percentage of renter-occupied units in the neighborhood in 2000 was 24%, well below the city average of 39%. Owner versus renter statistics for the neighborhood and city since 1980 are depicted in Figure 6.

Housing Occupancy

83%61%

76%59%65% 72%

39%24%41%28%35%17%

0%20%40%60%80%

100%

Nei

ghbo

rho

od 1

980

City

198

0

Nei

ghbo

rho

od 1

990

City

199

0

Nei

ghbo

rho

od 2

000

City

200

0

Owner Renter

Figure 6

What percentage of the housing units in the neighborhood was reported as vacant?

The percentage of vacant housing units in the neighborhood decreased from 7.2% in 1990 to 1.5% in 2000, which partially accounts for the neighborhood’s increase in population over this time period. In 2000, the neighborhood’s vacancy rate was less than the city’s vacancy rate of 6%


What percentage of the residents has lived in the neighborhood for 10 or more years?

In 2000, approximately 45% of the residents had lived in the neighborhood for 10 or more years. This percentage was well above the city average of 23%.

How does the overcrowding rate of the neighborhood compare to that of the city?

In 2000, the overcrowding rate (more than one person per room) in the neighborhood was 18.1%. This rate was above the city’s overcrowding rate of 12.5%.

Streets and Traffic

Streets, Sidewalks and Alleys Are there any unpaved streets in the neighborhood?

There are no unpaved streets in the neighborhood. Roads in the following areas have received asphalt treatment: Osborn to Indian School Roads, 67th to 64th Avenues (1992); Osborn Road to Grand Canal, 64th Avenue to 59th Avenue (1991); Grand Canal to Indian School Road, 64th to 59th Avenues (1992); Osborn to Indian School Roads, 59th to 55th Avenues (1991); Osborn to Indian School Roads, 55th to 51st Avenues (new construction for ballpark).

Are there any alleys in the neighborhood?

Yes, there are alleys throughout the neighborhood. Alley conditions were included as part of the neighborhood housing conditions survey conducted by the Neighborhood Preservation Division in August 2004. This survey indicated that 16.8% of the alleys in the neighborhood showed minor weed, grass, and trash violations.

Does the neighborhood have adequate street lighting?

The City of Phoenix Street Light Policy generally recommends that street lights be placed approximately 250 feet apart. In areas where there are crime, security and/or traffic concerns, the Street Transportation Director may determine that street lights may be spaced at less than 250 feet or that existing street lights may be upgraded to a higher intensity than the typical residential street light. The Street Transportation Department will prepare a street light survey for the neighborhood if residents identify street lighting as one of their budgetary priorities. Such a survey would show the location of existing street lights and proposed locations for additional lighting.

Are there any issues related to the facilities and services provided by the Street Transportation Department not addressed above that are a problem in the neighborhood?

According to the Streets Transportation Department, there are some sidewalks in need of repair in the neighborhood, but the general condition of the area is good.


Traffic Patterns and Volumes Are there any traffic problems in the neighborhood?

A study of 64th Drive between Amelia Avenue and Picadilly Road was conducted in October 2003. This study showed that 64th Drive carries 2,391 vehicles per day, which exceeds the maximum desired threshold for a local street of 1,000 vehicles per day. Two speed humps were installed in April 2004. A study of Clarendon Avenue between Indianola Avenue and 57th Avenue was conducted in December 2002. This study showed that 64th Drive carries 1,031 vehicles per day, which exceeds the maximum desired threshold for a local street. Two speed humps were installed in June 2003.

Are there any documented levels of cut-through traffic in the neighborhood?

It is often an indication that a local street is experiencing unusually high levels of cut-through traffic when total traffic exceeds 100 vehicles per hour or 1,000 vehicles per day. The Street Transportation Department has documented local street traffic volumes above this level on 64th Drive and Clarendon Avenue.

Are there any documented levels of heavy truck and/or commercial traffic in the neighborhood?

There are no documented unusual levels of truck and/or commercial traffic in the neighborhood.

Is there a residential parking program in effect or proposed in the neighborhood?

There is no residential parking program in effect or proposed for the neighborhood.

Infrastructure

Water What is the availability of water within the neighborhood?

According to the Water Services Department, City of Phoenix water service is available throughout the neighborhood.

Are there areas within the neighborhood targeted for the city's Water Main Replacement Program (WMRP)?


Currently no funds are targeted for any specific areas in this neighborhood.

Are there any recent Capital Improvement Program (CIP) water main projects within the neighborhood?

There are no CIP water main replacement projects within the neighborhood.

Sanitary Sewer What is the availability of sanitary sewers within the neighborhood?

According to the Water Services Department, sanitary sewer service is available in the streets/alleys throughout the neighborhood.

Are there areas within the neighborhood targeted for the city's Small Diameter Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation Program?

There are no areas in this neighborhood targeted for the Small Diameter Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation Program.

Storm Drainage Is any part of the neighborhood located within a designated floodplain?

Areas of the neighborhood north of the Grand Canal and north of Osborn Road are located within the 100-year floodplain.

Are there any areas subject to unusual flooding in the neighborhood?

A Fairmount Avenue residence set below street-level grade has experienced flooding and drainage problems. Maricopa County Flood Control District (FCDMC) constructed a detention basin as a first phase approach for addressing flooding issues in the area. No recent complaints have been filed since the construction of the detention basin.

Are there any unique storm drainage issues not addressed above that are a problem in the neighborhood?

There are no other documented unique storm drainage issues that are a problem in the neighborhood.

Public Safety

Police Protection Which police precinct serves the neighborhood?

The neighborhood is served by the Maryvale Precinct, located at 6180 W. Encanto Blvd.


Has the number of reported crimes in the neighborhood increased or decreased during the past three years?

The number of reported crimes in the neighborhood has decreased overall by 5% since 2001. The total number of crimes committed in the neighborhood during each of the past three years was 650 in 2001, 671 in 2002 and 616 in 2003.

Which crime rates for the neighborhood are more than 10% above or below the city averages?

The crime rate is the number of crimes per 1,000 persons. The following crime rates are based on estimated city and neighborhood populations for 2003. The neighborhood’s 2003 crime rate of 113.3 per 1,000 persons was 30% higher than the city crime rate of 87.2 per 1,000 persons. In 2003, the neighborhood crime rates exceeded the city crime rates for the following crimes by 10% or more: homicide (100%), sexual assault (40%), aggravated assault (126.3%), robbery (136%), theft (57.6%), auto-theft (43.8%), drug crime (29.7%), gang crime (50%) and domestic violence (62%). On the other hand, neighborhood crime rates were more than 10% below city crime rates for only burglary (-27.1%). Crimes reported by the Police Department are recorded for each applicable category. For example, a robbery that is determined to be gang related would be recorded as both a robbery and a gang crime. Figure 7 shows crimes by type per 1,000 persons for both the neighborhood and the city in 2003. Calls for police service (not necessarily resulting in a reported crime) in the neighborhood were above the city rate by 9% in 2003. There were 676.8 calls for service per 1,000 persons in the neighborhood versus 620.2 for the city.

2003 Crimes per 1,000 Population

8.3

0.53.8

22.4 23.3

5.9

20.416.2

33.5

0.4 0.7

8.6

35.3

0.90.22.5

28

6.410

0.60.05.0

10.015.020.025.030.035.040.0

Hom

icid

e

Sexu

alAs

saul

t

Aggr

avat

edAs

saul

t

Rob

bery

Burg

lary

Thef

t

Auto

The

ft

Dru

g C

rime

Gan

g C

rime

Dom

estic

Viol

ence

Crim

e

Type of Crime

Crim

es P

er 1

000

Neighborhood City

Figure 7


Have any crime prevention programs been established in the neighborhood?

The Maryvale precinct reports that the following crime prevention programs have been established in this neighborhood: Sunset Knoll Neighborhood Association, Maryvale UNITE and Marivue Neighborhood Association.

Are there any unique situations not addressed above that are a problem in the neighborhood?

The citizens in the neighborhood West of 6300 W. Indian School Rd. have requested additional street lighting, as well as the replacement of older fixtures, to assist in reducing criminal activity in the area.

There has been a gang problem in this community for several years. The “West Side Chicanos 64th” have blighted the area for several years with graffiti and other activities. Currently, a gang squad is working in the area to address the problem.

The low income housing area, Cypress Gardens, encompassing 67th Ave. to 71st Ave. from W. Osborn to W. Clarendon, continues to have issues with burglaries, car thefts, and narcotics. Three homes on 3100 N. 69th Drive continue to operate as half-way homes for recovering drug addicts and alcoholics. The homes are less then a block away from Davidson Elementary School, 6900 W. Flower and Osborn Streets.

Neighborhood concerns west of 5100 Indian School Rd. include: abandoned vehicles, vehicles for sale on residential streets and private parking lots, graffiti, and drug houses. Mobile vendors in the neighborhoods and shopping centers are also a huge concern.

Fire Protection Which fire station serves the neighborhood?

This area is primarily served by Fire Station 25 (FS25), located at 4010 North 63rd Avenue. FS25 is staffed with a total of 12 personnel operating a Basic Life Support (BLS) Engine Company (E25) and an Advanced Life Support (ALS) Engine Company (E725), and Ambulance (R25), and a Command Officer (BC3).

What is the typical response time from this fire station to the neighborhood?

The average first unit response time in this Fight Back area for FY2003-04 was four minutes and 41 seconds, which is slightly lower than the City-wide average of four minutes and 56 seconds. The Fire Department goal is a mean response time of three minutes.

Are there any water pressure problems in providing fire service to the neighborhood?

The Fire Department is not aware of any water pressure or water supply problems in the neighborhood.

Are there any known fire hazards in the neighborhood?


The Fire Department is not aware of any unusual fire hazards in the neighborhood. Is there an above average number of fire and/or emergency medical service calls in the neighborhood?

In FY2003-04, calls for service in the neighborhood were made at a rate of 209.4 emergency calls per 1,000 persons (as enumerated in the 2000 census). This rate was 118% above the city average of 95.7 calls per 1,000 persons. There were 970 calls for service within this Fight Back neighborhood. Of these calls, 613 were emergency medical with vehicle accidents accounting for 181 calls, 67 were fire calls with 7 reported structure fires and 11 car or vehicle fires. In FY2003-04, the Fire Department responded to 17 assaults, 11 gunshot wounds, and 14 overdoses within this Fight Back area.

Community Facilities

Parks and Recreation Which neighborhood park serves the neighborhood?

Marivue Community Park, located at 5625 West Osborn Road, and Maryvale Baseball Park, located at 3600 North 51st Avenue, serve the neighborhood.

What amenities do these parks offer?

Marivue Park offers a covered playground, lighted basketball and volleyball courts, a swimming pool, softball fields, soccer fields, ramadas, and restrooms. Maryvale Baseball Park, the spring training home of the Milwaukee Brewers, offers a stadium with a capacity of 8,000 seats, seven practice baseball fields, media rooms, a clubhouse, and a public plaza utilized for special events.

What types of recreation programs are provided at these parks?

Marivue Park offers soccer, softball, swim team and classes. Maryvale Baseball Park offers Opportunities Through Baseball, a Free Diamondbacks youth baseball clinic, tryouts for area youth to attend a free baseball clinic, a Light Up the Sky Festival, an Annual Independence Community Festival with free activities (entertainment and fireworks).

What is the nearest community center to the neighborhood?

Maryvale Community Center, which is under construction and will open in the late summer of 2004, is located at 4420 North 51st Avenue, which is located approximately one-half mile north of this neighborhood.

What types of services are available at these community centers?

Maryvale Community Center will offer dance classes, weight programs, basketball, volleyball, special interest classes (such as aerobics, arts and crafts, music, drama, and


karate), teen programs, senior and adult classes (such as cards, Tai Chi, ceramics, and bingo), and “productions” in the auditorium.

Are there any outreach services available in the neighborhood?

The John F. Long Family Services Center, located at 3454 North 51st Avenue, provides onsite services to meet the needs of low-income Phoenix residents.

Are there any recent recreational programs, grants, or activities in the neighborhood that are no longer offered or have been completed?

The Parks and Recreation Summer Program at Maryvale High School, due to a request by the school principal citing scheduled maintenance needs for the school and budgeting issues, will not be offered in 2003.

Library Which library serves the neighborhood?

This neighborhood is served by the Palo Verde Branch Library, 4402 North 51st Avenue.

What programs and activities are offered at this library?

The following programs and activities are offered at this library: • Computers with Internet access and Microsoft Office products for public use • Free computer classes • Story time • Special programs for all age groups • Summer reading programs for children and teens • Winter reading program for children • Phoenix Poetry Society • Meeting room for rental by community groups A groundbreaking for a new library to replace this branch at the same location was held in July 2003. The new Palo Verde Library/Maryvale Community Center Complex is scheduled for completion in the late summer of 2004.

Social Services What is the nearest family services center to the neighborhood?

The John F. Long Family Services Center (JFLFSC) is the nearest center to the neighborhood and is located at 3454 North 51st Avenue.

What types of services are available at the John F. Long Family Services Center?

Services provided through the Human Services Department’s Family Services Centers include a broad range of emergency and social problem-solving services designed to promote individual and family self-sufficiency, including: information and referral; emergency financial assistance (primarily for utility, rent or mortgage needs); emergency


food boxes; case management services to address the underlying or more complicated issues resulting in the current crisis; employment and training counseling and referral; and bus tokens for other medical, social service, and employment-related appointments. In addition, one special program is provided for unique populations. Family Self-Sufficiency assists residents of public housing.

In addition to the general services described above, the JFLFSC is also the location for several community-based programs, including: Catholic Social Services of Phoenix, English as a Second Language through the Gary Tang Adult Education Center, Quest Alliance, Southwest Human Development/Healthy Families Maricopa County, The Salvation Army, African Association of Arizona, and the Valley-Community Revitalization Project.

What other facilities service the neighborhood?

The Parks and Recreation Department and Senior Services Division occupy the Desert West Community Center in the same building as the Desert West Senior Center, 6501 W. Virginia. This site provides recreational and educational programs for youth and all ages of adults.

The following are other facilities that service the West Phoenix area: Department of Economic Security Family Assistance-Food Stamps, 5030 West McDowell Road; Department of Economic Security Job Service-Maryvale, 3406 North 51st Avenue; Chicanos por la Causa - Phoenix Centro De La Familia, 4622 West Indian School Road; Chicanos por la Causa- Phoenix Westside Training Center, 2916 North 35th Avenue; Maricopa County Health Primary Care Clinic, 4011 North 51st Avenue; Westside Senior Center, 4343 West Thomas Road. The Department of Economic Security Family Assistance office is located at 4016 North 67th Avenue. The Maricopa County W.I.C. office is located at 4002 North 67th Avenue.

Are there any specific services for youth, elderly or the disadvantaged in the neighborhood?

Residents in this area can access Head Start services through the Cartwright School District, located at 5480 W. Campbell Avenue. Head Start is a comprehensive child development program which serves children three to five years of age and their families. It is a child focused program and has the overall goal of increasing the social competence of young children in low-income families. The program provides a range of individualized services in the areas of education, health and nutrition, parent involvement, family social services, disabilities and mental health. The City also provides a directly operated program for working families that specializes in providing full-day, full-year child care opportunities in conjunction with Head Start services. The following youth programs are available to all city of Phoenix residents: • Operation Attendance Is Mandatory provides human services resources to youth ages 6

and 7 years and their families who have violated school attendance (in conjunction with Parks and Recreation, Police, and Prosecutor’s Departments).

• STEP-UP serves young fathers between the ages of 16 and 26 years by providing education, employment, and parenting services.

• Young Families CAN provides educational, employment, and parenting services to teen mothers between the ages of 13 and 19.

• Young First Offender provides an early intervention alternative for juveniles between the ages of 8 and 12 years from being processed through the Juvenile Court by offering


workshops, case management, and community service (in conjunction with Parks and Recreation Department).

Two senior centers provide services in this area: • Desert West Senior Center is located at 6501 West Virginia Avenue in the Desert West

Community Center. This center currently provides the array of services offered by the Senior Services Division, including congregate and home delivered lunch meals and other supplemental food and nutrition programs, educational opportunities, recreation and socialization programs, information, referral, resource specialists, advocacy, and transportation. Additionally, services for the elderly are provided throughout the city of Phoenix by the PACE Counseling and the Senior Companion Programs. PACE utilizes caseworkers stationed at various sites to help senior adults solve their problems by matching their needs to available resources.

• Westside Senior Center is located at 4343 West Thomas Road. This center currently

provides the array of services offered by the Senior Services Division, including congregate meals, educational opportunities, recreation and socialization programs, information, referral, resource specialists, advocacy, and transportation. Additionally, services for the elderly are provided throughout the city of Phoenix by the PACE Counseling and the Senior Companion Programs. PACE utilizes caseworkers stationed at various sites to help senior adults solve their problems by matching their needs to available resources.

What unique needs are being served in the neighborhood?

Area programs provide services for a wide range of populations and needs. At this time, there are no unique needs being served in the neighborhood.

Are there any specialized transportation services provided to the neighborhood?

Dial-A-Ride is a same-day, demand-response transportation system, providing door-to-door transportation in Phoenix to any destination.

Reserve-A-Ride is directly operated by the Human Services Department Senior Services Division. Reserve-A-Ride provides door-to-door transportation in Phoenix and requires registration with the system and a two-working-day advance reservation. The primary purpose is to transport seniors to senior centers, medical appointments and other social service agencies.

Are there any recent programs, grants or activities in the neighborhood that are no longer offered or have been completed?

There are no recent social services programs, grants, or activities in this neighborhood that are no longer offered or have been completed.


Public Transportation Which transit routes serve the neighborhood?

Route 41 operates daily along Indian School Road from Dysart Road to Granite Reef Road. Major destinations along this route are Estrella Mountain Community College and Desert Sky Mall. The bus runs weekdays from 5:00 am to midnight, every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 4:45 am and 10:15 pm, every 60 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 6:10 am and 8:35 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 430 on weekdays, 190 on Saturdays, and 130 on Sundays. Route 51 operates daily along 51st Avenue from Roosevelt Street to Thunderbird Road. A major destination along this route is Arizona State University West. The bus runs weekdays between 5:00 am and 8:45 pm with a frequency of every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 5:50 am and 7:25 pm, every 60 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 5:50 am and 7:35 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 60 on weekdays, 20 on Saturdays, and 14 on Sundays.

Route 59 operates daily along 59th Avenue from Buckeye Road to Utopia Road. A major destination along this route is Glendale Community College. The bus runs weekdays from 5:35 am to 9:35, every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 6:05 am and 9:25 pm, every 30 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 5:55 am and 8:55 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 80 on weekdays, 35 on Saturdays, and 16 on Sundays. Route 67 operates daily along 67thth Avenue from Buckeye Road to Bell Road. A major destination along this route is Arrowhead Towne Center. The bus runs weekdays from 6:15 am to 9:55 pm, every 30 minutes. Saturday service is between 6:10 am and 9:55 pm, every 30 minutes. Sunday and holiday service is between 6:20 am and 9:20 pm, every 60 minutes. The estimated numbers of daily neighborhood boardings are 100 on weekdays, 50 on Saturdays, and 25 on Sundays.

Which park-and-ride lot serves the neighborhood?

The Park-and-Ride lot located at the Maryvale Commercial Center, which is located at the northwest corner of 53rd Avenue and Indian School Road, serves the neighborhood.

Is there a demand for Dial-a-Ride services in the neighborhood?

Dial-a-Ride usage by area is not available. If ridership were distributed evenly by geographic area, only one or two boardings would be expected daily in the neighborhood. Dial-a-Ride service is provided throughout the neighborhood to seniors and persons with disabilities. Weekday services hours are 5 am to midnight. On weekends and holidays, service is available from 5 am to 10 pm. Service for Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) eligible persons is provided during the same hours as the regular Dial-a-Ride.


Choices on the Edge: Maryvale Community Assessment


The Juvenile Justice System in Maricopa County

The Juvenile Justice System in Maricopa County is responsible for protecting the community from juvenile criminal activity, assisting victims and their families, offering counseling and rehabilitation services to juvenile

ff d t ti hild h h

Over-Representation in Arizona In Arizona, minority youth often have less favorable outcomes than Anglo youth who commit comparable offenses. Nearly 1 in 12 Hispanic youth, nearly 1 in 6 African American youth, and nearly 1 in 9 Native American youth in Maricopa County are referred to the juvenile justice system Among White youth 1 in

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Choices on the Edge: Maryvale Community Assessment Almost no place in Phoenix is without troubled youth on the edge between a positive path and a life of hard times. Fortunately, people who want to help can be found in nearly every neighborhood. Because one historic portion of west Phoenix clearly has both, the Arizona Building Blocks Initiative chose three neighborhoods there in which to test a “hands on” approach to improving the circumstances that may affect young people’s options and choices. The Arizona Supreme Court, Maricopa County Juvenile Court, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections, Arizona Juvenile Justice Commission, Phoenix Police Department, Governor’s Division for Children, Cartwright School District, and other entities concerned with minority youth’s disproportionate presence in the juvenile justice system sponsor the Arizona Building Blocks Initiative. The Arizona Supreme Courts’ Juvenile Justice Services Division coordinates and staffs the project’s numerous components. With state and local leadership, Building Blocks works to rectify the over-representation of minority youth in the justice system. Building Blocks stands on the foundation that community changes play a significant part in reducing the number of minority youth in the justice system. Thus, community assessment—as done in Maryvale—is an important facet of any Building Blocks initiative. Choices on the Edge presents the results of the Maryvale Community Assessment, which was implemented from August 2002 through June 2003. Significant insights and assistance came from many Maryvale residents and leaders, community and school organizations, Arizona Supreme Court staff members, and others. To help achieve the Building Blocks goals, the community assessment sought to:

• Uncover community strengths, resources, needs and priorities

• Create a common understanding of youth and family issues

• Identify strategies for community improvements and juvenile justice changes

• Encourage community involvement in activities that benefit residents,

especially youth and families The assessment included reviews of previous community studies, discussions, and focus groups with stakeholders, parents and youth, and a community planning effort. More than 100 community members and service providers participated. The Maryvale assessment is the first Building Blocks has undertaken in Arizona, and the lessons learned from this process are expected to inform and support other such activities throughout the state.


Maryvale and Three Specific Places

The assessment focused on three neighborhoods in Maryvale: 27th Avenue—(Target Area 3) the most “inner city” of the three areas 51st Avenue—(Target Area 1) the center of the original Maryvale 67th Avenue—(Target Area 2) the most “suburban” feel

Taken Together The neighborhoods share 7 characteristics that relate to the Building Blocks community focus.

• Primarily Latino, Yet Diverse –Latinos comprise the majority of residents in these areas. In contrast, Whites (non-Hispanic) account for 55 percent of Phoenix’s population.

• Young and Younger—Children under 18 years of age comprise nearly 40 percent of the focus areas’ population, compared to 31 percent for Phoenix as a whole.

• Family Places—Family households account for more than 80 percent of households compared to 66 percent in Phoenix overall.

• On the Economic Edge—More than 40 percent of residents under age 17 live in poverty, compared to 36 percent in Maricopa County.

• Educational Issues—Educational attainment among adults in these neighborhoods is much lower than for the Phoenix metropolitan area.

• Experienced with Justice Systems—All three areas have higher juvenile drug and gang-related crime rates than does Phoenix.

• Resources and Assets—Maryvale has a wide array of places and organizations designed to meet residents’ social needs such as parks, libraries, recreation centers, non-profit and government agencies, health facilities, and churches. In addition, Maryvale has more neighborhood associations than many other Phoenix areas.

Community Assessment Outcomes

Insights in Four Areas Assessment efforts in the Maryvale neighborhoods sought to determine if knowing more about the inner workings of a community would reveal potential changes that could positively affect youth and juvenile justice. The answer is a resounding “Yes.” The assessment yielded a wealth of insights, ideas, and possibilities in the areas of:

• Youth • Families

Maryvale Neighborhoods


• Community • Juvenile Justice

Maryvale clearly has some strong leaders, positive organizations, and numerous steps worthy of pride in all of the neighborhoods. However, these assets are less valuable than they might be because of: 1) Inconsistencies in the way they are being used in the community and how issues are addressed; and 2) Gaps between services available and the needs of local residents. On the other hand, consensus about what should happen and a willingness to join to begin to do a better job are present.

Community Perspectives Five themes stand out from focus groups with almost 60 parents and youth, most of which had experience with juvenile justice. The groups included African American, White, and Latino participants with the greatest number being Latino.

What Experts Say Is True Numerous studies in recent years have shown a variety of characteristics, such as low school achievement, domestic violence, learning problems, and truancy to be prevalent among those involved in the juvenile justice system and to often serve as catalysts for community initiatives. The discussions in Maryvale illustrated these widely accepted findings.

The Luck of the Draw Based on these discussions, consistency is missing in a number of institutions. In fact, according to respondents, one’s experience with judges, police, services, or schools is simply “the luck of the draw.” Limited knowledge of community resources for assistance heightens the feeling of almost randomness of experience.

What’s There to Do? Drugs, guns, and gangs are prevalent in the neighborhoods according to adults and youth. Yet, neighborhoods reportedly offered few constructive activities, particularly for older teens. Youth clearly wanted to see more to do. In an exercise where they were asked to rate a list of activities, “jobs” was ranked first followed by “kick back Fridays (music, food, friends).”

Less-Than-Wonderful Places Every place has positives and negatives. What stood out in these groups, however, was the feeling that Maryvale neighborhoods and teens themselves were “forgotten.” Some teens felt adults simply assumed they were adults and, thus, they felt ignored by those who should have been guiding them.

Some Good Ideas and Options The groups agreed that much could be done to change the negative situations they perceived and discussed. When asked about activities needed in Maryvale, both youth and parents ranked “job and training opportunities” the top priority. Youth also favored “teen centers” and “prevention programs to keep kids out of trouble.” Parents ranked training on survival skills and sporting activities second, followed by after-school programs. Community stakeholders identified similar priorities, including after-school programs, job and training opportunities, and tutoring and academic enrichment.


“I think the reason all these kids are getting into gangs is cause you don’t really have

that many programs in Phoenix that we like.”

“There’s good cops and there’s bad cops. Some cops are cool, but….” “You’ve got some that are cool and will talk to you and they might let you go on a warning, and you’ve got some’ll beat you down for the heck of it.” “They judge you when they see you. They don’t get to know you, they just judge you.”

Community Assessment Findings Of course, individuals’ outlooks provide just one piece of the puzzle. Indeed, all of the information, taken together, points to common themes in the areas of youth, families, community, and juvenile justice—including inconsistent efforts and gaps in services.

Youth: Inconsistent Efforts

Handling Truancy Many respondents identified truancy as a top issue for Maryvale families. A “gateway” offense, truancy is the first sign of trouble. Many truants are unlikely to engage in more serious activities; however, those who do typically begin with truancy. Efforts to reduce truancy in Maryvale include Operation AIM in the Cartwright School District, CUTS at Trevor Browne High School, and Carl Hayden Community High School’s school-specific efforts. Other schools do little to combat truancy, however. In fact, many parents complained that they were not being told of their child’s absences from school. Officials reported achieving some success in reducing truancy, yet the larger issues not addressed include keeping kids in school, preventing dropouts, and raising the value of education. Doing so may require collaborative approaches as well as a comprehensive array of community resources, redefining truancy as a community, rather than juvenile court issue, and rebuilding relationships with parents and youth who have had negative school experiences.

Positive Things for Teens to Do A lack of youth activities is perhaps one of the most serious, yet solvable, problems in Maryvale. Available youth programs focus mainly on elementary- and middle school-aged youth. Few

programs or services provide safe, attractive activities for teenagers that truly appeal to them. As one teen recommended, “talk to teens to find out what we like to do on time off.” Opportunities exist for establishing relevant teen centers in Maryvale including at Marivue Park—where completion of renovations are expected by late 2004—and for collaborations

among Marivue Park, Desert West Community Center, and Chicanos Por La Causa’s new community center in the 27th Avenue area.

Use of Services and Programs Participation varies widely in youth services and programs. Some youth programs operate at or above capacity, while some operate below capacity. For example, just 20–25 young people visit the Desert View PAL Center per day. On the other hand, respondents noted that Big Brothers/Big Sisters has a three-year waiting list for their mentoring program.

Police Responses to Youth Young people voiced strong feelings about the police and concerns that police officers stereotype youth of color and treat them differently from others. Another concern was that some police officers considered Latino or African-


“I need a job for my life.”

American youth to be gang members based on the clothes they wore, their language or other factors unrelated to their actual behavior. The police could strengthen community policing by increasing officers’ positive interactions with youth.

Youth: Gaps in Services

After-School Programs After-school programs came up frequently as one of the greatest needs in Maryvale. Despite a number of efforts in schools, churches, and recreation facilities, the perception is that it is simply not enough, particularly for older youth.

Job and Vocational Training Opportunities No issue has more agreement than this one. Everyone wants to see more employment options for youth, but students and parents alike complain about few opportunities. Tutoring and Academic Enrichment Some Maryvale students do not do well in school for a variety of familiar reasons, from unidentified learning disabilities to limited English to family responsibilities. Students who have difficulties in school are more likely to become truant and drop out. Low student achievement in Maryvale indicates the need for substantial improvement in learning.

Prevention Efforts for the Under-10 Set Service prevention providers, and even young people themselves, say that prevention efforts should focus on the very young. This corresponds to prevention research that indicates relatively small investments early on in the development of at-risk children can translate into large savings later.

Strong Role Models and Mentoring Adolescents often look to peers, and others, as role models and the assessment neighborhoods appeared tightly knit in some ways. The lack of strong role models in Maryvale, though, concerned many. For some young Latinos especially, the pool of adult social support is rather limited. Lack of Documentation for Some Youth A complicating factor in Maryvale is the fact that a number of teens lack documentation of citizenship or legal status. Through no fault of their own, they are unable to qualify for a driver’s license or gain access to opportunities others their age enjoy.

Families: Inconsistent Efforts

ESL Supply and Demand The large number of speakers of Spanish and other languages in Maryvale creates a significant demand for English as a Second Language (ESL) instruction. Numerous providers in the area attempt to fill the need, however, tailoring services to users’ needs and desires occurs infrequently.

Help with Parenting Skills and Involvement Many Maryvale families, particularly those with delinquent children, are struggling to cope with numerous issues, including divorce, low incomes, low formal educational levels, clash of


cultures, drug abuse, and gang membership. For these and other reasons, many parents exhibit poor parenting skills. More parents need access to support systems such as parenting classes, ESL instruction, translation assistance, after-school programs, job training, and transportation.

Parent Resource Centers A few schools and districts operate parent resource centers to help immigrant and other parents develop stronger ties to schools and obtain the assistance they need. However, some immigrant parents, particularly those with limited English skills, may still feel isolated from schools. Family-Centered Services Stakeholders in Maryvale seem to agree that families who are experiencing stress, and children who may be at risk for delinquency, respond best to service models that emphasize strength-based, wraparound, and in-home strategies. Some agencies serving Maryvale families fully embrace this so-called Arizona Practice Model (as adopted by the state in the J.K. Settlement Agreement, March 2001). Other agencies have been slow to adopt this widely promoted approach. Cultural Competency in Family Services Cultural competency refers to actions agencies take to improve services for minority children, youth, and families. In Maryvale, cultural competency varies widely among family-serving agencies, despite the diversity of the population and the large number of residents with limited English skills.

Families: Gaps in Services

Informing Recent Immigrants of Youth Issues, Schools, and Laws Many new immigrants arrive in Maryvale with little understanding of U.S. culture and the complexities facing young people today. This results in a serious parental knowledge gap about children facing gangs, illegal drugs, violence, and a different “culture” of poverty. Educating new arrivals and referring them to services which could smooth the transition into the community requires developing new communication strategies. Bilingual Family Services and Programs Bilingual capabilities of family agencies vary as do cultural competency. A lack of Spanish-speaking staff represents a major barrier to monolingual residents, particularly those with multiple needs. Residents and providers perceived a bilingual environment was more effective. Bilingual Parenting Education and Training Parenting education and training placed as one of the top needs of Maryvale families. Such programs may help parents improve their disciplinary methods, in addition to children’s behavior and problem-solving skills. Research consistently shows that certain features of family relationships play a major part in the initiation of serious offending.

Community: Inconsistent Efforts

Inclusive Community Leadership Long-term residents, who have given countless hours to their neighborhoods, run most community groups in Maryvale. Few of these associations have been able to attract substantial Latino involvement and “grow” Latino leaders, resulting in community divisions.


Faith-based Involvement in Community Services A Maryvale Ecumenical Association survey identified nearly 80 churches operating in the area. A number of religious institutions have deep roots in Maryvale and substantial facilities. A handful responded to a changing environment, but the faith-based community appears to be a valuable, yet underutilized, asset. Schools as “Center of the Community” Residents tend to identify with small, local areas, rather than Maryvale as a whole. This inward focus makes “the community” a rather small place in the minds of many. The concept of a neighborhood school serving as a “center of the community” may be suitable for Maryvale.

Community: Gaps in Services Collaboration among Professional and Community Institutions While some agencies work together on occasion, they plan and implement most community initiatives independently. At the same time, only a small proportion of residents are involved in neighborhood activities. True collaboration for community safety and quality of life is regrettably rare among the many government and community organizations, residents, and the private sector. Strategies to Reduce Youth Access to Guns Obtaining guns is easy “if you’ve got the money,” according to young people. Nearly all of the residents talked about hearing gunshots close to their homes and youth talked about their friends who carry guns regularly. A number of jurisdictions are developing innovative programs to reduce gun crime that Maryvale should consider (i.e., Project Safe Neighborhood, Weed and Seed, Gun Courts). Police Relations Work with Latino Community Latino residents hold strong feelings toward police. These feelings all too often are negative with people believing the police treat Latinos differently from White residents. At the same time, Latino residents want the police to give their neighborhoods the same attention they perceive the police give to other areas. The community would benefit from strategies designed to improve police-community relations.

Juvenile Justice: Inconsistent Efforts Accountability and Consequences in the Community As one parent said, “the prevention effort is working for some youth, but not for others.” This sentiment came up frequently whether the issue was accountability or services. Numerous people identified the need for greater accountability by the juvenile justice system. They referred to a number of concerns, including the need for consequences for wrongful acts that would teach the juvenile the concept of “giving back” to the community, stronger diversion programs, and sufficient counseling services. Access to Bilingual Information and Staff Only a few bilingual probation officers work in the juvenile court and few materials are printed in Spanish. In addition, according to officials, probation officers whose caseload includes monolingual parents (most young people speak English) have few communication options except for a telephone translation service or, if a bilingual colleague is available, asking him or her to attend a meeting with parents or translate a letter. Use of even these limited options, however, does not appear to be common.


Knowledge of Community Help for Youth and Families Typically by the time young people enter the juvenile justice system, they are exhibiting behaviors that require multiple responses. However, when asked how they determine to which community agencies juvenile or family members should be referred, probation and parole officers often responded that, “it’s hit or miss.” A resource guide that describes community services in Maryvale would be helpful to juvenile justice officials, police officers, and youth and families. Probation Experience Considering the stories and opinions, the “luck of the draw” determines one’s experience with probation. Some parents believed they and their child benefited overall; others thought the system made an already difficult situation worse. The issue of who is and is not eligible to receive services through the juvenile court is complex. Since probation officers make most referral decisions, they should understand the details of potential services, but it appears that some do not.

Juvenile Justice: Gaps in Services

Regular Communication between Frontline People in Justice and Treatment Agencies Communication between the probation department and service agencies seems to occur among high-level managers, while connections among frontline workers addressing the needs of children and families within a particular community appear to be tenuous. This situation appears to be the norm in Maryvale. Community-Based Support and Re-entry Programs for Youthful Offenders Stakeholders identified the need for additional services in the community to help keep juveniles from re-offending. Whether returning from correctional institutions or juvenile detention, young people invariably return to the same community, people, and circumstances they faced previously. They need support programs to transition to a healthier lifestyle.

Looking toward a Better Future for Maryvale Maryvale has been described as a community on the edge. Thus, the choices that leaders, residents, and service providers make in the near future will play a major part in whether this historic community begins to become a better place for youth and families. The Maryvale Community Action Plan presents the broad consensus across the community and identifies the organizations and people who can lead the processes of change.


Maryvale Action Plan Focuses on Areas of Consensus

Major Recommendations

Youth

Increase Awareness of and Chances for Employment and Training

Focus on Prevention with Special Emphasis on the Very Young

Increase Youth Participation in Teen Centers, Services and Programs

Reduce Truancy through Community Collaborations

Improve Interactions Between Youth and Police

Families

Devise Strategies for Communicating with Recent Immigrants

Match English as a Second Language (ESL) Learning with Customer Needs

Promote the Development and Expansion of Family-Centered Services

Expand Bilingual Parenting Training and Education

Ensure Local Services Operate in a Bilingual Environment

Community

Develop Multi-cultural Leadership

Improve and Develop Existing Community Facilities and Services

Increase Collaboration Among All of Those Concerned in Maryvale

Create Strategies to Reduce Youth Access to Guns

Increase Trust Among All Residents and Police

Juvenile Justice

Promote Proposal for the Team and Place Approach

Increase Cultural Competency Among Juvenile Justice Workers

Expand Communication and Cooperation Among All Involved with Youth

Augment Efforts to Prevent Re-offending and Support Individual Progress

Initiate Parent Support Programs in the Court

Assess Diversion Classes and Counseling Allotments A look at the Action Plan reveals a close connection between what people and professionals said and what they want to accomplish. Considering the consensus, the focus on collaboration, and the continuing support from the Arizona Building Blocks Initiative, the odds are good that soon Maryvale will have come back from the edge and renewed its founder’s commitment to being a good place for youth and families.


Attitudes toward Programs, Identification of Barriers, and

Suggestions to Improve Parent Involvement


Executive Summary

Attitudes toward Programs, Identification of Barriers, and Suggestions to Improve Parent Involvement

January 2004

Sponsored by the Family Resource Center

Cartwright Elementary School District The intent of this research project was to identify barriers and concerns related to parent involvement in the educational achievement of their children at the Cartwright Elementary School District.

This report covers results from three rounds of research and data collection. First, interviews were conducted with 18 Cartwright School District Administrators and Board Members (hereafter referred to as school experts) in May and June of 2003. Second, survey responses from 72 community representatives, collected during July and August 2003, provided extensive information about the satisfaction and importance of parent involvement programs. Third, in November 2003, 34 community representatives returned a survey that asked them to rank 18 strategies to improve parent involvement.

Barriers and Constraints to Involvement Three barriers were identified by both school and community representatives: 1. Language differences were universally recognized as a significant barrier to effective

involvement Many individuals discussed the need for multi-lingual school staff and that parents must take advantage of opportunities to learn and practice English. The language barrier permeates much of the misperceptions between parents and the school district.

2. Lower Socioeconomic Status of parents and the challenges of the working poor

The reality of lower income parents places a great deal of stress on families to meet basic needs; engagement in school related activities are overshadowed by the fundamental necessity of earning a living.

3. Communication and expectation disconnect

Community and school experts recognized that the schools and parents are not effectively communicating. This encompassed negotiating expectations and practices for effective and viable parent involvement.


School experts identified two additional constraints: 4. No universal policy or definition of parent involvement within the district

Schools and principals are allowed to determine what involvement means for their campus and consequently the district has no mechanism to monitor or evaluate effective parent involvement.

5. Limited and scarce resources

Expanding or systematically strengthening existing parent involvement programs is constrained by limited resources.

Community representatives identified one more: 6. Personal parent responsibility

Many individuals expressed that parents need to be more engaged in their child’s education. They suggest that parents should make regularly interactions with teachers, administrators, and other children on their child’s campus a priority.

Recommendations for Overcoming Barriers Foster multi-language communities

Consistent with the overriding theme that language differences discourage parent involvement it is recommended that the Cartwright School District continue to support English language acquisition by non-English speaking parents. In addition, the school district should continue to accommodate Spanish language families by providing all written material in both English and Spanish. As well the school district should work to expand Spanish language competency on the school campuses among teachers, administrators, and staff.

Develop a common definition and shared expectations of parent participation The school district in all of its forms (teachers, administrators, staff, and board members) must individually and collectively work to negotiate expectations of parent involvement. This should happen with regular, consistent, and local involvement of parents. Together the school district and parents can set goals for engagement and better understand challenges and constraints experienced by each.

Support and encourage parents to assume their responsibility

Various strategies should be considered to help parents assume their role in the academic success of their children. This includes workshops and classes for parents covering such topics as how to be involved in school and how to help their child with schoolwork. In addition, school based resources such as parent liaisons, resource rooms, and childcare for siblings would advance parent involvement. This support needs to happen informally. Everyday on every school campus staff at the front desk, teachers, and principals can help parents recognize how they can be more involved.


Suggestions for Next Steps The constraints and barriers identified in this report are pervasive and unlikely to quickly disappear. Consequently, future practices should consider how best, within language and economic challenges, parents can become more engaged. We conclude that focused attention on the strategies proposed in this report will improve parent participation. In addition, we highly recommend continued discussion, refinement and development of strategies to encourage parent involvement. The 18 strategies developed for the second survey, clustered into the four key constraints of language differences, challenges of lower SES parents, parental involvement responsibilities, and communication and expectation disconnect provide a viable framework to engage conversation and discussion. The strategies need, however, to be more broadly vetted before they can be effectively implemented. The Family Resource Center could coordinate multiple mechanisms that would allow key constituents to contribute their perspective. Some specific examples include: • Community-based meetings with key school administrators and parents • Teacher workshops and meetings to discuss parent involvement • Expanded administration (e.g., teachers and parents) of a survey to rank and prioritize

potential strategies • School-based and district-wide committees and task forces to develop implementation

strategies for several key recommendations • Opportunities for school administrators to share best-practices and successful strategies Prepared by William Brown, Ph. D. Lisa Magaña, Ph. D. Robert Short, Ph. D. Tucker Brown, MA Arizona State University Center for Nonprofit Leadership & Management and Department of Chicano/Chicana Studies The full report is available at the Family Resource Center, Cartwright Elementary School District.


Concept Paper for the Organization and Structure of the Maryvale Alliance for

Community Initiatives


Concept Paper for the Organization and Structure of

the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives

A COALITION FOR COMMUNITY COLLABORATION AND ACTION

Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives

PO Box 23323 Phoenix, AZ 85063 Phone 602-284-4077 Fax 623-848-0901 E-Mail: [email protected]


Table of Contents

I. Table of Contents................................................................................................................................148

II. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................149

III. General Agency Description .............................................................................................................151

IV. History and Definition of the Current Situation............................................................................152

V. Goals and Objectives..........................................................................................................................155

VI. Products and Services .........................................................................................................................157

VII. Values and Philosophy .......................................................................................................................158

VIII. Organizational Structure ....................................................................................................................160

IX. Initiative Goals.....................................................................................................................................165

X. Operational Action Steps ...................................................................................................................166


Executive Summary

. The Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives (Maryvale Alliance) is a collaborative effort of over 40 organizations working towards enabling Maryvale residents to thrive and prosper in their community. The two main components are the Arizona Supreme Court Building Blocks Maryvale Initiative which was formed in 2000 to reduce overrepresentation of minority youth in the juvenile justice system and the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation which is focused on improving the well being of the community. In 2005, Building Blocks requested that the Revitalization Corporation act as the fiscal agent for one of its work groups. That work group became the Maryvale Alliance.

The Maryvale Alliance is a merger of the Youth & Family and the Community Building Blocks workgroups along with several new partnerships formed in 2005.

The purpose of the Alliance is to address the recommendations of the 2003 Maryvale Community Assessment which had been conducted as part of the Building Blocks Program. Other issues of concern to the residents of Maryvale will also be addressed. Concerns in the community to be focused on include juvenile delinquency, the drop out rate, truancy, community health and safety issues, housing, poverty and access to jobs.

Primary goals include empowering youth and families to reach their potential and offering youth meaningful life alternatives through diverse services and programs. These goals will be achieved by forging new partnerships to develop networks among service delivery systems. These networks create familiarity and camaraderie within the community and provide a community link between the service providers and those in need of their services. While our primary constituents are those in need, by providing quality and respectful service to them, we are serving the greater Maryvale community along with increasing the effectiveness of those who provide the services.

Through this collaboration, the largest ever assembled in the community, the lives of youth and the families of Maryvale will be improved by promoting or facilitating services that strengthen the family and community. The other Building Blocks workgroups will continue addressing juvenile justice and education along with a workgroup focusing on the overall research involved.


The strength of the organization comes from its common vision for the community and the commitment to work together on community wide initiatives brought forward by the Common Interest Action Teams. These initiatives will be worked on together by all the groups utilizing the broad based expertise in each of the action teams to addressing their segment of the overall community initiative. This wide spread involvement across all stakeholders in the community will help to insure the continued dedication and success of our efforts.


General Agency Description

The purpose of the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives (Maryvale Alliance) is to meet the recommendations described in the 2003 Community Assessment (Appendix I) and address other issues of concern for the residents of Maryvale.

The mission of Maryvale Alliance is to enable Maryvale residents to thrive and prosper in the community through the achievement of community based initiatives. We will do this by linking families with services, linking agencies with each other, creating service in the voids, and accessing funding for new and existing programs.

Vision Statement: The lives of youth, families and the community of Maryvale will be improved by promoting or facilitating services that strengthen the whole family and the community. Residents of the community will proudly say: “I’m from Maryvale. It’s a great place to live!”

Business Philosophy: Respect and dignity, equitable treatment, good stewardship and recognition of efforts will guide us as an organization in practicing our work and accomplishing our mission.

Key Leadership: The Maryvale Alliance is chaired by Dwight Amery, Executive Director of Maryvale Revitalization Corporation with vice chair Jan Sherwood, Director of Desert West Multigenerational Center and Park along with vital staffing from Lynn Wiletsky and Maria Dennis of the Administrative Office of the Courts’ Juvenile Justice Services Division of the Arizona Supreme Court. There are several community leaders and service providers that help make up the Steering Oversight Committee that lend their expertise to the Common Interest Action Teams.

Location: The Maryvale Alliance will share space in the John F Long Family Service Center with the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation and Valley Corporation beginning in July 2005. It is located at 3454 N 51st Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85031.


History and Definition of the Current Situation

The history of the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives is the story of the coming together of the work of at least three different organizations.

Maryvale UNITE was formed in 1992 as a neighborhood association in west Phoenix covering an area of Maryvale that is 1 mile by 1 ½ miles in size. Unite was incorporated in 1994 and 501(c)3 status was received in 1995. Three times between 1995 and 2000, Maryvale UNITE was named one of the top two neighborhood organizations in the nation by Neighborhoods USA for projects accomplished.

In November 2004 the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation was formed to take the activities of Maryvale UNITE to a higher level – all of the Maryvale area – from 43rd Avenue to 91st Avenue, from Camelback Road

to McDowell Road.

In November 2004, Articles of Amendment were filed with the Arizona Corporation Commission for the name change from Maryvale UNITE to Maryvale Revitalization Corporation. In that process the organization went from an all volunteer small scale organization to a larger, more encompassing organization with a paid executive director. Until all the paperwork has been processed by the State of Arizona, the organization needs to operate using both names.

The new organization has brought together all the facets of the community to work collaboratively on the common goal of beautifying, enhancing and improving our community. The Board of Directors includes


elected officials, faith based representatives, educators, business leaders, City of Phoenix staff and neighborhood leaders.

The Maryvale Revitalization Corporation has formed a partnership with the Maryvale Alliance for

Community Initiatives (Maryvale Alliance) and acts as their fiscal agent.

The Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives was created more directly as a result of the efforts of a program known as the Arizona Building Blocks Initiative.

In 2000, the Arizona Supreme Court created the Arizona Building Blocks Initiative (Building Blocks) to address the over-representation of minority youth in the juvenile justice system. The community of Maryvale, on the west side of Phoenix, was selected as the pilot site. Building Blocks is a partnership with the Maryvale community, Arizona Supreme Court, Arizona Supreme Court Commission on Minorities, Governor’s Office for Children, Youth and Families, Maricopa County Juvenile Court, Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections, Maricopa County Attorney, Maricopa Public Defender’s Office and the City of Phoenix Police Department. The Administrative Office of the Courts’ Juvenile Justice Services Division coordinates the Building Blocks Initiative. The Building Blocks Research Advisory Committee was created to collect and analyze juvenile justice systems data pertaining to over-representation. The Research Committee oversees a systems analysis of key decision points from the arrest stage through commitment/release from state juvenile corrections. The analysis targets policies and procedures that may inadvertently result in disproportionate minority contact with the juvenile justice system. The agencies involved are the Phoenix Police Department, Maricopa County Juvenile Court and the Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections.

In 2003, Building Blocks commissioned a community assessment on three targeted areas within Maryvale that were representative of the greater community. On May 6, 2003, over 65 representatives of public and nonprofit agencies, neighborhood associations, churches, and schools came together at a Community Workshop to review the findings of the Community Assessment. The Community Workshop’s main focus was to allow those with the greatest stake in the area to prioritize the community’s pressing challenges as identified in the report. The Community Assessment report, Choices on the Edge@, and an Executive


Summary in English and Spanish, is posted on the Arizona Supreme Court’s website www.supreme.state.az.us/jjsd/BB_Initiative.htm

Based on the findings and recommendations of the community assessment, the Building Blocks Governing Board established four action workgroups -- Youth and Families; Juvenile Justice; Community; and Education -- to develop and implement a holistic approach to address issues identified during the assessment and to reduce over-representation of minority youth in the justice system.

In 2004, the Youth and Families Workgroup merged with the Community Workgroup, which was a natural progression as Building Blocks moves to develop and implement programs and strategies identified during the community assessment phase. The workgroup is now known as the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives (Maryvale Alliance).

The Maryvale Revitalization Corporation (MRC) has agreed to be the Alliance’s fiscal agent for their community fund-raising efforts. The Maryvale Alliance was awarded a consultant through the Technical Assistance Program (TAP) grant sponsored by St. Luke’s Health Initiative to assist the Alliance in developing an organizational structure and business plan.

The Maryvale Alliance will continue to be an important element of the Building Blocks program to reduce over-representation of minority youth in the criminal justice system by providing a strong community within which children can grow and families can prosper.

http://www.supreme.state.az.us/jjsd/BB_Initiative.htm


Goals and Objectives

Maryvale Alliance Goals and Objectives:

Goal 1 - To empower Maryvale youth and families to reach their potential by promoting comprehensive integrated services in a safe, healthy and caring community.

Goal 2 - To offer youth and adults meaningful life alternatives through diverse services and programs.

Goal 3 - To forge new partnerships to develop networks and initiatives among service delivery systems.

Youth Objectives:

o Increased awareness of and changes for employment and training

o Focused attention on prevention with special emphasis on the very young

o Increased youth participation in teen centers, services and programs

o Reduced truancy through community collaborations

o Improved interactions between youth and police

Family Objectives:

o Strategies are devised for communicating with recent immigrants

o English as a Second Language (ESL) is matched with customer needs

o The development and expansion of family-centered services is promoted

o Expanded bilingual parenting training and education is available

o Local services operate in a bilingual environment

Community Objectives:

o Multi-cultural leadership is developed

o Existing community facilities and services are improved and developed


o Increased collaboration among all in Maryvale

o Reduced youth access to guns

o Increased trust among all residents and Police

Juvenile Justice Objectives

o Increased cultural competency among Juvenile Justice Workers

o Expanded communication and cooperation among all involved with youth

o Efforts to prevent re-offending and support individual progress are augmented

o Parent Support Programs in the Court are initiated


Products and Services

To achieve our Goals and Objectives, the Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives will provide:

• A communication link between existing services to people who need them

o A communication committee will utilize appropriate existing neighborhood groups, agencies such as schools and churches, local media and any other appropriate vehicles to get information to those who need it as well as informing the community of the work of the Maryvale Alliance

• A network/alliance of community providers/businesses, etc. to create familiarity and camaraderie within the community

o Monthly meetings are held where community providers/businesses can learn more about each others’ services and issues they face. This is the first opportunity for collaboration and assistance.

• A community problem solving vehicle that leads to cross functional work on community-wide initiatives.

o Three to Four Community Initiatives are selected by the Alliance and worked on by cross sector action teams. The Initiatives help the Alliance accomplish its objectives

• The identification and solicitation of funding/revenue sources to ensure the continuity/expansion of the existing programs as well as the addition of new ones.

o The Steering Committee will have a grant writing and fund raising component to identify and solicit funding for the Initiatives.


Values and Philosophy

Underlying our work we share the assumptions that: • Everyone feels they CAN make a positive difference in the community and the people who live here.

• Maryvale can be a great place to live!

• We have four major constituencies that we work with as an organization.

• With each constituency we have identified the values embedded in our relationship that will guide our work.

CONSTITUENCY VALUES EMBEDDED IN OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH EACH

CONSTITUENCY

MARYVALE

RESIDENTS WHO

NEED ASSISTANCE TO

THRIVE

• Are our primary customers

• Service provided with dignity and respect

• Caring

• Equitable treatment regardless of race, income, age, religion, sexual preference, gender within the appropriate laws and agency guidelines

GREATER MARYVALE • Creates community pride

• Promotes economic development

• Stabilizes the community

• Enhances safety

• Enhances opportunity for engagement

AGENCIES, ORGANIZATIONS,

BUSINESSES WHICH

PROVIDE SERVICES TO

MARYVALE

• Service Providers are our key stakeholders/our secondary customers

• Collaboration and cooperation


RESIDENTS • Synergy

• Community pride

• Equity among stakeholder groups/treated with equanimity/fairness

FUNDERS • Good stewardship

• High quality return on dollars

• Recognition/respect/gratitude

• Engagement beyond giving


Organizational Structure

a. The Maryvale Alliance will exist within the structure of the Maryvale Revitalization Corporation.

b. The Maryvale Alliance for Community Initiatives (MACI) will be open to all individuals and groups who are interested in pursuing the initiatives of the Alliance

i. Meetings will be held monthly to share information and hear progress on the initiatives

ii. It would be expected that most members would participate on one of the Common Interest Actions Teams (CATs)

c. A Steering and Oversight Committee (SOC) will coordinate the work

i. The SOC will be responsible for the approval of Initiatives that accomplish specific recommendations from the 2003 Community Assessment or other community issues.


ii. The SOC will be responsible for establishing baselines and measuring success on the Initiatives

1. Each of the initiatives will have a “champion”.

2. Through the work of an initiative “champion”, the SOC will be responsible for the coordination of the work across the CATs

iii. The SOC will be responsible for communicating to the public the selection of initiatives and progress on the initiatives.

iv. Bringing in additional resources for supporting the structure and to the work of the CATs and its members will be critical and fall to the leadership group

v. Membership of the SOC

1. Executive Director of the Maryvale Revitalization Corp (will chair for now)

2. A vice-chair

3. Secretary

4. Chairmen of each CAT

5. Initiative Champions (3-4)

6. Marketing Committee/Staff

7. Fund Raising Committee/Staff

d. Common Interest Action Teams (CATs) will be created from key community stakeholders/non-profits/business/government agencies/faith based organizations, etc.

i. Current CATs

1. Youth and Family Services

2. Public Safety

3. Employment

4. Health


ii. CATs propose initiatives for consideration of the SOC (for example: Public Safety could suggest “Reduce the drowning rate in Maryvale by 50% in 2006”).

1. If an initiative is approved, the CAT will be responsible for providing a “champion” who will oversee coordination of the actions across the other CATs

iii. CATs develop and execute plans in support of the approved initiatives

1. It would be expected that each of the CATs would support each of the initiatives in some way and submit their action plans to the SOC for approval and monitoring.

2. For example with the “prevent drowning” initiative, Youth and Family Services CAT could work through all their groups to get the message out to publicize the “water watcher” badge and request support for funding the printing and purchase of the badges. The Public Safety CAT could work with the Fire and Police Departments to conduct pool safety expos in collaboration with the Education CAT at all the Jr. High Schools.

iv. CATs can request communication and resource support from the SOC to assist in delivering their initiative plan

v. The chairman of each CAT sits on the SOC

e. CATs develop and suggest initiatives that can create the change required to achieve the “recommendations” using Table 28 of the Community Assessment (Plan for Collaboration and Action) as a starting place. Other community concerns are also possible initiative targets.

f. The SOC will approve 2 or 3 initiatives to be worked on collaboratively by all the CATs. The

initiatives will vary in length of time it will take to accomplish them.

g. CATs recruit and engage the appropriate community resources to achieve their desired outcomes

and develop action plans with dates and accountabilities in support of the approved initiatives.

h. CATs will report their progress to and can request assistance from the SOC for accessing

funding, communication or other resources.


i. And CATs can have their own initiatives if so desired.


Work culture

As ever evolving, ever changing, values driven groups of concerned citizens and providers interested in improving the quality of life in Maryvale we conduct our work in a timely and efficient, cooperative and collaborative, respectful manner.

Differentiation

• It’s focused on Maryvale, but similar to other successful neighborhood development groups.

• It’s focused on approved initiatives that will be able to demonstrate measurable change.

• Work on initiatives is done cross functionally through CATs but also works in collaboration with other groups within the community and within the Maryvale Community Revitalization Corporation.

Competitive advantage- We will engage the whole community. There is no competition; this is about collaboration.

•


Initiative Goals

Initiatives will be locally driven and developed, and will address

• Juvenile Delinquency

• Drop out rate

• Truancy

• Community Health and Safety issues

• Housing

• Poverty

• Access to Jobs

We will measure observable change in:

• Reduced numbers in the Juvenile Justice System

• Improvement in selected safety and health statistics

• Improvement in neighborhood appearance

• Reduction in unemployment rates of residents, particularly the youth.


Operational Action Steps

• Steering Committee needs to be officially convened.

• Initiatives need to be selected

• Action Plans from each of the CATs need to be developed using previously developed format

• CATs need to advise Steering Committee of resources needed

• Subcommittees of the Steering Committee needed to support the CATs, such as Communications and Fund Raising need to be formed and their action plans developed

• An operational plan and budget need to be developed

• A reporting format needs to be developed to be used at the monthly meetings to mark progress on the Initiatives


West Phoenix Revitalization Discussion Findings


Maryvale Block Watch Alliance

West Phoenix Revitalization Discussion Lisa Derrick, Facilitator

July 14, 2005

Participants were asked to propose what they would like to see Maryvale look like 5 years in the future. The following items were brought forward by the neighborhood leaders. These items were not rated by importance by the group so there is no priority to this list, it is an overall view. Parks Open All Day More And Higher Quality Retail (examples were Starbucks, Applebee’s) Maryvale Circulator Bus System New Theme Park Built Community Coming Together More ESL Classes to Meet Demand – This should be school systems responsibility Clean Neighborhoods Youth Activities No Cruising Outreach Groups Helping Each Other No Graffiti Increased Safety Diversity Participation Better Landscaped Streets – All Major Streets School Unification With Cartwright Elementary District, Maryvale & Trevor Browne New Housing Youth Opportunities, such as YMCA, Wesley type center, new Maryvale Multi-generational Center Encourage Health Walking Areas Family Education Performing & Excelling Schools Educating One Another Youth Opportunities for Life Longevity


Neighborhood leaders rankings of ideas for the future of the Maryvale community These are ranked by category first and then specifics within category People were given 3 blue for highest priority and 3 yellow for secondary priority For ranking purposes blue was 3 points and yellow was 1 point Category Item Blue Yellow Total Health Care 6 5 23 Affordable Health Care 1 3 6 Share Talents 1 3 More Health Fairs 2 2 School Education CPR 1 1 Help Each Other More Heath Care Safety & Security 5 7 22 Police Bike Patrols 1 3 Police More Visible 1 3 Police Foot Patrols 1 1 Clear Obstructions Intersections Police/Citizen Involvement Adequate Street Lighting Keep Graffiti Covered Up Hold People Accountable for Actions and Kids Actions More Police Create Graffiti Wall Enforce Curfews More Block Watches More Police Patrolling Neighborhoods Transportation 6 3 21 Maryvale Circulator Bus 2 3 9 More Busses Better Bus System Research Data on Busses Advertise Circulator Water Bill Discounts for Bus Riding Education 5 5 20 Unify Cartwright/2 High 5 1 16 Schools Providing ESL 1 3 ESL Comm. Action Team 1 3 Increased Funding 1 3 More After-School Programs Schools Report Child Abuse Housing Incentives for Teachers Immigrants Pay to Learn English More Grants


ESL Classes Asset Mapping - Abilities/Resources Volunteers English Class Aides Educational Resources in Presentations 12 Month School Year Community - Citizenship 4 5 17 Advertise Programs More Individual Involvement Willing to be Active Participant Know Your Neighbors - Needs, Wants, Concerns Block Parties, Diversity Participation Residents Watching Out for Children Residents Assist Elderly & Handicapped Distribute Information in English & Spanish Extend Helping Hand to Others Accountability - Report Crimes Seen Neighborhoods Responsible for Perimeters - Landscaping, Trash Business - Economics 4 12 Increase Job Training 3 9 Business Accept Hispanics 1 3 Honor Uncontained Timelines 1 3 New Jobs with Benefits & Required Residency Minority Leadership Development Program Summer Jobs for Youth Tax Incentives for Businesses Family Services 4 12 More Senior Centers 1 1 4 Help Each Other - Barter System 1 1 Fatherhood Look Out For One Another Information - Communication 4 12 Maryvale Newspaper 2 6 Share Resources in Newsletters 1 3 Expanded Grant Resource Education 2 2 More ESL Classes 1 1 Asset Mapping - Individual Block Watch Multi-cultural Specialists in NSD More Collaboration, New Partnerships Promote Great Ongoing Programs Leadership 2 3 9 Re-elect Tom Simplot 1 1 4 Elect Mattox as Next Mayor 1 3 Mentor New Citizens on Leadership 2 2 Work Together to Improve Phoenix 1 1 Good Leadership


Caring & Knowledgeable Leadership More Community Involvement How the City Works Workshops in Community Recreation 9 9 New Theme Park 1 3 New YMCA 1 1 More Youth Sports Teams 1 1 Maryvale Ball Park for Festivals 1 1 Food Fairs 1 1 More Lighting and Track Like Desert West at El Oso Parks in Every Neighborhood, Play and Tutoring More Parks Volunteer - Teach What You Know Walking Paths New/More Development in Parks Better Parks & Rec - City Wide Finish Desert West Park School Yards Open at Night With Lights Dog Parks Family Night Out Housing 1 2 5 Desert Landscaping 1 3 Affordable Housing 1 3 Out of State Residents 1 3 Affordable Housing - 1st Time Buyers 2 2 Equal Opportunity for All 1 1 Faith Based 1 1 4 Youth Groups of Diff. Faith Unite 2 6 Seek Help From Church Volunteers 1 3 Churches - Youth Activities, Tutoring, Responsible Parenting Block Watch Mass Walks More Youth Groups Public Works 3 3 Zoning Restrictions Business Fronts 1 1 Maintain Grass in Street & Uncontained Left Out Volunteer Committees to Maintain Streets Other 1 3 Embrace Hispanic Culture 1 1 4 Money 1 1 4 Landscape Grants for Low Income 1 1 More Citizen Involvement 1 1 City Money for Landscaping 1 1 Barter/Exchange of Services Become a Resource Yourself Get Your Neighbor Involved


Maintain Your Property Improved Street Maintenance Maryvale Public Relations Campaign Work Together Fines Issued for Littering Keep Clean Yards, No Junk Cars Committees for Everyone Increase Safety - Before it Expands Theme Park - Share Pride in Park


Maryvale UNITE Neighborhood Association West Phoenix Revitalization Discussion

July 21, 2005

Participants were asked to propose what they would like to see Maryvale look like 5 years in the future. The following items were brought forward by the residents. Dwight Amery, President and Gayle Slusser, Vice President did not list any items since they had participated in the Maryvale Block Watch Alliance discussion the week before. These items were not rated by importance by the group so there is no priority to this list, it is an overall view. Maryvale connection to light rail Shaded bus stops More trees in the parks Better maintained street landscaping Cleaner & better maintained residences Cleaner alleys More youth activities No graffiti Stricter enforcement on graffiti removal Block parties City employees reporting graffiti on city properties and utility poles & boxes More available immunizations & health care No junk/abandoned vehicles on the street or in yards Proactive preservation code enforcement Maryvale circulator bus Higher quality retail stores Improved street maintenance – fill the pot holes Funding assistance for property maintenance. (low/mod income home owners) Improved street landscaping


Residents rankings of ideas for the future of the Maryvale community These are ranked by category first and then specifics within category People were given 3 blue for highest priority and 3 yellow for secondary priority For ranking purposes blue was 3 points and yellow was 1 point Please note that some individual items may have rated high but not the category Category Item Blue Yellow Total Safety & Security 8 1 25 Concern about speeding at night in neighborhood More people involved in neighborhood watch More police patrols More visible police presence Housing 4 3 15 Removal of junk cars 2 1 7 Properties maintained - front & rear 1 2 4 Resident outreach increase knowledge 1 3 No cars parked in yards 1 3 Garbage cans off street after pickup Education 1 3 6 Classes for senior citizens 1 3 More ESL classes Beginning Spanish classes Health Care 4 4 CPR classes 1 1 4 Transportation 3 3 Light rail connection 1 1 4 Improved street landscaping 1 3 Clean up walls along streets 1 3 Shaded bus stops 1 3 Cleaner alleys 1 3 Streets repaired 1 3 Recreation 3 3 More activities for seniors 1 1 Other 2 2 Quicker graffiti removal 1 2 5 More senior centers 1 3 Existing landscaping maintained 1 1 Community/Citizenship 1 1 More concerns for seniors


Business/Economics Better selection of stores 1 3 Public Works Lower water bills 5 15


Appendix E

Key Informants

• List of Key Informants • Key Informant Interview Questions • Key Informant Interview Results


Maryvale Key Informant List

Interview Number

Key Informant Agency Role

Date of Interview

2005 Interview Location

1 Dwight Emery


Executive Director

7/25 JF Long Center

2 Boys & Girls Club Leaders

Boys & Girls Club

CEO, VP, & Club Manager

7/25 Boys & Girls Club

3 Claude Mattox

City of Phoenix

Councilman, District 5

7/26 City Hall

4 Josie Romero

City of Phoenix

Neighborhood Services

Neighborhood Services Specialist

7/28 City Hall

5 Michael Martinez

Cartwright Elementary

School District

Superintendent of Schools

8/2 School District Office

6 Martha Garcia

Maryvale Block watch

Alliance

Chair 8/2 State House of Representatives

7 Kathy Harbach

Neighborhood Block watch

Leader

Co-chair of Neighborhood

Fight Back

8/12 JF Long Center

8 Jane Forino

City of Phoenix Human

Services Department

Center Manager

8/14 JF Long Center


Maryvale FireStar Fund Project

Key Informant Interview Schedule

FireStar Fund team (Stardust Foundation, United Phoenix Fire Fighters Association, Valley of the Sun

United Way, Phoenix Fire Department & ASU Partnership for Community Development)

Interview Number _________ Date of Completion _________

Background commentary:

1. Introduce interviewer and context for involvement

2. Explain FireStar, and its potential for the Village (this is not a “research study”, the information is being gathered as a basis for developing an action plan to mobilize the community and define ways to access resources and potential FireStar community partners to build a better community).

3. Conceptually, explain distinctions between assets and challenges, why both are

important to consider. 4. Need to define community boundaries though use of a map Let’s start with something very general. Given all you know and all you have seen, what are your dreams for the Maryvale community? In an ideal world, how would the Village change or grow? Think about today and then think about an ideal Maryvale Village ten years from now – in the year 2015. What has changed? How would you describe this ideal? Similarly, how do you think the residents would describe this ideal if you were to ask them? What is foremost in their hearts, minds and souls as they look at today and dream about the future of Maryvale Village? What assets or services does your organization provide to the Maryvale Neighborhood? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


From a general perspective, what are three “points of pride” within the Maryvale Village community? What are you proud of? What are the residents proud of? Why do you think that they might find meaning in living in this particular neighborhood? 1) ____________________________________________________________ 2) ____________________________________________________________ 3) ____________________________________________________________ From your perspective, we would like to know what things are working particularly well in serving the needs of Maryvale residents. Think of programs, services, and organizations that serve the residents well – that help to build a strong community. What are three things that come to mind? What are you proud of? What do the residents appreciate? What are some good things in the way of lifting their life quality that are going very well? 1) ____________________________________________________________ 2) ____________________________________________________________ 3) ____________________________________________________________ When you think of government services and programs (federal, state, local), what things are working well in serving the needs of Maryvale residents? What programs are helping to build a strong community? 1) ____________________________________________________________ 2) ____________________________________________________________ 3) ____________________________________________________________ When you think of non-profit organizations charitable organizations, or service clubs, what organizations are working well in serving the needs of Maryvale residents? What kinds of programs are helping to build a strong community? 1) ____________________________________________________________ 2) ____________________________________________________________ 3) ____________________________________________________________


When you think of faith communities, what specific programs do they have that are working well in serving the needs of Maryvale residents? What are they doing to help build a strong community? 1) ____________________________________________________________ 2) ____________________________________________________________ 3) ____________________________________________________________ When you think of volunteer organizations (such as PTOs, Kiwanis Clubs, Elk Clubs, parent groups, teen groups, senior groups, etc.), what organizations are working well in serving the needs of Maryvale Village residents? What programs are helping to build a strong community? 1) ____________________________________________________________ 2) ____________________________________________________________ 3) ____________________________________________________________ When you think of schools and community centers, what programs and services are serving the residents well? What programs are working well in building a strong community? 1)______________________________________________________________

2)______________________________________________________________

3)______________________________________________________________

Now, let’s turn our thinking for a moment to some of the things that are not going so well – to some of the challenges in Maryvale Village. What do you think are the greatest challenges confronting the Maryvale community? What are the greatest problems that are undermining the growth of a strong, healthy community? 1) _____________________________________________________________ 2) _____________________________________________________________ 3) _____________________________________________________________


What are the youth in Maryvale Village most lacking? 1)_____________________________________________________________ 2) _____________________________________________________________ 3) _____________________________________________________________ What are the seniors in Maryvale most lacking? 1)_____________________________________________________________ 2) _____________________________________________________________ 3) _____________________________________________________________ What are the families and adult singles in Maryvale most lacking? 1)_____________________________________________________________ 2) _____________________________________________________________ 3) _____________________________________________________________ When you think about the provision of human services in our community – programs and offerings to meet the social and economic needs of Maryvale Village residents, what three things concern you the most? What is not going so well? What are you most nervous about? What are some things that are not being done well by government, by schools, by non-profits, by faith communities, by businesses, by service clubs, and by volunteer organizations in order to meet people’s needs and create a strong community?

1) __________________________________________________________

2) __________________________________________________________

3) __________________________________________________________

4) __________________________________________________________ Now we want to move into a more specific assessment of neighborhood conditions – weaknesses, strengths and potentials for the future. The FireStar project has identified 18 specific features of a strong, healthy neighborhood. We call them “Pillars of Strength” for a strong, healthy neighborhood. They are features that simply need to be present for the community to be well.


I would like to mention each one of them – one at a time. Then, we would like your quick, first-thought impressions of three things. (1) What are some good things going on – the assets? (2) What are some of the challenges going on? (3) And, what needs to be done to strengthen this Pillar of Strength so it is even stronger in the future? Public Safety Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Housing Conditions Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Strong Education Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Infrastructure - (power/water) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Appearance - (streets, sidewalks, lighting) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Transportation - (access to services, jobs, and neighborhood functions) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Employment Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Faith Communities Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Youth Services - (After-school programs, gang prevention, keeping kids engaged, giving vision) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Senior Services Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Land Use - (Zoning) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Shopping Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Human Services Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Entertainment - (Venues within community) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Public Amenities - (Libraries, parks, open spaces, pools, community centers, etc.) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Civic Infrastructure - (Neighborhood organizations, churches, block watches, scout troops, PTOs) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


Tax Structure - (Neighborhood marketability, tax base to improve the neighborhood) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Local Leadership - (Individuals who live in the community and make a difference in the quality of life) Assets/ Good things Ways to strengthen /Things going well Challenges you have heard of by 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Who are some key (emergent) leaders from inside the community that we should interview about the future of Maryvale? ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ This completes the interview. On behalf of the FireStar Fund partners and the ASU Partnership for Community Development, we thank you for your input. This information will be synthesized into a community scan report without any reference to individuals’ names. The report will be used to develop action plans that the community will implement with support from FireStar Fund partners.


Key Informant Questionnaire Results

From a general perspective, what are three “points of pride” within the Maryvale Village community? What are you proud of? What are the residents proud of? Why do you think that they might find meaning in living in this

particular neighborhood?

Answer N Percent

Baseball facility 3 33

Council members Mattox & Sampleton 2 22

Heritage/historical significance 1 11.25

Residents commitment & responsive support 1 11.25

Block watch program 1 11.25

Diversity & culture 1 11.25

Total 9 100


When you think of government services and programs (federal, state, local), what things are working well in

serving the needs of Maryvale residents? What programs are helping to build a strong community?

Answer N Percent

City's Neighborhood Services Dept. 4 24

Fight Back program 2 15.5

Police dept. 2 15.5

Maryvale UNITE 1 9

Building Blocks Coalition 1 9

West Valley Revitalization Project 1 9

Desert West Community Center 1 9

Make a Difference 1 9

Total 13 100


When you think of non-profit organizations charitable organizations, or service clubs, what organizations are working well in serving the needs of Maryvale residents? What kinds of programs are helping to build a strong

community?

Answer N Percent

YMCA 3 16

Block watch 2 11

Churches 2 11

Local business support 2 11

Maryvale Revitalization Corp. 2 11

Boys & Girls Club 2 11

Make a Difference program 2 11

Maryvale UNITE group 1 4.5

Westside Food Bank 1 4.5

JF Long Center 1 4.5

Cartwright Family Center 1 4.5

Total 19 100


When you think of faith communities, what specific programs do they have that are working well in serving the needs of Maryvale residents? What are they doing to help build a strong community?

Answer N Percent

New Beginnings Church – summer programs, youth initiatives 5 45.5

St. Vincent de Paul Catholic Church 2 18

Calvary United 1 9

St. Paul's Lutheran Church 1 9

St. Augustine – food baskets 1 9

St. Mary's Food Bank 1 9

Total 11 99.5


When you think of volunteer organizations (such as PTOs, Kiwanis Clubs, Elk Clubs, parent groups, teen groups,

senior groups, etc.), what organizations are working well in serving the needs of Maryvale Village residents? What programs are helping to build a strong community?

Answer N Percent

Block watch group 3 43

Tomahawk 1 14.25

Peralta 1 14.25

Knights of Columbus 1 14.25

Senior Center (67th Ave. & Thomas) 1 14.25

Total 7 100


When you think of schools and community centers, what programs and services are serving the residents well? What programs are working well in building a strong community?

Answer N Percent

Maryvale Multi-generational Center 5 33

JF Long Center 2 13.5

Cartwright ESD Family Service Center 2 13.5

Desert West 1 8

YMCA 1 8

Maryvale Park (pools) 1 8

Boys & Girls Club 1 8

Cartwright Superintendent & Board 1 8

Total 14 100


What do you think are the greatest challenges confronting the Maryvale community? What are the greatest problems that are undermining the growth of a strong, healthy community?

Answer N Percent

Language/cultural barriers 4 45

Youth activities/programs 3 33

Crime 2 22

Total 9 100

What are the youth in Maryvale Village most lacking?

Answer N Percent

Positive activities (after school/entertainment) 3 38

Parental involvement/support 2 24.5 Goal/future oriented mindset & programs/resources (college-prep/career counseling) 2 24.5

Another pool 1 13

Total 8 100


What are the seniors in Maryvale most lacking?

Answer N Percent

Transportation 2 50

More activities 1 25

ESL programs 1 25

Total 4 100

What are the families and adult singles in Maryvale most lacking?

Answer N Percent

Social/recreational resources 3 43

ESL education 2 29

Economic security 1 14

Transportation 1 14

Total 7 100


What are some things that are not being done well by government, by schools, by non-profits, by faith communities, by businesses, by service clubs, and by volunteer organizations in order to meet people’s needs

and create a strong community?

Answer N Percent

Need more youth activities/programs 2 33

Need more business involvement 2 33

Need community identity, community pride events 1 17 Focus and coordination required- could be helped by faith communities 1 17

Total 6 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen public safety in the community?

Public Safety

Assets Challenges Ways to Strengthen

N % N % N % police community oriented 1 33 police understaffed 6 55 more police

presence/activity 1 14

police nearby 1 33 inconsistent leadership 2 18 more programs/resources (DARE)

1 14

active block watch program 1 33 slow police response

time 1 9 firefighters could help 1 14

awareness of police to community issues 1 9 police need to get over

"siege" mentality 1 14

more radar stands 1 9 consistent leadership 1 14

officers who live in Maryvale 1 14

sidewalks 1 14

Totals 3 99 11 100 7 98


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen housing conditions in the community?

Housing Conditions


N % N % N % older block homes in good condition 2 66 blight/income levels low

so maintenance suffers 5 56 affordable housing development 3 33

Revitalization Corp. doing well 1 33 housing unaffordable 2 22 revitalization 2 22

overcrowded residences 1 11 more Fight Back staffing 1 11

many rentals, low ownership 1 11 education 1 11

coordination 1 11

Sheriff's chain gang for help 1 11

Totals 3 99 9 100 9 99


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen education in the community?

Strong Education


N % N % N %

community colleges 1 50 language/culture barrier 3 100 bilingual/multi-cultural education in school-teachers & students

2 50

new staff 1 50 tutoring support 1 25

unify Cartwright School District (2 high schools in Phoenix Union)

1 25

2 100 3 100 4 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen infrastructure in the community?

Infrastructure


N % N % N % Revitalization Corp. starting to work 1 50 new streets needed 1 26 streets: maintenance,

sidewalks, aesthetics 3 100

certain pockets good 1 50 Revitalization Corp. needs staffing 1 25

safe streets assessment should include speed bump needs

1 25

narrow streets not safe 1 25

Totals 2 100 4 100 3 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen the community’s appearance?

Appearance


N % N % N %

curb-appeal lacking/sidewalks 2 66

business development should include exterior improvement, not just interior

1 33

more parks/beautification 1 33 breakdown barriers to

address issues 1 33

clean-up initiatives 1 33

Totals 3 99 3 99


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen transportation in the community?

Transportation


N % N % N %

most teens picked up from Boys & Girls Club 1 100

students ride city bus to school (routes cut from budget)

1 50 circulator bus like ALEX in Ahwatukee 3 75

lots of people walking 1 50 extension of light-rail 1 25

Totals 1 100 2 100 4 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen employment in the community?

Employment


N % N % N %

lack of middle income or youth jobs 2 40 transportation for

commuters 1 33

unemployment 1 20 youth employed for revitalization efforts 1 33

bedroom community(residents work outside Maryvale)

1 20 Valley Interfaith project to train community leaders

1 33

service industry only 1 20

Totals 5 100 3 99


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen faith communities in the community?

Faith Communities


N % N % N %

youth programs 1 100 lack of involvement/organization community-wide

1 33 neighborhood get-togethers 1 50

need training in human services work 1 33 linkage w/ public

schools 1 50

focus too narrow 1 33

Totals 1 100 3 99 2 100

What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen youth services in the community?

Youth Services


N % N % N %

after-school programs 1 50 technology education 1 100

YMCA 1 50

Totals 2 100 1 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen senior services in the community?

Senior Services


N % N % N %

no help for homebound 1 100 health fairs to meet health needs 1 100

Totals 1 100 1 100

What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen land use in the community?

Land Use


N % N % N %

land is locked 1 100 planning commission help needed 1 100

Totals 1 100 1 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen shopping in the community?

Shopping


N % N % N %

Wal-Mart okay 1 100 not enough opportunities 1 100 more upscale needed 1 100

Totals 1 100 1 100 1 100

What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen entertainment in the community?

Entertainment


N % N % N %

theme park pending 2 50 land availability 1 100

many facilities available 2 50

Totals 4 100 1 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen public amenities in the community?

Public Amenities


N % N % N %

available, more coming 1 100

Totals 1 100

What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen civic infrastructure in the community?

Civic Infrastructure


N % N % N %

available 1 100 need Scout troops 1 100

Totals 1 100 1 100


What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen the tax structure in the community?

Tax Structure


N % N % N %

low tax base 2 100 theme park will help 1 100

Totals 2 100 1 100

What are the assets, challenges, and ways to strengthen local leadership in the community?

Local Leadership


N % N % N % good core- residents, organizations like B&G, government

5 100 community interest/involvement 2 50 invitations to

functions/meetings 1 25

language barrier 1 25 bilingual training 1 25

identity 1 25 Block watch support 1 25

uniting efforts 1 25

Totals 5 100 4 100 4 100


Appendix F

Focus Groups

• List of Focus Group Meetings • Focus Group Questions • Focus Group Results


Maryvale Focus Groups Meeting Dates and Locations

Focus Group Number Date Location # Attending

1 08/15/2005 Boys & Girls Club 7 2 08/16/2005 JF Long Center 10 3 09/12/2005 JF Long Center 35 4 09/15/2005 Cartwright School

District Board Room 16

5 09/23/2005 Maryvale High School 13 6 09/23/2005 Maryvale High School 12


Maryvale Focus Group Questions

1. What are the Points of Pride in your neighborhood?

2. What are the things (programs, services, organizations) working well in your neighborhood?

3. What are the Challenges in your neighborhood?

4. What can help the neighborhood to grow?

5. Image Maryvale in the year 2020, what does it look like?

6. What can the Maryvale firefighters do to help the community?

7. In a one word phrase, what does Maryvale need?


Table 1. What are the Points of Pride in your neighborhood?

Points of Pride N Percent

Available Facilities roller rink, drive-in, stadium, family center, golf course, police/fire stations, pools, hospital 9 33.3

Recent Development schools, businesses, library, community center, new residents 9 33.3 Community Service Organizations Boys & Girls Club 3 11.1

community residents 2 7.4

area beautification 1 3.7

Community Fight Back 1 3.7

good School District 1 3.7

John F. Long’s philanthropy 1 3.7

Total 27 99.9


Table 2. What are the things (programs, services, organizations) working well in your neighborhood?

Things Working Well N Percent

Facilities

J.F. Long Family Center, pools, senior center, Desert West Park, stadium, school district’s Family Resource Center, Roosevelt center, new libraries, Maryvale mall into office complex, Starlight remodel, retirement homes, golf course, middle school remodel, hospital, Cartwright school space use, parks

23 23.7

Businesses Wal-Mart, restaurant selection, Ranch Market, Pizza Palace, new CVS and Walgreen’s, SRP, Spanish theater, small businesses, dollar stores, Whataburger, Burger King, multiuse facilities

13 13.4

Community Services

block watches, Phoenix neighborhood patrol, Community Action Officers, Suns/Cardinal involvement, John F. Long Foundation and programs, Sizzler support and food bank, ASU

11 11.3

Faith Communities

Jewish organizations, New Beginnings, Augustine, St. Vincent de Paul, 59th & Camelback Methodist, Calvary United, Church of the Nazarene 10 10.3

Youth Services

Little League, Boys and Girls Club, after-school programs, teachers, swimming programs, school sports 8 8.2

Cohesion community history, diversity, Ponchos, residents assistance, get along, youth initiative 7 7.2

Education Peralta Growth-ESL/resource rooms, Alpha Partner with ASU, Leaps & Bounds, Library with new volumes, caring teachers, Westcor shopping reading programs 6 6.2

Service Organizations Salvation Army, police/fire, block watch, police donations, block watch donations 6 6.2

Curb Appeal remodeled plazas, new subdivisions, clean streets, graffiti busting 4 4.1

Leadership Council Member Mattox, Martha Garcia, Dwight Amery 4 4.1 Community Activities sports, band, July 4th celebration at the stadium 3 3.1

Safety Police Department gives extra ordinary support 1 1.0

Volunteers Maryvale Hospital 1 1.0

Total 97 99.8


Table 3. What are the Challenges in your Neighborhood?

Challenges N Percent

Safety car theft, speeding, cruising, prostitution, theft/break-ins, crime, pushers, pool fences, water safety info, domestic violence, meth labs, drugs, guns, bullying 16 13.3

Education

crowded schools, quality, truancy enforcement, senior literacy, teachers have problems, need dedicated teachers/coaches, poor parenting & accountability, newer/lighter school tax base, sex/drug education, participation in school activities

14 11.7

Cohesion volunteers, parental involvement, resident involvement, clique conflict in schools, racism, respect for youth, apathetic adults 12 10.0

Curb Appeal

graffiti, city, neighborhood, streets, sanitation dirty restrooms-no doors on stalls, sink urination, dirty parks, littering, animal control education/enforcement, spray paint sales in surrounding areas, vacant homes

11 9.2

Youth Programs unsupervised, parenting classes, Head Start/youth development, teen pregnancy, day care, kids clubs 8 6.7

Employment income, poverty, employment, lack of entry level, lack of higher paying jobs, bums, poor families 7 5.8

Public Communication

get information out, resource knowledge, media images, media focus on north & east sides, educate media, positive w/ negative news 7 5.8

Public Safety police understaffed/inactive, neighborhood, fire, guns, crime, education 6 5.0

Transportation youth, public 6 5.0

Facilities park swings broken, water fountains, green ponds, community centers 4 3.3

Traffic/Parking intersection control, baseball, drag racing, neighborhood, lots of issues, more crosswalks, more speed bumps, Cleardon & 59th Ave. needs light 4 3.3

Youth Safety fire, gun, pedestrian 3 2.5

Businesses vacancies, draw new businesses at 83rd & 91st Ave., instead of medical offices 2 1.7

Community Services lack of civic clubs, West Phoenix Business Alliance absent 2 1.7

Language Barrier ESL class availability 2 1.7


Business quality 1 .83

Community image 1 .83

Elderly 1 .83

Halfway Houses location 1 .83

Health Care more mammograms for women under 45 for breast cancer screening 1 .83

Health Facilities building for outreach for medical health, not in hospital 1 .83

house Numbers 1 .83

I love Maryvale 1 .83 Maryvale Community have Maryvale considered part of West Valley 1 .83

Maryvale Hospital competency 1 .83

Parent Education parents who aren’t tolerant 1 .83 Park & Recreation Facilities 1 .83

Philanthropy money, funds 1 .83

Pool Safety fences 1 .83

Public Phones More 1 .83

water retention basins not lighted 1 .83

Total 120 99.9


Table 4. What can help your community to grow?

Community Growth Facilitation N PercentPublic Communication/ Organization

neighborhood newsletter, flyers, agency info exchange, postings at businesses, resource awareness, inform adults, City of Phoenix flyers, Desert West Center flyers, meet your neighbor program

8 29.6

Cohesion resident familiarity, community sense/identity, activities, events, education, block watch networks, UNITE, fair 7 25.9

Corrections/Court Services court orders to help clean-up neighborhood, DOC work crews 2 7.4

Education technology availability, classes for family, adults and kids 2 7.4

Police Proactive police, neighborhood patrols 2 7.4

Faith Communities faith community could help 1 3.7

Leadership a west side mayor 1 3.7

later hours for Boys and Girls Club 1 3.7

grow to become a better place to live 1 3.7

neighborhood initiative designation – redevelopment 1 3.7

YMCA coming 1 3.7

Total 27 99.9


Table 5. Think of Maryvale in the year 2020, what does it look like?

Future Appearance N Percent

Cohesion respect, pride, socialization, culture/diversity appreciation, cooperation, friendship, parental involvement, respect for youth, no racism, harmony, open communication, trust

25 15.3

Safety drag racing, gangs, car theft, better lighting, criminal sentencing, guns, police presence/activity, crime, rioting 25 15.3

Facilities multi-use park, pools, sports, skateboarding, soccer, community centers, extended hours for existing community centers, theme park, music & dancing 22 13.5

Curb Appeal graffiti, landscaping, sanitation, trees, water, new housing, grocery cart order, litter 18 11.0

Education uniforms-yes, sports-no general, facility repair/improvements, gyms, classroom size, technology, teacher quality, parents involved, drop outs 14 8.6

Community Activities social events, promotion for activities, neighborhood, block parties, parades, sports 8 4.9

Youth Services sports, clubs, after-school, funding, mentorship, programs 7 4.3

Businesses alliances, empty corners, eliminate adult industry, restaurant variety, school involvement 6 3.7

Transportation more frequent bus routes, A/C, light rail, neighborhood, school, community 6 3.7

Community Services block watches, counseling mental health, teen programs 5 3.1

Traffic/Parking alleys, street surfaces 5 3.1

Language Barrier community-wide, students, ESL classes 3 1.8

Employment more opportunities, training 2 1.2 Public Communication community announcements in paper, information dissemination 2 1.2

beach 1 .61

bicycle riders 1 .61


chilled water 1 .61

green belt 1 .61

image of West side – “rough neighborhood” 1 .61

involvement of firefighters in baseball games, like at Mil Brewers games 1 .61

low gas prices 1 .61

more churches verses liquor stores 1 .61

need help for those who need grocery carts 1 .61

no problem unite kids 1 .61

opportunities for parties 1 .61

residence for senior living (semi-assisted) 1 .61

restorative justice for everybody 1 .61

sex 1 .61

teach children basics of growing plants – community garden in vacant lots 1 .61

Total 163 99.9


Table 6. What can the Maryvale firefighters do to help your neighborhood?

Firefighter’s Neighborhood Support N Percent

Youth Services volunteer for programs, sports programs, coaching, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, umpires don't show, Boy/Girl Scouts, mentorship, after-school program involvement, leadership

14 20.9

Cohesion show up when asked informally, traditions like flag raisings, sense of pride, good neighbor relations, talk and listen and get-to-know teens, approach teens w/ respect, not authoritative w/ teens, communicate w/ teens, helpful to teens

11 16.4

Safety water safety, CPR, background checks for youth services, child safety around emergency vehicles, West Nile prevention/education, patrol community, educate teens

10 14.9

Education visit schools, school involvement, teach, counsel teens, career counseling for teens, business skill training for teens 8 11.9

Community Services neighborhood coalition building, community action office, block watch liaison, town hall meeting participation 4 6.0

Curb Appeal clean up fields, repair bikes/houses, fire hydrant graffiti, report graffiti 4 6.0

Language Barrier bilingual Fire Department info, help schools understand barrier 4 6.0

Employment build career knowledge programs 1 1.5 Public Communication people don’t know how to get involved 1 1.5

station in Laveen has wonderful model of fire involvement 1 1.5

blood pressure for people who can’t afford it, vital assessment 1 1.5

bring us equipment, and show us how it is used 1 1.5

check out fire house 1 1.5

give us different points of view 1 1.5

helping people, seniors, families to meet their needs - mowing lawns, repairs, looking to be helped for something that is too much for one person to do 1 1.5


proud to be in community with Police and Fire Department we have 1 1.5

show us GPS equipment 1 1.5

take time – assess and help 1 1.5

take us in rides in fire truck 1 1.5

Total 67 100.1


Table 7. In a one word phrase, what does Maryvale need?

Phrase N Percent

Communication communication with the public, we don’t know where to start or how to get involved, increase communication 2 14.3

marketing from a good perception, about what is going on in community 1 7.1

clean up neighborhoods and eliminate graffiti 1 7.1

educate parents and kids 1 7.1

trust 1 7.1

show kids to take pride in the positive aspects of the community 1 7.1

good role models 1 7.1

respect 1 7.1

help educators increase their understanding of parents and their concerns 1 7.1

positive family education 1 7.1

get the Cardinals and Coyotes to help, get all involved 1 7.1

train kids for success in business 1 7.1

Desert West Community Center needs an additional room and more staff 1 7.1

Total 14 99.5


Appendix G

Neighborhood Stability Factors (FireStar Planning Committee)


Neighborhood Stability Factors The following are aspects of neighborhoods which affect their stability at a given time in their history. Neighborhoods are complex, organic entities in which the interaction and influences of various factors will influence their attractiveness in the market. This fact needs to be considered in any plan for rejuvenation of a distressed neighborhood. A neighborhood’s image and reputation also affects their attractiveness and marketability, sometimes in profound ways. The real test in determining the direction of a neighborhood is its attractiveness in the market place. When people want to live there and businesses want to open there in a context of increasing values, we are headed in a positive direction. The factors listed below are in order of relative priority.

1. Public Safety. If a place in not safe people will not come, or worse criminal elements will. Police and Fire departments are primary in this area although direct neighbor and neighborhood organizational involvement are critical for real crime suppression.

2. Housing Conditions. Attractive, affordable homes are critical to a

neighborhood’s stability. There should be a range of housing types and costs. Rentals are part of a range of housing types but an over supply of rentals creates instability. Low income people should not be concentrated in any given neighborhood. New low income development should be such a quality that it adds to the positive feel and value of a neighborhood. Distressed properties should be rehabbed and ownership should be promoted. Appearances of homes matter to the surrounding neighborhood.

3. Education. Education systems that are effective in producing a competent

workforce are essential to attract families to neighborhoods. In older neighborhoods with struggling school systems they can be a major impediment to rejuvenation.

4. Basic Infrastructure/Appearance. Basic public services such as water and

power must be available at reasonable costs. The appearance of basic infrastructure such as streets, sidewalks, and lighting is extremely important to the attractiveness of a neighborhood as a whole.

5. Transportation. A multimodal transportation system is critical to employment

accessibility. Systems should take into account the needs of workers working on different shifts.

6. Employment. People should be able to work and live near their homes. The

current reality is many will live in the best neighborhood they can afford and work in the best job they can find. They would like to not be burdened with long


commutes though. Availability of employment throughout the community adds vibrancy to neighborhoods, increases productivity, and shortens commute times.

7. Faith Community. The faith community can provide both a sense of community

and services to a neighborhood. Faith leaders can also provide leadership and connection to the neighborhood.

8. Youth Services. In a given neighborhood issues revolving around youth can be

significant. After-school programs, gang prevention efforts and other targeting youth can make a major impact on the crime and the quality of the community.

9. Land Use. Land use policies for a given neighborhood can act to energize or

retard the viability of a neighborhood. Old policies which have led to unbalances in zoning types may be reviewed. New zoning approaches allowing for heightened density or mixed use zones may act to jump start redevelopment.

10. Shopping and Services. People want quality shopping and services near

where they live. Typically services follow additional population growth. A neighborhood with a negative image though may be left out in quality commercial redevelopment even if market demands are present.

11. Entertainment Venues. People want various entertainment forms in the area in

which they live. It makes a given neighborhood more attractive.

12. Public Amenities. Libraries, parks, desert, open space, pools, senior centers and other amenities all add to the attractiveness of a neighborhood.

13. Civic Infrastructure. Individuals committed to the place they live in can have a

major impact in its future, from identifying issues and problems, to proposing and implementing solutions, people in local institutions are important. People participate though neighborhood organizations, community development corporations, churches, block watches, village planning committees, city council meetings, scout troops, PTOs and other organizations. They should be supported and encouraged.

14. Social Services. There are numerous health and human services that assist in

a wide range of services people may need at some point in their lives. From food to senior care, from homeless services to child care, these institutions struggle to keep up with an ever growing demand and an even tighter funding. They need to be supported if there is to be a safety net worthy of the name.

15. Tax Structure. The tax structure of a given community can have an impact on

the marketability of one neighborhood over the next, particularly between school districts.


16. Local Neighborhood Leadership. The presence of formal and informal leadership is essential to assist in focusing the efforts of the community and speaking up when attention needs to be drawn to issues. The direction of local leaders is essential and gets to the heart of the issues in a much more direct fashion.

17. Healthcare. Local, accessible, affordable healthcare for the under and

uninsured.


Appendix H

Neighborhood Assets


Neighborhood and Community Assets * In the neighborhood - refers to assets within in the neighborhood boundaries, Serves the neighborhood – refers to

assets outside the neighborhood boundaries but serves the neighborhood. Education – in the neighborhood

Cartwright School District 3401 N. 67th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 691-4000 William Sullivan (Manager)

Family Resource Center 4308 N. 51st Ave., #103, Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 691-1994 Irene Rivera (Director) The Cartwright School District’s Family Resource Center is dedicated to assisting Cartwright families in support of the education of their children. The Center provides family literacy classes, ESL classes, GED classes, parenting classes, referrals to counseling services, emergency food boxes, referrals to health services, computer classes, library services and sign language classes to the Cartwright families. All services are provided in English and Spanish. The Center annually sponsors special events, such as Family Game Night, Partners in Print, Celebration of Grandparent’s Day, Mexican Independence Celebration, and the Back to School Event. For the 2004-2005 school year, over 3,000 people attended classes provided by the Family Resource Center and over 3,400 people take advantage of other services they provide.

Frank Borman Middle School 3637 N. 55th Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 691-5000 Mrs. Susan Jurkunas (Principal) Frank Borman Middle School provides Connected Mathematics Program, honors classes, special education, ELL, after-school programs, Character Education Program, breakfast/lunch program, and a parent resource room. After-school programs consist of student council, after-school games, art, National Junior Honor Society, and after-school sports. Frank Borman Middle School also provides its students with computer labs and a library.

Maryvale High School 3415 N. 59th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 271-2500 Barbara Dobbs (Principal) Maryvale High School provides honors classes, advanced placement classes, ESL Program, Estrella Community College Co-Enrollment Program, breakfast/lunch programs, counseling services, West Phoenix Business Alliance services, and health services. After-school programs consist of JROTC, boys varsity/JV/freshman athletics 9-12, National Honor Society, and girls varsity/JV/freshman athletics 9-12. Maryvale High School also provides its students with two computer labs and a media studio.


St. Paul Lutheran Preschool, Day Care and Kindergarten 6301 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 846-2235 Karen Moses (Executive Director) Enrolls approximately 50 students a year.

Sunset Elementary School 6602 W. Osborn Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 691-4600 Enrique Gonzalez (Principal) Sunset Elementary School provides school-wide Title I program, literacy and math focus, Reading Recovery, recreational activities and City of Phoenix after-school program. After-school programs consist of academic/sports programs, band, chorus, and student council. Sunset Elementary School also provides its students with a computer lab and modern music facility.

Serves the neighborhood

Acclaim Charter School 5350 W. Indian School Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 691-0919 Malonie Powers-Martine (Executive Director)

Bostrom Alternative Center 3535 N. 27th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85017 (602) 764-1700 T.J. Jenkins (Supervisor) Bostrom Alternative Center provides core academic and elective classes, special education resource and inclusion, Focus on Reading, writing and mathematics, academic tutoring in ACE period, substance abuse counseling, anger management counseling, student career and job fair, and college financial aid counseling. After-school activities consist of student government, yearbook club, enrichment activities, and multi-cultural workshops. Bostrom Alternative Center also provides its students with a shared-use computer lab and fitness center.

Bret R. Tarver School 4315 N. Maryvale Parkway Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 691-1900 Ms. Angela Graziano (Principal) Bret R. Tarver School provides Title I reading and math programs, after-school tutoring, Spalding Total Language Arts Program, and ELL programs for all grade levels, urban survival program, Christmas Angel Program, food boxes, and parenting classes. After-school programs consist of student council, after-school tutoring and quality time, peer mediation, and pom and cheer. Bret R. Tarver School also provides its students with an internet-accessible computer lab and an internet-accessible library.


Cartwright Head Start 5480 W. Campbell Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (602) 691-5101 Isaac Salcido (Director) Head Start is a comprehensive child development program, which serves children three to five years of age and their families. It is a child focused program and has the overall goal of increasing the social competence of young children in low income families. The program provides a range of individualized services in the areas of education, health and nutrition, parent involvement, family social services, disabilities and mental health. The City also provides a directly operated program for working families that specializes in providing full-day, full-year child care opportunities in conjunction with Head Start services.

Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center 5480 W. Campbell Ave., Phoenix 85031 (602) 691-5101 Isaac Salcido (Director) Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center provides on-site special education, structured English immersion, after-school instruction, and arts and physical education, a lunch program, a school-based health clinic, a breakfast program, and after-school programs. After-school programs consist of student council, Epworth Church After-School Program, chorus, and yearbook. Cartwright Preschool and Gifted Center also provides a media center/studio and computer stations in the library.

Desert Sands Middle School 6308 W. Campbell Ave. Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 691-4900 Mr. Jim Paczosa (Principal) Desert Sands Middle School provides blocked instruction, honors classes, on-site special education, ELL, breakfast/lunch programs, counseling services, West Phoenix Business Alliance services, and health services. After-school programs consist of a student council, publications, peer mediation, and interscholastic athletics. Desert Sands Middle School also provides its students with two computer labs and a media studio.

Desiderata 512 E Pierce St., Phoenix, AZ 85004 (602) 271-2950 Desiderata provides alternative education, small classes (up to 12 students), social worker and counselor support, special education, core academics, referrals to outside agencies, counseling services, home visits, and crisis intervention. After-school activities consist of lunchtime activity program, student government, and athletic participation at home school. Desiderata provides its students with student computers in all classrooms and shared use computer lab.


Flora Del Sol Elementary 3818 N. 67th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 691-5900 Myrna Richley (Administrator) Flora Del Sol Elementary provides teaching of emotional control, decision-making skills, self-esteem, learning to respect, and also provides a garden and library for its students. The Family Resource Center, contacts with Value Options, social workers, and use of school resource officers (SROs) are also made available for community use.

James Sandoval Preparatory High School 3830 N. 67th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 845-0781 Mr. Dutton ( Principal) JSPHS provides small class sizes to less than 300 students and is determined to help their students develop good character through teaching responsibility, trustworthiness, caring, fairness, citizenship and respect.

John F. Long Elementary School 4407 N. 55th Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 691-4300 Shelby Jasmer (Principal) John F. Long Elementary School provides on-site special education, structured English immersion, after-school instruction, arts and physical education, lunch program, school-based health clinic, breakfast program, and after-school programs. After-school programs consist of student council, Epworth Church After-School Program, chorus, and yearbook. John F. Long Elementary School also provides its students with a media center/studio and computer stations in library.

Metro Tech High School 1900 W. Thomas Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85015 (602) 764-8000 Mr. Frank Rasmussen (Principal) Metro Tech High School provides integrated career and academic curriculum, school-to-work, core academic classes, honors credit, child care center, job placement services, wellness center/health services, and CUTS. After-school activities consist of the National Honor Society, MECHA, VSOs (VICA, FBLA, DECA), and art club. Metro Tech High School also provides a technology center and 30 specific career labs.

St. Vincent de Paul School 3140 N. 51st Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 247-8595 Sr. Louise Camous, D.C. (Principal)

http://www.phxhs.k12.az.us/education/staff/staff.php?sectionid=2950


Suns-Diamondbacks Education Academy 1505 N. Central Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85004 (602) 744-1220 Rick Beck (Supervisor) Suns-Diamondbacks Education Academy provides an inclusion resource program, technology-based instruction, curriculum integration, six-week credit periods, a student government, partnerships with the business community, substance abuse counseling, student career and job fair, and anger management counseling. Suns-Diamondback Education Academy also provides its students with a computer-assisted learning lab and classroom learning labs.

Trevor High School 7402 W. Catalina Dr., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (602) 764-8500 Dr. Virginia Cordor (Principal) Trevor High School provides honors classes, advanced placement, on-site special education, co-enrollment with community colleges, crisis intervention, recreational activities, counseling services, and Spanish Language Radio Parent. After-school activities consist of vocational clubs--DECA and COE, Close-Up, student government, and National Honor Society. Trevor High School also provides its students with 14 computer labs and a CBT Instructional Program.

Faith Communities – in the neighborhood

Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints 3802 N 59th Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 846-4017

St. Paul Lutheran Church 6301 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 846-2228 Norman Walter (Pastor) Approximately 100 people attend the church each weekend. They have adult Bible classes and Sunday school each weekend, vocation Bible school in the summer, and Preschool and Kindergarten classes.


Arizona Korean Presbyterian Church 6440 W Indian School Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 866-1166

Maryvale Church of the Nazarene 3201 N 51st Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85031 (602) 269-3489


New Beginnings Community Church 3830 N. 67th Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 849-2363 Eli Marez (Pastor)

St. Vincent de Paul 3140 N. 51st Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 247-6871 Rev. Jeff Harvey, C.M. (Pastor) Daily Masses in English and weekend services in English and Spanish.

Government – in the neighborhood

Fire Department 4010 N. 63rd Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85033 (602) 534-9734 Russell Bovee (Manager)

John F. Long Family Services Center 3454 North 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (602) 262-6510 Carolyn Ruiz (Facility Director) They provide a broad range of emergency and social problem-solving services designed to promote individual and family self-sufficiency, including: information and referral; emergency financial assistance (primarily for utility, rent or mortgage needs); emergency food boxes; case management services to address the underlying or more complicated issues resulting in the current crisis; employment and training counseling and referral; and bus tokens for other medical, social service, and employment-related appointments. In addition, one special program is provided for unique populations. Family Self-Sufficiency assists residents of public housing. In addition to the general services described above, the JFLFSC is also the location for several community-based programs, including: Catholic Social Services of Phoenix, English as a Second Language through the Gary Tang Adult Education Center, Quest Alliance, Southwest Human Development/Healthy Families Maricopa County, The Salvation Army, African Association of Arizona, and the Valley-Community Revitalization Project. They provide on-site services to meet the needs of low income Phoenix residents. JFLFSC assisted approximately 1,480 families with rent costs and 1,680 with utility assistance. They serve an average of 272 families a month for the last fiscal year and due to capacity have to turn others away.


Arizona Department of Economic Security 3406 N. 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ (623) 846-1046 Provides AHCCCS health insurance, food stamps, cash assistance, employment assistance, child care assistance, child support assistance and referrals services.


Maricopa County W.I.C. 4002 N. 67th Ave. Suite 10, Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 846-5809 W.I.C. provides information to approximately 9,495 people every month, 24% are women, 29% are infants and 47% are children. They provide immunizations, information on drugs and information on children’s needs. Of the people that use these services, 89% are Hispanic, 6% are White, 4% are Black and 1% is made up of other ethnic/racial groups.

Maryvale Family Health Center 4011 N. 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 344-6900

Maryvale Hospital Medical Center 5102 W. Campbell Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 848-5000 John Smithhilser (Chief Executive Officer)

Maryvale Hospital and Medical Center Family Assistance Program 4550 N. 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 849-1944

Palo Verde Branch Library 4402 N. 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (602) 262-6805 The following programs and activities are offered at the library: computers with internet access and Microsoft Office products for public use, free computer classes, story time, special programs for all age groups, summer reading programs for children and teens, winter reading program for children, Phoenix Poetry Society, meeting room for rental by community groups.

Phoenix Police Department 6180 W Encanto Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85035 (602) 495-5008 Joseph Yahner (Commander)

Non-profit – in the neighborhood

Boys and Girls Clubs of Metropolitan Phoenix 6629 W. Claredon Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 848-1022 The Boys and Girls Club offers programs and services in art, character and leadership development, education and career development, health and life skills and sports, fitness and recreation. In the last fiscal year this branch provided services to 600 children. Approximately 39% of the families with children attending this branch had family income levels under 24,999 annually.


Phoenix Workforce Connection 3406 N. 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 247-3304 The Workforce Connection provides workshops to teach resume preparation, job readiness, networking, interviewing techniques and internet skills. They provide computer, office and employment resources and referrals to other services people may need when unemployed and search for employment.


Chicanos por la Causa - Phoenix Centro De La Familia 4602 W. Indian School Rd., Suite C-3, Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-0464

Chicanos por la Causa provides educational programs, housing programs, social services and subsidiaries.

Chicanos por la Causa- Phoenix Westside Training Center 2916 N. 35th Ave., # 5, Phoenix, AZ 85017 (602) 269-6485 Chicanos por la Causa provides educational programs, housing programs, social services and subsidiaries.

Desert West Community Center 6501 W. Virginia Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85035 (602) 495-3700 The Desert West Community Center provides recreational and educational programs for youth and all ages of adults. The Human Services Department Senior Services Division operates the Reserve-A-Ride program. which provides door-to-door transportation in Phoenix and requires registration with the system and a two-working-day advance reservation. The primary purpose is to transport seniors to senior centers, medical appointments and other social service agencies.

Desert West Senior Center 6501 W. Virginia Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85035 (602) 495-3709 Deborah Ellison (Supervisor) This center currently provides the array of services offered by the Senior Services Division, including congregate and home delivered lunch meals and other supplemental food and nutrition programs, educational opportunities, recreation and socialization programs, information, referral, resource specialists, advocacy, and transportation. Additionally, services for the elderly are provided throughout the City of Phoenix by the PACE Counseling and the Senior Companion Programs. PACE utilizes caseworkers stationed at various sites to help senior adults solve their problems by matching their needs to available resources.


The Salvation Army 4022 N. 67th Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 848-1072 Provide emergency food boxes.

St. Mary’s Food Bank 2831 N. 31st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85009 (602) 352-3640 The Cash and Carry program is designed to help people save 40% to 50% on their grocery bills.

Vineyard Food and Clothing Bank 6250 W. Peoria Ave., Glendale, AZ 85302 (623) 934-4000 The food and clothing bank is administered from Vineyard Christian Fellowship of North Phoenix Church. They service anyone in need of food or clothing.

Westside Senior Center 4343 W. Thomas Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (602) 262-1609 Pat Hosier (Supervisor) This center currently provides the array of services offered by the Senior Services Division, including congregate meals, educational opportunities, recreation and socialization programs, information, referral, resource specialists, advocacy, and transportation. Additionally, services for the elderly are provided throughout the City of Phoenix by the PACE Counseling and the Senior Companion Programs. PACE utilizes caseworkers stationed at various sites to help senior adults solve their problems by matching their needs to available resources.

Parks and Recreation – in the neighborhood

Maryvale Baseball Park 3600 N. 51st Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 534-6441 Maryvale Baseball Park is the spring training home of the Milwaukee Brewers, offers a stadium with a capacity of 8,000 seats, seven practice baseball fields, media rooms, a clubhouse, and a public plaza utilized for special events. Maryvale Baseball Park offers a Free Diamondbacks youth baseball clinic, tryouts for area youth to attend a free baseball clinic, a Light Up the Sky Festival, an Annual Independence Community Festival with free activities (entertainment and fireworks).



Marivue Community Park 5625 W. Osborn Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 262-4539 Marivue Park offers a covered playground, lighted basketball and volleyball courts, a swimming pool, softball fields, soccer fields, ramadas, and restrooms. Marivue Park offers soccer, softball, swim team and classes.

Marivue Pool 5625 W. Osborn Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 261-8929 Stacy Bauer (Manager)

Maryvale Community Center 4420 N. 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 262-5030 Debbie Selleck (Manager). Maryvale Community Center offers dance classes, weight programs, basketball, volleyball, special interest classes (such as aerobics, arts and crafts, music, drama, and karate), teen programs, senior and adult classes (such as cards, Tai Chi, ceramics, and bingo), and “productions” in the auditorium.

Maryvale Municipal Golf Course 5902 W. Indian School Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 846-4022 John Martin (Manager)

Maryvale Park 4420 N. 51st Ave., Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 262-5030 Debbie Selleck (Manager)

Maryvale Play lot N. 65th Ave & W. Cherry Lynn Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 262-4539


Businesses – In the neighborhood Business Address Phone Contact America Transfer Inc. 5877 W. Indian School Rd.

Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 849-3388 N/A

Banana Communications 51st Ave & Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Bank of America 5401 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 245-3801 N/A

BBB Fashion 5251 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 846-6000 David Lee (Manager)

Blockbuster Video 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-1188 Ray Razo (Manager)

Candie’s Beauty Salon 5881 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 845-7100 Candie Smith (Owner)

Cash Time Title Loans Inc.

6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-6900 N/A

Check Into Cash 5243 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 849-2533 N/A

Check ‘N Go 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-0200 N/A

Chinese Gourmet 5301 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 846-3626 Bill Young (Owner)

CVS Pharmacy 59th Ave & Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Desert Valley Pediatrics 3802 N. 53rd Ave #160 Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-0883 Robert Altamura Lisa Ring Joseph Bonanno M Richard Levinson

Discotecas El Embrujo Musical


N/A

Dollar Store 5851 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Dollar Tree 5235 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 849-7113 Angel Tirado (Manager)

El Jacal 5889 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-4993 Dolores Wilson (Owner)

El Pollo Loco 6535 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-0702 Joe Massiello (President)

Fades & Cuts W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

N/A

Factory 2 U 5239 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

N/A

Farmers Insurance Group 5839 W. Indian School Rd (623) 247-7799 Louie Fratini


Phoenix, AZ 85033 (Manager) Feature Cuts 5243 W. Indian School Rd.

Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 247-7784 Angie Alegria

(Manager) Fry’s Food Store 6601 W. Indian School Rd.

Phoenix, AZ 85033 (623) 846-0622 N/A

H& R Block Tax Service 5127 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-7550 N/A

Hi-Health Supermart 5127 W. Indian School Rd. #1678 Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-6591 Julieta Young (Manager)

La Botana Restaurant 5881 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 873-4341 N/A

Laundromat 59th Ave & Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Long John Silvers 5368 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 245-0822 Spencer Montgomery (Manager)

Payday Loan Store of Arizona

W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Payless Shoe Source 5127 W. Indian School Rd. #A17 Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-3232 Irma Martinez (Manager)

Pizza Hut 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-7000 N/A

Preferred Water & Ice 5127 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 849-0599 Don Hansen (Manager)

Presto Pizza 5127 W. Indian School Rd. #107A Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-6368 Judith Villalobos (Owner)

Ray’s Barber Shop 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-5445 Ramon Magaleno (Owner)

Rent-A-Center 5243 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 269-5858 Tom Dunlap (Manager)

Rent-A-Center 59th Ave & Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

N/A

Rent-A-Center 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-4496 Frank Silvia (Manager)

Royal Reception Hall 5877 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Salon Glamour Latino 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 245-0075 Patricia Pacheco (Owner)

Smoke House 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 845-6080 K C Cantlin (President)

Smoke Shop 59th Ave & Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

St. Paul Lutheran Day Care Center


(623) 846-2235 Karen Moses (Executive Director)

Subway Sandwiches & Salads


(623) 245-0056 William Kenworthy (Manager)

Sun Devil Auto 3830 N. 51st Ave #A (623) 247-0603 Tony Romero


Phoenix, AZ 85031 (Manager) Superior Motor Vehicle Services


(623) 937-8598 Josephine Charles (Owner)

Susie’s Factory Direct 5127 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 245-9455 Cecilia Cardenas (Manager)

Teck Cell 5881 W. Indian School Rd. #8-1 Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 849-4700 Maria Quintana (Owner)

Tienda Santaneca 57th Ave & W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

N/A

U.S. Nails 5243 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 691-9298 Peter Vu (Owner)

Vina Nail 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-3103 Phuong Nguyan (Owner)

Volt Services Group 3802 Maryvale Parkway Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Walgreens 5127 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-1011 Susan Spencer (Manager)

Waterhouse 6601 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-7844 N/A

Wendy’s 5225 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-6037 Lisa Paredes (Manager)

Serves the neighborhood Another Level Barber Studio

4146 N 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033-3313

(623) 849-7191 Carl Holmes (Owner)

Adult Shoppe 5021 W. Indian School Rd Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 245-3008 Chris Latour (Chief Executive Officer

Bargain City Sales & Rental


(623) 247-0532 Ishmael Aguilar (Manager)

Basic Food Market 4002 N. 67th Ave #11 Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-7779 Art Persails (Manager)

Bill’s Mobil 6702 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-5375 Nancy Yassine (Manager)

Carniceria la Hereford 67th Ave & Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85033

N/A

Checker Auto Parts 59th Ave & Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Circle K 5850 W. Indian School Rd Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-3256 Bob Gates (Manager)

Clinica Hispana 6524 W. Indian School Rd. #B Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-7409 Shallu Vaid (Manager)

Da Spot 6534 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-2420 Dawn Litter (Owner)

Del Taco 4101 N 67th Ave (623) 247-5773 Hayde Gil (Manager)


Phoenix, AZ 85033 Denny’s 4120 N. 51st Ave

Phoenix, AZ 85031 (623) 247-4195 N/A

Desert School Federal Credit Union

51st Ave & Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Dollar Store 6804 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 845-9415 Amia Ragwani (President)

Don Pancho Panderia/Taqueria

4150 N 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 873-6220 Jose Cisneros (Owner)

Emergency Chiropractic Care


(623) 848-0800 Richard Mileuski (Manager)

Fallas Paredes 50th Ave & Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85033

N/A

Firestone Tire & Service 5045 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-6861 Steve White (Manager)

Fitness West 6850 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-6884 Pat Demars (Manager)

Fiesta Party Supply 67th Ave & W. Indian School Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85033

N/A

Goldberg & Osborne 50th Ave & W. Indian School Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Grand Stop III 4039 N. 51st Ave Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-4230 Jerry Yousif (Owner)

Haggard Chiropractic 6850 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 849-8000 Justin Haggard (Owner)

Hire Source Staffing 4002 N. 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 845-7200 Jill Fridley (Owner)

J & J Drive-in-Liquors 6532 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-6266 George Smith (Owner)

Jackson Hewitt Tax Service


(623) 247-9288 Melody Prasil (Manager)

Kaboom Beauty & Barber Salon

4002 N. 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-7850 N/A

Lam’s Seafood Market 6740 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-2941 N/A

Mariscos Altata Seafood 5828 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-0731 Mariscos Altata (Owner)

Maryvale Car Wash 5025 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-8166 Doug Sewell (Owner)

Maryvale Hospital Medical Center

5102 W. Campbell Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-5000 John Smithhilser (Chief Executive Officer)

May Garden Restaurant 5814 W. Indian School Rd Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 245-0052 N/A

Mega 99 Cent 6730 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-0601 Krim Kangiani (Owner)


Midas Auto Service Experts

6856 W. Indian School Rd Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-7291 Craig Howerton (Manager)

Mo Mo Gifts 6802 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-7730 Song Mun (Owner)

New China Buffet 4117 N. 51st Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 245-3535 Zhuseng Shi (Owner)

Peter Piper Pizza 4024 N. 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-8000 Rey Herkshan (Manager)

Phoenix West Animal Hospital


(623) 846-5965 Marion Ansems (Manager)

Popo’s Fiesta Del Sol 6542 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-2636 Betty Salazar (Owner)

Radio Shack 4109 N. 51st Ave Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-0460 Garrett Shaver (Manager)

Rainbow Donuts 5001 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 247-8778 Pete Carpanzano (Owner)

Rumors Bar 4134 N. 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-1916 Gloria Gordun (Owner)

Shell 6701 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-9445 Dee Hoisington (Manager)

Sizzler 5060 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-5524 Ricardo Soto (Manager)

Smile Care Dental Group 6524 W. Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 846-5555 Minoo Harsiny (Manager)

Today In Style Nail 4105 N. 51st Ave Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 849-2058 Duong Hoang (Owner)

Valley Wide Insurance 4153 N. 51st Ave #2T Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 245-2711 Raymond Luce (Manager)

Viva Check Cashing 4002 N. 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 247-1674 N/A

Wal-Mart 51st Ave & Indian School Rd. Phoenix, AZ 85031

N/A

Wells Fargo Bank 5120 W. Indian School Phoenix, AZ 85031

(623) 528-7330 Norman Balderrama (Manager)

West Phoenix Physicians LTD


(623) 247-1081 Arthur Miller

Westside General Practice


(623) 846-3186 Norma Anaya (Manager)

Whataburger 4030 N. 67th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85033

(623) 848-8991 Cathy Dean (Manager)


Appendix I

Key Indicators of Healthy Neighborhoods (Adapted from Anderson et al., 2003)


Key indicators of a healthy neighborhood and corollary intervention strategies (adapted from Anderson et al., 2003)

Healthy

Neighborhood Indicator

Example of


Component 1. Neighborhood Living Conditions Housing quality and safety • Tenant organizations & support

• Public programs to abate housing hazards (lead paint removal, rodent extermination)

• Child-proof homes (e.g., safety locks, poison symbols, scald-proof water controls)

• Protection against extremes in the climate • Removal of unsafe or abandoned buildings and

debris in vacant lots • Fire safety protection (e.g., inspections, detector

checks) • Neighborhood beautification

Safe neighborhoods • Neighborhood Watch programs • Rapid access to emergency personnel (e.g., fire,

police, and EMT) • Home security systems • Animal control • Neighborhood policing by residents • Reduction of gang activity • Reduction of street racing • Reduction of drug trafficking and neighborhood

“shooting galleries” • Increased sidewalks, recreation paths, and lighting • Reduction in liquor store density • Instruction on CPR/First Aid

Affordable housing • Support for subsidized housing • Shelter for low income and homeless populations • Housing units for low-income, single adults • Mixed-income housing

Building, improving, & retaining neighborhood assets

• Public libraries, schools, fire departments, hospitals, & parks

• Public information systems (media, Internet)


• Neighborhood businesses and home-based enterprises

• Cultural organizations and citizen associations • Religious organizations • Sports facilities and special interest clubs • Family resource centers • Supermarkets • Transportation systems (e.g., bus, rail, or car pools)


• Informal neighborhood social activities (e.g., sewing, book or gardening clubs)

• Mentoring programs (e.g., Big Brothers/Big Sisters, youth business mentoring, adopt-a senior programs)

• Involvement in community organizations (e.g., Kiwanis or Scouts)

• Senior Centers • After-school programs • Accommodations for the disabled • Elder day care • Park, recreation and exercise programs • Architecture designed to facilitate interaction (e.g.,

front porches, open spaces and access pathways) • Neighborhood planning to increase public meeting

spaces (e.g., plazas, parks, trails, local entertainment centers).

Component 2: Opportunities for Learning and Developing Capacity Early learning and child development opportunities

• Child development programs (e.g., Head Start)

• Parenting classes in schools, churches, or human

service agencies

• Training programs for providers of home-based

child-care

• High quality foster care systems

• Programs to support young mothers

Quality of educational systems • Schools as sites for human service support systems

(e.g., after-school programs, parenting programs, or

community support programs)

• Business support for local education

• Senior citizens serving as models and mentors in

schools


• Adequate public investment in education

• Competitive teacher salaries

• Programs to strengthen school-community

relationships

• Efforts to improve curricular standards

• Lower teacher-student ratios

• Curriculum focusing on community development and

health issues

Recreation and leisure activities for all ages

• YMCA/YWCA programs

• Boys and Girls Clubs

• Scouting programs

• Community sports for youth

• Community arts programs

• Public recreation programs and parks

• Local hobby clubs

• Adult recreational sports and exercise programs

• Senior activity programs

Life-long learning environment • Learning programs for all ages

• Leadership development for all ages

• Adult education programs

Component 3: Community Development and Employment Opportunities Economic viability • Enterprise zones

• Small loans to support locally owned businesses • Recruitment/retention of neighborhood stores and

services • Sustainable technologies • Job relocation to workers’ neighborhoods • Contract with community-based businesses • Small-business assistance • Local business clubs as resource for business

owners • University and community partnerships to advise

local business owners and provide student apprenticeships

• Policy and legislative safety nets during recessions


Job training, workforce development and employment opportunities

• K-12 exposure to entrepreneurial activities • Volunteer programs to mentor students in diverse

occupations • Youth internships in local service agencies and

businesses • Training of local residents for neighborhood

intervention programs • Junior Achievement programs in schools • School-based student businesses for neighborhood

services • Technical school scholarships by local businesses • Hiring of local residents in local businesses • Placement of service companies and light industries

in local neighborhood • Community jobs for people who are mentally and

developmental impaired • Federal and state jobs programs (e.g., job corps) • Roles for senior citizens in workplaces • Safe and equitable work conditions for new

immigrants • Quality, affordable child care for workers • Jobs that provide personal growth and fulfillment • Adequate health benefits • Financial safety in case of injury or illness

Component 4. Social Cohesion, Civic Engagement, and Collective Efficacy Civic engagement in communities • Voter registration drives

• Media spotlight on issues that need local input • Human service links with local faith communities • Civic clubs (e.g., Rotary, volunteer firefighters,

parent-teacher associations) • Enhanced sense of community around political

jurisdictions (e.g., City, Council District) • Non-categorized funding support for organizing

community action groups

Social engagement in communities • Neighborhood social clubs • Community centers or facilities for group meetings • Senior centers • Community day care programs (e.g., for youth,

elderly or disabled)


• Promotion of public leisure activities (e.g., concerts or festivals) in lieu of private activities (e.g., staying at home watching TV or video games)

• Increase opportunities and facilities for community volunteers to share knowledge (e.g., about arts, languages, or sports)

• Centers for community entertainment and leisure activities (e.g., theatre, bookstore, coffee-shop complex)

• Attractive, safe neighborhood meeting spaces (e.g., parks, playgrounds, or plazas)

Community infrastructure to maximize local decision-making

• Non-categorized funding support for community organizing

• Community coalition building • Training in negotiation/mediation skills for

community groups • Training programs for grassroots advocacy • Reinforcement of cultural heritage to build common

interests (e.g., language courses or Saturday schools to teach ethnic group customs and art)

Component 5. Prevailing Community Customs, Norms, and Processes Social solidarity and understanding across diverse groups

• Nondiscrimination policies • Affirmative action programs • Anti-stigma campaigns (AIDS, mental illness, etc.) • Freedom schools (like in the civil rights era) • Diversity training in schools and workplaces

Focal point for community growth and social support activities through religious organizations

• Increase locations for social support, leisure and spiritual fulfillment

• Increase locations for multi-cultural social interaction • Provide source of aid for community members • Increase outlets for members to provide community

service • Increase outlets for socialization across generations • Provide centers for all neighborhood residents

Embracing multi-cultural beliefs and customs

• Neighborhood multi-cultural festivals • Cultural arts sponsorship (music, dance, art) • Multi-cultural training for care providers • Increased multi-cultural sensitivity through

professional associations (e.g., American Medical and Nursing Associations)


• School-based programs that celebrate ethnic traditions

• Recognition and reinforcement of cultural behaviors that are protective of health

• Social and health services that are sensitive to cultural beliefs and customs

Support for community centers for socialization

• Provide community facilities for local group meetings • Public recreation facilities with programs for all ages • Increase after-school programs • Increase support or interest groups • Youth programs that provide alternative to

unsupervised leisure (e.g., music, sports, and art) • Senior centers for socializing, education, and leisure

activities Democratic norms for equal voice and influence for all community members

• Stimulation of community debates on issues of social equity (e.g., location of undesirable and desirable facilities)

• Attention to trends of increasing inequity in income and wealth and the consequences on health and social structure

• Increased community voice in local government • Encouragement of accountability of public agencies • Encouragement of accountability of private

companies (e.g., unsafe products or employment practices)

Component 6. Health and Human Services Opportunities and Promotion Community-defined goals for health and human service programs

• Community participation in health and human service decision-making

• Continuous access to health and human service information for decision-making

• Research driven by community-identified health and human service issues

• Community as equal collaborator in research on neighborhood

Accessible health and human service programs accessible

• Collaboration between health and human services and broader social, economic, and political sectors

• Use of media for community health education and raising of awareness of health and human service programs

• Access to quality programs for all ages • Coverage for preventive as well as curative or

intervention care


• Health and human service providers available for all populations

• Health-promotion curriculum in schools (self-esteem or health choices)

• Preventive care (hearing/vision screenings or therapy for speech and learning difficulties)

• School completion and parenting skills programs for adolescent parents

Culturally appropriate health and human services

• Multi-cultural providers • Interpreter services • Health and human service education materials in

multiple languages • Multi-cultural participation in designing and

evaluating health services Promoting health and disease prevention in the workplace

• Mental health promotion and care • Opportunities for exercise and healthy eating • Child care, child development centers • Opportunities to strengthen social networks • Opportunities for meaningful work experiences

Monitoring community health indicators

• Health indicators (e.g., preventable morbidity and mortality or health disparities)

• Socio-economic indicators (e.g., rates of employment, crime, or housing availability; surveys of quality community life)

Adapted from Anderson et al., 2003: The Community Guide’s Model for Linking to Social Environment to Health.

building the community health of maryvale village: a ... · foundation, the united phoenix fire...

Documents