2013-05-28 TSC ANSI/GOM Task Force notes
TSC Agenda/Minutes
Meeting Info/Attendees
| HL7 TSC ANSI/GOM Task Force Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 985371# |
Date: 2013-05-28 Time: 6:00 PM U.S. Eastern | |
| Facilitator: Austin Kreisler | Note taker(s): Lynn Laakso | |
| Quorum n/a | ||
| Attendees | ||
| x | Calvin Beebe | |
| Jean Duteau | ||
| x | Freida Hall | |
| x | Austin Kreisler | |
| x | Lynn Laakso (scribe) | |
| delayed | Pat Van Dyke | |
Agenda
Link to updated GOM Action Items:
- Freida will check with Karen to see if ANSI would consider allowing HL7 to pre-load the ballot pools with all voting members and ask them to opt-out, or offering them the interest areas they can be automatically signed up for. (from 2013-04-23_TSC_ANSI/GOM_Task_Force_notes)
- Jean will write something on How do we flag balance issues on the ballot tally page among voter categories? 'No single interest category can constitute a majority.' Don would need to create % summaries of the interest types and the mechanism to "lock down" enrollment at any point after the enrollment closes where it comes into balance
Status: We’ll need to submit proposed changes to the GOM by end of June, other than ANSI audit issues which are already approved work items.
Review of the continued list of Partial List of Needed or Suggested Changes still has areas that have not been addressed. Final set of comments from the ANSI auditor now available
- the ANSI auditor has provided response on an item we've discussed (excerpt of email from Karen to GOC):
- The way we define consensus body and how we determine balance.
- They are requesting
- That we change our procedures to do a balance check before the ballot begins (we currently check this one week or so into the ballot) and that balance we applied to the consensus group, not the ballot group. This can be done a couple of different ways, so we will need some discussion here. Also we need to clarify how abstentions are treated and whether or not an abstention is considered a vote.
Resolve “backup” dilemma encountered when CTO is not available.
14.03.06 Ballot Pool or Consensus Group Variance Process Any Affiliate or organizational member experiencing a change in voting representatives or any other situation which impacts current ballot pools or consensus groups shall request a variance of process from the CTO. A request for variance of process shall include a detailed explanation for such a request and clearly identify the individuals involved. The CTO shall triage the issue, engage the appropriate parties, and assure resolution of the issue. Documentation of the variance and its resolution will be retained with the ballot material for review during the ANSI audit process.
- Freida sends Issue 1305003, which reads "The GOC agrees that a process dependent on a single individual is less than optimal given the nature of our organization. The GOC will seek to define viable alternatives and scan the GOM for similar occurrences."
- Similar occurrence suggested as 14.05.04 Reporting Concerns in the Voting Process.
Minutes
Minutes/Conclusions Reached:
Action Items:
- Freida will check with Karen to see if ANSI would consider allowing HL7 to pre-load the ballot pools with all voting members and ask them to opt-out, or offering them the interest areas they can be automatically signed up for. (from 2013-04-23_TSC_ANSI/GOM_Task_Force_notes) Karen noted that preloading would unbalance the pool due to the preponderance of vendors. It was agreed that this should not be pursued.
- Jean will write something on How do we flag balance issues on the ballot tally page among voter categories? 'No single interest category can constitute a majority.' Don would need to create % summaries of the interest types and the mechanism to "lock down" enrollment at any point after the enrollment closes where it comes into balance.
- Jean is still unwell and not on the call.
Status: We’ll need to submit proposed changes to the GOM by end of June, other than ANSI audit issues which are already approved work items.
Resolve “backup” dilemma encountered when CTO is not available.
14.03.06 Ballot Pool or Consensus Group Variance Process Any Affiliate or organizational member experiencing a change in voting representatives or any other situation which impacts current ballot pools or consensus groups shall request a variance of process from the CTO. A request for variance of process shall include a detailed explanation for such a request and clearly identify the individuals involved. The CTO shall triage the issue, engage the appropriate parties, and assure resolution of the issue. Documentation of the variance and its resolution will be retained with the ballot material for review during the ANSI audit process.
- Freida sends Issue 1305003, which reads "The GOC agrees that a process dependent on a single individual is less than optimal given the nature of our organization. The GOC will seek to define viable alternatives and scan the GOM for similar occurrences."
- Similar occurrence suggested as 14.05.04 Reporting Concerns in the Voting Process.
- Chuck Meyer recommended we could replace the CTO with HL7 Headquarters and have HL7 staff do the investigation and prepare recommendations for the TSC. However, the CTO should be consulted on what he prefers. The TSC Chair could also be a backup. Other options discussed include the Executive Committee. ACTION ITEM: Austin will talk with John on his preferences for the backup position.
Review of the continued list of Partial List of Needed or Suggested Changes still has areas that have not been addressed. Final set of comments from the ANSI auditor now available
- the ANSI auditor has provided response on an item we've discussed (excerpt of email from Karen to GOC):
- The way we define consensus body and how we determine balance.
- They are requesting
- That we change our procedures to do a balance check before the ballot begins (we currently check this one week or so into the ballot) and that balance we applied to the consensus group, not the ballot group. This can be done a couple of different ways, so we will need some discussion here. Also we need to clarify how abstentions are treated and whether or not an abstention is considered a vote.
- What is the effect for Don? He's on vacation this week so cannot ask him. If seeking balance in the pool before it opens pushes out the opening of the ballot, you risk not being able to open the ballot in time to get it closed for the next WGM.
- Processes on closing the ballot pool enrollment before ballot opens discussed, known to be ANSI's preference. May want to advance the enrollment deadline to be a week before ballot opens to give time to obtain balance. If it is not in balance at that deadline it remains open until the pool is balanced and once it is balanced the pool is closed. Calvin asks if it remains open to those sought for balance and closed to those categories of members making it out of balance.
- Austin proposes you check for balance on the day before ballot opens. If it is in balance, the pool is closed. If it is not in balance, it remains open. Need to talk to Don if we can move ballot pool open to the 12th along with ballot pool announcement.
- Strength of recommendation from ANSI discussed. Seems a strong recommendation: a must-do-something.
- Changing normative ballots to be open seemed acceptable when Freida discussed with them. ACTION ITEM: Freida will to write up the normative ballot pools being open as a GOM change. As a side effect, we will remove the checkbox to enroll in all pools at once.
- Taking away the check box to enter all ballot pools at once, would inconvenience actual voters but remove the abundance of non-returned votes. Statistical evaluation of voter history, number of ballots enrolled and number of votes cast would be helpful. Perhaps you retain it only as a benefactor membership privilege.
- Freida will invite the TSC ANSI/GOM task force to the GOC call June 13.
- Discuss the balance check timing on the June 13 call.
Interpretation policy: this is not intended to address issues sent to a listserv but formal requests to HQ for interpretation. The constitution of a written request as stated in the GOM is not defined (email, phone call, wiki comment, etc). Austin reports that HQ routes them to Work Groups or Work Group co-chairs already. Austin fears TSC would end up triaging support requests. He wouldn't want to have the TSC agenda obligated to address each such request. TSC should be able to route them as they arrive, without exception for normative standard interpretation. Freida will send a suggestion that was discussed by Ed and Karen.
Freida further notes that the reconciliation responsibility of Work Groups (approval of ballot package) "in accord with the WGs DMPs" is complicated by the inability to version the DMPs. Should they be generalized to a quorum (simple majority or % agreement) or should we put each WG's DMP in SVN? And the abstentions and their effect on voting would also have to be addressed.
Pick up the discussion next week. Adjourned 7:06 PM.
Next Steps
Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date)
| |||
| Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items |
© 2013 Health Level Seven® International. All rights reserved.
