ToC+-+Success+Metrics+Meeting+Minutes+07-12-2011

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="TOC Header"
 * Meeting:** ToC Success Metrics Workgroup Meeting 3
 * Date:** July 12th, 2011


 * Action Items:**
 * **Action Item** || **Next Steps/ Status** || **Lead** || **Contributors** || **Due Date** ||
 * Review and Comment on the ToC Metrics Matrix as posted to the Wiki;
 * Can we establish a baseline in Year 0?
 * What might we survey to build that baseline? || In Progress || John Donnelly, Dr. Holly Miller || Workgroup Members ||  ||
 * Explore the research and come back with prioritization and then come back with the timelines || In Progress || SWG Members || n/a || ongoing ||
 * Follow up with outputs of PD WG---Awaiting Feedback from Arien || In Progress || Amy Berk || Arien Malec || ASAP ||


 * __Notes from Discussion:__**
 * General Topics:**
 * Dr. Miller was absent from today’s call
 * As of last week the workgroup members were requested to review the matrix and leave comments on the wiki.
 * Members are encouraged to use the discussion tab to give your feedback on the matrix


 * Matrix Review:**
 * One important topic that was tabled last week was the Use of Certified Directories and Use of Certificate Authority and whether they are in or out of scope.
 * The workgroup is waiting on Confirmation from Arien around this topic.
 * Through further analysis, one option for these two metrics were to keep them in the matrix but combine them
 * In order to collect stats, group could use the ONC website with list of vendors using certificates, ask them for statistics of their certificates
 * If a provider is using an EMR system, and accessing a provider directory, whoever stands up the directory is a user of the certificate
 * DIRECT is best source for identifying DIRECT use of certificate authorities and provider directories
 * There is no certification body for provider directories
 * Do we want to add in the actual word “DIRECT” or take it out – we don’t care if it is a certified certificate authority/provider directory
 * How many systems are using either provider directories or certificate authorities?
 * Discuss the users of the resources, not the resources themselves.
 * Can do an Electronic data exchange but not necessarily a ToC requirement; transport mechanism of exchange is perhaps out of scope
 * Are the core data elements all or nothing?
 * Must send ALL 4 data elements to meet the ToC requirements every time.
 * Care providers use of providers directories should be measured by number or % as the unit
 * Metric Name Change: “Use of Recognized Data Model (from ToC CIM WG ) by EHR/ PHR participating vendors”, measured by a binary measure (Y/ N) (in %)
 * Care Providers Use of Certificate Authorities
 * Start certifying MU Stage 2 by next year.
 * Do we tie the success of the ToC documents to HOW they are exchanged?
 * Success should be based on the document itself, not on how its exchanged.
 * Numerator = # of certified vendors supporting CIM Model; Denominators = # of all vendors
 * ATCB = Authorized Testing & Certification Body


 * Resolution(s):**
 * After additional conversation, the SWG members recommend keeping them together – need to figure out interventions
 * If they needed to be separated in the future it would be difficult – it’s better to keep them separate now.
 * When collecting data, we will struggle with whether the entity is a provider directory or certificate authority
 * These are measures of adoption within ToC but not mandatory; they are in scope, but keep them separate
 * The workgroup will further review the metrics categories and leave comments/updates on the Wiki.
 * Method to establish baseline is an informational interview; additional interviews in year 1 to assess the percent increase

include component="page" wikiName="siframework" page="space.template.inc_contentleft_end"