This wiki has undergone a migration to Confluence found Here
20180116 US Realm SC Call
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
back to US_Realm_Steering_Committee
back to US_Realm_Steering_Committee_Conference_Calls
| US Realm Steering Committee Call Agenda/Minutes |
Date: 2018-01-16 Time: 1 PM Eastern | ||
| Co-Chairs | Ed/Brett | Note taker(s) | Anne |
| Attendee / Name | |||||
| x | Calvin Beebe | Keith Boone | x | Hans Buitendijk | |
| Lorraine Constable | Johnathan Coleman | x | Ed Hammond | ||
| x | Tony Julian | x | Paul Knapp | Austin Kreisler | |
| Brett Marquard | Ken McCaslin | Nancy Orvis | |||
| Brian Pech | x | Wayne Kubick | x | Christol Green | |
| Sandra Stuart | . | Pat Van Dyke | . | Craig Parker | |
| Danielle Friend | x | Eric Haas | x | Jenni Syed | |
| x | Steve Posnak | . | David Susanto | x | John Roberts |
| Visitor/ Name | |||||
| x | Craig Gabron | x | Bob Dieterle | x | Lenel James |
| Quorum: Chair + 7 | |||||
Agenda
Administrivia
- Agenda review
- Review notes from 2018-01-09_US_Realm_SC_Call
- Review Items
Discussion:
- Review of any outstanding issues
Minutes
- Agenda review
- Review notes from 2018-01-09_US_Realm_SC_Call
- Review Items
- DaVinci PSS
- Lenel introduces the PSS. Is a public sector initiative. Assembles a multi-stake holder group consisting of payers, providers, HIT vendors, HL7, and CMS. Bob Dieterle continues with details of the project. US Realm Steering Committee is listed as the sponsor. Ed notes that he doesn't understand US Realm being the sponsor, although there aren't really other possibilities. We need to recognize a great deal of other detail must be provided regarding the relationships. There are probably other groups that are similar that have a different perspective. Eric: Is this an HL7 driven process or is it independent?
- Discussion over Argonaut items not being balloted through HL7. Lorraine notes that some of the Argonaut content has been balloted through HL7; ARB has done the external content review. But Argonaut didn't do it this way, with a PSS and a formal HL7 project. Lenel cautions to not compare this with Argonaut. We're linking with HL7 up front. Bob goes through the powerpoint to more clearly explain the relationship between DaVinci and HL7. The goal is to create a standard and reference implementations. Paul: You've created a formal funding community which has some use cases and work that needs to be done, but then the work will in fact follow exactly the normal HL7 process. Lorraine: This is an overarching program that will spawn projects that will be hosted in the WGs responsible for the specific domains.
- Discussion over how the project teams will operate between HL7 and DaVinci. Project will be run out of DaVinci in coordination with WGs. Ed: When you're talking about providing to HL7, you're actually providing funding to DaVinci. The only money that will go to HL7 is an agreement with administrative staff to provide support to DaVinci...it's not coming to HL7 to product the guides. Is that correct? Bob: The money will be deposited into an HL7 account. HL7 will keep an administrative fee, and the rest will go back into the Davinci project. That money will go into creating the project roles. The IG and reference implementation development will happen within the project with WGs welcome to participate in any level they wish. Lorraine: The spun off projects are not that different than in IG where Cerner sends someone to HL7 to participate in the guide. Lenel: It is not the same. HL7 tends to work on broad standards, while DaVinci will work on narrow things. Ed expresses concern that anything that DaVinci does is going to be in competition with what HL7 is doing. You're saying you're giving money to HL7 to manage, but the control of that money is not in control of HL7. The governance of DaVInci is not within HL7. Bob reports that a board member will be on the DaVinci steering committee, so HL7 will be at the table. Eric: So the decisions are going to be made by DaVinci, so the WGs are not driving the process. Bob: The steering committee will decide on the use cases and their priority. The members of the use case project will come from members of DaVinci and the WGs; it will be brought back through normal HL7 processes.
- Wayne: This doesn't belong in a PSS. This is more a strategic initiative that needs an SOU. The projects will generate PSSs but this isn't listing outputs. This is describing a separate organizational structure. Lorraine: The PSS is what we use to communicate what's going on, sometimes beyond regular projects, such as when we created PLA. I personally appreciate that we're doing it this way. Ed: We're defining a new arrangement.
- Continued to review PSS. Lorraine advises to add CIIC to the "participation with other entities" section. Ed notes that we are in favor of what is being done, but the complication is having a separate DaVinci board. Lorraine: For project objectives/deliverables, the overall plan and structure for the first year should be delineated. Calvin: This PSS is really about what the project is trying to accomplish. Hans: The intent is really to prioritize use cases. Lorraine: And there will be no ballot on this particular PSS. Agreement to update the PSS with those corrections. Lorraine notes that ARB usually reviews external content, but not sure how it will work with this project since HL7 WGs will be involved. Will need to clarify with TSC re: the external content policies. Note that section 6.c. should reflect the stakeholders of DaVinci. Lorraine: Might be useful to do a presentation to TSC before the whole thing gets through the process. Paul: This should go to TSC to get a reading on clarifying the content and purpose before the approval process.
- MOTION to send to TSC for review: Paul/Lorraine
- VOTE: All in favor
- Guidance on Implementation of Standard Electronic Attachments for Health Care Transactions (ACP) PSS
- Craig Gabron presents project. Craig will correct the deliverable dates. The issue was that to publish this as a joint white paper, the project has to go through ballot, while the original PSS only covered a non-balloted Work Group white paper.
- MOTION to approve: Christol/Paul
- VOTE: All in favor
- Craig Gabron presents project. Craig will correct the deliverable dates. The issue was that to publish this as a joint white paper, the project has to go through ballot, while the original PSS only covered a non-balloted Work Group white paper.
- DaVinci PSS
Discussion:
- Review of any outstanding issues
Meeting Outcomes
| Actions
|
Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items
|
© 2018 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved
