Chair:  Robert Dieterle

Scribe: Dana Marcelonis 

NOTE: This attendance applies if you are present at the related meeting/call, regardless if you have signed a different attendance for your WG. 






Momeena Ali

Shaumik AshrafMITRE

Steve Atwood Athena

Samuel Benton Booz Allen

Matthew Bishop Open City Labs

Seth Blumenthal AMA

Greg Bloom 

Jeff Brown MTIRE

Matt Caroll

Daniel Chaput Independent
xChris Cioffi Elevance Health

Erin Clements

Melanie Combs-Dyer Mettle Solutions

Jeff DanfordOptum

Sorin DavisCAQH


Seneca Global

James DerricksonInterSystems
xMing Dunajick Lantana

Justin EdelmanCAQH

Rachel Foerster & Associates

xPoint-of-Care Partners, FAST PMO

Rick GeimerLantana

Independent Health


James HaleyArkansas Blue Cross


Project Unify

Jackie HemenwayUPMC

Jack HathwayEpic

David HillMITRE

Andy HorvatEpic

Elevance Health

Chetan JainOptum


Gregg Johnson

Point-of-Care Partners, FAST PMO


Alex Kontur ONC


Daniel LilavooisAetna/CVS Health

Alberto S. Llanes FEHRM


Patient Centric Solutions

Sean Mahoney MITRE

Point-of-Care Partners, FAST PMO

UC Davis Health

Brianna MathiowetzMITRE

Greg Meyer Cerner


Alex MuggeCMS





xSmile Digital Health

Kaiser Permanente



Liz Sheffield




Jamie Smith IQVIA



Jaffer Traish

Lauree Tu

Liz TuriONC

Kevin Van Aucer

Dave Vaillancourt

CVS Health/Aetna


Mark Wholey

Patient Centric Solutions


Sonja ZieglerOptum





Minutes Approved as Presented 


This is to approve minutes via general consent. "You have received the minutes. Are there any corrections to the minutes? (pause) Hearing none, if there are no objections, the minutes are approved as printed."

Agenda Topics

Agenda Outline

Agenda Item

Meeting Minutes from Discussion

Decision Link(if not child)
ManagementHL7 Antitrust StatementProfessional Associations, such as HL7, which bring together competing entities are subject to strict scrutiny under applicable antitrust laws. HL7 recognizes that the antitrust laws were enacted to promote fairness in competition and, as such, supports laws against monopoly and restraints of trade and their enforcement. Each individual participating in HL7 meetings and conferences, regardless of venue, is responsible for knowing the contents of and adhering to the HL7 Antitrust Policy as stated in §05.01 of the Governance and Operations Manual (GOM).

HL7 Code of Conduct

Meeting Minute Approval

2023-03-23 National Directory Meeting

Approved by unanimous consent

Project Links

Project Page: National Healthcare Directory

Project Scope Statement: National Healthcare Directory PSS

Implementation Guides:

Connectathon: 2023- 01 FAST National Directory of Healthcare & Da Vinci Plan Net

Zulip Channel:

Predecessor work that this effort builds upon:


Sept 2022 Ballot Cycle Milestones

Ballot VotingComplete
Ballot ReconciliationIn Progress

September 2023 Ballot Cycle Milestones

Notice of Intent to Ballot (NIB)


 Please be sure to update your Zoom by adding your company name to your name. 

  • Find your name under "participants" (bottom of your zoom screen)
  • Click the ... next to "mute"
  • Choose the "rename" option and add your company next to your name and save the change. 

CMS Advancing Interoperability and Improving Prior Authorization Processes Proposed Rule (CMS-0057-P)

This proposed regulation cover areas like Patient Access API, Payer to Payer Exchange, Handling Prior Authorization, etc.

Administrative Simplification: Adoption of Standards for Health Care Attachments Transactions and Electronic Signatures, and Modification to Referral Certification and Authorization Transaction Standard Proposed Rule (CMS-0053-P)

This is the long awaited attachments rule from the Division of National Standards. It contains follow on requirements in the Accountable Care Act that mandated that CMS establish a standard for exchange of attachments compatible with HIPAA transactions. 

Da Vinci PDex Plan Net discussions will take place on the 2nd Friday of each month during the standing PDex/Formulary/Plan Net Implementer Support meetings (at 1:00 pm ET). Will plan to reconcile Jira tickets that influence/impact ND work.

HL7 May WGM+links: 


Picking up from 3/23 call: 

RD: Need to create a base definition of what is attested to, becomes part of nationally attested data. An organization can attest to their data. A payer can attest to an insurance plan. We discussed idea of a network. Networks exist on their own as do practitioner, etc. What else exists on its own? In this case "networks" implies HIE/HIO in the broader definition. 

RD: On the "create" side, when you're attesting in the role, it is expected you will contribute all the information necessary to create that resource. You're responsible for it. 

RD: Base endpoint created by one or more organizations. 

RD: Organizations create endpoints, except Direct/HIE/HIO. Payers are certain part of the organization (except Direct/HIE/HIO).

RD/MD/MB: Healthcare service can be provided by healthcare team.  An organization is typically created for the health care team to exist. May exist across multiple aspects of the organization. 

  • RT: From a reimbursement perspective it may be the funder/payer that may defines what could a service.

RD: Practitioner roles get created by? Example: Can a hospital create a valid and visible practitioner role by declaring the following providers have a relationship? 

  • MD: Hospital will attest to the hospital, the practitioner and the relationships (for employees)
  • RD: What about those who are not employees but have admitting privileges? 
  • MD: Hospital can say they have a relationship with the providers
  • RD: We agreed that the practitioner declares the role, hospital declares the role. It may not be mutually attested. When the role doesn't exist can either one create the role? 
  • MD: if only one attested, need verification to take place
  • RD: verification usually occurs against primary source, who is the primary source in this scenario? We used primary source to mean something that is 'fact.' Examples: graduated school, address at this place. Saying it doesn't make it fact. A form of verification may be mutual attestation. 
  • MD: Mutual attestation will make the data valid to put into the ND
  • RD: Need to make a recommendation. Does attested data become available through the ND whether or not it's been verified. Is attestation sufficient? 
  • RL: State or federal or both regulations from a payer perspective re: validating information in the network. Are there similar drivers re: this data? For a provider directory, verification occurs by an individual contacting an organization/provider group/etc. and providing a contact who can speak authoritatively to the scenario. 
  • RD: The things you're verifying, would you consider them to be attestation on their part? 
  • RD: Practitioner role is a relationship declaration. Do we allow the concept that anyone who declares a relationship (e.g., practitioner role), we create the role and make it available. It's only attested information. Does it have to be mutually attested before it hits downstream directories?
  • RL: Attesting doesn't necessarily make it true unless it's attested on the other side. 
  • MD: composition is a way to manage data 
  • RD: Who submits the composition? How do we know they have the right to attest to the other side of the story? Composition assumes that one entity can do both. Verification resource is about attestation, validation...and can point to any one element/target. Only allow 1 attestor. For mutual attestation do we need to allow more attestors? Attestation is 0..1. Probably should have been 1..2. The base resource is 1..1, Can still represent, need to get the verification result to be sure they've been mutually attested. 
    • Either we don't make it available for we tell people to make sure it's been attested to on both sides. Otherwise we need an extension on almost every element. 
    • RL: homework and pick this up on Thursday. 
    • RD: Primary issue may be where and how do we indicate something has been verified? Do we need anything else? A status on the resource itself? 

May HL7 Connectathon

ManagementNext Agenda

Future meetings:

  • Review HSDS revisions to align with our work

Adjourned at 

Supporting Documents

Outline Reference

Supporting Document