76 resultados para request
em Iowa Publications Online (IPO) - State Library, State of Iowa (Iowa), United States
Resumo:
Clarification of the word "intermediary" under the Improving Transition Outcomes Request for Proposals for becoming a Community Demonstration Prototype.
Resumo:
Request for Proposals under Improving Transition Outcomes with Iowa Vocational Rehabilitation Services.
Resumo:
Letter to the Colo-Nesco Community School District as a result of reaudit procedures performed at the request of the Superintendent pursuant to Chapter 11.6(4)(a)(2) of the Code of Iowa for the period July 1, 2007 through June 30, 2008
Resumo:
This Voter Guide is intended to help all eligible Iowans, regardless of health or physical disability, to register and vote on election day. This guide contains information on voter registration, voting accessibility, absentee voting and important election dates and deadlines. The Iowa Department for the Blind has an audio cassette version of this Voter Guide available for your convenience. NOTE: THIS VOTER GUIDE WAS VALID THROUGH 2003. IF YOU WANT THE CURRENT VOTER INFORMATION INCLUDING THE ABSENTEE BALLOT REQUEST FORM GO TO: http://www.sos.state.ia.us/elections/index.html
Resumo:
Monthly newsletter for public safety. Information in this document has been redacted at the request of one of the named individuals. To examine the unedited document, please contact Iowa Library Services / State Library of Iowa – Main Library, 1112 E. Grand Avenue, Des Moines, IA 50319, (515) 242-6542, 1-800-248-4483.
Resumo:
Monthly newsletter for public safety. Information in this document has been redacted at the request of one of the named individuals. To examine the unedited document, please contact Iowa Library Services / State Library of Iowa – Main Library, 1112 E. Grand Avenue, Des Moines, IA 50319, (515) 242‐6542, 1‐800‐248‐4483.
Resumo:
Monthly newsletter for public safety. Information in this document has been redacted at the request of one of the named individuals. To examine the unedited document, please contact Iowa Library Services / State Library of Iowa – Main Library, 1112 E. Grand Avenue, Des Moines, IA 50319, (515) 242-6542, 1-800-248-4483.
Resumo:
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)
Resumo:
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)
Resumo:
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) 1999 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 Scores (median value) • Educational Level (average) • Reading Scores (average)
Resumo:
This paper presents a detailed report of the representative farm analysis (summarized in FAPRI Policy Working Paper #01-00). At the request of several members of the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the U.S. Senate, we have continued to analyze the impacts of the Farmers’ Risk Management Act of 1999 (S. 1666) and the Risk Management for the 21st Century Act (S. 1580). Earlier analysis reported in FAPRI Policy Working Paper #04-99 concentrated on the aggregate net farm income and government outlay impacts. The representative farm analysis is conducted for several types of farms, including both irrigated and non-irrigated cotton farms in Tom Green County, Texas; dryland wheat farms in Morton County, North Dakota and Sumner County, Kansas; and a corn farm in Webster County, Iowa. We consider additional factors that may shed light on the differential impacts of the two plans. 1. Farm-level income impacts under alternative weather scenarios. 2. Additional indirect impacts, such as a change in ability to obtain financing. 3. Implications of within-year price shocks. Our results indicate that farmers who buy crop insurance will increase their coverage levels under S. 1580. Farmers with high yield risk find that the 65 percent coverage level maximizes expected returns, but some who feel that they obtain other benefits from higher coverage will find that the S. 1580 subsidy schedule significantly lowers the cost of obtaining the additional coverage. Farmers with lower yield risk find that the increased indemnities from additional coverage will more than offset the increase in producer premium. In addition, because S. 1580 extends its increased premium subsidy percentages to revenue insurance products, farmers will have an increased incentive to buy revenue insurance. Differences in the ancillary benefits from crop insurance under the baseline and S. 1580 would be driven by the increase in insurance participation and buy-up. Given the same levels of insurance participation and buy-up, the ancillary benefits under the two scenarios would be the same.
Resumo:
The Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning issued its first state legislation monitoring report in February 2002, covering the first six months’ impact of Senate File 543 (which enacted a number of sentencing changes) on the justice system; monitoring of the correctional impact of this bill was at the request of several members of the legislature. Since then, the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Advisory Council has requested that CJJP monitor the correctional impact of enacted legislation of particular interest. This report covers monitoring results or future plans to monitor the following: 1. Changes in “crack” cocaine and “powder” cocaine penalties under Chapter 124.401 (effective FY2004; see p.3). 2. Commitments to prison involving manufacture, distribution, or possession of methamphetamine under Chapter 124.401 (see p.5). 3. Prosecution of offenders for child endangerment under Chapter 726.6(g) for permitting the presence of a child or minor at a location where a controlled substance manufacturing or a product possession violation occurs (see p.7). 4. Provision of an enhanced penalty for manufacturing of controlled substances under Chapter 124.401C when children are present and the offender is not charged under section 726.6(g) (see p. 7). 5. Creating a new offense when a retailer sells more than two packages of any product containing pseudoephedrine (chapter 126.23A) and providing for an enhanced penalty under Chapter 714.7C when a theft involves more than two packages of similar products (see p.8). 6. Establishment of parole eligibility at 70% of time served for persons sentenced under the “85% law” provisions of Iowa Code Section 902.12. (effective FY2005; see p. 9).
Resumo:
The Iowa Watershed Improvement Review Board was created by the Iowa Legislature and signed into law by the Governor in 2005 as Senate File 200. This statute is now codified in Iowa Code Chapter 466A. The fifteen-member board was appointed with the initial meeting being held August 22, 2005. Subsequent Board meetings were held October 10, December 2, and December 19. Attachment 1 lists the board members and their organization affiliation. The Board created a five-member subcommittee to develop and submit to the Board the Request for Applications (RFA) documents and procedural guidelines. These RFA documents were approved as modified on October 10, 2005.
Resumo:
At the request of the Government Oversight Committee, the Ombudsman gathered information regarding competition by county Soil and Water Conservation Districts (SWCD) with small business through the sale of products and services. The goal of the Ombudsman’s review was to assist the Government Oversight Committee (Committee) in gaining an objective understanding of the issues so the Committee can ascertain whether there is a problem that requires legislation this legislative session. The Ombudsman focused on gathering specific information from four SWCD offices in central Iowa; Dallas, Greene, Guthrie and Jasper. These offices were specifically identified in documentation presented to the Government Oversight Committee by affected small business owners (contractors), Jon Judson of Diversity Farms and Dan Brouse of Iowa Restorations. However, with 100 SWCDs in Iowa,1 each with their own elected commissioners and each with different practices, priorities and fundraising activities, what the Ombudsman learned about these four counties may not be applicable to all the SWCDs in Iowa. The Ombudsman assigned the case to the Assistant Citizens’ Aide/Ombudsman for Small Business, Kristie Hirschman. For reference purposes in this report, actions taken by Ms. Hirschman will be ascribed to the Ombudsman.
Resumo:
The Iowa Watershed Improvement Review Board (WIRB) was created by the Iowa Legislature and signed into law by the Governor in 2005 as Senate File 200. This statute is now codified in Iowa Code Chapter 466A. The fifteen-member Board conducted eight meetings throughout the year in-person or via teleconference. Meetings were held January 24, February 27, March 13, May 15, August 7, September 20, October 6, and December 18. Attachment 3 lists the board members and their organization affiliation. The Board appointed a five-member subcommittee to review and revise the Request For Applications (RFA) documents and submit recommendations to the full Board. The RFA documents were approved as modified at the May 15, 2006 Board meeting.