FRAX® International Task Force of the 2010 Joint International Society for Clinical Densitometry & International Osteoporosis Foundation Position Development Conference.

Osteoporosis is a serious worldwide epidemic. FRAX® is a web-based tool developed by the Sheffield WHO Collaborating Center team, that integrates clinical risk factors and femoral neck BMD and calculates the 10 year fracture probability in order to help health care professionals identify patients who need treatment. However, only 31 countries have a FRAX® calculator. In the absence of a FRAX® model for a particular country, it has been suggested to use a surrogate country for which the epidemiology of osteoporosis most closely approximates the index country. More specific recommendations for clinicians in these countries are not available. In North America, concerns have also been raised regarding the assumptions used to construct the US ethnic specific FRAX® calculators with respect to the correction factors applied to derive fracture probabilities in Blacks, Asians and Hispanics in comparison to Whites. In addition, questions were raised about calculating fracture risk in other ethnic groups e.g., Native Americans and First Canadians. The International Society for Clinical Densitometry (ISCD) in conjunction with the International Osteoporosis Foundation (IOF) assembled an international panel of experts that ultimately developed joint Official Positions of the ISCD and IOF advising clinicians regarding FRAX® usage. As part of the process, the charge of the FRAX® International Task Force was to review and synthesize data regarding geographic and race/ethnic variability in hip fractures, non-hip osteoporotic fractures, and make recommendations about the use of FRAX® in ethnic groups and countries without a FRAX® calculator. This synthesis was presented to the expert panel and constitutes the data on which the subsequent Official Positions are predicated. A summary of the International Task Force composition and charge is presented here.

Iowa Sex Offender Treatment and Supervision Task Force Report to the Iowa General Assembly, January 15, 2006

Over the last several years, lawmakers have been responding to several highly publicized child abduction, assault and murder cases. While such cases remain rare in Iowa, the public debates they have generated are having far-reaching effects. Policy makers are responsible for controlling the nature of such effects. Challenges they face stem from the need to avoid primarily politically-motivated responses and the desire to make informed decisions that recognize both the strengths and the limitations of the criminal justice system as a vehicle for promoting safe and healthy families and communities. Consensus was reached by the Task Force at its first meeting that one of its standing goals is to provide nonpartisan guidance to help avoid or fix problematic sex offense policies and practices. Setting this goal was a response to the concern over what can result from elected officials’ efforts to respond to the types of sex offender-related concerns that can easily become emotionally laden and politically charged due to the universally held abhorrence of sex crimes against children. The meetings of the Task Force and the various work groups it has formed have included some spirited and perhaps emotionally charged discussions, despite the above-stated ground rule. However, as is described in the report, the Task Force’s first set of recommendations and plans for further study were approved through consensus. It is hoped that in upcoming legislative deliberations, it will be remembered that the non-legislative members of the Task Force all agreed on the recommendations contained in this report. The topics discussed in this first report from the Task Force are limited to the study issues specifically named in H.F. 619, the Task Force’s enabling legislation. However, other topics of concern were discussed by the Task Force because of their immediacy or because of their possible relationships with one or more of the Task Force’s mandated study issues. For example, it has been reported by some probation/parole officers and others that the 2000 feet rule has had a negative influence on treatment participation and supervision compliance. While such concerns were noted, the Task Force did not take it upon itself to investigate them at this time and thus broaden the agenda it was given by the General Assembly last session. As a result, the recently reinstated 2000 feet rule, the new cohabitation/child endangerment law and other issues of interest to Task Force members but not within the scope of their charge are not discussed in the body of this report. An issue of perhaps the greatest interest to most Task Force members that was not a part of their charge was a belief in the benefit of viewing Iowa’s efforts to protect children from sex crimes with as comprehensive a platform as possible. It has been suggested that much more can be done to prevent child-victim sex crimes than would be accomplished by only concentrating on what to do with offenders after a crime has occurred. To prevent child victimization, H.F. 619 policy provisions rely largely on incapacitation and future deterrent effects of increased penalties, more restrictive supervision practices and greater public awareness of the risk presented by a segment of Iowa’s known sex offenders. For some offenders, these policies will no doubt prevent future sex crimes against children, and the Task Force has begun long-term studies to look for the desired results and for ways to improve such results through better supervision tools and more effective offender treatment. Unfortunately, much of the effects from the new policies may primarily influence persons who have already committed sex offenses against minors and who have already been caught doing so. Task Force members discussed the need for a range of preventive efforts and a need to think about sex crimes against children from other than just a “reaction- to-the-offender” perspective. While this topic is not addressed in the report that follows, it was suggested that some of the Task Force’s discussions could be briefly shared through these opening comments. Along with incapacitation and deterrence, comprehensive approaches to the prevention of child-victim sex crimes would also involve making sure parents have the tools they need to detect signs of adults with sex behavior problems, to help teach their children about warning signs and to find the support they need for healthy parenting. School, faithbased and other community organizations might benefit from stronger supports and better tools they can use to more effectively promote positive youth development and the learning of respect for others, respect for boundaries and healthy relationships. All of us who have children, or who live in communities where there are children, need to understand the limitations of our justice system and the importance of our own ability to play a role in preventing sexual abuse and protecting children from sex offenders, which are often the child’s own family members. Over 1,000 incidences of child sexual abuse are confirmed or founded each year in Iowa, and most such acts take place in the child’s home or the residence of the caretaker of the child. Efforts to prevent child sexual abuse and to provide for early interventions with children and families at risk could be strategically examined and strengthened. The Sex Offender Treatment and Supervision Task Force was established to provide assistance to the General Assembly. It will respond to legislative direction for adjusting its future plans as laid out in this report. Its plans could be adjusted to broaden or narrow its scope or to assign different priority levels of effort to its current areas of study. Also, further Task Force considerations of the recommendations it has already submitted could be called for. In the meantime, it is hoped that the information and recommendations submitted through this report prove helpful.

Evaluation de la permanence téléphonique 0800 801 381 du Programme intercantonal de lutte contre la dépendance au jeu (PILDJ)

[Sommaire] Résumé. 1. Introduction. 2. Mandat et méthode. 3. Description et analyse de la permanence téléphonique 0800 801 381 (Fonctionnement - Evolution des appels - Analyse de la clientèle en 2010 - Synthèse des données statistiques - Stratégies de promotion de la permanence - Statistiques du site www.sos-jeu.ch). 4. Autres lignes d'aide en Suisse. 5. Autres type d'offres en Suisse romande pour les personnes dépendantes au jeu. 6. Lignes téléphoniques d'aide dédiées au jeu au niveau international. 7. Réponses aux questions d'évaluation et recommandations. Annexes. Bibliogr. p. 79

Report of Task Force into Critical Incidents within the Iowa Prison System, 2004

Report #02-04 Concerns about the death of two Iowa inmates at the Anamosa State Penitentiary, asked the Ombudsman Office to review the incidents and provide an assessment of each incident. The Governor also asked the Ombudsman Office to propose a set of recommendations for improving inmate and staff safety within Anamosa State Penitentiary.

Audit report on a special investigation of the Bear Creek Narcotics Task Force for the period July 1, 2003 through November 30, 2006

Audit report on a special investigation of the Bear Creek Narcotics Task Force for the period July 1, 2003 through November 30, 2006

Summary Report for the Iowa Alzheimer's Task Force 2007 from the Iowa Alzheimer's Disease Demonstration Projects

The Iowa Department of Elder Affairs, in collaboration with the University of Iowa College of Nursing, has been engaged in developing and evaluating community based services for persons with dementia in the state of Iowa over the past 7 years under a grant form the Administration on Aging. This grant tested out several models of care (dementia nurse care manager, memory loss nurse specialist, “People Living Alone Need Support” (PLANS), varying models of respite care), surveyed agencies and service providers in regard to how they provide services for persons with dementia, and provided training to case management, community college instructors, adult day service providers and other related services providers including assisted living and nursing home facilities.

Final Report: 2007 Alzheimer's Disease Task Force, January 2008

Following an overview of the history of the task force and background information on Alzheimer’s disease, the report is divided into four sections. These sections correspond to the delineation of four subcommittees into which task force members were divided. It should be noted that the term “Alzheimer’s Disease” is used to encompass not only Alzheimer’s disease but also additional brain disorders such as vascular dementia, mixed dementia, mild cognitive impairment, dementia with Lewy bodies, and other types of dementia. Interspersed throughout the report are verbatim comments received from Iowans who responded to on-line surveys about how Alzheimer’s disease has affected their lives. Their words poignantly give voice to the emotions, frustrations, and hopes of Iowans who are personally experiencing the impact of Alzheimer’s disease. The Report includes 22 recommendations to the Iowa General Assembly designed to improve the availability and quality of services for people with dementia, their caregivers, and their families. The recommendations fall into four categories; a) Education and Training; b) Services and Housing; c) Wellness and Disease Management; and, d) Funding and Reimbursement.

Agriculture and Environment Task Force Report To the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission, August 2008

The Rebuild Iowa Agriculture and Environment Task Force respectfully submits its report to the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission (RIAC) for consideration of the impacts of the tornadoes, storms, high winds, and flooding affecting Iowa’s agriculture sector and environment. The Task Force was required to address very complex and multi-faceted issues. Understanding that there were a broad range of immediate concerns, as well as critical issues that need to be addressed in the future, the Task Force structured its work in two sessions. To better address the issues and priorities of the Task Force, this report categorizes the issues as agriculture, conservation, environment, and livestock.

Cultural Heritage and Records Retention Task Force Report, August 2008

The Rebuild Iowa Cultural Heritage and Records Retention Task Force respectfully submits its report to the Rebuild Iowa Advisory Commission (RIAC) for its consideration of the impacts of the tornadoes, storms, and flooding on Iowans and their cultural, historical, and arts institutions and organizations and records collections and archives. As the RIAC fulfills its obligations to guide the recovery and reconstruction of Iowa, the cknowledgement that culture and records as Iowa’s identity is important, and that if these items of cultural heritage vanish from Iowa’s landscape, the items that Iowans associate with their history, traditions, and sense of place also disappears. Iowa is certainly not the only state that has experienced this type of disaster; however, many states have not recognized culture and records as critical concerns as part of the recovery and rebuilding process. When rebuilding Iowa stronger, smarter, and safer, quality of life is an important consideration for attracting new residents, making it a necessity to keep culture alive and thriving in Iowa. Additionally, the cultural arts constitute a vital economic industry, providing employment to thousands of Iowa’s citizens and generating millions of dollars in local and government revenue across the state. In the case of records, these items are irreplaceable and provide important information for the daily workings of government and life in our state, and maintain vital records of Iowa’s heritage and traditions. This report provides background information on the damages incurred in Iowa from the disasters and additional context for policy and rebuilding discussions. It also offers recommendations to the RIAC for steps that might be taken to address the significant and important challenges faced by Iowa’s cultural, historical, and arts institutions and organizations; individual artists and other cultural workers; and records retention entities and officials.