How a Bill Becomes a Law, September 18, 2008

A legislative bill is a written proposal for a law. Ideas for bills come from many sources: a legislator’s constituents, businesses, government agencies, professional associations, interest groups and other state legislatures. When a legislator recognizes or is made aware of a problem which could be pursued through legislation, that idea is put into the form of a bill. In Iowa, only legislators are able to sponsor and introduce bills. Bills may be sponsored by a Senator or Representative, or by a Senate or House committee. All bills must be approved by both the Senate and the House before being sent to the Governor for final approval. When a bill is introduced by members of a legislative chamber, it must follow a process and, if passed, be sent to members in the other legislative chamber where this process is repeated. The bill and its language must be in identical form from both chambers before being sent to the Governor.

How An Idea Becomes a Law, 2008

A flow chart of how an idea becomes a law.

Supporting interdisciplinary case studies: development and implementation of a joint learning environment for students in forensic science and criminal law

Scientific reporting and communication is a challenging topic for which traditional study programs do not offer structured learning activities on a regular basis. This paper reports on the development and implementation of a web application and associated learning activities that intend to raise the awareness of reporting and communication issues among students in forensic science and law. The project covers interdisciplinary case studies based on a library of written reports about forensic examinations. Special features of the web framework, in particular a report annotation tool, support the design of various individual and group learning activities that focus on the development of knowledge and competence in dealing with reporting and communication challenges in the students' future areas of professional activity.

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2004

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2005

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2006

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2007

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2008

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2009

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2010

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2011

Agency Performance Report

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy Performance Report, FY2014

Annual Report Created by Academy Director E.A. (Penny) Westfall

Iowa Law Enforcement Academy, Strategic Plan, 2012-2015

This report outlines the strategic plan for Iowa Law Enforcement Academy, goals and mission.

Appropriateness of initial treatment for severe Crohn's disease: application of EPACT criteria to the EC-IBD European cohort

Background: The appropriateness of use of therapy for severe active luminal Crohn's disease (CD) cases has never been formally assessed. The European panel on the appropriateness of Crohn's disease therapy [EPACT (http://www.epact.ch)] developed appropriateness criteria. We have applied these criteria to the EC-IBD prospectively assembled, uniformly diagnosed European population-based inception cohort of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) patients diagnosed between 1991 and 1993. Methods: 426 CD patients from 13 European participating centers (10 countries) were included at the time of diagnosis (first flare, naive patients, no maintenance treatment, no steroids). We used the EPACT definition of the severe active luminal CD, agreed upon by the panel experts (acute flare, hospitalized patient, without documented fistula or stenosis and who did not undergo surgery for abscess drainage or a fistulectomy). The various treatments were analyzed to determine the appropriateness of the medical decision, according to the EPACT criteria. Results: 84 (20%) patients met the inclusion criteria. Considering at least one appropriate (A) treatment as appropriate: 60 patients (71%) received an appropriate treatment, 24 patients (29%) an inappropriate treatment (I). Furthermore, in 87% of the cases with one appropriate treatment an additional mostly inappropriate treatment was added or continued. Detailed results are indicated in the table below. Conclusion: In the EC-IBD cohort, the treatment for severe active luminal CD was appropriate for more than 70% of the patients, but frequently an inappropriate treatment was continued or added, thus increasing the risk of adverse reactions, drugs interactions and costs.