Over the last few decades, sustainability has become a great focus for individuals as well as businesses globally. The focus of this study was to understand why businesses purchase certain office supplies and why they may not be choosing to purchase the most sustainable options. The research question asked, “why are certain businesses reluctant to make positive, sustainable changes to their usage of office materials in their workplace environments?” Most companies do not look for alternatives that would benefit the environment when purchasing products for their office space. The reasons behind this hesitancy to change was studied through current literature on the topic as well as interviews conducted with Office Managers of several different businesses. Comparisons were made between each businesses’ decision patterns in order to find the root cause or causes of why companies do not choose more sustainable options when purchasing products for their workspaces. The interviews revealed that cost and quality are the most important factors these businesses take into consideration when purchasing office supplies. While some companies have looked into alternative products for their supplies, they ultimately choose to still purchase the less sustainable option. This is because the less sustainable option is often cheaper, and the company knows what quality to expect for the item. Overall, all of the Office Managers who were interviewed acknowledged some sort of sustainable practice that their company was taking part in, even if it did not directly relate to the types of office supplies that they purchase. This inclusion of general sustainable practices demonstrates how businesses are making efforts one way or another towards a more sustainable future. Therefore, this awareness to sustainability suggests that most, if not all businesses will eventually end up purchasing sustainable alternatives for their office supplies. However, the timeframe for which this occurs for each company will likely vary.

Brundtland’s definition of sustainability is the ability to “meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs” (IISD, 2021). But what if there are no future generations? Social sustainability, the sector of sustainability that foregrounds the well-being and livelihoods of people (and thereby continuation of humanity), is included in definitions within the sustainability field, but less developed in sustainability practice. In an effort to bridge this gap of knowledge, 14 U.S. cities and over 100 sustainability policies were analyzed for their social sustainability performance. An eight-item analytical framework that deals with differing areas of social equity guided the analysis. Results found that most cities’ sustainability departments fell short of truly addressing social sustainability concerns. Out of the eight items, the most frequently addressed were housing security and racial and gender equality whereas few, if any, cities addressed the more specific social concerns of immigration, technology and media, or arts/cultural preservation. Future research is recommended to gain a better understanding of the ways existing cities can improve in this area.

It is well known that the lack of care coordination in the healthcare system causes numerous problems including cost inefficiency and inconsistent care, specifically for complex pediatric and adult patients. Many pediatric patients have complex medical and social service needs which can be expensive for both the patient’s parents and the general healthcare system. Therefore, it is difficult for the healthcare system to deliver the highest quality care possible, due to the number of appointments that have to be scheduled (with some being out of state), the large volume of physical health records, and overall lack of time parents have to coordinate this care while also caring for themselves and other family members. It is integral to find a more efficient way to coordinate care for these patients, in order to improve overall care, cost efficiency, and outcomes. <br/>A number of stakeholders in Arizona came together to work on this problem over several years. They were funded through a PCORI Eugene Washington Engagement grant to investigators at ASU. This project, Take Action for Arizona's Children through Care Coordination: A Bridge to Action was developed in order to further develop a research agenda and build the network (PCOR). Regional conferences were conducted in Flagstaff, Yuma, Phoenix, and Tucson, as well as a final capstone conference held in Phoenix. At these conferences, frustrations, suggestions, and opinions regarding Children with Special Health Care Needs (CSHCN) and navigating the healthcare system were shared and testimonials were transcribed.<br/>This study focused on the capstone conference. The study design was a strategic design workshop; results of the design analysis were analyzed qualitatively using descriptive content analysis. Themes described parent’s common experiences navigating the system, impacts resulting from such experiences, and desires for the care coordination system. Quotes were then grouped into major themes and subthemes for the capstone conference. After these themes were determined, the overarching goals of stakeholders could be assessed, and implementation projects could be described.