September 25, 2018

Monthly OpenLMIS Governance Committee Call. This meeting includes members of the governance committee, as well as anyone else interested in participating. 

Time

  • 7:00 - 8:00 AM PST - Seattle
  • 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM EST - New York, DC
  • 3:00 PM CET - Geneva, Copenhagen
  • 5:00 PM EAT - Dar


Call Details


Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/377281719

Or iPhone one-tap :
US: +19294362866,,377281719# or +16699006833,,377281719#

Or Telephone:
Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location):
US: +1 929 436 2866 or +1 669 900 6833
Meeting ID: 377 281 719

International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/byw2qkHOU


Action items for next call  

  • Core team funding runway: Carl Leitner to connect Mark, Kaleb and Lindabeth Doby

Action Items from August Governance


Notes


Topic

Who

Notes

Chat Captures

Introductions and Call opening



Intro from Stew, joining the call today



Engaging SolDevelo to participate in Governance

(3ish minutes)


Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated)
  • SolDevelo have been functioning as trusted partners for some time but have never officially been invited to governance
  • Proposal to be grandfathered in as a TP and member of the governance committee: all feedback is positive, no dissent
    • JSI: approve
    • VR: approve
    • PATH: approve
    • Ona: approve
    • Kaleb: approve
    • PSM: approve
  • Continued Discussion: Should SolDevelo sign a letter to comply with principles of TPs? We could do that for every organization; make everyone officially sign up to adhere principles

Next Step: Rebecca Alban to officially invite Jakub from SolDevelo


Partner coordination  (5 min)


Parambir S Gill (Unlicensed)
  • Discussion/suggestions on how to increase partner coordination for upcoming opportunities; more joint proposals
  • JSI: we need better information about actual opportunities, and enough lead time to put together a solid proposal
  • The more we know in advance, the better prepared we can be
  • Suggestion from JSI: could solicit input from the community during the design phase, scope of projects. This could produce realistic scopes of work
  • Suggestion from VR: promote partnerships within the community to put together better teams; want to evangelize this idea
  • If partnerships are created in early phases, from the outset, they will be more well-received
    • Was Angola work a public RFP? Yes, but work will be done to increase visibility of future opportunities and publicize it within the community 



Software development Update (2 minutes for questions)



Context: Includes all four teams. Started testing in Sprint 105, released 3.4 in Sprint 106.

Current sprint stats: https://openlmis.atlassian.net/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=12504 

Only 15 bugs ranked as major (a huge reduction for the team). Overview of bugs here.

Living Product Roadmap for what is to be delivered in 3.5. We are thinking to push back the 3.5 release to the end of November/early Dec. 

Proposal to IHE QRPH for ADX on FHIR for indicator reporting to DHIS2 

Proposal to IHE QRPH for ADX on FHIR

New Trusted Partner Update (4 min)


  • As agreed in the last meeting, Observer status of the Governance Committee was extended and accepted by Softworks
  • New Trusted Partner logo created- draft guidance on logo usage and the logo files have been added to Trusted Partner document. Anyone willing/able to review this language so we can vote on it as a group?
    • Next Step:  Rebecca Alban to circulate draft language and logos- will give everyone one week to comment and then will finalize
  • Trademarking is likely necessary; raises questions over who would own the trademark. This is going to take some time to pursue; should we start to investigate options? or delay. Lets decide this as a group. If pursue, we can present options at the next governance call
  • VR: not to worry about trademarking at this time; intellectual property should be lumped in with other sustainability work
  • Here is the new logo:

Feedback: lettering looks a little fuzzy but may be a resolution thing. Rebecca will check.

Sustainability update (4 min)



Kaleb Brownlow (Deactivated)

Vendor Contracting and Kick Off

Resonance submitted a proposal, Kaleb provided feedback around our concerns re: timing. Final proposal and budget is in the final review process. Should be finalized in less than 2 weeks. 

How do we want to kick off the process? Can we find a way to get all of the governance committee to initiate discussion with them? Perhaps divide this group into time zones. Resonance are based in Vermont. Kaleb Brownlow (Unlicensed) to send an email out to the group to kick off the process, Rebecca can help as needed to coordinate initial discussions



Grant Spend and Proposal Update (5 min)


Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated)
  • The below presentation provides a high-level funding overview of current and upcoming grants, spending, and risks/challenges
  • We should highlight these funding-related risks and challenges to Resonance and Lenati as we move forward in our conversations with them

Source: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1GxQ4hv8kLGGLfYcd7or7zkoRYVdYXeHGaB2CH4BPwa4/edit?usp=sharing


Interface Workstream Update (5 min)


Rebecca AlbanMary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated)

  1. Voting outcome for prioritizing DHIS2 (Vision for Integration)-majority vote achieved
  2. How to proceed for remaining priorities (do we really need this level of detail on Governance or should we move to product?)

Not sure we will have much time to do other work in this workstream; so no need to propose any other votes at this time. 

Carl: happy to help support DHIS2 team; can play a facilitation and coordination role

Stew also interested in being in the loop on this conversation. Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) will keep him and Carl looped in 


Using actual data for demo, performance, and reporting

We are constantly constrained by our inability to obtain large data sets from our current implementations. We would like to update the governance of this challenge and risk to current work.

Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated)Brandon Bowersox-Johnson

Challenge is that we don't have access to robust set of actual data. We have tried to obtain VIMS (obtained approval) but couldn't get the data. How do we address this risk?

This is challenging for us to do development work; and a risk. We did try to get data from Tanzania; approval was given but we were not able to get the data. 

If there is a way we can leverage this community to get a data set, that would be very helpful. Perhaps we can continue to coordinate with JSI to obtain the Tanzania data. There was a previous mis-communication between country team and others. Ashraf and Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) to continue to coordinate

Stew: What is the crux of the difficulty? Is it data approval, or sharing issue?

Kaleb: getting a couple of data sets would be really helpful for product development. Issue seems to be on the sharing side

Parambir: How much data is needed? Response: 6 months or a year of stock management and requisitions. This would limit us to TZ and Zambia

Carl: Could data-sharing agreements/data governance be integrated into future RFPs? Want to make sure this is carved into project activities, timelines and budgets. 

Ashraf: eLMIS data is already being shared through a formal agreement with BI&A

Next step: need for more conversation around how the community can access anonymized data; extended discussion on strategy needed


Current implementations-updates on what stage they are at/activities 

*There was not time for this update, suggest that we add it to next month's agenda

 (5 min)

  • Mozambique (VR implementer, Brandon)
  • Angola (VR implementer, Brandon)
  • Cameroon (CHAI implementer, Satish)- the country team in Cameroon presented the CHAI-VR OpenLMIS concept note to GAVI late last week. We are yet to hear back from them. I will keep you posted as soon as I have any updates from the country team. As of now, the concept note only has a high level approach and solution sans the budget. Once GAVI responds positively, we will work on building a more comprehensive proposal.
  • Malawi

Implementation Opportunities for more details.


Conferences and Meetings

Conferences provide the community the opportunity for OpenLMIS members to speak or represent the OpenLMIS software and community in public forum.

All

Conferences 

  • OpenHIE Community Meeting
  • Global Health Supply Chain Summit (GHSCS)
  • Global Digital Health Forum
    • Washington, DC December 10th
    • Abstract to participate in panel accepted ''Facilitating collaboration to accelerate, scale and improve digital health global goods ''
  • Angola
    • Postponed to late October
  • Tanzania Health Supply Chain
    • October 10-11, 2018

Meetings

  • OpenLMIS Community Lunch Meeting: being planned to dovetail with GHSCS conference



Opportunities Roundtable

Definitions to use shared terminology:

  • Implementation opportunity: an opportunity for an implementation or deployment of the OpenLMIS software.  Usually this is done at a national or sub-national level within a ministry of health. This can also include feature work which would be done within the implementation and contributed back to the global codebase.
  • Community opportunity: a funding opportunity to support an organization or individual to work directly on the global codebase and/or administrate the community processes. This may include funding specific features on the community roadmap.
Rebecca Alban

Community implementation opportunities:

  • This Trello table is being updated on an ongoing basis; to help the core team to track and manage implementation opportunities, but also provides a detailed snapshot of the scope and status of current implementation opportunities for stakeholders.



Moving Forum Discussion from Google Groups to Discourse

*There was not time to address this agenda item. It was mainly an update that we will move forward to Discourse, so no need to include it in next month's agenda

Wesley Brown

Discussion and Decision

Update: after weighing the potential costs and benefits of shifting community conversations to Discourse, the community stewards decided that this is a 'value-add' and want to move forward with it

Any questions or reservations from the group on this?

Highlighting the current gaps:

  • Google Groups:
    • Does not fill the gap between real time communication (Slack) and email.
    • Ends up being another funnel into our inboxes
    • Lacks advanced forum features like categories, user/community management, user individualization/progression, etc

Proposal for Discourse (based on feedback from Craig):

  1. Discourse would be the main entry point into the OpenLMIS community for new members
  2. The system should require an account but one that can be freely made by the user. User categorization can be used to denote users with more experience within the community (see OpenMRS Developer Stages)
  3. I think that Discourse would incorporate:
    1. Google Groups discussions
    2. Public project-related email
    3. Some of what currently goes into Slack
    4. Some the discussions currently occurring within the wiki

Conflict of Interest

(September agenda is packed, so we will cover this in our October meeting)

Mary Jo
Cite examples from recent Cote d'Ivoire opportunity:
What do we do when a Trusted Partner decides not to support the OpenLMIS v3?  Or how does OpenLMIS decide When to not propose OpenLMIS when there is a system in country or a local entity is proposing a custom solution?
 

AOB


Community and Product Updates
Product Updates
Community Updates

Community Meeting



ATTENDANCE

Mattias Wiklund (Unlicensed)Brandon Bowersox-JohnsonAshrafCarl LeitnerParambir S Gill (Unlicensed)Edward WilsonMatt BergKaleb Brownlow (Unlicensed)Rebecca AlbanWesley BrownCraig Appl (Unlicensed)Josh Zamor




RECORDING AND CHAT TRANSCRIPT 




ADDITIONAL READING