Subject:NSSP-CoP DecemberSteering Committee Meeting (Open)

Date and Time:Wednesday, December 7, 2016, 4:30-6pm

Attendees:

Natasha Close / Harold Gill / NimiIdaikkadar, CDC*
Krystal Collier / Teresa Hamby / Leslie Hausman, CDC*
Lauren DiBiase / Robert Mathes / Amy Ising, ISDS*
Rosa Ergas / Caleb Wiedeman / Emilie Lamb, ISDS**

*non-voting member

**ISDS Liaison

Agenda Items:

  1. Minutes Approval from November Call
  2. Update from the In-person BioSense Governance Group Meeting
  3. Overview of the transition to the new Community Membership Site
  4. Development of Business Process for Group Participation
  5. Definition of Workgroup vs. Community Discussion Group
  6. Definition of Roles and Responsibilities of Group Admins
  7. Development of a Business Process for Posting content to Forums
  8. Review and Assessment of Workgroups and Community Groups
  9. Assessment of existing Workgroups
  10. Assessment of existing community groups
  11. Call for the creation of new groups

Meeting Notes:

  1. Minutes Approval from November Call
  2. Minutes will be sent as soon as possible. Please be sure to review the notes and approve them before the next meeting.
  3. Update from the In-person BioSense Governance Group Meeting
  4. Emilie: The BGG would like to focus on the technology and that it is meeting the needs of the community and the SC would focus on advancing the practice of the community.
  5. Natasha: There would still be the ability for the SC to suggest changes to the technology.
  6. MikeColetta: The BGG would also be collaborating with the SC on new technology and helping to identify needs.
  7. Overview of the transition to the new Community Membership Site
  8. Emilie: During the panel discussion, ISDS discussed some of the new functionality of the new site like:
  9. Control over the creation and visibility of the group to the community
  10. Private virtual workspace with file libraries for working documents (separate from the KR)
  11. Private group forum
  12. Also can have community forums that are open to all members to comment on any topic
  13. Dave Swenson: How do you become a member of the CoP?
  14. Rosa: The new ISDS site will have a member registration profile for CoP members. It’s anyone who is working in SyS surveillance. You don’t have to be a participant in the NSSP to participate in the NSSP-CoP.
  15. Development of Business Process for Group Participation
  16. Emilie: What is the SC’s definition of workgroups vs. community forum groups vs. committees?
  17. Caleb: Workgroups are specifically task oriented with a start date and an end date. They have set deliverables and a timeline for achieving those goals. There is a defined scope. They include a point-person who is responsible for following up about the deliverables.
  18. Dave: For example, urgent care.
  19. Rosa: That is a great definition of a workgroup but not being used in practice.
  20. Rosa: Committees are more long term groups that are coordinated around ISDS and not necessarily part of NSSP CoP.
  21. Don: Are there deliverables around the CoP that are outlined in the CoAg? That would help the community support the SC.
  22. Emilie: The deliverables around the CoAg are to support the workgroups that the community deems critical.
  23. Emilie: What should the workgroups that don’t meet the SC’s definition (above) be defined as, if they are no longer workgroups?
  24. Harold: Research Committee should be a committee. The EHR Vendor Data Quality should be a committee.
  25. Natasha: Not all of the groups that currently exist need to continue to exist. It takes time to call into meetings and we need to be sensitive to that and make sure the calls are meetings are worth their time.
  26. Mike: I also hate to going to a meeting that is about MU but that doesn’t have anything to do with that topic. It is ok to retire groups. The SC needs to give some direction about their bandwidth and what can be done.
  27. Carl: Maybe the simplest way is to enumerate the groups and put it out for a community wide vote.
  28. Rosa: Before we send some of the groups out for a vote we should define the structure and try to fit some of the existing groups into that structure.
  29. Dave: What hierarchy can be created that includes monitoring and accountability? What is the communication structure about how this information is going to be shared with the community?
  30. Harold: Is it causing any issues with calling things “committees, workgroups, etc.”? And the idea of the committees managing the workgroups makes sense in some aspects. But in other aspects if there is a short-term specific goal, then it wouldn’t be necessary to have a committee manage the workgroup.
  31. Caleb: It wouldn’t be the committee administering the workgroups. It would be the committee starting the discussion and then the workgroup reporting back to the committee so that any information can be disseminated back to the community. More that the groups are more structured and that the discussions happen at the committee level with the workgroups doing the work.
  32. Harold: I would think the workgroup would disseminate the information to the community.
  33. Caleb: Then we would continue with the current issue of having lots of different workgroups and no one is really aware of what work is being done.
  34. Harold: Then maybe we should have a workgroup product dissemination committee
  35. Rosa: We need to define the roles of Group administrators who would track the progress of the goals of the workgroups. They would have roles and responsibilities within the ISDS website, but they would also have some responsibilities for reporting back to the community.
  36. Harold: Do we need to make a distinction between workgroups and community groups? Or is that just a distinction based on how people have decided to share resources?
  37. Natasha: I do attempt to use the forums, but not as groups, but more discussion threads. Most of the forum groups don’t function as workgroups.
  38. Dave: Seems that there are the following divisions:
  39. Workgroups: maybe there aren’t many of these based on the current definition. Example: Urgent care group that would report back to a committee to follow up about the activities of the workgroup.
  40. Community discussion groups: MU, EHR vendor groups; but those topics change. Maybe those should be committees that generate agendas.
  41. Discussion threads with questions: just looking for feedback from other people
  42. Teresa: The issue is that not everyone is on all the same forums (groups), so if a question is posted in a group forum that I am not part of, I won’t see it. If you are interested in something specific, then you join that group, but if you are interested in the broader picture, you need to indicate that.
  43. Rosa: Four different groups
  44. Workgroups
  45. Community Calls (BUG, MU, NSSP CoP)
  46. Forums and Discussion Threads – don’t need to be transferred to the new website
  47. Committee
  48. Emilie: the website will have open community forum where anyone can post a question and anyone can follow up on it. Then there will be “groups” that can be joined and virtual shared workspace with a private forum, file sharing, etc. Each group will need to have a group admin that will be responsible for determining when the group resources (documents or resources shared in the group forum) are ready to the uploaded to the KR.
  49. Shandy: Once the website is released, we will need to put together a training/webinar to talk through how to use the new site and join these groups. We should also develop a diagram about the partnership with CDC/ISDS and the CoP and write up business processes for the groups/committees/workgroups.
  50. Mike: Committees would be advisory groups with the chair’s responsibility to develop the discussion topics to spawn new discussions.
  51. Carl: The committee is a standing concern and the committee meeting would have a chair, agenda, minutes, etc. A workgroup would also have a specific concern with deliverables. A community discussion is a discussion of the topic when they are looking for feedback.
  52. Rosa: We need to review existing/retired groups for content that could be beneficial to the community. Need to curate the information but need community assistance to complete that.
  53. Natasha: Most of the existing forum groups don’t need to be transferred to the new website.
  54. Mike: Once the SC has selected which groups should continue, the members of the groups that are being retired should go through those groups and see if there is any content should be saved.
  55. Teresa: A lot of older groups had topics that aren’t relevant any more and could be combined into current groups.
  56. Rosa: There needs to be a process/ option for calls/groups to be retired if they don’t have topics for the call any more.
  57. Teresa: If there is a lack of activity after 6 months, then someone checks in with the group Admin to see if the group is still relevant. If there isn’t activity after 12 months, then the group is retired.
  58. Don: This is why curation of the groups and resources is required.
  59. Krystal: Some of the challenges in leading the groups is that you don’t know who to go to for direction. Need some guidance and tools (documentation) to show these processes is really important. There are community members/grantees who are supposed to be participating but they need more direction.
  60. Leslie: Groups can be stood up and they can be sunset when their task is completed
  61. Caleb: Would like to see an org chart of the groups.
  62. Harold: Processes to be developed
  63. Creation of committees and groups
  64. Process for creation of a workgroup with deliverables and timeline
  65. People need to know how to post a question on a topic
  66. People need to know how to participate in calls on a topic
  67. There should be a historical compilation of previous group discussions
  68. There should be some sort of group that will work on organizing the content and curating it for dissemination
  69. Natasha: It is nice to have an open call/forum for just talking through community issues (without an agenda)
  70. Caleb: This might be the role of a committee
  71. Teresa: Each group should have documentation about their scope and description that can be searchable for others to determine if they want to join a group or participate in the group calls.
  72. Natasha: other than a workgroup, do we need private groups at all. It seems to make things more divided.
  73. Harold: why should any of the groups be private?
  74. Rosa: there are some groups that might be region or jurisdiction specific that doesn’t involved everyone in the community.
  75. Natasha: but even with the public groups, things can get buried in the group pages, unless they are uploaded to the KR.
  76. Review of existing workgroups and community forum groups
  77. Leslie: Are there existing groups that could be polled about if they should continue?
  78. Natasha: Should we talked to the group owners on the NING groups and ask them if the group should continue in the new site. They would need to be the group admins for the new site any way.
  79. Caleb: A lot of the groups need to be renamed and combined.
  80. Rosa: None of the forum groups should be moved over.
  81. Caleb: We should reach out to the groups that have been active in 2016 and see if they need a group on the new website.
  82. Teresa: Should we just archive everything from the discussion groups so that it can be review/revived if needed.
  83. Emilie: ISDS will look into an archive process for the historical discussions on the NING platform.
  84. Rosa:
  85. Charlie: ISDS also needs to determine what it can support.

Next Steps:

  1. ISDS will move forward with plans for an external KR to be built outside of the new Your Membership platform that will be hosting the new ISDS website.
  2. The SC will develop business processes for workgroups and community forums regarding the creation of groups, use of group pages, forums, and when working content should be transitioned to the KR
  3. The SC will develop a business process for determining what content should be transitioned to the KR from the existing content found on the ISDS Discussion Forums (NING).
  4. The SC will determine which workgroups/forum groups should be transitioned to the new YM site.
  5. Please review all the existing forum groups and think about groups that could be combined, retired, revived, etc. so that a decision can be made about which groups should be transitioned.
  6. ISDS will communicate with the forum group creators and assess their desire to transfer their groups to the new platform.
  7. ISDS will follow up about archiving the NING forum discussions for historical record.

Page 1 of 6