Joint Exchange / Interop Work Group Test Workgroup Eric Heflin/Judith Huntman/Ed O’Connor Aug 8, 2012

Roll 2 NameOrganizationRepresentation Nick VanDuyneNYeC State Ivan HandlerIL John DonnellyNJTask Group Co-Chair - IWG Marty PrahlSSA Federal agency Dennis Peterson, Curtus Browning, Elaine Hunolt, Taimur Aslam, Willie Singletary, Monica VanDykeVHA Kevin BradyNIST David Tao, Dan HuberSiemens EHR Vendor Dave Cassel, Rob KlootwykEpic Bill Howard, Charles ParisotGE Jeff Cunningham, Tim DunningtonICA HIE vendor Mike LaRoccaIntersystems Vladi Reznikov, Jennifer PuyenbroekCONNECT PMO Matt Bell, Tom Wilson, Kathy LinAxolotl Teddy GedamuMedfx Melissa OwensMarshfield ClinicHealth System Steve LeightyMedVirginia Regional HIE Brian Bonnington, Dave Trepanier, Dave Smith, Steve MichaelIHIE Anuj DesaiInterop WG Eric HeflinTHSATask Group Co-Chair - Exchange Mariann YeagerExchange Ed O'Connor, Judith HutmanNitorONC Testing Contractor Dennis Wilson, Alisa Ray, Sue Rieber CCHIT ATCBs and Testing SMEs Jim St. Clair IHE USA Amit Trivedi, Kevin Brown, Michella Knighton ICSA Labs Traci Mapps SLI Global Solutions Kyle Meadors, Timothy Bennett Drummond Group Milton Padilla, Steve Wilson, Mark Shin, Doublas Biggs, Les Biggs InfoGuard

Roll Call – Admin Announcements – Eric (5 mins) ‘Round-the-Room for Harmonized Specs – Eric (10 mins) Phased Approach to Harmonization for Remaining Specs – Judith/Ed (10 mins) ‘Round-the-Room for Phasing Approach – Eric (10 mins) Test Execution and Test Architecture – Ed (10-15 mins) Definition of Done – Ed (5 mins) Test Case Metrics – Ed (7 mins) Open Discussion – All Wrap Up - Eric RFP Schedule Review - Eric Agenda 3

Harmonized PRL (PD/QD/RD/MP/AF) Tests Are Drafted No objections were received and are now candidates for “done” status Future changes are possible, but will be incorporated into the next phase of test cases design and implementation We will do a ‘round-the-room next on the status RFP Has 5 respondents Bidder interviews have been conducted top few vendors Analysis is nearing completion Announcements 4

‘round-the-room Do you object to the harmonized test specifications (presented over the last few weeks) being considered final? The scope of this question is the harmonized specifications for Patient Record Lookup (aka Patient Discovery, Query for Documents, and Retrieve Documents + Messaging Platform and Authorization Framework).

Harmonization Phases Phase 1 – SOAP Send/Receive Phase 2 – Direct Send/Receive Phase 3 – Secondary Methods, Service Discovery, & Provider Directories Parent Use Cases (Done) Test Case harmonization (Done) Tests: Mess & Auth Framework (Done) Tests: Patient Discovery (XCPD, PIX, PDQ), Query for Documents, Retrieve Documents (Done) Test Execution Guides (Done) Parent Use Cases Test Case harmonization Tests: Direct Applicability Statement (Done) Tests: Direct XDM/XDR-Bridge (Done) Tests: Direct Certificate Discovery (Done) Test Execution Guide Parent Use Cases Test case harmonization Tests: Web Services Registry (Done) Tests: HPD+ Tests: Document Submission (Done) Tests: Administrative Distribution (Done) Test Execution Guides Unified Test Process – Has Been Proposed

Phase II Work Plan: Direct Test Specs BodyStatus * Parent Use Cases Done Test Case harmonization -Top-down (use case) -Bottom-up (spec based) tests In Process Tests: Direct Applicability Statement Done Tests: Direct XDM/XDR-Bridge Done Tests: Direct Certificate Discovery Done Test Execution Guide -Combine Mod Spec Phase II (messaging) -Phase III (cert discovery) documentation Not Started * More detailed status is should be posted on the Wiki

Phase III Work Plan: Secondary Specs Secondary Methods, Service Discovery, & Provider Directories BodyStatus Parent Use CasesIn Process Test case harmonizationNot Started Tests: Web Services Registry -Bottom-up (spec based) test package is complete Done Tests: HPD+ -Top-down (use case) test package is complete Not Started Tests: Document Submission -Bottom-up (spec based) test package is complete Done Tests: Administrative Distribution -Bottom-up (spec based) test package is complete Done Test Execution Guides -Doc Sub and Admin Dist draft guides exist In Process

‘round-the-room What are your thoughts about the phased approach for harmonization? Feedback is needed, especially if you or your organizations to the proposed approach.

Test Case Execution Manual: Step-by-step instructions are included in written test packages Draft tracking worksheet for execution methods What tests are the best candidates for tooling? soapUI as a component, review different uses of it Other utilities/components to research? What about the conformance checklists?

Refresh on Reference Toolkit concept Check-in on feedback to high-level Toolkit architecture Assumptions on prioritization at utility level Message simulation for High test cases in PD/QD/RD Proof of concept of lightweight orchestration (BDD layer) Integration of NIST content tools (c32 then CCDA) Ideas/volunteers for utilities, modules, or approaches? Architecture Review 11

Tracked through status (Unsorted, Untargeted, Research, in- Development, Peer Review or Pilot, Final) and Priority (High, Medium, Low, Zero) Written tests priority x ease/benefit of execution x importance of spec/functionality = Overall Priority* Test Execution Metrics 12 PDQDRDM&ADirectHPD+/ WSR Doc Sub Adm Distro EUA +MR Total High (Active/Done) 12 (5) 21 (18) 8 (4) 70* (0) 31 (19) 4 (0) 6 (0) 4 (0) 10 (0) Total Possible: Execution tracker will be fleshed out with numbers for medium/low/zero priorities and detailed methods over time

Open Discussion

RFP released — July 2nd Questions received by 6 organizations Answers distributed — July 13th Bids due — July 20th Expected award — August 15th Contract start — TBD RFP Schedule Review 14 We are here