Presentation on theme: "Information Collaborative"— Presentation transcript:
1 Information Collaborative Community HealthInformation Collaborativeand the Northeast Minnesota Regional Health Information OrganizationCheryl M. StephensExecutive DirectorCommunity Health Information CollaborativeMelinda MachonesHIT Project Manager The College of St. ScholasticaClark AverillIT Director, St. Luke’s Hospital Chair, CHIC Board of Directors
2 CHIC Overview Planning started in 1997 Initial focus Developed with Federal Office of Rural Health Network grantKey participants included regional hospitals, physician practices, public health, and the Minnesota Health Data Institute.Initial focusTo coordinate health information technology in Northeastern MinnesotaTo share costs and best practices across the membershipGained Non-profit 501(c)3 status in 1999Hold up map
3 Current CHIC ServicesProvide secure and encrypted claims submission to Medicare, Medicaid and various commercial Payors.Lead agency for the Minnesota Immunization Information Connection in 18 counties.Administrative Coordinator for Emergency Preparedness activities for 16 hospitals in 7 counties in the Arrowhead.Provide USAC administrative services – brought $185,000 back to the region in 2004Hold up map
4 Total Sites contributing data – 344 CHIC MembersTotal Sites contributing data – 344Hospitals – 32Clinics – 110Public Health Agencies – 19Long-term care – 9Urgent Care Sites – 2Tribal Health Agencies – 20Schools – 146Corrections – 2Home Care Agencies – 2Pharmacy – 2Just beginning to add long-tem care – MDH funded a pilot study to look at the sharing of pneumoccocal vaccine data between hospital, physician offices and LTC.
5 Membership Fee Structure Based on organization size and services usedHospitals/Health Systems fees are based on bed size and employed physiciansClinics fees are based on employed physicianPublic Health is a set feeTribal Health is a set feeSome members fees are paid by grants that CHIC is administrating
6 Reasons for RHIO National Focus snapshot Office of National Coordinator of Health Information Technologies (Dr. David Brailer)June 6: American Health Information Community Advisory Panel announcedJune 7: Four RFP’s focusing on Health Information ExchangeJune 8: Capital Hill HIT ShowcaseJune 16: "Health Technology to Enhance Quality Act of 2005" (Health TEQ)”
7 Reasons for RHIO Regional Activities MN e-Health Steering CommitteeThis Minnesota Rural Health ConferenceSt. Scholastica focus on HIT and interdisciplinary health sciences programsSMDC, St. Luke’s, SISU investments in EHR technologyCHIC is the logical organization to drive this strategy in NE Minnesota
8 RHIO DefinitionAn organization that facilitates the sharing of health information across all organizations contributing to the continuum of patient care.Very close to the current mission statement of CHIC
9 RHIO Models Common Community EHR Shared repository of summary EHR data Not practical, would involve replacing all existing investmentsShared repository of summary EHR dataCostly duplication of technologyShared access to multiple EHRsPractical solution in consumer-directed marketShared electronic clinical transactionsPractical starting point while EHR adoption matures, e.g. immunization registries, Rx histories, e-prescribing
10 RHIO Major Stakeholders Physicians, hospitals, public health, tribal health and other health care providersPayersPatients / ConsumersEmployersCommunities – Winona has a community based EHR up and runningE-Health Initiative Steering Committee has members from Payors in the state, there are cost benefits to them –reduced duplicate testing, HEDIS chart pulls could be done electronicallyPatients – someday we may be able to access our own records electronically. ER visits, medication lists, etc.
11 Criteria for our RHIO Vision An appropriate and effective Vision must include the following components:Create the technological infrastructureDevelop processes to make effective use of these systems within and between healthcare systemsEngage all stakeholders with special focus on rural providersWe are very early on in the development of RHIOs.
12 RHIO Work Group CHIC Cheryl Stephens SISU Medical Systems Mark Schmidt The College of St. Scholastica Kathy LaTour Melinda MachonesIron Range Resources Richard WalshSt. Luke’s Hospital Clark AverillSt. Mary’s/Duluth Clinic Tess SettergrenSuperiorEdge Kelly PetersonCommunity Health Board Julie MyhreNot written in stone, we may be adding more folks
13 ChallengesEHR adoption in rural NE Minnesota providers – cost and resourcesLack of comprehensive standards between vendorsPublic concern over privacy and securityAvailable funding
14 Advantages CHIC’s history and relationships with providers SMDC and St. Luke’s commitment to the projectNational focus and momentumWe can learn from earlier projects around the country
15 RHIO Initiatives in NE MN Learn from other RHIO projectsAcquire FundingAssess EnvironmentAddress privacy and security issuesPromote the project
16 Initial Implementation Share CCR with EPIC and Meditech providers2 largest systems in the regionCCR provides basic patient informationAllows us to expand by system or by record dataProvides for a well-defined, early success