2010-08-16 TSC Call Minutes

TSC Agenda/Minutes

Meeting Info/Attendees

HL7 TSC Meeting Minutes Location: call 770-657-9270 using code 124466# GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206		Date: 2010-08-16 Time: 11:00 AM U.S. Eastern
Facilitator	Charlie McCay	Note taker(s)	Lynn Laakso

Attendee	Name	Affiliation
x	Calvin Beebe	HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
x	Woody Beeler	HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
?	Bob Dolin	HL7 Board Chair
x	Austin Kreisler	HL7 DESD Co-Chair
x	Lynn Laakso	HL7 staff support
x	Ken McCaslin	HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair
x	Charlie McCay (chair)	HL7 TSC Chair, Affiliate Representative
x	Charlie Mead	HL7 ArB Chair
x	Ravi Natarajan	HL7 Affiliate Representative
?	Ron Parker	HL7 ArB Alternate
regrets	John Quinn	HL7 CTO
regrets	Gregg Seppala	HL7 SSD SD Co-Chair
x	Helen Stevens	HL7 TSS SD Co-Chair
x	Ed Tripp	HL7 DESD Co-Chair
?	D. Mead Walker	HL7 FTSD Co-Chair
x	Scott Robertson	project representative, EHR
x	Shelly Spiro	project representative, EHR

Quorum Requirements (Chair +5 with 2 SD Reps) Met: yes

Agenda

Agenda Topics

1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests)
2. Agenda review and approval - Charlie McCay
3. Approve Minutes of 2010-08-09_TSC_Call_Agenda
4. Review action items –
   • #1582 - Ed: Draft Project Scope Statement for Innovations Project
   • #1581 - Woody: Draft Project Scope Statement for TSC T3F Strategic Initiative Review project
   • #1580 - Ken, John, Charlie McCay: Draft Project Scope Statement for U.S. Healthcare Readiness Plan;
   • #1573 - John Quinn: Identify actions needed to be taken by the TSC based on Roadmap subcommittee recommendations. See criteria - one week left for TSC Members to provide your feedback.
   • #1548 - From 2010-05-03: John and Charlie Mead will work on a one sheet overview of SAIF vs NIEM, reviewed by ArB with the HL7 position
5. HL7 Chair or CEO Report – if available
6. CTO Report - John Quinn
7. ArB Report – Charlie Mead/Ron Parker
8. Affiliates Report – Ravi Natarajan/ Charlie McCay
9. Domain Experts Report– Austin Kreisler/Ed Tripp
10. Foundation & Technology Report– Woody Beeler/Mead Walker
11. Structure & Semantic Design Report– Calvin Beebe
    • Tabled Motion: Approve EPrescribing Functional Profile based on the EHR-S Functional Model at TSC Tracker # 1615, Project Insight # 697
    • Tabled Motion: Approve Pharmacy/Pharmacist Provider Functional Profile based on the EHR-S Functional Model at TSC Tracker # 1616, Project Insight # 698
    • Motion: Approve Request to Publish DSTU for Implementation Guide for CDA Release 2.0 Unstructured Documents (Universal Realm) Draft Standard for Trial Use Level 1; at TSC Tracker # 1622, Project Insight ID# 569, for 24 months.
12. Technical & Support Services Report- Ken McCaslin/ Helen Stevens
    • Motion: Approve Project Scope Statement for SAIF and Sound - Fast Track to Standard Development, at TSC Tracker # 1625, Project Insight ID# 676.
    • Project Services to update HDF in support of SAIF. - Ken McCaslin
13. Membership Comments on Steering Division Reports
14. WGM Planning -
    • Marketing and promotion - update from HQ -
    • TSC preparations - Lynn Laakso
    • Working Group preparations - agendas
15. Organizational Relations Committee update (semiweekly) - Helen Stevens - no meeting this week. NO report.
16. Discussion Topics:
    • Open Issues List

Supporting Documents

1. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1615/7419/2010SEP_PSS_EHR_PatVanDyke_EPrescribingProfile20100630-SSD-SDApproved.doc
2. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1616/7420/2010SEP_PSS_EHR_PatVanDyke_PharmacyProvider20100629-SSD-SDApproved.doc
3. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1582/7479/HL7ProjectScopeStatementInnovationsv01.doc
4. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1573/7466/HL7StrategicInitiativecriteria03Aug2010.doc
5. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1622/7473/201007_UDDSTU_Publication_Request.doc
6. http://gforge.hl7.org/gf/download/trackeritem/1625/7474/2010-05-20HL7ProjectScopeStatement-SAIFandSoundFinal.doc

Minutes

Minutes/Conclusions Reached:

1. Introduction of visitors (including declaration of interests) Scott Robertson and Shelly Spiro on the line to speak to the EPrescribing FP and Pharmacy/Pharmacist Provider FP from SSD SD.
2. Agenda review and approval - Charlie McCay
   • No ORC report.
   • Move EHR items first to accommodate visitors.
   • Tabled Motion: Approve EPrescribing Functional Profile based on the EHR-S Functional Model at TSC Tracker # 1615, Project Insight # 697
     • Pharmacy has not responded to attempts to enlist their participation, and will then be removed from cosponsorship on the project and the ballot. Scott notes the Functional Profile (FP) is US-centric and has participation from NCPDP for SMEs. CCHIT needed a pharmacy FP for EHR certification. Woody notes that there are other examples of FPs in other areas that did not involve cosponsorship. Helen notes that as the project is executing they should present to the Pharmacy group. Austin notes that the execution is complete; Shelly adds it has been in process since 2008, and only surfacing at time of ballot within HL7. Seems to be a problem with NCPDP progressing the work and not realizing it had not been surfaced with EHR WG. As it surfaced it became two separate projects. Helen and Austin ask if there are any other EHR ‘stealth’ projects? Further discussion on making EHR projects more visible, and Charlie McCay notes that international participants would look to the Pharmacy WG for pharmacy related projects. The TSC asks they make a point of requesting agenda time from the Pharmacy WG in Cambridge to present the project.
     • Vote:unanimously approved as amended.
   • Tabled Motion: Approve Pharmacy/Pharmacist Provider Functional Profile based on the EHR-S Functional Model at TSC Tracker # 1616, Project Insight # 698
     • Strike Pharmacy WG from cosponsorship of project and ballot, and request they present to Pharmacy WG at 2010Oct WGM.
     • Vote: unanimously approved as amended.
3. Approve Minutes of 2010-08-09_TSC_Call_Agenda unanimously approved.
4. Review action items –
   • #1582 - Ed: Draft Project Scope Statement for Innovations Project
   • Ed has received feedback from Ed Hammond and Ravi. TSC project to monitor the health of the Innovations activity, including tracking. Intent is to sunset the project and keep the process after January 2011. Leave out there for more feedback one more week and bring back for TSC committee approval next week.
   • #1581 - Woody: Draft Project Scope Statement for TSC T3F Strategic Initiative Review project
     • postpone to next week.
   • #1580 - Ken, John, Charlie McCay: Draft Project Scope Statement for U.S. Healthcare Readiness Plan;
     • Charlie McCay started drafting with Ken not yet ready for circulation; bring back next week.
   • #1573 - John Quinn: Identify actions needed to be taken by the TSC based on Roadmap subcommittee recommendations. See criteria - one week left for TSC Members to provide your feedback.
   • #1548 - From 2010-05-03: John and Charlie Mead will work on a one sheet overview of SAIF vs NIEM, reviewed by ArB with the HL7 position
     • Charlie Mead (in John’s absence) reports he met with an influential person in starting NIEM and he would be willing to have an off-the record discussion with John Quinn and review concerns so that NIEM could get things back on track. John was supposed to set up this discussion and then come back to the TSC to collate a formal analysis. An email from this person midweek last week indicated they were trying to put together something. This person told Charlie that what is happening with NIEM now was not the original intent. Need to hear from John. Come back with this in a couple of weeks. ACTION ITEM: Lynn to follow up with John.
5. HL7 Chair or CEO Report – not available
6. CTO Report - not available.
7. ArB Report – Charlie Mead – ArB was unable to meet but Charlie met with I/C group on the 10th. He has gone through their comments, mostly clarifications around language but nothing off track. Terminology with RM/ODP a small hurdle. Discussed with them the TSC’s desire to have I/C take over ECCF IG for HL7. They weren’t sure if they had enough resources to do the work, but might be willing to do it. They will make a decision no later than the October WGM. If they are not willing, the TSC and ArB will need a fallback strategy. Stressed to them that the ECCF Canonical document will have implementation guides developed by many organizations.
   • Charlie sent out to the TSC the draft NCI ECCF IG and another version is coming in a few days. IF and BF chapters have implementation guides in process.
8. Affiliates Report – Ravi Natarajan
   • Strategic Initiative feedback meeting has had only one respondent to scheduling.
9. Domain Experts Report– Austin Kreisler – nothing to report.
10. Foundation & Technology Report– Woody Beeler notes they didn’t have quorum last week due to no cochairs.
11. Structure & Semantic Design Report– Calvin Beebe
    • Motion: Approve Request to Publish DSTU for Implementation Guide for CDA Release 2.0 Unstructured Documents (Universal Realm) Draft Standard for Trial Use Level 1; at TSC Tracker # 1622, Project Insight ID# 569, for 24 months.
      • Non-XML representations of documents e.g. PDFs, resolution of negatives related to block votes whose reference had withdrawn their negatives.
      • Vote: unanimously approved.
12. Technical & Support Services Report- Ken McCaslin
    • Motion: Approve Project Scope Statement for SAIF and Sound - Fast Track to Standard Development, at TSC Tracker # 1625, Project Insight ID# 676.
      • Thought it had been approved before but nothing in the minutes so it is being submitted for approval. Austin has concerns regarding the powerpoint that was circulated on impacts to methodology caused a great stir. They want input from key work groups (ArB, MnM, Vocab), and Austin notes they should enlist them as cosponsors to develop how SAIF is going to be implemented in terms of methodology.
      • Ravi asks if this is part of the EA IP? Austin felt its like a lock-step yearly project scheduling defining how we use SAIF and artifacts such as the RIM. Charlie McCay felt it was more about Project Services defining how SAIF would affect the Project Life Cycle. Woody feels though they have mediated their representation of RIM balloting there is still fear that Project Services is co-opting responsibility from other groups. The one-year production schedule cycle noted in the Project Need is not to dictate the schedule but provide example how work groups can accomplish such development in a year. Woody notes RIM balloting in a year is still very challenging even modifying an existing product. Woody asks why this is being done outside of ArB in regards to SAIF. Ravi thought it would do an analysis that based on the framework to come back with recommendations of what needs to happen. Austin notes that analysis is one thing, and getting input. But there is language in here saying that things will be ‘done’ not just recommended. Charlie Mead agrees; the ArB thought this was more analysis and less action. Ken asks if they want to see the group work more cooperatively with ArB, MnM and Vocab and even enlist them as cosponsors. Ravi says the ArB should be the primary sponsor with cosponsor by Project Services. Woody notes that the word ‘introduce’ in second to last line of scope is a little strong. A draft that might lead in that direction is reasonable, but ‘introduce’ is too directive in this context. Doing the analysis and preparing the white paper as their scope as defined in the success criteria is less troubling. Charlie McCay says that the analysis resulting in actionable improvements in HL7 is a good idea. Woody notes that actions should be a separate project to go forward. Ravi asks is this is a pre-analysis is a SAIF rollout or part of the SAIF rollout. Woody notes that it’s not only SAIF but PLPCD. McCay notes that the EA IP would have had this activity in its scope but has narrowed to focus on the pilot projects. Refactoring the SAIF rollout project needs a proposal to the TSC, as the initial project has lapsed. We have a call on Friday with Charlie Mead and John Quinn to discuss. Ken will take these comments back to the PSC.
    • Project Services to update HDF in support of SAIF. - Ken McCaslin. Does the TSC feel that this will be constructive? Charlie Mead noted that Ioana had identified that the HDF should be developed as the SAIF implementation guide. I/C is working on ECCF chapter, but other chapters’ development should be tightly coordinated with ArB. They may want to start by using the NCI guide but should not be developing HDF as SAIF IG in a vacuum. They should work with ArB as cosponsor to assist.
13. WGM Planning -
    • Marketing and promotion - update from HQ –
      • How can the TSC help interested people use the standards specified in the MU standards. Healthcare Readiness project scope statement should be ready in the next week or so, send suggestions to Charlie McCay or John.
      • co-located training on DCM in October? Is there a process or recommendations for persons providing HL7-related services around but not in direct relation to, the WGM? DCM have a life of their own but no process within HL7; they’re not participating in publishing, they’re not balloting. Austin notes he thinks they are balloting, the medical devices one is in this ballot cycle. DCM introduction is a separate issue we need to address. The issue Charlie stated that there is a separately marketed meeting in the same hotel as the WGM for Results4Care. Austin notes they should not be using the HL7 logo in their marketing. Woody notes we should be very cautious about that; goes back to question on the past on demos, detracts from the meeting. Should not be using HL7 listservers to promote. Charlie McCay asks do we ignore it or provide some formal guidance on what our expectations are? Woody notes it depends if they’re using HL7 in their materials. If they are we should intervene. (Patient Care list) Helen suggests we add to next week’s agenda. Ravi suggests we get DCM on the next call too.
      • Guidelines and instructions around related meetings co-located with HL7
      • Update and Status on DCM activities. TSC approved the project with the request to have periodic presentations on progress, notes Helen.
14. Adjourned at 12:06 PM EDT.

Next Steps

Actions (Include Owner, Action Item, and due date) Lynn to follow up with John on his discussions with a person in NIEM and review concerns, to come back to the TSC to collate a formal analysis. Come back with this in a couple of weeks. Follow up with Patient Care on DCM activities.

Next Meeting/Preliminary Agenda Items #1582 - Ed: Draft Project Scope Statement for Innovations Project Guidelines and instructions around related meetings co-located with HL7 Update and Status on DCM activities.