Notes from User Story Review Workgroup


Status of Notes: DRAFT
Date: May 3, 2010
Time: 11am-12pm
Attendees: Arien Malec, Honora Burnett, Steven Waldren. Susan Torzewski, Andy Heeren, Hank Fanberg, Robert Lynes, Peter DeValut, John Moehrke, Lee Jones, Steve Krsacok, Dan Russler, Teri Byrne and Paul Tuten

Actions from this Week
#
Date
Action
Status
Owner
Due Date
34
5/3/10
Arien will mark State public health agency reports public health data to Centers for Disease Control User Story as a “Should”
Closed
Arien Malec
5/10/10
35
5/3/10
Arien will post to blog and send out to mailing list, call for endorsement at IG level for User Stories
Closed
Arien Malec
5/10/10
36
5/3/10
All organizations will vote on May 6th meeting for IG endorsement, and Arien will remind those that will not be attending to vote on the grid
Closed
All organizations &
Arien Malec
5/10/10
37
5/3/10
Arien will change the meaning of priority to 1st, 2nd and 3rd
Closed
Arien Malec
5/10/10
38
5/3/10
Arien will change the language to reflect that all user stories will be considered, but the first set are ones we intend to accomplish in the calendar we’ve set out for ourselves
Closed
Arien Malec
5/10/10

Actions from Last Week
#
Date
Action
Status
Owner
Due Date
28
4/26/10
Vote on consensus for User Stories: User Story Workgroup Endorsement
Open
All
5/3/10
29
4/26/10
Create a Long Term Care Story
Closed
Arien
5/3/10
30
4/26/10
Create a Quality Reporting Registry
Closed
Arien
5/3/10
31
4/26/10
Update the stories that are links that are not complete & stories without links about Public Health
Closed
Noam Arzt
5/3/10
32
4/26/10
Update the stories that are links that are not complete & stories without links about Quality Reporting
Closed
Will Ross
5/3/10
33
4/26/10
Make clear when there are dual criteria for hospitals/providers that are reflected in the mapping and the story
Open
Will Ross
5/3/10

Notes
Proposal to split priority column to reflect policy/technology
  • Individual involvement issues: concern from John that the way we’re doing prioritization doesn’t reflect the discussion we’re having, the technical design must fit the story
  • Proposal to split priority column to reflect policy/technology
  • Don’t paint ourselves into a corner
  • Identify the mechanisms used to implement these as a first step
  • Round robin on splitting
Comment from Steven Waldren
  • Proposal is to split the column making it clear that there are must stories for implementation priorities and also from a technology perspective
Comment from Susan Torzewski
  • Separating out won’t be that successful
Comment from Andy Hernan
  • Separation might lead to confusion
  • What would an end user take away?
Comment from Steven Waldren
  • Consumer involvement: a patient send information to a provider
  • Consumer community saying that we are not interested in patients offering information
  • This vs. the HITPC communication about patient -> providers are very important
  • Is the technology solution completely going to ignore this, or just paint it as a policy/technology question?
  • Show the consumers that we are working on their problem
Comment from Lee Jones
  • Confusing to split them out
Comment from Steve Krsacok
  • Add something to the definitions to say that they should all be considered musts
Comment from Dan Russler
  • Conversation from S&T, how do we authenticate? What are the business processes? What is the related messaging?
  • Third column that group these around policy/ pre-conditions
Comment from Paul Tuten
  • Clarify definitions as to what we currently have in place – the problem could be handled by
Comment from Hank Fanberg
  • Project management 101
  • Changing must/should to first and second
Comment from Peter DeVault
  • Adding another column would be confusing
  • Additional information about what challenges lie ahead
  • Must has to mean: these are the things we are doing now, and unless we accomplish them we haven’t been successful
Comment from Arien
  • Saying all the stories in the main stable are all in scope from a specification level
  • But we are focused on all the stories from implementation level
    • All stories in main table are “in scope for specification consideration”
    • Must -> Phase I
    • All user stories will be considered, but the first set are ones we intend to accomplish in the calendar we’ve set out for ourselves
Quality Reporting User Stories
· Will Ross created a new User Story: State public health agency reports public health data to Centers for Disease Control
· Arien will mark State public health agency reports public health data to Centers for Disease Control User Story as a “Should”
· Arien will post to blog and send out to mailing list, call for endorsement at IG level for User Stories
· All organizations will vote on May 6th meeting for IG endorsement, and Arien will remind those that will not be attending to vote on the grid
· Arien will change the meaning of priority to 1st, 2nd and 3rd
· Arien will change the language to reflect that all user stories will be considered, but the first set are ones we intend to accomplish in the calendar we’ve set out for ourselves