20120726 arb minutes

ARB - Meeting (Date in Title)

Agenda

1. Call to order
2. Roll Call
3. Approval of Agenda
4. Approval of Minutes
5. Report from Architecture Project
6. Review of Architecture Implications of Strategic Initiatives
7. BAM
8. Item2
9. Other business and planning
10. Adjournment

Meeting Information

HL7 ArB Work Group Meeting Minutes Location: Telcon		Date: 20120723 Time: 4:00pm U.S. Eastern
Facilitator	Parker, Ron	Note taker(s)	Julian, Tony
Attendee	Name	Affiliation
X	Bond,Andy	NEHTA
.	Constable, Lorraine	Constable Consulting Inc.
X	Curry, Jane	Health Information Strategies
.	Dagnall, Bo	HP Enterprise Services
.	Grieve, Grahame	Health Intersections Pty Ltd
X	Hufnagel, Steve	U.S. Department of Defense, Military Health System
X	Julian, Tony	Mayo Clinic
.	Loyd, Patrick	ICode Solutions
X	Lynch, Cecil	Accenture
.	Mead, Charlie	National Cancer Institute
X	Milosevic, Zoran	NEHTA
.	Ocasio, Wendell	Agilex Technologies
X	Parker, Ron	CA Infoway
.	Quinn, John	Health Level Seven, Inc.
.	Guests
.
.	Legend
.	Present
.	Absent
Quorum Requirements Met: Yes

Minutes

1. Minute Approval
   1. MOTION to approve minutes(Andy/Zoran)
   2. VOTE (7-0-0)
2. Architecture Implications of Strategic Initiatives(SI) - Jane Curry
   1. Dont speak to Awareness of customer base.
   2. Jane: Strategic Initiatives:
      1. We dont have measurable goals, so these are really goals instead of initiatives
      2. Most of part 1 are Board Level
      3. "Adoption" section does not have metrics
      4. 2.1.5 defines the beginning of a market segmentation analysis
      5. 2.2 is where the Business Architecture begins.
      6. Includes business, Board, and TSC requirements.
      7. 2.2.4 End to end V3/CDA template and implementation guide infrastructure has been developed
      8. Defines work, but requires work before TSC can implement
      9. 2.2.5 defines a task, but does not define measurability.
      10. 2.2.6 Vocab is working on aligning vocabulary across v2/v3/CDA.
      11. 2.3.1 Industry responsiveness has been demonstrated through the timely development and maintenance of key standards
      12. 2.3.2 HL7 Standards implementation has gotten easier
      13. 2.3.3 HL7 Education Plan has been developed
      14. 2.3.4 Tooling strategy has been developed - has been trialed by tooling. Grahame will come back to Board at the summer retreat with recommendation.
      15. 2.3.5 Product strategy has been developed - Not the same thing as product lines.
   3. Cecil: Issue is that there is a two-fold problem:
      1. Messaging and the Message Organizing and sending within a known enterprise
      2. Messaging in a Health Information Exchange is a larger problem. Developers are comfortable with the message space, but not what happens when the message leaves your boundaries.
      3. People dont know the implications of the OIDS in the exchange. - People are lost.
      4. Ron: Not enough guidance to use the standards.
      5. Cecil: Why are not all of the IT oids in the OID registry? There is an infrastructure/tooling issue.
      6. Jane: I realized working with the open health tools that HL7 exists in an ecosystem. The implementers are not all on the same page. We are not serving the OHT initiatives. IHE implementations: From an implementors perspective we are doing a disservice to our customers by not understanding the requirements.
      7. Jane: No one defined what "Easier to adopt" means. Would be better if we knew what it is. Our Business Architecture should not be anonymous to the GOM - needs to pay attention to IHE - Need to be more collaborative, make our work more accessible.
      8. There are Non-TSC governance issues galore.
      9. Ron: This is our opportunity to make comments about the SI to help the TSC meet them. We need to define assumption, abscences, and opportunities for actions by the TSC.
      10. Ron: The idea of broader engagement is interesting. Not sure how the TSC or Board would action them.
      11. Ron: This is good - we need to reframe for the TSC.
      12. Cecil: This is the same effort we had around SNOMED with TERMINFO. We need a similuar thing to make US MU usable.
      13. Jane: IHE is only one of other kinds of implementation strategies.
   4. Ron: How do we action what you have done?
   5. Jane: I defined the impact of the SI on the Business Architecture. We need to provide pushback to the TSC. There is no indication of how these are being actioned. Is there a delegation plan?
   6. Ron: TSC needs to map the SI to projects. We need to provide guidance to the TSC to go back to the Board where necessary. We should look at these,and assert where risks might be.
   7. Ron: Tony will put on agenda for next week.
3. GRID:
   1. Risk assessment goes back to the TSC
   2. Business architecture is
   3. SAIF glossary is Zoran.
   4. Ron will provide feedback to Austin and John - they may want revisions.
   5. Ron: Semantic web leave for the WGM - a Lloyd and Charlie thing.
   6. Ron: SAIF model IG will not get to until WGM. Ron will do templating of the Architecture at the WGM.
4. Adjournment at 4:50 PM Eastern.