7AM PST - Seattle
10AM EST - New York, DC
5PM CEST - CEST, Geneva, Copenhagen
6PM EAT - Dar
Monthly OpenLMIS Governance Committee Call. This meeting includes members of the governance committee, as well as anyone else interested in participating.
Call Details:
WebEx Link: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/#/meetings/detail?uuid=MD8GRRT530EZ1G2PBBEH31BOI1-3O29&rnd=9626.4823780
Meeting Number: 194 399 578
US Audio: WebEx Online or +1-415-655-0001
International Audio: WebEx Online
Agenda
The main focus of this meeting should be on discussing the Governance committee charter and voting structure.
Let's try to quickly run through the first housekeeping items and reserve the majority of the discussion for the Governance structure and voting discussion.
Topic | Duration | Who | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
Product committee update (recent activity)
Roadmap Mashup Update: Currently we are in step 1 of the approach.
Functional requirements & feature capture "kit" Update
| 5 | Will take some time to get the roadmaps public Initial draft from Brian shared with the Product committee today | |
Gap analysis update Zambia gap analysis review | 10 total for remaining housekeeping items | Chris Wright Gap analysis - fundamentally there were some generalities going on that the team heard when they were in country. Specific feedback that couldn't be generalized. The feeling from both Zambia and TZ was that the gap analysis as written wasn't reflective of the true picture of what is really going on in each country. Still some issues. Will require more work and analysis to see how far down into the details we want to go for the plan is for 3.x and what the plan is for each country is right now. Info from key informants on reporting, assumptions on how supply chain works in Zanzibar, some details. All listed in the doc. Figured it would be an iterative process. | |
BAA contract status | Conversations with Jake on Friday. We don't need a contract initially. Chris, Wendy, Alpha, team on the TZ side. PATH will be following up with them shortly to get work items on the functionality and the functional requirement kit. We will look to utilize Wendy and Chris as subject matter experts and go through to get the items documented. Go through and put those on the Product Committee. Next steps: Following up with JSI. Chris Wright as lead? Edward? Chris can be primary POC. | ||
Action items from USAID GS1 and BI&A - December 15, 2016
GS1 sync update Update from Josh Zamor: We’re taking to heart the idea of removing the term “product," and replacing it with three terms: Product becomes an "orderable." Global product becomes "commodity type," and trade item stays trade item. Before, we knew that a global product was hierarchical; what we now understand is that this is best described as a classification system, and we also understand that it wouldn’t be unusual for an implementation to use multiple classification systems. The Logical Reference Model (LRM) will use UNSPSC for pharma, and GPC for family planning. We would use a mix of these two classification systems. Trade items can then cross reference classification systems. For some of the things in orderables, we’re going to sync with the Global Data Dictionary (GDD) and make sure that if there's something we’re trying to define (product strength for example), we’ll review the GDD to make sure we’re not duplicating. | Jake Watson (Deactivated) for Josh Zamor | Chris to follow up on MOH MFL - looking for the structure of the facility list - don't need all the data Brian - OpenHIE. Have it from INSTEDD. They have the data structure and model. Using care services discovery. Brian can also follow up and support. | |
| Open source license | Jake Watson (Deactivated) | Had talked about relaxing it at some point for 3.0. Since the business development workstream for OpenLMIS is going to start in February, we should just leave it for now. Suggestion is that we don't change it for now, leave it as an open question for now for the advisory board. Comments or objections? None. | |
| Vaccine module update | Jake Watson (Deactivated) | Hoping to get the sub-agreement in place with JSI. Chris - was drafting a SOW, needs Ashraf's help on that. Want to wrap that up, hoping to get it to us last week. Vidya and Rachel will be reaching out to Chris to talk about process and general timeline. Meeting with Kaleb last week, saw an email from him as well. Lakshmi is changing her role, may not be supporting supply chain any more. Guarav will start attending while they look for a suitable replacement to attend. Lakshmi has done a lot of work to help flesh out the stock management stories. | |
Governance charter & voting structure | 45 | Who's going to represent the organizations? Voting structure? Kaleb - Good to have something on paper. Moving more toward a standardized process. Equal votes sounds good. See that there's a UN security council idea - any 'no' vote can stop an issue. Discussion on major changes and cost implications - Product, Technical, would present recommendations to Governance - major change. Some will have a major cost element. Slightly different process? Money is coming principally from USAID & Gates. Could theoretically be vetoed. Budget scoring? LOE? Good for donors to be able to see that in order to prioritize and evaluate different recommendations. Overall - like where we're going. How to build in some kind of self-evaluation in six months time, late this year. Including membership. Question: How would the Governance committee relate to the Business Development sustainability work? Separate group, but is the Governance committee another point to advise, consult, inform? Or review proposals that come out of different options? How to link the Governance committee & the other workstream. LB - Lots of thoughts, will let us know. Set a schedule to work on this, collate edits. In terms of Governance or biz dev workstream, there needs to be reporting back to the Governance committee, if there's a market then OpenLMIS would form its own entity and replacing the Governance committee would be a board of directors - Gates and USAID representation. Charter is a good exercise because any kind of entity would have a much more formal charter. Represents the BOD more or less. Mattias - A few times in the last months, haven't been able to be involved. The concept of the biz dev workstream is new to me, not sure how that would work into the structure of the community, or talk with folks who have been more involved. Representation, echo the sentiment to have something on paper to react to. We have a number of people involved from JSI - want to make sure that we're representing everyone's opinion. Discuss internally. Chris - In general looks great. Kaleb brought attention to the voting structure - UN security council rules may be onerous. Don't necessarily have a better way. One person can object and can block and change everything. Guarav - Experiences from other groups? Kaleb - Approval responsibilities. First three make sense. How would the proposal approval actually work? Guinea? Make a pitch? USAID talks about the pitch? |
site and GitHub for commodity tracking softwareACTION ITEMS
ATTENDANCE
NOTES
RECORDING
ADDITIONAL READING