HIA WG Concall 2010-11-18 Minutes

Owned by
Former user (Deleted)
Last updated: Dec 09, 2010Version comment
6 min read

HIA WG Concall 2010-11-18 Minutes



Date and Time

  • Date: Thursday, November 18, 2010
  • Time: 10am PST | 1pm EST | 5pm UTC | 7pm CEST (Time Chart)
  • Dial-In: Skype: +9900827044630912 - North American Dial-In: +1-201-793-9022
  • Code: 4630912

Attendees

  • Dervla O'Reilly (non-voting)
  • Dan Combs (voting)
  • Myisha Frazier-McElveen (voting)
  • Laurie Tull (voting)
  • Bob Pinheiro (voting)
  • Pete Palmer (voting)
  • Rich Furr (voting)
  • Dave Minch (non-voting)
  • Tom Smedinghoff (observer)
  • Dazza Greenwood (non-voting)
  • Lara Zimberoff (non-voting)
  • Tim Reiniger (non-voting)

Apologies

Apologies - TBD

We had 6 voting members on the call where we did reach quorum.

Agenda

1.       Roll call

2.       Approve Minutes from Oct. 28, 2010

3.       Patient ID Pilot update

4.      Other Patient ID portal topics

1. Roll Call

See above

2. Approval of Minutes

Rich Furr and Laurie Tull approved the minutes from Oct. 18. 2010

3. Patient ID Pilot Update

Dazza: Had and opportunity to sit down with Nat from Open ID to make sure we’re in synch on this project. The deadline has been extended to the end of November, Joni has distributed a revised contract. To my knowledge, the final contract is in the hands of Dan’s attorney for review and we expect that we’ll have returned to complete before the end of this month. Open ID will then be transferring the funds to Kantara. There’s a one month buffer and then we have 3 months to complete the work. Nat, Joni and I realized that we need to know who the pilot participants will be. What we have proposed is that Kantara, eCitizen and OpenID work diligently to identify pilot participants and set up very early milestones about a month into the design phase. We’re expecting to have a phase 1.5 where we identify the pilot participants, and after that, we would begin phase 2, which would be conducting the pilot.

Dan: We had always had identification and engagement of participants in the plan. We need to elevate this to a particular milestone in the project and I’m glad we’re doing this now as opposed to later into the project, so I support this idea.

Pete: Any questions or  comments on that?

Pete: Dan and Dazza, what are looking for from this group as far as stepping up and being participants?

Dazza: We would need a brief description and a letter of intent, something lightweight, maybe just a paragraph, to distribute and identify participants.

Dan: In order to conduct this pilot, it’s going to take a commitment on the part of the participants to provide resources for the project. Based on my experience, it takes some time to get that commitment. For the pilot, there’s no doubt we’ll need money to do it, but we also need people with the commitment and skills to build and implement. We’re likely to seek a mix of organizations and individuals who can bring skills, funding, and technical capabilities to make this work. As we’re thinking about what has to happen between now and whatever end point there is, we need a commitment to provide resources.

Myisha: Is there a use case documented?

Dazza: Yes, we need to hone in on that and it will evolve.

Dan: The use case at this point is 2 parted, to use existing infrastructures, and we intend to make the processes in the use case under the meaningful use requirements. There are parts that are fairly stable, but how that gets done and gets modeled is flexible.

Dan: Were there any concerns about the concept of a use case?

Myisha: No, just wanted the specifics on what the use case is.

Pete: Thank you, Dazza and Dan. Is there anything else on that?

Dazza: I don’t think so, we should plan a meeting of the steering committee to update the project plan.

Pete: Let’s move on to item 4, the other patient ID projects. Dan, would you like to speak about NSTIC or IDPV?

Dan: We’ve been doing a fair amount of work to socialize, promote, and get ready for the project. For those of you who haven’t followed this, I’ll give a little bit of background. Starting on NSTIC – back in March or April, the EOP lead either was on a call on which I presented a brief or was provided that information, and about an hour later, he contacted me in regards to what the NSTIC team could do to support the project. It’s become quite a bit of work to align the pilot with the strategy. We’re working out how the NSTIC team can support the project. I posted an article on the wiki from Digital ID News that talks about the status of NSTIC and that in between one and six months, the strategy of the project will be finalized. There’s been an implementation plan associated with the strategy. The most recent news that I’ve heard is that the implementation plan will be coming back out for limited public input sometime in that same one to six month window. We’ll be able to provide our input.

Dazza: The implementation plan had private input. Will this be public or by private invitation?

Dan: From what I’ve heard, it’s likely to be by invitation for limited input. I have no idea if that’s accurate.

Pete: So as it relates to our portal project, is it anticipated they’re going to pay for anything?

Dan: I wouldn’t hold my breath on that, but it’s a possibility. There is no budget for the NSTIC or PMO, however, there may be ways to capitalize, potentially get grant funding, etc. There are people who would like that to happen but there’s not guaranteed way of doing that right now. A lot of this is still very up in the air.

Pete: That is always confusing to me that they would want to solicit info for projects…then what? Is the purpose to pilot their strategy?

Dan: One of the things that’s hard to do is draw down government money. What I originally proposed is that if they can’t give us money, somehow NSTIC put its stamp of approval on a project like this and potentially engage other support. We may not have cash, but it’s a near cash equivalent. To some extent, our project is a test case.

Pete: Dan, would you like to talk about IDPV or ADAIDM?

Dan: Yes

?: Sorry if I’m repeating information, but did you discuss the delay of the NSTIC?

Dan: Yes, the article is up on the wiki and we talked a little bit about the one to six month delay

Dan: The IDPV, if you’re not aware, is a verification groups around standards and identification. I’m chairing the drafting group. If you want specific information, I can certainly provide that. If you have any questions, feel free.

(no questions)

Dazza: As a setup to the ADA, I just want to be clear that we recognize the importance of the legal layers and we’re very excited to have Tom on the call, whose expertise is the legal dimension of these kinds of transactions.

Dan: Absolutely. If it’s okay, Tom, would you like to talk about the task force?

Tom: Essentially, to look at the legal side of identity management, to understand the legal barriers, what ways there are to deal with them, what models to look at and adopt. The task force itself is an American Bar Association task force, but it is not necessary to be and ABA member or even a lawyer in order to participate. We’ve held 4 in-person meetings this year, most recently in October in Washington. The meeting was excellent and very productive in terms of understanding areas we need to focus on. Our immediate goal is to draft a report to figure out where we are in terms of the legal side of identity management. We then need to figure out how to remove the barriers, how parties can setup their own legal frameworks that work around existing laws, etc. We’re trying to get a draft report done by end of this year or early next year, hold another meeting, and figure out where we need to go with that report. If anyone would like to join, participate, or monitor the list-serve, feel free to visit our website or send an email.

Dan: We’ll get the link up on the wiki.

Pete: Tom, what can Kantara be brought to that effort?

Tom: I have a call scheduled with someone from your group later this week to talk about that effort.

Dan: The task force is not exactly the same population but there is a significant overlap. There is agreement that it would be valuable to have a use case to establish what the task force is doing. Both groups will have to consider whether this valuable. In my opinion, it would be beneficial for the patient id portal to have a group of experts address the legal piece of the project. It seems to be a pretty good marriage of an ongoing project which needs legal input, and a project for which the ABA could apply their concepts and to have a specific project to apply it to. I’m hoping both groups would find it worthwhile to at least continue conversations to determine how they would benefit.

Tom: Whatever we come up with, we need to test it against different use cases, so I think this is very valuable for both projects

Pete: scheduling for next meeting, Rich moved for scheduling off-cycle meeting on 12/2, Pete seconded

4. Other Patient ID portal topics

See Above

Next Meeting

  • Date:  Thursday, Dec. 2, 2010
  • Time: 10am PST | 1pm EST | 5pm UTC | 7pm CEST (Time Chart)
  • Dial-In: Skype: +9900827044630912 - North American Dial-In: +1-201-793-9022
  • Code: 463091