2009-07-06 TSC Call Minutes

From HL7 TSC
Revision as of 16:02, 6 July 2009 by Llaakso (talk | contribs) (New page: TSC - Technical Steering Committee Monday, July 6, 2009 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5) To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466# GoToMeeting at https://www.goto...)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

TSC - Technical Steering Committee

Monday, July 6, 2009 11:00 AM (US Eastern Time, GMT -5)
To participate, dial 770-657-9270 and enter pass code 124466#
GoToMeeting at https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/165215206
GoToMeeting ID: 165-215-206 

back to TSC Minutes and Agendas



  • John Quinn

Meeting Admin

  • Roll Call - The following individuals joined the call:
At Name Affiliation Email Address
x Calvin Beebe HL7 SSD SD cbeebe@mayo.edu
x Woody Beeler HL7 FTSD woody@beelers.com
Jim Case HL7 Ad-Hoc jtcase@ucdavis.edu
Bob Dolin HL7 Chair-elect BobDolin@gmail.com
John Koisch HL7 ArB jkoisch@guidewirearchitecture.com
x Austin Kreisler HL7 DESD austin.j.kreisler@saic.com
x Lynn Laakso (scribe) HL7 HQ lynn@hl7.org
Ken McCaslin HL7 TSS SD Kenneth.H.McCaslin@QuestDiagnostics.com
x Charlie McCay (chair) HL7 TSC Chair charlie@ramseysystems.co.uk
Charlie Mead HL7 ArB Charlie.mead@booz.com
x Ravi Natarajan HL7 Affiliate Ravi.Natarajan@nhs.net
John Quinn HL7 CTO jquinn@hl7.org
x Gregg Seppala HL7 SSD SD gregg.seppala@va.gov
x Ioana Singureanu HL7 FTSD ioana@eversolve.com
x Helen Stevens Love HL7 TSS SD helen.stevens@shaw.ca
x Ed Tripp HL7 DESD Edward.tripp@estripp.com
  1. Accept Agenda – agenda accepted
  2. Approve Minutes from 2009-06-29_TSC_Call_Minutesunanimously approved
  3. Review action items – none this week

Standing Committee Reports/Approvals

  1. CEO Report – none available
  2. CTO Report – My apologies for not attending this weeks call. I inadvertently (across multiple time zones) managed to commit myself at another meeting at the same time as this call. I will strive to insure that this does not happen again (or at least does not become a recurring problem).
    • Last week was a relatively short week. I took holiday/vacation Tuesday through Friday as much as possible. On Monday I attended the first of a two day meeting hosted in Washington DC by ONCHIT (specifically the NHIN) announcing the availability of their open source “connect” software for the NHIN. Chuck Jaffe attended both days and attended other meetings in Washington DC after I left at the end of day on Monday.
    • Chuck and I were both informed that HL7 needs more physical presence at Washington meetings—specifically the ONCHIT ARRA Standards Advisory Board meetings. Apparently the attendance has to be specifically HL7 leadership and the fact that at least three board members are on the Board is not sufficient. Questions arise during the meetings that require HL7’s input and sometimes commitment. I (or a specific appointed substitute) will attend each of these meetings in the future.
    • I will attend that HITSP Panel meeting on Wednesday this week in Washington DC.
    • EA IP Update: EA IP webinar date set July 15 3-5 pm.
  3. ArB Report – no report available
  4. Affiliates Report – nothing to report
  5. Domain Experts –
    • Project Approval: Anesthetic Record Implementation Guide for CDA R3. PSS at TSC Tracker 1084
    • vigorous email discussion on intersection of these IGs with DCM
    • working in parallel with CDA R3 though R3 not yet balloted
    • do they need additional cosponsor work groups, e.g. Patient Care?
    • Charlie proposes we approve contingent on Patient Care becoming co-sponsor. Helen wonders if Patient Care has resources to devote as cosponsor. Austin recounts that Patient Care wants a different coordination mechanism but wants to wait until Atlanta. The TSC doesn’t want to hold it up. Helen moves that Patient Care come forward in two weeks to present options to the TSC, proposed ideas to address their concerns.
    • Project scope statement as amended with Patient Care as co-sponsor unanimously approved
    • Motion:Helen moves that Patient Care attend TSC call in two weeks to address their issues. Second by Ioana. Unanimously approved.
    • Project Approval: (JIC) Pharmacy IDMP Terminologies Project. PSS at TSC Tracker 1085; Discussion – question on budget and which organization is funding. Unanimously approved
  6. Foundation & Technology – no quorum at last week’s meeting; nothing to report
  7. Structure & Semantic Design – anticipating publication requests next week
  8. Technical & Support Services - not meeting until end of July.

Discussion topics

  • Open Issues List
    • TSC Tracker 749: Review the role of the steering divisions
      • Document the role of the steering divisions. For example DESD holds votes open until they reach quorum to ensure there is participation. Helen feels they are an important layer. The discussion above on Patient Care concerns should be happening at the Steering Division level. Dangerous to the organization that there are WG chairs not participating at SD level. Implies they are working in isolation from the rest of the organization. Austin states that they cannot get quorum on their calls, so they don’t attempt SD meetings except at WGM. Part of the problem is the size of DESD, with scheduling conflict of clinical personnel day jobs. He recounted that many of these that used to be SIGs, perhaps under Patient Care, and are not carrying the breadth of responsibility to which TCs were accustomed. Do we need to encourage some of these other work groups to merge, for example with CIC. Could tell those showing up poorly on Work Group Health (e.g. Devices) that after another cycle they will be shut down and merged with CIC or some other WG. Helen agrees that now that we have the Work Group Health scorecard we should be prepared to act upon it. Austin indicates the GOM does not have a mechanism for the SD or TSC to initiate the closing of a WG. Perhaps that should be addressed as part of the role of the Steering Division? This would give a Steering Division like Austin’s some teeth, for example, instead of only gums. Austin recounts that the DESD chairs are happy with the ‘lightweight, veto-ing structure’ as indicated in the Tracker Issue. The Re-org intended the SD provide better collaboration and coordination fora. As another example in FTSD, ITS has occasionally tried to merge with InM to reduce its overhead. Austin asks if the SAEAF will have anything in it to address this? Woody feels it handles a more technical view of the organization. Charlie says that SAEAF will address how the models are expressed as Patient Care has shown concern, but not on how Work Groups within a Steering Division are organized and perform their collaboration. Charlie asks if it can be discussed in the SD in their meetings, and Ed proposes they put up a poll with some pointed questions. Ed will come up with some suggestions. Austin asks Charlie to make the invitation to Patient Care to attend the July 20th meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 11:51 AM – early adjournment due to Board call immediately following

Tabled until next week:

  1. TSC Tracker 745: HQ to explore cost of providing secretarial support to the WGs
  2. TSC Tracker 1001: TSC Large Customer Partnerships Project Proposal
  3. PSS at TSC Tracker 999: TSC Product Visibility Project Proposal
    Feedback on draft “Product Brief” categories and matrix on domains.
    Does this need to be approved as a project? Does the TSC wish to modify the product list before “approving” it? Are we ready to send the Product Brief templates to the appropriate work groups to fill out?
  4. PSS at TSC Tracker 998: TSC Project Visibility Proposal
  5. PSSat TSC Tracker 997: TSC Work Group Visibility project proposal
  6. Three-year plan guideline review
    • Motion tendered and tabled on 2009-06-01 CC: The TSC provide a structure and format guideline for three year plans to the WGs that describes the content detail required for their own project guidance and decision making processes
    • Project Insight proposed modifications to support tracking of three-year planning for projects -
    1. Modify fields within Project Insight. Suggestions include:
      • Project State – Currently an unused field; use ‘Planning’ (three-year-plan) or ‘Active’ (currently in-process) as appropriate
      • Project Status – Currently an unused field; add the items in Ed Tripp’s dropdown list: Lynn or Dave of HQ can update Project Insight each ballot cycle for those projects coming to ballot.
      • Project Type – modify this field by adding a selection item to identify a project as a 3 Year Plan project – this was a suggestion but probably would not be needed if we used the 'planning' project state to identify those items not-yet-in-progress
      • End Date - update the end date field to reflect that which is listed in the project or on a three-year plan, and run reports for those projects exceeding their predicted End Date to get an updated status and timeline.
    2. Enter approximately 100+ new projects into Project Insight (these would be all of the Work Group’s 3 Year Plan items)
    3. Modify the Searchable Project Database Tool (cannot be done until mid to late August as HQ is booked with work on the new website). So far, the modifications needed would be to pull in the two unused fields mentioned above
    • The majority of the 'projects' (or activities that look like they’re our typical projects) missing PI #s is small. The larger number, and probably no more than a hundred, are 'tasks' that cochairs may choose not to add to project insight but to maintain manually on a three year plan spreadsheet. The project Insight export and the manually maintained list would have to be combined to fully represent a work group’s three-year plan, but many of these tactical tasks are not necessarily things that would be of interest to the audience we’ve targeted for providing visibility to the activities of the Working Group.
  7. Nominations for SD reps not sufficient numbers to cover open positions; please promote!

Future Agenda item list

Click for TSC Action Item List