With regard to restrictions on ClarEDI, I can't speak for other carriers, but can share information about why we have restricted access to our data. Shyness really doesn't have anything to do with it. Rather its just being practical.
We are using ClarEDI during our system testing process. Before we send a file through system testing, we are sending that file to ClarEDI for certification. Why would we do that? The answer is that by certifying a 270 file, for example, as compliant, if the transaction bombs out in the test, we have a reasonable belief that the problem is not in the file but in the system. It is not appropriate to show where we are based on those "tests" for two reasons. First, it would be wrong to give the impression that we are at the certification testing phase when we are just using the tool for system testing purposes. Second, the information might suggest we are planning to capable of sending files we don't intend to send. For example, we may create an 820 Premium Payment transaction for system testing purposes, but we have no intention of sending outbound 820's in the real world, post-HIPAA. But if you were able to see the data regarding our Plan, you'd get the impression that we were testing outbound 820s. Also, given the fact that many of our tests are for the System testing stage, we don't have the staff resources to handle calls from folks asking how soon we will be certified so they can do business with us, or whatever other questions that may come up. -----Original Message----- From: William J. Kammerer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 5:29 PM To: WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing Subject: Why it's not the End of the World if providers and payers don't share information in a public registry... Yes, I was disappointed at the reticence of most of Claredi's directory participants to share their information. Most of it's locked down and available only to other members of their trading "group." Obviously, the main purpose of the Claredi directory is to share information on certification progress: perhaps folks are humbled that they are not further along in achieving compliance, and don't want the rest of the world to know! I guess that's only natural. In any case, as Chris notes, the same "shyness" will affect our Healthcare CPP Registry. If people are not too keen on even publicizing their address and phone number, they probably won't give away to just anyone as to how to send transactions their way. Even though I'm absolutely confident we can come up with technological solutions to expose information only to others in certain categories, that still will not get people over their agoraphobia. This is a social engineering problem that mere technology will not solve. On the positive side, clearinghouses are always anxious to advertise the payers they support - I suppose that's a selling point to providers. So at least CHs will probably be happy to prime the pump with payer CPPs - which will naturally point to portals at those very same clearinghouses! Keep in mind that the CPP (electronic partner profile) is really not dependent on a global, public federated registry. These are just standardized XML documents with machine readable information that describe the partner's capabilities: certification, financial institution data and EDI addresses, inter alia. The CPP doesn't have to reside in a public directory. A payer could continue to do business the old way, where a provider has to fill out all sorts of paperwork, sign TPAs, endure hideous EDI enrollment delays and whatnot. And at the end of all this, he'd be e-mailed - what else? - a nice CPP! William J. Kammerer Novannet, LLC. Columbus, US-OH 43221-3859 +1 (614) 487-0320 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Christopher J. Feahr, OD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "William J. Kammerer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, 21 May, 2002 10:23 PM Subject: Re: Electronic Funds Transfer and Security William, Thanks very much for this information about the banking world... as unsettling as it is. It may turn out that other CPP information about payors and providers will have to be semi-restricted as well. I noticed, for example, that some Claredi customers have chosen to restrict public access to some of their directory fields, even though the information looks pretty harmless to me. Of course, the whole point of our CPP record is to make it widely available... but to one's potential partners... not necessarily to one's "competition"... and maybe not very much of it in one query, no matter who you are. I would expect payments in most low-volume or CPP-initiated trading relationships to continue to be paper checks for the next few years... mailed to the address in the CPP record. In the hi-volume relationships, it will probably be necessary to send a voided paper check, sign a few forms, etc. in order to set up a direct-deposit, electronic payment arrangement anyway. So all we may need in the CPP record now is a place to indicate preferences/abilities with respect to electronic payments. -Chris Christopher J. Feahr, OD http://visiondatastandard.org [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cell/Pager: 707-529-2268 CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This E-Mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in error, please do not distribute and delete the original message. Please notify the sender by E-Mail at the address shown. Thank you for your compliance.
