Cris Ross, co-chair Anita Somplasky, co-chair December 1, 2015 Certified Technology Comparison (CTC) Task Force

Welcome and Opening Remarks Comparison framework Proposed panel questions Review work plan Public comment Adjourn 1 Agenda

COMPARISON FRAMEWORK 2

When providers are looking to purchase certified health IT, what are their areas of focus? Certified health IT is modular Some providers may not need all health IT components Need a tool that allows comparison of products relevant to providers’ needs Tool also must meet providers where they are in adoption and use spectrum – Ex. new adopter, adding modular technology, shifting to Alternative Payment Model, replacing existing technology 3

Comparison Framework Regulatory requirements Identifies which certified health IT modules meet federal program requirements. Practice management/ financial system integration Scheduling, billing, payment processing, financials Privacy and security Certification criterion mapping, ease of use Usability User reviews in relation to workflow and patient safety Data migration Data portability, functionality to support effective migration, support payer audits Population health management Analytic functionalities, panel management, case management Patient engagement Patient access to health information, API, secure messaging, bill pay, scheduling, patient generated health data Interoperability Services HISP connectivity, e- prescribing, public health interfaces, ability to connect to other EHRs, other interfaces (lab, radiology, etc.) Transition to Alternative Payment Models (APMs) Provides guidance on selection of modules to support APM activities Quality improvement Availability of practice-relevant clinical quality metrics, ability to track performance over time, reporting architecture, audit accountability, data storage Total cost of ownership Provides information on the base cost of the product, service charges, interfaces, hardware costs, other recurrent fees Accessibility Identifies products that provide accessibility- centered design Categories not prioritized in any way

Comparison within categories Within each category, items for comparison could include: Functionality Usability and accessibility User reviews / satisfaction Cost 5

PROPOSED PANEL QUESTIONS 6

The Task Force will hold two virtual hearings in January to hear from experts in the field. Their feedback will help to inform final recommendations to the HITPC and HITSC. Panel IPrimary care providers Inclusive of both non-adopters and experienced users, primary care providers (physicians and advance practice providers), practice managers Panel IISpecialists Health care providers who provide non-primary care services. May include physician specialists, non-physician providers of care (ex. OT/PT/dentistry), and practice managers Panel IIICertified health IT developers Developers of certified EHRs and other health IT Panel IVHealth IT comparison and informational tool vendors Vendors who currently provide comparison and/or informational health IT selection tools ACBs/ATLs who provide CHPL data Panel VQuality Improvement and Advanced Payment Model (APMs) Capabilities Providers and/or vendors who can speak on the challenges of finding certified health IT products that have the applicable CQMs or advanced health IT functionalities necessary to meet APM and quality reporting needs Virtual Hearing: Proposed Panels 7

Potential Panel I Questions If a comparison tool was established, would you use it? If you were to use it, is there a form or format that you would find most helpful? Current users of health IT: – If you are currently using health IT and contemplating making a change, what are the factors you would entertain to accomplish that and what resources would be necessary? – Did you use any comparison tools to help you select an EHR? If yes, comment on the efficacy of those tools. If no, why not? Non-adopters: – What information do you need to make your decision about which product(s) to purchase? 8 Panel IPrimary care providers Inclusive of both non-adopters and experienced users, primary care providers (physicians and advance practice providers), practice managers

Potential Panel II Questions Does your specialty have specific requirements for certified health IT? How do you identify those requirements? If a comparison tool was established, would you use it? If you were to use it, is there a form or format that you would find most helpful? If you are currently using an EHR and contemplating making a change, what are the factors you would entertain to accomplish that and what resources would be necessary? 9 Panel IISpecialists Health care providers who provide non-primary care services. May include physician specialists, non-physician providers of care (ex. OT/PT/dentistry), and practice managers

Potential Panel III Questions What specific modules are relevant for the typical ambulatory office, and how do you package those features? What should be standard features for comparison? Does a vendor comparison tool foster competition and innovation? 10 Panel IIICertified health IT developers Developers of certified EHRs and other health IT

Potential Panel IV Questions What is the best way to develop a tool that meets the needs of different provider groups? Are there data that you would like to include in your comparison/informational product that are not currently available to you? How will that benefit the provider? For ACBs/ATLs: What information from the testing process would be useful for providers in selecting a certified product? Are there limitations in what can be shared? 11 Panel IVHealth IT comparison and informational tool vendors Vendors who currently provide comparison and/or informational health IT selection tools

Potential Panel V Questions How might a comparison tool be implemented that would guide providers to select certified health IT components necessary for quality improvement and/or APM participation? What specific health IT modules are relevant for APM participation? What information do providers need to know when selecting certified health IT to be used for quality measurement reporting? 12 Panel VQuality Improvement and Advanced Payment Model (APMs) Capabilities Providers and/or vendors who can speak on the challenges of finding certified health IT products that have the applicable CQMs or advanced health IT functionalities necessary to meet APM and quality reporting needs

NEXT STEPS 13

Task Force Workplan 14 Meeting GoalsMeeting Tasks Tue, Nov 17, :00am Overview of charge and plan Initial considerations from committee Overview of market research to date Tues, Dec 1, :30pmPotential Topic: Provider/vendor needs How might a tool address different health IT needs for different stages of adoption or implementation? (maturity model) Does a tool need to address different provider types’ health IT? If so, how might that be implemented? Does a tool need to address different forms of patient care? If so, how might that be implemented? Does a tool need to provide resources to compare base EHR vs. modular health IT needs? Thurs, Dec 3, 2015 – Admin Call (non- public) Refine the virtual hearing format December 8, Draft Recommendations to HITPC Status of current TF work Expectations for what will be learned from the virtual hearing December 10, Draft Recommendations to HITSC Status of current TF work Expectations for what will be learned from the virtual hearing Thu, Jan 7, :00am –Hearing Hear from additional expertise to inform final recommendations Fri, Jan 8, :00pm Refine recommendations Fri, Jan, Hearing Hear from additional expertise to inform final recommendations Tue, Jan, 19, :00pm Finalize recommendations January 20, Final Recs Joint HITPC/HITSC Presentation