jimmack99 wrote on Tuesday, April 19, 2016:
Likewise, why let competing vendors such as BlueEHS on board? It seems that they are here to promote their own system. This is obvious from their previous postings as well as choosing a user name called BlueEHS.
sunsetsystems wrote on Tuesday, April 19, 2016:
Not meaning to bash anyone, the organization has done a lot. Am just thinking the next leap forward will require more OpenEMR users than vendors being involved.
tmccormi wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Funny… I really do like you Brady… 
On Apr 18, 2016 2:59 AM, “Brady Miller” bradymiller@users.sf.net wrote:
For this one time, then, I will give you the last word here
(I’ll delete my post after posting this)Write-In Ballot For Executive Director
https://sourceforge.net/p/openemr/discussion/oemr_501c3/thread/75b4ebdf/?limit=25#b405Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in
https://sourceforge.net/p/openemr/discussion/oemr_501c3/To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit
https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/
–
Please be aware that e-mail communication can be intercepted in
transmission or misdirected. Please consider communicating any sensitive
information by telephone. The information contained in this message may be
privileged and confidential. If you are NOT the intended recipient, please
notify the sender immediately with a copy to hipaa-security@mrsb-ltd.com and
destroy this message.
visolve1995 wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Could not agree more with Rod.
A suggestion here is a free webinar, free online training and we will be
more than happy
to develop and chime in for this.
-Sena Palanisami
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 4:25 AM, Rod Roark sunsetsystems@users.sf.net
wrote:
Not meaning to bash anyone, the organization has done a lot. Am just
thinking the next leap forward will require more OpenEMR users than vendors
being involved.Rod
http://www.sunsetsystem.com/Write-In Ballot For Executive Director
https://sourceforge.net/p/openemr/discussion/oemr_501c3/thread/75b4ebdf/?limit=25#1665Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in
https://sourceforge.net/p/openemr/discussion/oemr_501c3/To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit
https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/
visolve1995 wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
As long as they add value to OpenEMR, and do not have a conflicting
interest in OpenEMR decision making process, I dont see an issue with this.
More contributor the merrier it is!
-Sena
On Wed, Apr 20, 2016 at 3:46 AM, Jimmy Limmack jimmack99@users.sf.net
wrote:
Likewise, why let competing vendors such as BHS on board? It seems that
they are here to promote their own system.Write-In Ballot For Executive Director
https://sourceforge.net/p/openemr/discussion/oemr_501c3/thread/75b4ebdf/?limit=25#ec3aSent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in
https://sourceforge.net/p/openemr/discussion/oemr_501c3/To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit
https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/
visolve1995 wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Agree with Rod on the idea of “Vendors” not being in the decision making role rather in an advisory or contributing role. This will definitely will give a much more professional view to the community as “Open Source”
bradymiller wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Regarding grants,
We do have a member of the community, fsgl, whom has been itching to start the grant writing process for MU3. However, the OEMR organization needs to be “healthy” before this can be done(when submitting a grant, the facility/organization “health” weighs heavily in the decision). The OEMR organization was dormant for several years and upon reawakening this year, there have been some issues that we are working out to improve the organization’s “health”. And considering the long turn around time of grants and the closing gap on MU3, with a sense of urgency, there has been a focus on some basic issues:
To even begin to apply for funding grants, these basic things need to be solid. To keep things as transparent as possible, we are currently documenting everything regarding the OEMR organization here:
http://www.open-emr.org/wiki/index.php/OEMR_wiki_page
-brady
bradymiller wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Regarding vendors in the OEMR organization,
There was a call to arms at the beginning of this year for OEMR organization board members. And everybody who volunteered was accepted to the board. The board currently has 10 members and only 3 of them are not professional developers or vendors. Thus, at this point, it would not even be practical to exclude vendors (ie. it would be very lonely and not much would get done ).
At the last board meeting (audio and prelim minutes can be found here: http://www.open-emr.org/wiki/index.php/OEMR_wiki_page#April_13.2C_2016 ), we did discuss whether it made sense to allow professional developers and vendors on the Executive Committee; and, as above, the conclusion was that we needed to be practical.
We do need to deal with conflict of interest, though. One example of this is something we have done to prepare for MU3 and the need to pay professional developer; we have created a committee with a very specific charter that does not allow vendors or professional developers on the committee; and that committee will be responsible for choosing which professional developers and vendors are awarded contracts. The goal of this is to remove the conflict of interest of the vendors and professional developers by excluding them from these type of decisions.
-brady
jimmack99 wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Good point. I’m not against vendors but I’m concerned with someone who is obviously promoting their own system instead of OpenEMR. If so, why sit on the board on OpenEMR? This is not the same as a lab vendor who works with OpenEMR or a vendor who hosts OpenEMR as a service.
bradymiller wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Hi Jimmy,
From your post above, I am assuming you are directing your issues towards BlueEHS, which is Z&H Healthcare. In OpenEMR’s open source ecosystem, contributors come in all shapes and sizes. Z&H has contributed to the OpenEMR project for I think 5 years now. Their most recent contributions to OpenEMR which were provided at no cost include: 1) provided code and passed 9 of the items for MU2 certification(ie. the Care Coordination module), 2) now actively working on passing 2 more MU2 items, and 3) provide a patient portal to the OpenEMR community (which is required to pass MU2 also). In this rather complicated ecosystem, I’ve found that intentions can be very tricky to figure out; to simplify things for myself, I usually assume that when vendors and companies contribute to OpenEMR on a long term basis, that they are doing it because the success of the vendor/company is tied to the success of OpenEMR.
-brady
mdsupport wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
Mr. Limmack’s concern is valid even though I disagree with his solution. If the governing organization does not have committment and representation of all vested interests, you run the risk of lopsided actions. In OpenEMR’s case I can think of users, individual developers(software contributors, may or may not offer services but not products) and vendors offering branded product based on free version as three groups.
Vendors definitely need to be represented as proxy of the interests of their customers who are users of this software. The challenge is to make sure these three groups have equal representation so not one group can hijack the decision making process.
fsgl wrote on Wednesday, April 20, 2016:
We are fortunate that a number of folks have responded to Art’s request that OEMR become more professional in the way it conducts its business.
Change have begun slowly, but it requires time & patience. Most importantly, commitment & a good understanding of the motivation of key players are required.
It’s well & good to talk about ideals; but it’s quite another matter to put in the time to understand the personal dynamics & then the effort to ensure that we work toward those ideals.
A good example is producing the minutes. We discussed the various recording methods. Some directors valued written minutes for its compact quality & worried that audio recordings may bump up against legal issues, therefore audio files are undesirable. Folks may be quick to offer their note taking services; but, more often than not, written minutes are missing for weeks on end. Talk is cheap.
Physician users are too busy dealing with their own patients & government mandates to have the time to volunteer in OEMR, but their interests are being represented. If OEMR abides by democratic principles going forward, user voices will be more audible.
jjcahs wrote on Thursday, April 21, 2016:
I, Jit Chawla, the undersigned, cast my vote for Brady Miller to serve as Executive Director.
-Signed-
Jit Chawla
fsgl wrote on Thursday, April 21, 2016:
My hat’s off, Stephen, to your lawyerly mind.
Congratulations, El Jefe.
Deep gratitude to the Directors, who have placed their confidence in Brady.
bradymiller wrote on Sunday, April 24, 2016:
Hi,
At this point have 9 total votes(8 yes and 1 nay) out of 10 total board members.
Just need Kevin’s vote to complete this “Action Without a Meeting”; all board members need to participate in an Action Without a Meeting per bylaws for the action to take effect. Kevin can vote yes, no, or even abstain; ie. just need to participate in the action. Kevin, even if you vote no, I’ll still keep your up for grabs iframe demo going, I promise
-brady
yehster wrote on Sunday, April 24, 2016:
I vote yes.
Brady, one concern was/is that you already seem to be stretched thin with regard to involvement in the project. Hopefully this won’t be the straw that breaks the camel’s back.
bradymiller wrote on Sunday, April 24, 2016:
Thanks for voting and no worries on that issue. My interest generally follows what I think is best for the project. And at this point, I think the OEMR organization is crucial for the project in order to manage donations/grants, fulfill MU2, fulfill MU3, and all the other crazy regulations/certifications that will be coming our way. This will mean less time for other things (perhaps will need to drop the ubuntu package or less code reviews etc.), but is well worth it.
-brady