Bob, Thanks for (attempting) to get the focus back. I've said this in so many different ways over the last several months that I've run out of words.
The path is to 1. document what today's "current state" is 2. decide what you want the "future state" to be 3. chart a transition plan to get from here to there 4. keep in mind that even with a roadmap to get to the future state, the industry has to live in the current state and implement all of this stuff by October, 2003....and begin testing with external trading partners by April, 2003. To date we do not have in any formal draft document: 1. a good documentation of the current business model(s) and scenario(s) 2. requirements to achieve point 4 3. a clear cut statement of the future state 4. requirements for the future state (how on earth can you create a transition plan if you don't know the requirements for the future?) 5. proposed business model(s) and scenario(s) for the future Thus far all of this blue-skying hasn't at all addressed how in the h*ll the industry is going to accomplish implementation of the EDI requirements using the control structures for identification and routing so that point 4 can be accomplished....and tick tock, tick tock....the clock is ticking and time is running out! Rachel Rachel Foerster Principal Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd. Professionals in EDI & Electronic Commerce 39432 North Avenue Beach Park, IL 60099 Phone: 847-872-8070 Fax: 847-872-6860 http://www.rfa-edi.com -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 8:23 AM To: Mimi Hart Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: TA1 responding to non-participating health care providers In my opinion, we have to separate two things here. There is today - and the desired future. Today, an open door can not work. There ARE security issues and connectivity issues and identification issues and contract issues and validation issues and - well, you get the point. We can not ignore those or just make them go away. But, there must also be a vision for the future. I have had that vision for years, and shared it here. But, that IS very much a future vision today. We should be able to use the internet for open healthcare EDI. But that requires security and non-repudiation solutions and databases that provide identification and routing and validation and connectivity information. We do not have those today. This is not a simple situation. The problem that I see with the current discussion is that we are not actively recognizing that we have a today and a future. The talk often sounds like one side saying "The future is here, accept it" and the other side saying "I am not ready for it". As I recall from the beginning, the focus was on trying to establish a direction for the future vision and to facilitate the move to that future, not to impose the future. And, this group's focus is on only part of the total problem. I guess what I would like to see is a general tone of "This is were we should try to go". We could even identify the other issues or problem that must be solved before we can even go there. The interoperability work is part of that. The national identifiers is part. There will be a need for identifiers for other entities not specifically ID'd under HIPAA. And this will get even more complicated - I foresee a need for increasing payer to payer EDI. I don't recall any discussion about that dimension. Greg is right about healthcare today. Mimi is right about what healthcare needs to become at some tomorrow. The transition will be a bear, and will not happen overnight. I am hoping that this group can describe the destination, and maybe start to build the road map. I guess that's enough preaching for today. Maybe I'll see some of you next week at the X12 meeting. Bob
