1. 1 Standards Harmonization Readiness Criteria TIER 1 March 2, 2006 HITSP Standards Harmonization Criteria Committee

2. 2 Purpose The Readiness Criteria presented here are “Tier 1” or the highest level. Although they will require further definition and detail, to fully meet intended use in harmonization by HITSP, they represent a starting point for Panel approval and preliminary use by the Technical Committees. We anticipate further iterations and changes and welcome feedback.

3. 3 Foundation for Standards Harmonization We are planning recommendations to HITSP to adopt a primary goal and basic set of objectives as the foundation for harmonizing healthcare standards.

4. 4 Harmonization Readiness Explained Harmonization Readiness is determined by applying specific criteria that will allow the HITSP to select the initial set of standards most ready for use as an interlocking set to implement in support of breakthrough use cases. An interlocking (harmonized) set of standards requires: –Selection of initial standards based on criteria –Resolution of gaps and overlaps between selected standards –Coordinated maintenance of the set of standards based upon feedback from use Readiness is relative to an action for interoperability and must be understood at the messaging level with constrained vocabulary. (delete)

5. 5 Readiness Criteria within Standards Harmonization Flow d a r d s Use Case Charter Recommended Standards Criteria for Inventories Recommend changes based upon user feedback

6. 6 Criteria as Filters Suitable for purpose Organization and process Costs Life cycle maturity

7. 7 Suitable for Purpose To be determined suitable, standard(s) must: –Align with ONC Strategic Framework for HIT –Meet the use case business and technical criteria –Be compatible with other standards, framework, architecture and models as determined by HITSP. –Demonstrate the flexibility and extensibility to adapt over time –Backward, lateral and forward compatibility considerations (Delete) Includes a documented discovery process of standards landscape (Delete)

8. 8 Organization and Process Initial Criteria for SDOs: Balance and lack of dominance by any single interest group –Applies both to leadership and approval process Formal development and approval processes –Includes process for responding to input/feedback from implementers Effective governance and funding to be responsible stewards, open to stakeholders and able to maintain and enhance their standards Domain relevance with history of commitment Favorable intellectual property and licensing terms Willingness to collaborate with other standards developers and HITSP Adequate consumer voice in the development process Technology and vendor neutrality

9. 9 Costs Total life cycle costs including development, licensing, and use Lack of barriers, ease of access

10. 10 Life Cycle Maturity Where is standard in Life Cycle from Initial Development to Implementation? SDO standards either, ‘draft’ or ‘approved and published’ Standard is tested Standard matures and ITS products are developed Standard implementation and change What is the level of standards developer support and market adoption? This must be a balance, particularly when dealing new standards, gaps and duplications.

11. 11 Other Considerations Existing resources of “harmonized” standards information –National Committee on Vital and Health Statistics (NCVHS) –Consolidated Health Informatics (CHI) –ANSI Health Informatics Standards Board (HISB) –etc Jurisdictional laws and regulations (HIPAA, Medicare Part D (ePrescribing), etc.) Accepted best practices and recommendations