Tooling Project Selection and Prioritization

Specify criteria for tooling project selection and prioritization.

Return to Tooling Work Group

Project Information

From Project Insight # 801 Description: align the requirements gathering and tool selection processes to ensure resources are available to develop or enhance requests for tools that come to either group that may impact the other group."

• Project facilitator: Jane Curry

Status

• Objectives:
  • Revised process documented - Proposed RFP Release and Selection Process as discussed at 2012-06-21_Tooling_Call
  • Revised process accepted by the board - Draft process exercised with EHR-S FM Profile designer RFP

Issues/Hot Topics

• Part of new strategy is that funding will be a subsidy for additional participation for those that are already working on areas of interest. This is in comparison to historical commissioning of the building of tools by commercial tool builders. (from 2012May Tooling WGM Minutes)
  • Proposal for trialing a new process for funded projects using the EHRS-FM and MAX projects.
    • a number of Tooling projects, some of which are volunteer driven need to move from a strategy of commissioning people to perform projects to a strategy of participation in other tooling efforts to build tools that work for us as well. The clear path is probably to fund this effort (from 2012-05-12 TSC Meeting minutes)
    • some guidance needed on what the budget document design should be for targeting likely budget amounts, such as: here are the people, these resources, and this is what we could accomplish for this chunk of money, and can scale back according to funding available. (from 2012-04-19_Tooling_Call)
• Process for funded tool development projects (see also RFP Release and Selection Process)
  • PSS mandatory, with co-sponsorship from requesting Work Groups
  • Requesting Work Groups to provide resources to document requirements, review deliverables and test software; may request funding subsidy
  • Requirements documented with sufficient detail to produce time/cost estimates
  • Request for proposal based on requirements to solicit resources to be developed by requesting Work Groups and reviewed by Tooling
  • Request to be sent to Contracts listserve (contractwork 'at' lists.hl7.org) to solicit resources and then posted to Job Listing site (http://www.hl7.org/jobs/index.cfm)
  • Proposals may request funding subsidy for identified roles in the project that cannot be completed with only volunteers
  • Criteria for selecting resources gives preference to individuals already volunteering (see full criteria below)
  • Proposals need to indicate estimated time contributing as volunteer and estimated funded time - financials as a separate piece
  • Financial portions of proposals reviewed for budget implications prior to main selection by budget authorities
  • Contracts to be approved based on deliverables from RFP
    • 1 RFP can have more than one successful proposal,
    • each proposal = 1 contract unless 1 prime and the rest sub-contractors
  • Tooling to lead proposal evaluation, any Tooling WG members will recuse themselves for any proposals they are involved in
  • Successful proposals to enter into contract with HQ
  • Tooling and requesting Work Groups to review and approve deliverables
  • More detailed processes being worked out with HQ and CTO

Specification of criteria for tooling project selection and prioritization

• Recognizing that strategic efforts like SAIF, FHIR & Tooling become components of an overarching technical strategy
  • That strategy is aligned with the organizational objectives as identified in the strategic initiatives
• HL7’s strategic intent to use the Eclipse Platform, including the expectations of intra-tool data exchange (from 2012-04-12_Tooling_Call)
• FHIR initiative and tooling: the production of the standard is based on a tool chain. The tool chain is open source and hosted on GForge SVN. What is Tooling's responsibility on that tool chain maintenance and provision? The ability to produce the standard from the tool chain is the concern. By the next January WGM in Phoenix we may want to schedule a joint quarter to decide how to manage the tool chain going forward.
• Resolved 2011Sept: we prioritize tools:
  • firstly, based on the critical path to ensure standards are produced on a regular basis according to schedule,
  • secondly, based on Board direction and
  • thirdly, subject to available funding to complete an existing tooling project so as not to dilute the ability to fully complete a project

Selection criteria in RFP (approved by Tooling WG on 2012-06-21_Tooling_Call)

1. Preference for resources who are already volunteering in HL7 in some capacity
2. Preference for resources with current involvement in sponsored project
3. Preference for open source software with rights to create derivatives
4. Meets stated licensing criteria
5. Proposal contains information to evaluate budget implications
6. Proposal indicates what deliverables would be provided in a phased approach to accommodate budget constraints and demonstrate progress
7. Proposal formatted to support selection process
8. Familiarity with methods and technology used by HL7
   • Ability to work in distributed virtual environment
   • Demonstrates approach to protect HL7 Intellectual Property (e.g. use of MIF-Lite)
9. Approach proposed for change management and knowledge and skills transfer
   • During project
   • Ongoing support
10. Compatibility of proposed tooling platform with target tooling architecture
11. Skill and experience of proposed resources
    • Communication skills
    • Software development skills