State of Iowa Inmates at Mid-Year, 2001

This report was compiled at the request of the Department of Corrections. The statewide analysis of Iowa’s prison population at mid-year (June 30) 2001 includes the following information: · Type of Most Serious Offense (e.g., arson, assault, burglary, etc.) · Offense Class of Most Serious Offense · Sex · Race/Ethnicity · Age (median, or middle value) · Inmate Custody Level (minimum, medium, maximum security) · Educational Level (average) · Reading Score (average)

State of Iowa Inmates at Mid-Year, 2000

This report was compiled at the request of the Department of Corrections. The statewide analysis of Iowa’s prison population at mid-year (June 30) 2000 includes the following information: l. Type of Most Serious Offense (e.g., arson, assault, burglary, etc.) 2. Offense Class of Most Serious Offense 3. Sex 4. Race/Ethnicity 5. Age (median, or middle value) 6. Inmate Custody Scores (median value) 7. Educational Level (average) 8. Reading Scores (average)

Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Independent Auditor's Reports, Basic Financial Statements and Schedule of Findings, June 30, 2004

Other Audit Reports - 28E Organizations

Healthy Iowans 2010 Mid-Course Revision, July 2005

In the past century, public health has been credited with adding 25 years to life expectancy by contributing to the decline in illness and injury. Progress has been made, for example, in smoking reduction, infectious disease, and motor vehicle and workplace injuries. Besides its focus on traditional concerns such as clean water and safe food, public health is adapting to meet emerging health problems. Particular troublesome are health threats to youth: teenage pregnancies, violence, substance abuse, sexually transmitted diseases, and other conditions associated with high-risk behaviors. These threats add to burgeoning health care costs. A conservative estimate of $69 billion in medical spending could be averted through the impact of public health strategies aimed at heart disease, stroke, fatal and nonfatal occupational injuries, motor vehicle-related injuries, low birth weight, and violence. These strategies require the collaboration of many groups in the public and private sectors. Collaboration is the bedrock of public health and Healthy Iowans planning. At the core of Healthy Iowans 2000 and its successor, Healthy Iowans 2010, is the idea that all Iowans benefit when stakeholders decide on disease prevention and health promotion strategies and agree to work together on them. These strategies can improve the quality of life and hold down health care costs. The payoff for health promotion and disease prevention is not immediate, but it has long-lasting benefits. The Iowa plan is a companion to the national plan, Healthy People 2010. An initiative to improve the health of Americans, the national plan is the driving force for federal resource allocation for disease prevention and health promotion. The state plan is used in the same way. Both plans have received broad support from Republican and Democratic administrations. Community planners are using the state plan to help assess health needs and craft health improvement plans. Healthy Iowans 2010 was written at an unusual point in history – a new decade, a new century, a new millennium. The introduction was optimistic. “The 21st century,” it says, “promises to add life as well as years through improved health habits coupled with medical advances. Scientists have suggested that if these changes occur, the definition of adulthood will also change. An extraordinary number of people will live fuller, more active lives beyond that expected in the late 20th century.” At the same time, the country has spawned a new generation of health hazards. According to Dr. William Dietz of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), it has replaced “the diseases of deficiency with diseases of excess” (Newsweek, August 2, 1999). New threats, such as childhood overweight, can reverse progress made in the last century. This demands concerted action.

Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Independent Auditor's Reports, Basic Financial Statements and Schedule of Findings, June 30, 2005

Other Audit Reports - 28E Organizations

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2006

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2006

Long-Term Care Insurance Companies, September 2007

The companies on this list have been approved to sell long-term-care insurance in the State of Iowa. Customer service numbers are listed for each company. Please open pdf for the numbers.

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2007

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2007

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2008

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2008

Consumer Advisory Bulletin; Beware of “Debt Settlement” Companies, June 2010

The Attorney General’s Consumer Protection Division receives hundreds of calls and consumer complaints every year. Follow these tips to avoid unexpected expense and disappointments. This record is about: Beware of “Debt Settlement” Companies

Special investigation of the City of Humboldt and Mid Iowa Growth Partnership for the period January 1, 2007 through June 10, 2010

Special investigation of the City of Humboldt and Mid Iowa Growth Partnership for the period January 1, 2007 through June 10, 2010

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2010

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2010

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2011

Audit report on Mid-Iowa School Improvement Consortium, Carlisle, Iowa for the year ended June 30, 2011

Record of Decision Council Bluffs Interstate System (I-29, I-80 and I-480) Improvements Project TIER 1 Environmental Impact Statement Council Bluffs, Iowa to Omaha, Nebraska FHWA-IA- EIS-04-01F Project Number: IM-029-3(62)54—13-78 Submitted Pursuant to 42 USC 4332(2)(c) and 49 USC 303, October 2008

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approves the selection of the Reconstruction of All or Part of the Interstate (Construction Alternative) as the Preferred Alternative to provide improvements to the interstate system in the Omaha/Council Bluffs metropolitan area, extending across the Missouri River on Interstate 80 to east of the Interstate 480 interchange in Omaha, Nebraska. The study considered long-term, broad-based transportation improvements along Interstate I-29 (I-29), I-80, and I-480, including approximately 18 mainline miles of interstate and 14 interchanges (3 system, 11 service), that would add capacity and correct functional issues along the mainline and interchanges and upgrade the I-80 Missouri River Crossing. FHWA also approves the decisions to provide full access between West Broadway and I-29, design the I-80/I-29 overlap section as a dual-divided freeway, and locating the new I-80 Missouri River Bridge north of the existing bridge. Improvements to the interstate system, once implemented, would bring the segments of I-80 and I-29 (see Figure 1) up to current engineering standards and accommodate future traffic needs. This Record of Decision (ROD) concludes Tier 1 of the Council Bluffs Interstate System (CBIS) Improvements Project. Tier 1 included an examination of the area’s transportation needs, a study of alternatives to satisfy them, and broad consideration of potential environmental and social impacts. The Tier 1 evaluation consisted of a sufficient level of engineering and environmental detail to assist decision makers in selecting a preferred transportation strategy. During Tier 1 a Draft EIS (FHWA-IA- EIS-04-01D) was developed which was approved by FHWA, Iowa DOT, and Nebraska Department of Roads (NDOR) in November 2004 with comments accepted through March 15, 2005. The Draft EIS summarized the alternatives that were considered to address the transportation needs around Council Bluffs; identified reconstruction of all or part of the interstate, the “Construction Alternative,” as the Preferred Alternative; identified three system-level decisions that needed to be made at the Tier 1 level; and invited comment on the issues. The Final EIS (FHWA-IA- EIS-04-01F) further documented the Construction Alternative as the Preferred Alternative and identified the recommended decisions for the three system level decisions that needed to be made in Tier 1. This ROD defines the Selected Alternative determined in the Tier 1 studies.

Council Bluffs Interstate System Improvement Project Tier 2, Segment 3 Pottawatomie County, Iowa Environmental Assessment, March 2011

This Tier 2 Environmental Assessment (EA) presents the results of studies and analyses conducted to determine the potential impacts of proposed improvements in Segment 3 of the Council Bluffs Interstate System (CBIS) in the Council Bluffs metropolitan area. This document is tiered to the Tier 1 Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) that evaluated impacts of the overall CBIS Improvements Project, which includes five segments of independent utility1 This EA on Segment 3 of the Project is divided into the following sections: and encompasses 18 mainline miles of Interstate and 14 interchanges along Interstate 80 (I-80), Interstate 29 (I-29), and Interstate 480 (I-480). More information about the tiering process is found below under Project Background. • Section 1 provides background information on the Project and discusses the relationship between the earlier Tier 1 EIS and this Tier 2 EA. It also discusses the proposed action and the area studied, the purpose of the Project, and the need for the Project based on transportation problems that currently exist or are expected in the future. • Section 2, Alternatives, identifies the range of alternatives considered for Segment 3 to address the transportation problems identified in Section 1. It also identifies the alternatives retained for further study in this EA and the preferred Segment 3 alternative. • Section 3, Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences, describes the general environment for each resource affected by the proposed improvements. It also describes the potential environmental impacts of the Segment 3 Project and methods to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts. • Section 4, Disposition, lists the agencies and organizations that will receive copies of this EA and the locations at which this EA will be available for public review. • Section 5, Comments and Coordination, summarizes the agency coordination and public involvement efforts in conjunction with the Segment 3 Project. • Section 6, Conclusion and Recommendation, summarizes resource impacts. • Section 7, References, lists the sources cited in this EA. For Segment 3, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) determined that an EA is the appropriate level of Tier 2 study to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. The primary purpose of an EA is to clearly establish the significance of a project’s environmental impacts. That analysis is included in this document.