Speed Management Toolbox for Rural Communities, TR-630, 2012

The primary objective of this toolbox is to summarize various known traffic-calming treatments and their effectiveness. This toolbox focuses on roadway-based treatments for speed management, particularly for rural communities with transition zones. Education, enforcement, and policy strategies should also be considered, but are not the focus of this toolbox. The research team identified treatments based on their own research, a review of the literature, and discussion with other professionals. This toolbox describes each treatment and summarizes placement, advantages, disadvantages, effectiveness, appropriateness, and cost for each treatment. The categories of treatments covered in this toolbox are as follows: horizontal physical displacement, vertical physical displacement, narrowing, surroundings, pavement markings, traffic control signs, and other strategies. Separate 3- to 4-page Tech Briefs for various aspects of this toolbox are attached to this record: Center Islands with Raised Curbing for Rural Traffic Calming, Colored Entrance Treatments for Rural Traffic Calming, Dynamic Speed Feedback Signs for Rural Traffic Calming, Transverse Speed Bars for Rural Traffic Calming. This toolbox and the tech briefs are related to the report Evaluation of Low Cost Traffic Calming for Rural Communities – Phase II, which is also included in this record or can be found at http://publications.iowa.gov/id/eprint/14769

Statewide Process and Comparative Outcomes Study of 2003 Iowa Adult and Juvenile Drug Courts, August 2009

A statewide evaluation of the six adult and three juvenile drug courts in operation during calendar year 2003 was conducted. Completion rates, recidivism, substance abuse treatment, and supervision and placement (juveniles only) costs were examined by model (Judge and Community Panel) and by Judicial District. In addition, adult drug court participants were compared with a group of offenders who were screened and declined or were rejected by drug court in 2003 (referred) and a sample of offenders starting probation in 2003 (probationer). The adult participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through December 31, 2007. This yielded an average post-program follow-up time of almost 3 years (2.9) for drug court participants. For the juvenile portion, drug court participants were compared with a group matched on several demographic and offense variables (Matched Comparison group) and juveniles referred to drug court who did not enter the program (Referred Comparison group). The juvenile participant and comparison groups were tracked from their entry into drug court, or the study, through approximately 16 quarters after program discharge with an end date of December 31, 2007.

Governor's Youth Race and Detention Task Force; Full Force, May 2009

This report, the Full Report, is the culmination of the Task Force’s responsibilities as set out in Executive Order 5, dated October 30, 2007. The Executive Order specifies a number of goals and report requirements.There is a commonly held perception that the use of detention may serve as a deterrent to future delinquency. Data in this report reflect that approximately 40% of youth detained in 2006 were re-detained in 2006. Research conducted by national experts indicates that, particularly for low risk/low level offenders, that the use of detention is not neutral, and may increase the likelihood of recidivism. Comparable data for Iowa are not available (national data studied for this report provide level of risk, but risk level related to detention is not presently available for Iowa). The Task Force finds no evidence suggesting that recidivism levels (as related to detention risk) in Iowa should be different than found in other states. Data in this report also suggest that detention is one of the juvenile justice system’s more costly sanctions ($257 - $340 per day). Other sites and local jurisdictions have been able to redirect savings from the reduced use of juvenile detention to support less costly, community-based detention alternatives without compromising public safety.

Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grand Fund Outcomes Report and FY2002 Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary, January 2002

This document contains two related, but separate reports. The Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund Outcomes Report is a summary of outcomes from services and activities funded through the Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund in FY2001. The Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary describes Iowa communities’ current prevention and sanction programs supported with funding from the Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning (CJJP) during FY2002. The material in Juvenile Crime Prevention Community Grant Fund Outcomes Report is presented in response to a legislative mandate to report specific prevention outcomes for the community Grant Fund. It includes a brief description of a Youth Development Results Framework established by the Iowa Collaboration for Youth Development. Outcomes are reported using this results framework, which was developed by a number of state agencies as a common tool for various state programs involving youth development related planning and funding processes. Included in this report is a description of outcomes from the prevention activities funded, all or in part, by the Community Grant Fund, as reported by local communities. The program summaries presented in the Juvenile Justice Youth Development Program Summary provide an overview of local efforts to implement their 2002 Juvenile Justice Youth Development plans and include prevention and sanction programs funded through the combined resources of the State Community Grant Fund and the Federal Title V Prevention, Juvenile Justice & Delinquency Prevention Act Formula Grant and Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant programs. These combined funds are referred to in this document as the Juvenile Justice Youth Development (JJYD) funds. To administer the JJYD funds, including funds from the Community Grant Fund, CJJP partners with local officials to facilitate a community planning process that determines the communities’ priorities for the use of the funds. The local planning is coordinated by the Iowa’s Decategorization Boards (Decats). These local officials and/or their staff have been leaders in providing oversight or staff support to a variety of local planning initiatives (e.g. child welfare, Comprehensive Strategy Pilot Projects, Empowerment, other) and bring child welfare and community planning experience to the table for the creation of comprehensive community longterm planning efforts. The allocation of these combined funds and the technical assistance received by the Decats from CJJP is believed to have helped enhance both child welfare and juvenile justice efforts locally and has provided for the recognition and establishment of connections for joint child welfare/juvenile justice planning. The allocation and local planning approach has allowed funding from CJJP to be “blended” or “braided” with other local, state, and federal dollars that flow to communities as a result of their local planning responsibilities. The program descriptions provided in this document reflect services and activities supported with JJYD funds. In many cases, however, additional funding sources have been used to fully fund the programs. Most of the information in this document’s two reports was submitted to CJJP by the communities through an on- line planning and reporting process established jointly by the DHS and CJJP.

State of Iowa 1998 Inmate Profile, 1999

This report was compiled at the request of the Department of Corrections. The first section describes Iowa’s prison inmate population at mid-year. The first section also provides a comparison of the mid-year 1998 prison population with the population one year ago, and five years ago. Included is analysis of sex, race/ethnicity, age categories, life terms, mandatory minimum sentences, number of sentences per inmate, and offense type. Following the statewide section are Facility Profiles that examine each Department of Corrections institution. The facility profiles cover the same types of information as the statewide report for mid-year 1998, except that committing county and judicial district, Board of Parole risk scores and sex are excluded.

Long-Range Goals for Iowa's Criminal & Juvenile Justice Systems, February 2005

Iowa Code Section 216A.135 requires the Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning Advisory Council (CJJPAC) to submit a long-range plan for Iowa's justice system to the Governor and General Assembly every five years. The Criminal and Juvenile Justice Advisory Council directed that the 2005 plan be developed with input from the public. A public hearing was held in September 2004, utilizing the Iowa Communications Network at 5 sites across Iowa. Using the information gained, the Council developed new goals and strategies and modified others from the 2000 plan. The 2005 Long Range Goals for Iowa’s Criminal and Juvenile Justice Systems, organized as follows, are meant to facilitate analyses and directions for justice system issues and concerns in Iowa.

Uniform Crime Reports as a Vehicle For Reporting State Wide Data on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, April 1998

This project is part of an effort conducted by the Justice Research and Statistics Association (JRSA) under a grant whose objective is to provide states with descriptions of existing methodologies to collect Domestic Violence (DV) and Sexual Assault (SA) data. JRSA has identified three different methodologies to collect such data: · Incident-based reporting as part of the Uniform Crime Reports · Specialized data collection from law enforcement through a separate data collection system · Specialized data collection coming directly from service providers. One state has been selected as an example of each type of data collection above, with Iowa selected as a representative of states with incident based reporting (IBR) as part of the UCR system.

Iowa Board of Nursing Annual Report, July 1, 2012-June 30, 2013

The annual report of the Iowa Board of Nursing includes information on legislation, administrative rules, nursing education, nursing practice, continuing education, licensing, enforcement, administration, financial report, statistics and general nursing demographics.

Iowa Board of Nursing Annual Report, July 1, 2012-June 30, 2013

The annual report of the Iowa Board of Nursing includes information on legislation, administrative rules, nursing education, nursing practice, continuing education, licensing, enforcement, administration, financial report, statistics and general nursing demographics.

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.

Iowa Truck Information Guide, July 2013-July 2014

The Iowa Department of Transportation and the offices of Motor Vehicle Enforcement, Vehicle and Motor Carrier Services, and Driver Services want to make your travels into and through our state safer, legal and less complicated. This book will address and clarify many of the rules and regulations concerning the operation of commercial vehicles in the State of Iowa. However, it is not possible to include every rule and regulation that may apply. If any questions exist, the reader is encouraged to contact other sources, including the agencies listed on pages 4 and 5 of this book.

Toolbox of Countermeasures for Rural Two-Lane Curves [updated], TR-579, October 2013

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that 58 percent of roadway fatalities are lane departures, while 40 percent of fatalities are single-vehicle run-off-road (SVROR) crashes. Addressing lane-departure crashes is therefore a priority for national, state, and local roadway agencies. Horizontal curves are of particular interest because they have been correlated with increased crash occurrence. This toolbox was developed to assist agencies address crashes at rural curves. The main objective of this toolbox is to summarize the effectiveness of various known curve countermeasures. While education, enforcement, and policy countermeasures should also be considered, they were not included given the toolbox focuses on roadway-based countermeasures. Furthermore, the toolbox is geared toward rural two-lane curves. The research team identified countermeasures based on their own research, through a survey of the literature, and through discussions with other professionals. Coverage of curve countermeasures in this toolbox is not necessarily comprehensive. For each countermeasure covered, this toolbox includes the following information: description, application, effectiveness, advantages, and disadvantages.

Governor's Office of Drug Control Policy Five-Year Strategic Plan July 1, 2010-June 30, 2015

The Office of the Drug Policy Coordinator is established in Chapter 80E of the Code of Iowa. The Coordinator directs the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy; coordinates and monitors all statewide counter-drug efforts, substance abuse treatment grants and programs, and substance abuse prevention and education programs; and engages in other related activities involving the Departments of public safety, corrections, education, public health, and human services. The coordinator assists in the development of local and community strategies to fight substance abuse, including local law enforcement, education, and treatment activities. The Drug Policy Coordinator serves as chairperson to the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The council includes the directors of the departments of corrections, education, public health, public safety, human services, division of criminal and juvenile justice planning, and human rights. The Council also consists of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, substance abuse prevention specialist, substance abuse treatment program director, judge, and one representative each from the Iowa Association of Chiefs of Police and Peace Officers, the Iowa State Police Association, and the Iowa State Sheriff’s and Deputies’ Association. Council members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The council makes policy recommendations related to substance abuse education, prevention, and treatment, and drug enforcement. The Council and the Coordinator oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive State of Iowa Drug Control Strategy. The Office of Drug Control Policy administers federal grant programs to improve the criminal justice system by supporting drug enforcement, substance abuse prevention and offender treatment programs across the state. The ODCP prepares and submits the Iowa Drug and Violent Crime Control Strategy to the U.S. Department of Justice, with recommendations from the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The ODCP also provides program and fiscal technical assistance to state and local agencies, as well as program evaluation and grants management.

Engineering Study Automating Iowa's Speed Monitoring Program, HR-228, 1983

Excessive speed on State and County highways is recognized as a serious problem by many Iowans. Speed increases both the risk and severity of accidents. Studies conducted by the FHWA and NHTSA have concluded that if average speeds were increased by five MPH, fatalities would increase by at least 2,200 annually. Along with the safety problems associated with excessive speed are important energy considerations. When the national speed limit was lowered to 55 MPH in 1974, a tremendous savings in fuel was realized. The estimated actual savings for automobiles amounted to 2.2 billion gallons, an average of 20.75 gallons for each of the 106 million automobiles registered in 1975. These benefits prompted the Federal-Aid Amendment of 1974 requiring annual State enforcement certification as a prerequisite for approval of Federal-aid highway projects. In 1978, the United States D.O.T. recommended to Congress significant changes in speed limit legislation designed to increase compliance with the national speed limit. The Highway Safety Act of 1978 provides for both withholding Federal-aid highway funds and awarding incentive grants based on speed compliance data submitted annually. The objective of this study was to develop and make operational, an automatic speed monitoring system which would have flexible capabilities of collecting accurate speed data on all road systems in Iowa. It was concluded that the Automatic Speed Monitoring Program in Iowa has been successful and needed data is being collected in the most economical manner possible.