# OEMR Board Meeting - Wednesday, June 14th, 2017 **URL:** \ **Category:** OEMR Non Profit Organization\ **Created:** [June 12, 2017, 7:05am UTC](https://community.open-emr.org/t/oemr-board-meeting-wednesday-june-14th-2017/8613 "2017-06-12T07:05:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/user_avatar/community.open-emr.org/brady.miller/32/10178_2.png) [@brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/u/brady.miller)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 7:05am UTC](https://community.open-emr.org/t/oemr-board-meeting-wednesday-june-14th-2017/8613/1 "2017-06-12T07:05:58Z")
Here is the Agenda for June 14, 2017 OEMR Board Meeting: 1. Call to Order. Roll call. 2. Approval of prior meeting minutes. -April 12, 2017 Board Meeting. -May 10, 2017 Board Meeting. 3. Financial Report 4. MU3 Report (ONC 2015) 5. Unfinished Business -Revocation status. -Marketing. -Conference outreach. -Raising funds. -Conflict of interest policy. -Trademarking. -Join OSI.(pending) 6. New Business 7. Public and Community Concerns 8. Next Board Meeting on July 12, 2017 9. Adjourn Board Meeting ---
**Author:** ![brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/user_avatar/community.open-emr.org/brady.miller/32/10178_2.png) [@brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/u/brady.miller)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 7:09am UTC](https://community.open-emr.org/t/oemr-board-meeting-wednesday-june-14th-2017/8613/2 "2017-06-12T07:09:14Z")
Audio files for prior meetings can be found here: [http://www.open-emr.org/wiki/index.php/OEMR\_wiki\_page#May\_10.2C\_2017](http://www.open-emr.org/wiki/index.php/OEMR_wiki_page#May_10.2C_2017) May 10, 2017 Board Meeting minutes are here: > April 12, 2017 Board Meeting minutes are here: > ---
**Author:** ![brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/user_avatar/community.open-emr.org/brady.miller/32/10178_2.png) [@brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/u/brady.miller)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 7:11am UTC](https://community.open-emr.org/t/oemr-board-meeting-wednesday-june-14th-2017/8613/3 "2017-06-12T07:11:09Z")
Just let me know if there’s any other business that needs to be added to the agenda. thanks, -brady ---
**Author:** ![stephenwaite](https://community.open-emr.org/user_avatar/community.open-emr.org/stephenwaite/32/15754_2.png) [@stephenwaite](https://community.open-emr.org/u/stephenwaite)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2017, 2:02pm UTC](https://community.open-emr.org/t/oemr-board-meeting-wednesday-june-14th-2017/8613/4 "2017-06-12T14:02:21Z")
thanks @brady.miller, here’s the latest advice from the attorneys regarding our reinstatement: > I have reviewed the IRS’s adverse determination letter, OEMR’s protest > letter and the IRS’s response, and I did some preliminary research > within the range requested by the client to see whether there is even a > basis to contest the IRS’s determination. Based on my review of the > materials and limited research, it is not clear whether the organization > would prevail at Appeals, but they can certainly try to appeal the > decision. > OEMR is a non-profit organization formed to ensure that all people, > regardless of race, socioeconomic status or geographic location, have > access to high-quality medical care through the donation of free, open > source medical software and service relating to that software. OEMR > supports the OpenEMR project and uses OpenEMR software as an instrument > to effect its goals. According to our research, software issues under > the Internal Revenue Code have always been challenging, and in 2013 it > was reported that exemption applications for open source software > projects had landed on the IRS watch list. Following this report, word > came out that the IRS was denying 501(c)(3) status on many of these > projects, and private rulings denying tax exempt status were released. > For example, in PLR 201349022 (Dec. 6, 2013) (copy attached), the IRS > denied an exemption for an organization that maintained a website for > the development and dissemination of a FLOSS fluid dynamics modeling > program and was formed solely to promote the development, distribution > and adoption of the free open source software code and associated > documentation comprising the software application, for benefit of the > general public. Despite the clearly scientific content of the program, > the IRS’s rationale for denial was perfunctory: “Maintaining a website > to promote the development, distribution and adoption of open source > software is not an exempt purpose.” The IRS did not that the > organization’s day-to-day operations were devoted solely to maintaining > their website that hosts and makes software available and it engaged in > no other activities. Because the organization did not protest and > challenge the IRS’s decision, a more in depth analysis of the IRS’s > ruling and reasoning is not available. > The protest letter submitted by OEMR was not very well written and did > not provide an in depth analysis of the facts, issues and law at hand. > The protest letter attempted to explain the differences and the > separateness between OEMR and OpenEMR, but made many references to OEMR > supporting the “charitable side” of OpenEMR. However, based on the PLR > referenced above, the IRS may not view OpenEMR’s activities to be > charitable. If we were to assist OEMR with challenging the IRS’s > adverse determination at the Appeals level, I would suggest having us > prepare a response letter to be submitted to Appeals that provides an in > depth analysis of the issues, facts and law at issue and that describes > in further detail the separateness between OEMR and OpenEMR and the > other “charitable” and “educational” activities that OEMR engages in. > Although the IRS has issued many denials related to these types of > organizations, the IRS has also approved exemption applications related > to these types of organizations. The following is a link to some of the > private letter rulings and other documentation of IRS determinations > relating to FLOSS (free/libre and open source software) organizations – > [https://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Main/Projects/entities-wg/IRS+Ruling+Documentation/#HUnder50128c2928329-1](https://wiki.opensource.org/bin/Main/Projects/entities-wg/IRS+Ruling+Documentation/#HUnder50128c2928329-1). > If we were to challenge this with IRS Appeals, we would want to review > all of these private letter rulings to discern patterns in the IRS’s > approval or denial of exemption applications submitted by organizations > with activities related to open source software. The following link > provides some discussion on patterns in approvals and denials related to > these types of organizations - [https://opensource.org/node/840](https://opensource.org/node/840). It > notes that organizations whose 501(c)(3) applications were approved > between 2010 and 2014, generally speaking, worked on software that > served traditionally “charitable” or “educational” purposes (as the IRS > has interpreted those concepts) (e.g., supporting development of > software for use by educational institutions, producing medical records > platform for healthcare providers, particularly in developing countries, > producing a software platform to support disaster relief). By contrast, > most of the organizations whose 501(c)(3) applications were denied > produced more general-purpose software (e.g., developing tools to enable > engineers to model fluid dynamics, producing web standards and > accompanying software to ease federation between websites). This > article further notes that there was little else to distinguish the > organizations that were denied from those that were approved and there > was a fair amount of overlap between approved and denied organizations. > According to the article, it is impossible to know what ultimately made > the difference for the “close-call” applications that were approved and > in all likelihood, it was a mix of factors, including the quality of the > application and the receptiveness of the individual examiner. > In light of the above, it may be worth trying to take this to IRS > Appeals and submitting a well-written, detailed analysis, assuming that > the client understands that a good amount of time will be involved in > doing additional research, preparing the written analysis and working > with Appeals and there is a risk that they may not prevail at the > Appeals level. Please let me know what your thoughts are. > “as the above discussion demonstrates the IRS has not been friendly to > claims that creating open source software is a valid scientific, > charitable, or educational activity in its own right. However, a variety > of organizations have secured tax-exempt status despite the Service’s > concerns with FLOSS in general. Typically, their key to success has been > convincing the IRS that the organization had a larger charitable > ….purpose to which the FLOSS activities were somehow incidental. This is > often easier to demonstrate where the software development activities > are only one among several complementary ways of furthering exempt > purposes. It is also easier in cases where most obvious uses of the > FLOSS are themselves charitable. The following are examples of > organizations whose exempt status were approved: • An organization that > lessened the burdens of government and conducted educational research by > collecting information about election technologies and problems with > those technologies, developing sample code to address those > technologies, and making all of this information available to state > elections officials and other stakeholders through white papers, > conferences, and other communications. • An organization that created a > platform for tracking medical records electronically on the kinds of > resource-constrained hardware environments available in the developing > world. Often the easiest larger purpose that can subsume a FLOSS > development effort is an educational purpose. As there are few limits on > the range of topics an educational organization can pursue, many FLOSS > organizations can find an educational effort with which the published > source code would fit well as a demonstration project or otherwise.” > Again, this further demonstrates that it may be worth challenging the > IRS’s adverse determination and if were to challenge it at the appeals > level, we should prepare a detailed analysis explaining the other > “charitable” and “educational” activities that OEMR engages in. Please > let me know if you have any questions. ---
**Author:** ![stephenwaite](https://community.open-emr.org/user_avatar/community.open-emr.org/stephenwaite/32/15754_2.png) [@stephenwaite](https://community.open-emr.org/u/stephenwaite)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 2:43pm UTC](https://community.open-emr.org/t/oemr-board-meeting-wednesday-june-14th-2017/8613/5 "2017-06-13T14:43:43Z")
updated financials [Balance Sheet (eguile)–06\_13\_2017.pdf](https://discourse-uploads-openemr.s3.dualstack.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/original/2X/7/7f33a4f601ebbcff1bfbf804eaadb0ea61f1c062.pdf) (88.0 KB) ---
**Author:** ![brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/user_avatar/community.open-emr.org/brady.miller/32/10178_2.png) [@brady.miller](https://community.open-emr.org/u/brady.miller)\ **Post date:** [June 17, 2017, 4:53am UTC](https://community.open-emr.org/t/oemr-board-meeting-wednesday-june-14th-2017/8613/6 "2017-06-17T04:53:25Z")
Hi, Here’s the audio for the June 14th, 2017 board meeting: [https://www.open-emr.org/oemr/audio/OEMR-board-meeting-06142017.mp4](https://www.open-emr.org/oemr/audio/OEMR-board-meeting-06142017.mp4) -brady