780 resultados para Work-family issues
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
Background: Annotations of completely sequenced genomes reveal that nearly half of the genes identified are of unknown function, and that some belong to uncharacterized gene families. To help resolve such issues, information can be obtained from the comparative analysis of homologous genes in model organisms. Results: While characterizing genes from the retinitis pigmentosa locus RP26 at 2q31-q33, we have identified a new gene, ORMDL1, that belongs to a novel gene family comprising three genes in humans (ORMDL1, ORMDL2 and ORMDL3), and homologs in yeast, microsporidia, plants, Drosophila, urochordates and vertebrates. The human genes are expressed ubiquitously in adult and fetal tissues. The Drosophila ORMDL homolog is also expressed throughout embryonic and larval stages, particularly in ectodermally derived tissues. The ORMDL genes encode transmembrane proteins anchored in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Double knockout of the two Saccharomyces cerevisiae homologs leads to decreased growth rate and greater sensitivity to tunicamycin and dithiothreitol. Yeast mutants can be rescued by human ORMDL homologs. Conclusions: From protein sequence comparisons we have defined a novel gene family, not previously recognized because of the absence of a characterized functional signature. The sequence conservation of this family from yeast to vertebrates, the maintenance of duplicate copies in different lineages, the ubiquitous pattern of expression in human and Drosophila, the partial functional redundancy of the yeast homologs and phenotypic rescue by the human homologs, strongly support functional conservation. Subcellular localization and the response of yeast mutants to specific agents point to the involvement of ORMDL in protein folding in the ER.
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
For people with disabilities, however, housing options have been limited. Today, state and federal laws are changing this. Who will benefit? All of us. For “accessibility” is an issue that, at one time or another, affects us all. This is true whether _ temporarily or permanently _ we use wheelchairs, need grab bars, cannot climb stairs, require easy-to-reach shelves, or rely on easy-to-navigate living spaces. The primary purpose of accessible housing law is to prevent discrimination against people with disabilities, but the end result is a living environment that is more usable for everyone. For example, both the very young and the very old will find an accessible dwelling more comfortable. People with temporary limitations due to injury or illness will find it easier to live in. Such a home will be more welcoming to guests with disabilities.
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
A-1 - Monthly Public Assistance Statistical Report Family Investment Program
Resumo:
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.
