Annual Infrastructure Report 2009, January 25, 2010

Major maintenance; health, safety, loss of use; and Americans with Disabilities Act deficiencies at the Capitol Complex and statewide for twelve agencies and divisions participating in the Vertical Infrastructure Program in collaboration with the Governor's Vertical Infrastructure Advisory Committee, including the Department of Administrative Services; the Department of Commerce, Alcoholic Beverages Division; the Department of Corrections; the Department of Cultural Affairs; the Department of Education, including Iowa Public Television and Iowa Vocational Rehabilitation Services; the Department of Human Services; Iowa Law Enforcement Academy; the Department of Public Safety; Terrace Hill; Iowa Veterans Home and Iowa Workforce Development. The advisory committee meets on a monthly basis to review the progress of the work and to make recommendations on procedures and priorities. Additional information on major maintenance projects is available in the advisory committee's Tenth Annual Report to the Governor, dated December 15, 2008.

Annual Infrastructure Report 2010 January 28, 2011

Major maintenance; health, safety, loss of use; and Americans with Disabilities Act deficiencies at the Capitol Complex and statewide for twelve agencies and divisions participating in the Vertical Infrastructure Program in collaboration with the Governor's Vertical Infrastructure Advisory Committee, including the Department of Administrative Services; the Department of Commerce, Alcoholic Beverages Division; the Department of Corrections; the Department of Cultural Affairs; the Department of Education, including Iowa Public Television and Iowa Vocational Rehabilitation Services; the Department of Human Services; Iowa Law Enforcement Academy; the Department of Public Safety; Terrace Hill; Iowa Veterans Home and Iowa Workforce Development. The advisory committee meets on a monthly basis to review the progress of the work and to make recommendations on procedures and priorities. Additional information on major maintenance projects is available in the advisory committee's Tenth Annual Report to the Governor, dated December 15, 2008.

Annual Infrastructure Report 2012, January 15, 2012

Major maintenance; health, safety, loss of use; and Americans with Disabilities Act deficiencies at the Capitol Complex and statewide for twelve agencies and divisions participating in the Vertical Infrastructure Program in collaboration with the Governor's Vertical Infrastructure Advisory Committee, including the Department of Administrative Services; the Department of Commerce, Alcoholic Beverages Division; the Department of Corrections; the Department of Cultural Affairs; the Department of Education, including Iowa Public Television and Iowa Vocational Rehabilitation Services; the Department of Human Services; Iowa Law Enforcement Academy; the Department of Public Safety; Terrace Hill; Iowa Veterans Home and Iowa Workforce Development. The advisory committee meets on a monthly basis to review the progress of the work and to make recommendations on procedures and priorities. Additional information on major maintenance projects is available in the advisory committee's Tenth Annual Report to the Governor, dated December 15, 2008.

Annual Infrastructure Report 2013, January 15, 2014

Major maintenance; health, safety, loss of use; and Americans with Disabilities Act deficiencies at the Capitol Complex and statewide for twelve agencies and divisions participating in the Vertical Infrastructure Program in collaboration with the Governor's Vertical Infrastructure Advisory Committee, including the Department of Administrative Services; the Department of Commerce, Alcoholic Beverages Division; the Department of Corrections; the Department of Cultural Affairs; the Department of Education, including Iowa Public Television and Iowa Vocational Rehabilitation Services; the Department of Human Services; Iowa Law Enforcement Academy; the Department of Public Safety; Terrace Hill; Iowa Veterans Home and Iowa Workforce Development. The advisory committee meets on a monthly basis to review the progress of the work and to make recommendations on procedures and priorities. Additional information on major maintenance projects is available in the advisory committee's Tenth Annual Report to the Governor, dated December 15, 2008.

2011 Annual Report for Appropriations from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund and Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund to the Watershed Improvement Fund

The Watershed Improvement Fund and the Watershed Improvement Review Board (WIRB) were created in 2005. This statute is now codified in Iowa Code Chapter 466A. The pmpose of the Watershed Improvement Fund is to enhance the water quality and flood prevention efforts in the state through a variety of impairment-based, locally­ directed watershed improvement projects. These projects are awarded grants through a competitive application process directed by the WIRB. Appropriations to the Fund do not revert. Interest earned on the moneys on the Fund are also retained in the Fund and are used to fund projects or pay per diem and expenses of the WIRB members. In state fiscal years 2009 (SFY2009) and 2010 (SFY2010), the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $5,000,000 from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund (RIIF). In SFY2011, the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $2,000,000 from the Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund (RBC2).

2012 Annual Report for Appropriations from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund and Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund to the Watershed Improvement Fund

The Watershed Improvement Fund and the Watershed Improvement Review Board (WIRB) were created in 2005. This statute is now codified in Iowa Code Chapter 466A. The purpose of the Watershed Improvement Fund is to enlmnce the water quality and flood prevention efforts in the state through a variety of impairment-based, locally­ directed watershed improvement projects. These projects are awarded grants through a competitive application process directed by the WIRB. Appropriations to the Fund do not revert except for the Capital Revenue Bonds II (RCB2) appropriation. Interest eamed on the moneys on the Fund are also retained in the Fund and are used to fund projects or pay per diem and expenses of the WIRB members. Starting July 1, 2012, the Fund is also receiving Animal Agriculture Compliance Fund Penalties. In state fiscal years 2009 (SFY2009) and 2010 (SFY2010), the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $5,000,000 from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund (RIIF). In SFY2011, the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $2,000,000 from the Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund (RBC2). No appropriation was received in fiscal year 2012. In SFY 2013, the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $1,000,000 from the RIIF.

2013 Annual Report for Appropriations from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund and Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund to the Watershed Improvement Fund

The Watershed Improvement Fund and the Watershed Improvement Review Board (WIRB) were created in 2005. This statute is now codified in Iowa Code Chapter 466A. The purpose of the Watershed Improvement Fund is to enhance the water quality in the state through a variety of impairment-based, locally-directed watershed improvement projects. These projects are awarded grants through a competitive application process directed by the WIRB. Appropriations to the Fund do not revert except for the Capital Revenue Bonds II (RCB2) appropriation. Interest earned on the moneys on the Fund are also retained in the Fund and are used to fund projects or pay per diem and expenses of the WIRB members. Starting July 1, 2012, the Fund is also receiving Animal Agriculture Compliance Fund Penalties. In state fiscal years 2009 (SFY2009) and 2010 (SFY2010), the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $5,000,000 from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund (RIIF). In SFY2011, the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $2,000,000 from the Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund (RBC2). No appropriation was received in fiscal year 2012. In SFY 2013, the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $1,000,000 from the RIIF.

2014 Annual Report for Appropriations from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund and Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund to the Watershed Improvement Fund

The Watershed Improvement Fund and the Watershed Improvement Review Board (WIRB) were created in 2005. This statute is now codified in Iowa Code Chapter 466A. The purpose of the Watershed Improvement Fund is to enhance the water quality in the state through a variety of impairment-based, locally-directed watershed improvement projects. These projects are awarded grants through a competitive application process directed by the WIRB. Appropriations to the Fund do not revert except for the Capital Revenue Bonds II (RCB2) appropriation. Interest earned on the moneys on the Fund are also retained in the Fund and are used to fund projects or pay per diem and expenses of the WIRB members. Starting July 1, 2012, the Fund is also receiving Animal Agriculture Compliance Fund Penalties. In state fiscal years 2009 (SFY2009) and 2010 (SFY2010), the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $5,000,000 from the Rebuild Iowa Infrastructure Fund (RIIF). In SFY2011, the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $2,000,000 from the Revenue Bonds Capitals II Fund (RBC2). No appropriation was received in fiscal year 2012. In SFY 2013, the Watershed Improvement Fund was appropriated $1,000,000 from the RIIF.

Evaluation of Post-Tension Strengthened Steel Girder Bridge Using FRP Bars, 2003

Many state, county, and local agencies are faced with deteriorating bridge infrastructure composed of a large percentage of relatively short to medium span bridges. In many cases, these older structures are rolled or welded longitudinal steel stringers acting compositely with a reinforced concrete deck. Most of these bridges, although still in service, need some level of strengthening due to increases in legal live loads or loss of capacity due to deterioration. Although these bridges are overstressed in most instances, they do not warrant replacement; thus, structurally efficient but cost-effective means of strengthening needs to be employed. In the past, the use of bolted steel cover plates or angles was a common retrofit option for strengthening such bridges. However, the time and labor involved to attach such a strengthening system can sometimes be prohibitive. This project was funded through the Federal Highway Administration’s Innovative Bridge Research and Construction program. The goal is to retrofit an existing structurally deficient, three-span continuous steel stringer bridge using an innovative technique that involves the application of post-tensioning forces; the post-tensioning forces were applied using fiber reinforced polymer post-tensioning bars. When compared to other strengthening methods, the use of carbon fiber reinforced polymer composite materials is very appealing in that they are highly resistant to corrosion, have a low weight, and have a high tensile strength. Before the post-tensioning system was installed, a diagnostic load test was conducted on the subject bridge to establish a baseline behavior of the unstrengthened bridge. During the process of installing the post-tensioning hardware and stressing the system, both the bridge and the post-tensioning system were monitored. The installation of the hardware was followed by a follow-up diagnostic load test to assess the effectiveness of the post-tensioning strengthening system. Additional load tests were performed over a period of two years to identify any changes in the strengthening system with time. Laboratory testing of several typical carbon fiber reinforced polymer bar specimens was also conducted to more thoroughly understand their behavior. This report documents the design, installation, and field testing of the strengthening system and bridge.

Report on a special investigation of the City of Garwin Ambulance Service for the period July 1, 2010 through March 31, 2015

Report on a special investigation of the City of Garwin Ambulance Service for the period July 1, 2010 through March 31, 2015

Effectiveness of a drug dosing service provided by community pharmacists in polymedicated elderly patients with renal impairment a comparative study

Background: Drug dosing errors are common in renal-impaired patients. Appropriate dosing adjustment and drug selection is important to ensure patients" safety and to avoid adverse drug effects and poor outcomes. There are few studies on this issue in community pharmacies. The aims of this study were, firstly, to determine the prevalence of dosing inadequacy as a consequence of renal impairment in patients over 65 taking 3 or more drug products who were being attended in community pharmacies and, secondly, to evaluate the effectiveness of the community pharmacist"s intervention in improving dosing inadequacy in these patients when compared with usual care. Methods: The study was carried out in 40 Spanish community pharmacies. The study had two phases: the first, with an observational, multicentre, cross sectional design, served to determine the dosing inadequacy, the drug-related problems per patient and to obtain the control group. The second phase, with a controlled study with historical control group, was the intervention phase. When dosing adjustments were needed, the pharmacists made recommendations to the physicians. A comparison was made between the control and the intervention group regarding the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy and the mean number of drug-related problems per patient. Results: The mean of the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy was 17.5% [95% CI 14.6-21.5] in phase 1 and 15.5% [95% CI 14.5-16.6] in phase 2. The mean number of drug-related problems per patient was 0.7 [95% CI 0.5-0.8] in phase 1 and 0.50 [95% CI 0.4-0.6] in phase 2. The difference in the prevalence of dosing inadequacy between the control and intervention group before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.73% [95% CI (−6.0) - 7.5] and after the pharmacists" intervention it was 13.5% [95% CI 8.0 - 19.5] (p < 0.001) while the difference in the mean of drug-related problems per patient before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.05 [95% CI( -0.2) - 0.3] and following the intervention it was 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 - 0.7] (p < 0.001). Conclusion: A drug dosing adjustment service for elderly patients with renal impairment in community pharmacies can increase the proportion of adequate drug dosing, and improve the drug-related problems per patient. Collaborative practice with physicians can improve these results.

Effectiveness of a drug dosing service provided by community pharmacists in polymedicated elderly patients with renal impairment a comparative study

Background: Drug dosing errors are common in renal-impaired patients. Appropriate dosing adjustment and drug selection is important to ensure patients" safety and to avoid adverse drug effects and poor outcomes. There are few studies on this issue in community pharmacies. The aims of this study were, firstly, to determine the prevalence of dosing inadequacy as a consequence of renal impairment in patients over 65 taking 3 or more drug products who were being attended in community pharmacies and, secondly, to evaluate the effectiveness of the community pharmacist"s intervention in improving dosing inadequacy in these patients when compared with usual care. Methods: The study was carried out in 40 Spanish community pharmacies. The study had two phases: the first, with an observational, multicentre, cross sectional design, served to determine the dosing inadequacy, the drug-related problems per patient and to obtain the control group. The second phase, with a controlled study with historical control group, was the intervention phase. When dosing adjustments were needed, the pharmacists made recommendations to the physicians. A comparison was made between the control and the intervention group regarding the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy and the mean number of drug-related problems per patient. Results: The mean of the prevalence of drug dosing inadequacy was 17.5% [95% CI 14.6-21.5] in phase 1 and 15.5% [95% CI 14.5-16.6] in phase 2. The mean number of drug-related problems per patient was 0.7 [95% CI 0.5-0.8] in phase 1 and 0.50 [95% CI 0.4-0.6] in phase 2. The difference in the prevalence of dosing inadequacy between the control and intervention group before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.73% [95% CI (−6.0) - 7.5] and after the pharmacists" intervention it was 13.5% [95% CI 8.0 - 19.5] (p < 0.001) while the difference in the mean of drug-related problems per patient before the pharmacists" intervention was 0.05 [95% CI( -0.2) - 0.3] and following the intervention it was 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 - 0.7] (p < 0.001). Conclusion: A drug dosing adjustment service for elderly patients with renal impairment in community pharmacies can increase the proportion of adequate drug dosing, and improve the drug-related problems per patient. Collaborative practice with physicians can improve these results.