HL7 Organizational Relations Committee

Meeting Minutes Draft

March 11, 2010

11:00 am – 12:00 p.m. Eastern

Participants:

·  Scott Robertson, co-Chair
·  Chuck Meyer / ·  Karen Van Hentenryck, Staff
·  Mike Glickman, invited guest (Oasis)

Agenda

·  Roll call and agenda review (2 minutes) – Scott Robertson welcomed those on the call and reviewed the agenda.

·  Review draft agreements (30 minutes)

·  Oasis – Mike Glickman reported that a four-way agreement is being proposed between HL7, Oasis, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and HHS to address the need to coordinate activities in the area of first responders and emergency services. This need became apparent in recent HITSP work that focused on the transfer and processing of data between emergency responders and an emergency department. HITSP and HL7’s PHER WG have demonstrated this capability using Oasis’ EDXL-HAVE (Emergency Data Exchange Language – Hospital Availability Exchange) standard and HL7’s CDA/CCD standards. Coordinating these activities is essential. Glickman noted that Homeland Security and HHS should be part of this agreement as adoption of these standards for this particular use case are depending on DHS/HHS issued policies and/or regulations and their inclusion provides assurance that they will cooperate.
Meyer asked whether Oasis is an ANSI accredited SDO as ANSI accredited SDO are required to seek out other SDOs who may be developing standards in any particular area before developing another standard that may overlap. There are clearly some overlaps in the EDXL and CDA standards. Oasis is not an ANSI accredited SDO. Meyer asked if Oasis has examined HL7’s CDA standard for overlaps. Glickman responded that this proposal is an attempt to begin that analysis and that Oasis and DHS are anxious to enter into an agreement. NIST was suggested as a possible fifth party in the agreement to provide input from a testing perspective.
Next Steps: Identify the right parties at each of the five organizations to begin the needed discussions. The ORC will begin the outreach to those who are interested and in the know. Don Mon would likely be interested.


ACTION ITEM: Van Hentenryck will contact Jaffe, Quinn and Dolin to ensure that they are supportive of moving this effort forward.


The ORC will begin the outreach to those who are interested and in the know. Don Mon would likely be interested.

·  IEEE – Agreement expired in Jan 2010 – The ORC agrees that this associate charter agreement should be extended. ACTION ITEM: Van Hentenryck will draft an extension letter for IEEE

·  Liberty Alliance – This agreement expired in 2008. HQ contacted them prior to and after the agreement expired but has never received the signed extension letter. ACTION ITEM: Van Hentenryck will reach out one more time. If they don’t respond, we will drop them for our list of collaborators.

·  Mohawk College – There is still confusion regarding the nature of this relationship. Since Dolin suggested that we enter into an agreement with Mohawk, the ORC should get his input as to the benefits that such an agreement would provide to HL7. ACTION ITEM: Van Hentenryck will email Dolin to ask him to draft his ideas in an email and to invite him to participate on the next call.

·  Discuss agreement types and criteria (20 minutes) – Robertson noted there was a discussion in Phoenix about the various types of agreements. We currently have MOUs and Associate Charter Agreements and may need other types of agreements. There were questions around what makes an agreement a MOU vs. an Associate Charter Agreement, which lead to a discussion regarding the need to have a set of criteria for each. Meyer noted that some organizations that approach HL7 are familiar with MOUs. MOUs are usually are very specific, i.e., related to a specific project. Associate Charters Agreement are more generic and are a means for getting people to the table so that we can examine how and where the two organization can work together. Robertson asked whether we need distinction between the two. Meyer suggested that ORC engage the marketing committee WRT Mohawk College to determine whether this would fit under the university program.

·  Review master list of agreements/liaisons and prioritize for next call (10 minutes)

o  Safe Biopharma

o  Finding replacements for Ed Hammond as liaison.

·  New business – No new business was suggested

·  Adjourn – The call adjourned at 11:47 am ET