Report of the State Highway Commission of Missouri

Title Varies: 1917-1920, Report of the State Highway Board of Missouri; 1921-1944, 1966/68-1968/70, Biennial Report of the Missouri State Highway Commission

Annual report on transport statistics in the United States.

Beginning with 1980, issued in two parts: Transport statistics in the United States. Part 1, Railroads, and; Transport statistics in the United States. Part 2, Motor carriers.

Annual report of the Chicago, Indianapolis & Louisville Railway Company.

Published: Chicago: Stromberg, Allen & Co., 1900-

Annual report on transport statistics in the United States.

Issued in parts.

Report of the Railway Accounting Officers

øissued{by{the{ørailway{øaccounting{��officers{øassociation��{1918\3��

Report of the proceedings of the ... biennial Convention of the International Fur Workers Union of the United States & Canada.

Mode of access: Internet.

Annual report

"A report covering the period from organization to November 30, 1907, was filed with the governor, as required by law, but was not printed." cf. First annual report. p. [3]

Critical review of Queensland's Crime and Misconduct Commission Inquiry into abuse of children in foster care : social work's contribution to reform

This paper profiles Queensland's recent Crime and Misconduct Commission Inquiry into the abuse of children in foster care. The authors welcome the outcome as an opportunity to highlight the problems encountered by child protection jurisdictions in Australia and internationally, and they applaud some of the Inquiry's findings. However, the paper argues that the path to reform is hampered by insufficient accountability by government and management, and an inadequate challenge to the ideologies underpinning contemporary child protection policy and practice. The authors conclude with a call to value and assert social work's contribution to child protection systems so as to vastly improve outcomes for children and families.

Independent review of ACT Corrective Services Alexander Maconochie Centre [Interim Report]

Under a Services Agreement dated 16th April 2010 the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) engaged Knowledge Consulting Pty Ltd to conduct an independent review of operations at the Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC) in the ACT. The Review was commissioned following a motion passed in the ACT Legislative Assembly as follows: “That this Assembly: (1) notes: (a) concerns regarding the operation of the AMC; (b) the unanimous findings of the Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety report, Inquiry into the delay in the commencement of operations at the Alexander Maconochie Centre; and (c) the Government’s intention to have a review into the operation of the AMC after its first year of operation; and (2) calls on the Government to: (a) commission an independent reviewer to conduct the one year review into the AMC; (b) ensure that the review be open and transparent and public, and include input from community and non-government groups with an interest or involvement in the AMC, including on the terms of reference for the review; (c) ensure the review is completed in a timely manner and be tabled in the Legislative Assembly immediately upon completion; and (d) report upon the progress of the review in August 2010;��

Charities and the industry commission

On 27 October 1994 the Industry Commission (the Commission) handed down a draft report on its inquiry into charitable organisations. The Commission had spent nearly 12 months investigating community social welfare organisations (CSWOs) including the appropriateness of the present taxation treatment of charitable organisations. The draft report makes recommendations for the taxation of CSWOs including alterations to their exemption from sales tax, fringe benefits tax and other indirect taxes with alterations to the threshold of tax deductible gifts and range of organisations qualifying for public benevolent status. This article examines the current taxation treatment for these organisations and the recommended changes made by the Industry Commission.

A taxing definition ��� a comment on the industry commission's draft proposals for defining community social welfare organisations

The draft report of the Industry Commission's charitable organisations inquiry introduces a new term for nonprofit organisations delivering human services. The new term is "community social welfare organisation" or "CSWO". The report recommends that tax deductibility of donations be extended such organisations. It then hints at making the definition of CSWO a standard criteria for state taxation exemptions. This paper examines the definition of the new term community social welfare organisation and charts its possible consequences if adopted by the federal government. The promise of tax deductibility status to previously shunned organisations is largely illusory. The Commission's aim of simplification through clarification of the definition is flawed and will not reduce the administration costs for the Australian Tax Office (ATO) or organisations.

CCi Submission to ALRC Copyright Inquiry

The attached report was prepared by Professor Terry Flew, Dr. Nicolas Suzor and Dr. Bonnie Liu of the Queensland University of Technology.   It was developed in consultation with Professor Stuart Cunningham, Professor Anne Fitzgerald, Associate Professor Axel Bruns, Associate Professor Jean Burgess (QUT), Professor Julian Thomas (Swinburne University of Technology), Professor Christoph Antons (Deakin University), and film producer Ms. Cathy Henkel (Virgo Productions and Adjunct Professor, QUT).

Submission to National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention from The Australian Psychological Society

Executive Summary The Australian Psychological Society categorically condemns the practice of detaining child asylum seekers and their families, on the grounds that it is not commensurate with psychological best practice concerning children’s development and mental health and wellbeing. Detention of children in this fashion is also arguably a violation of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. A thorough review of relevant psychological theory and available research findings from international research has led the Australian Psychological Society to conclude that: • Detention is a negative socialisation experience. • Detention is accentuates developmental risks. • Detention threatens the bonds between children and significant caregivers. • Detention limits educational opportunities. • Detention has traumatic impacts on children of asylum seekers. • Detention reduces children’s potential to recover from trauma. • Detention exacerbates the impacts of other traumas. • Detention of children from these families in many respects is worse for them than being imprisoned. In the absence of any indication from the Australian Government that it intends in the near future to alter the practice of holding children in immigration detention, the Australian Psychological Society���s intermediate position is that the facilitation of short-term and long-term psychological development and wellbeing of children is the basic tenet upon which detention centres should be audited and judged. Based on that position, the Society has identified a series of questions and concerns that arise directly from the various psychological perspectives that have been brought to bear on estimating the effects of detention on child asylum seekers. The Society argues that, because these questions and concerns relate specifically to improvement and maintenance of child detainees’ educational, social and psychological wellbeing, they are legitimate matters for the Inquiry to consider and investigate. • What steps are currently being taken to monitor the psyc hological welfare of the children in detention? In particular, what steps are being taken to monitor the psychological wellbeing of children arriving from war-torn countries? • What qualifications and training do staff who care for children and their families in detention centres have? What knowledge do they have of psychological issues faced by people who have been subjected to traumatic experiences and are suffering high degrees of anxiety, stress and uncertainty? • What provisions have been made for psycho-educational assessment of children���s specific learning needs prior to their attending formal educational programmes? • who are suffering chronic and/or vicarious trauma as a result of witnessing threatening behaviour whilst in detention? • What provisions have been made for families who have been seriously affected by displacement to participate in family therapy? • What critical incident debriefing procedures are in place for children who have witnessed their parents, other family members, or social acquaintances engaging in acts of self-harm or being harmed while in detention? What psychotherapeutic support is in place for children who themselves have been harmed or have engaged in self- harmful acts while in detention? • What provisions are in place for parenting programmes that provide support for parents of children under extremely difficult psychological and physical circumstances? • What efforts are being made to provide parents with the opportunity to model traditional family roles for children, such as working to earn an income, meal preparation, other household duties, etc.? • What opportunities are in place for the assessment of safety issues such as bullying, and sexual or physical abuse of children or their mothers in detention centres? • How are resources distributed to children and families in detention centres? • What socialization opportunities are available either within detention centres or in the wider community for children to develop skills and independence, engage in social activities, participate in cultural traditions, and communicate and interaction with same-age peers and adults from similar ethnic and religious backgrounds? • What access do children and families have to videos, music and entertainment from their cultures of origin? • What provisions are in place to ensure the maintenance of privacy in a manner commensurate with usual cultural practice? • What is the Government���s rationale for continuing to implement a policy of mandatory detention of child asylum seekers that on the face of it is likely to have a pernicious impact on these children���s mental health? • In view of the evidence on the potential long-term impact of mandatory detention on children, what processes may be followed by Government to avoid such a practice and, more importantly, to develop policies and practices that will have a positive impact on these children���s psychological development and mental health?