S&I+CEDD+WG+Meeting+Minutes+2-2-2012

**Meeting Agenda:**

 * **Topic** || **Time Allotted** ||
 * Introductions and Overview || 10 minutes ||
 * Review of S&I CEDD key work products || 40 minutes ||
 * Next steps/questions and closing || 10 minutes ||

Attendance
Holly Miller, Russell Leftwich, John Donnelly, Meredith Lewis, Cem Mangir, Erik Pupo, Bob Yencha, Jennifer Barrett, Robin Barnes, Susan Campbell, Mike Fitzmaurice, Kris Cyr, Lindsey Hoggle, Emma Jones, Saul Kravitz, Ed Larsen, Laura Heermann Langford, Cindy Levy, Kosta Makrodimitris, Vassill Peytchev, Zeshan Rajput, Sandy Stuart, Serafina Versaggi, Luann Whittenburg

Action Items

 * **#** || **Action** || **Owner** || **Status** || **Due Date** ||
 * 1 || WG Members to provide feedback on process flows to Meredith Lewis (melewis@deloitte.com) or Cem Mangir (cmangir@deloitte.com) via email. || WG Members || Open || 2/17/2012 ||
 * 2 || Harmonization Team to work with USHIK on S&I CEDD additions/modifications form(s). || Harmonization Team || Open || 2/17/2012 ||

Meeting Notes

 * Started meeting by introducing Holly, Russ, and John as the WG Co-Chairs
 * Summarized the purpose of the S&I Framework CEDD and highlighted key work products, including:
 * S&I CEDD process flow
 * S&I CEDD additions/modifications process flow
 * S&I CEDD additions/modifications recommendation form
 * S&I CEDD one-pager
 * Outlined purpose and value of the S&I Framework CEDD
 * Need to distinguish that CEDD is not solely for clinical elements, but for clinically relevant elements, as well (e.g. non-clinical, admin, etc.)
 * Reviewed the CEDD process flow in detail:
 * Susan – how would one account for the need to encompass the data elements in the use case when the S&I has a fixed timeline?
 * Erik – responsibility of SDS; CEDD is a common standards analysis tool, and is not meant to force SDOs to modify standards
 * Bob – how do we address multiple standards with different element definitions (e.g. X12 and LDAP define PD elements differently)?
 * Erik – we would try to make the distinction, and try to harmonize data elements, depending on standard/SDO and contextual use; we would try to adhere to the definition used by the underlying standard as much as possible.
 * Gary – still need to be able to represent data in source form with signature bound to it downstream, regardless of standard.
 * Reviewed the CEDD additions/modification process flow in detail:
 * Mike – difficult to differentiate responsibilities/activities of UC team vs. CEDD WG
 * Erik – CEDD should be used by UC team as a reference to avoid redundancy and need for additional harmonization activities
 * Holly – we will work offline to determine responsibility of WG in addition/modification process
 * Reviewed CEDD additions/modifications recommendation form:
 * Gary – how will existing initiative elements get captured in the S&I CEDD?
 * Erik – Existing DES will be grandfathered from initiatives and rationalized