Utah Digital Health Commission Meeting Minutes
Friday September 7, 2007
9:30 a.m. -11:30 a.m.
Utah Department of Health
288 North 1460 West
Salt Lake City, Utah
Members Present: Joseph Cramer, Mark Munger, Chet Loftis, Scott Barlow, Via Video Conferencing: Brad LeBaron, Dennis Moser, Via Telephone Deb LaMarche, Michael Jenson
Members Absent: Rulon Barlow, Terry Holmes, and Rod Ross
Staff Members: Wu Xu, Humaira Shah,
Guests: Sharon Donnelly (HealthInsight), Bette Vierra (AUCH), Barry Nangle (UDOH), Francesca Lanier (UDOH), Don Beckwith (UDOH), Randy Fisher (DTS), and Lyle Odendahl (AG)
Welcome and Introduction: Dr. Joseph Cramer, UDHS Commission Chair, opened the meeting by welcoming the members, staff and guests and thanking everyone. Dr. Joseph Cramer also introduces Lyle Odendahl, Assistant Attorney General for the UDOH. An attendance roster was passed around for members and guests to update their information.
Training for Open Meeting Law: Lyle Odendahl gave training on the Open Meeting Law. He spoke about the “Public body”, definition of a “Meeting”, and public notice of meetings- Emergency meetings and then he discussed the Minutes of open meeting and explained how to record meetings. He told about how this chapter does not apply to any chance meeting or social meeting. This chapter also explains how it does not prohibit the removal of any person from a meeting. If that person willfully disrupts the meeting to the extent that orderly conduct is seriously compromised. There is a criminal penalty for closed meeting violation saying that a member of a public body who knowingly or intentionally violates any of the closed meeting provisions of this chapter is guilty of a class B misdemeanor.
Proposed Revision of the Digital Health Service Act: Due to Dr. Joseph Cramer and all the commission members including the staff there were five changes that were agreed on:
1- 26-9f-103: (2) Selected from a list of three nominees for each open position recommended by the department in consultation with the commission, who fall into one or more of the following categories
2- 26-9f-103: (6) The department shall provide informatics staff support to the commission.
3- 26-9f-104: (2) Advise and make recommendations on digital health service issues to the department and other state entities.
4- 26-9f-104: (3) Advise and make recommendations for digital health service information standards.
5- 26-9f-104: (7) Explore and encourage the development of digital health service systems as a means of reducing health care costs and increasing health care quality and access, with emphasis on assisting rural health care providers and special populations with access to or development of electronic medical records.
Scott Barlow moved to accept the changes. Mark Munger seconded the motion.
Brad Lebaron, Joseph Cramer, Chet Loftis, Dennis Moser, Deb LaMarche, and Michael Jensen were in favor of the motion..
Proposed Mission Statement: From all of the member common decision this is the proposed mission statement:
“The Utah Digital Health Service Commission's mission is to facilitate and promote the adoption of the secure, effective and efficient exchange of electronic health data and services, as a means to reduce health care costs, enhance quality, increase access, and improve medical and public health services.”
Brad Lebaron made the motion. Mark Munger seconded the motion.
Scott Barlow, Joseph Cramer, Chet Loftis, Dennis Moser, Deb LaMarche, and Michael Jensen were in favor of the motion.
Policy Needs on Privacy and Security for Health Data Exchange in Utah:
Francesca Lanier, Director for the UNIFY-PS project provided update information on the privacy and security project. The project is in phase 2 with RTI and NGA. She discussed TPO. They are focusing on an education component that looks at exchange for the TPO clause for HIPAA and have subcontracted with health insight. They are working with the Utah Attorney Generals office on an assessment to help providers look at the implications of recommended policy and/or regulatory change and policy implications. The second project was the analysis of Notice of Privacy Practice policies being conducted under subcontract with Brad Madsen at the BYU law school. Policies were rated according to their ability to meet the required elements under HIPAA. The draft indicates that they (providers) are not doing well in just meeting what’s required for the notice of privacy practice; considerable variations exist in terms of the notice of privacy practice policies. She mentioned about some options that were discussed; checklists for providers to use to self assess their policies for compliance with HIPAA, a common language form that could be adapted, and education materials. There’s a requirement for plain language that is often overlooked and in the draft document the subcontractor didn’t include it in his score able items. Policies range from one page to seven pages and the fact is the requirement states specifically that these should be written in plain language. The draft analysis indicates places where you could probably narrow existing variation and common language would be useful ((i.e. information required by law).
Joseph Cramer (chair) calls for a motion.
Chet: My motion is that we work toward a bottom language that includes each of the check listed items, that we work toward taking this and translating it into other languages.
Scott Barlow seconded the motion.
Joseph Cramer, Chet Loftis, Scott Barlow, Mark Munger, Deb LaMarche, Michael Jensen, Dennis Moser, and Brad Lebaron were in favor of the motion
The UDOH e-Health Building Block Request for SFY-2009:
Barry Nangle explains about the e-Health Initiative and Dr. Sundwall’s vision for e-Health. Dr. Sundwall wants to support Dr. Joseph Cramer and energize the Digital Health Service Committee. He sees the UDHSC as a primary instrument for him to advance his vision of e-Health vehicle to receive advice from the community, from experts in this area, really is only advisory committee that is directly related to his e-Health vision. He wants to make the departments e-Health agenda be better know at legislation. Dr. Sundwall says he has given one of his major resources in this area which is Wu, and has made Wu staff to this commission.
Medicaid EMR Project: Target Number of Medicaid Clinics:
Sharon Donnelly, DOQ-IT Project Director at HealthInsight, updates the Commission about the Medicaid EMR project. The project has two sources of funding (federal and state). With the federal funding Health Insight is able to work with about 60-65 clinic sites in the state that they were able to work with. They can work with adult primary care. The state funds cover pediatricians, orthopedic surgeons and such. She explains that this funding began in July and they have 26 sites of the 60-65 already filled up. They want to look at the high volume Medicaid providers and take out the ones they are already working with. She says their first target is pediatricians and OBGYN’s, if any other specialty clinic group comes to them then they will work with them as well. The funds go through next June.
Evaluation and Planning:
Joseph Cramer brings the meeting to a conclusion. He asks how we think we did and if this meeting felt different. He continues asking if we think we’re making progress and are growing as a commission. He explains that he values everyone’s time and it shouldn’t get wasted so he hopes progress was made. He appreciates everyone for coming and felt the meeting went great. Suggestions were made for future meetings about when they should be held. Dr. Cramer is tempted to go with the schedule of the meetings to be held every 3 months but with the legislation coming up he doesn’t want to lose momentum so he asks for thoughts from the commission. The next meeting will be held on the second of November as decided. Dr. Cramer concludes with a warm thank you to everyone.