Data Matters: Elevating Health and Community Information Exchange

Stephanie Broderick:
I am Stephanie Broderick. I’m SVP of Provider Solutions for Clinical Architecture, and excited to present our next panel at our Data Quality Theater. This panel, we’re going to be talking about how data matters, especially when elevating health and community information exchange. And this fine group of panelists are going to talk about an initiative that we’re working on in Chicago for the Chicago Regional CIE. But before we go into that, I’m going to have everyone introduce themselves and so we’ll start with Waldo.

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
Good morning everybody. Waldo Michaels Carrasco. I’m the Director of the Center for Health Information Sharing and Innovation at the Illinois Public Health Institute, and I got the distinct honor of being the founding managing director of the Chicago Regionwide, CIE.

Stephanie Broderick:
Fantastic, Gregg.

Gregg Church:
Good morning everyone. I’m Gregg Church, I’m president at 4medica, and we will be working closely with Waldo and team as the technology stack for the Chicago Regionwide CIE. Thanks.

Stephanie Broderick:
Fantastic. And Dwayne?

Duane Connors:
I’m Dwayne Connors, CEO of Wellconnected, bringing collaborative community care all in one place, partnering with the for 4medica team and IPHI and Waldo to really, really successfully build the Chicago wide CIE

Laura Nixon:
And Laura. Hi everyone, my name’s Laura Nixon. I’m VP of Interoperability Solutions at Clinical Architecture and also facilitator for the Regionwide CIE. Thank you.

Stephanie Broderick:
And Laura has been involved in this initiative from the beginning, helped to write the RFQ for this initiative. Alright, Waldo, we’re going to start with you. So what is the Chicago Regionwide, CIE and what are its goals?

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
Yeah, so the Chicago Regionwide CIE is based on a model that was created in San Diego by San Diego 2 1 1. It seeks to partner together networks of providers from multiple sectors that create kind of surrounding a person with care. So there’s no wrong door when they seek help, if they go to a clinical provider, if they go to a social provider or a housing provider, any one of those could initiate a longitudinal record where they can access and share information between these different providers to manage that person’s care without friction.

Stephanie Broderick:
Alright. Really largely around social determinants of health. Right,

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
Right.

Stephanie Broderick:
So those non-medical factors that impact a person’s health?

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
Yes. However, increasingly this is true for most true ces, they are partnering more and more just because people also need clinical care. So they are partnering more with clinicians or clinical providers, whether that care is happening in Chicago, our use cases are shelter based care and medical respite. Those are the two we’re starting with. And so that clinical care, there’s a clinical partner in the shelter providing that care. So we already have those partnerships happening. We’re seeing that more and more across the country with ces, not just doing social stuff, but actually doing additional clinical information introduced into it.

Stephanie Broderick:
Okay. Great clarification. And obviously we’re talking data quality. So how will data quality and interoperability shape the success of the CIE?

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
So because you have care providers from different domains working together, it’s important that they can see the work that they have to do. So they have to see those ADTs. If this person’s being discharged from a hospital and there’s a transition of care that they’re not going to a sniff, they’re not going to nursing home, they’re being discharged for care to the shelter and to be able to see both the clinical data that’s necessary for them to transition as well as the social data is super important because it’s a care team that’s being virtually assembled

And that they’re going to coordinate that person’s care moving forward. The data quality has to be up to date and de-duplicated because nobody wants to see five CDAs of the same activity. They want normalized information, they want UpToDate information and they want it on demand because these people are not making appointments. So that’s why working with 4medica and Wellconnected super important because that’s a true environment where the data’s normalized, the quality’s good. The MPI is really important. This is a very hard population to identify and to match. So all of those things are super important and I think these guys do a pretty good job of that.

Stephanie Broderick:
Fantastic. Well, Gregg, let’s switch over to you. So what role does 4medica play in this Chicago regionwide, CAE, and how does your technology stack improve whole person care management?

Gregg Church:
Yeah, great question. So think of us as being the backbone, right for aggregating the data. I mean, when we’re talking data now we’re talking clinical and we’re talking social data and doing that is so important because bridging that data gap is what now is not just patient care, it’s whole person care. So you’ve got data aggregation, bringing data together, you’ve got identity matching, which you just touched on. That’s a critical component of this. You’ve got now data sitting in different data silos and you’re going to have different ways that people are being registered. So you got to have a really robust MPI data management process. The data insights is really going to be important as well. What we do with the data and the decisions that are going to be made with that data, super critical. And when you talk about data normalization, that data integrity without that normalization doesn’t allow anything to happen specifically when you’re looking at it from a whole person perspective. So we think that’s going to be a critical component. And then parting with Wellconnected, you’re going to hear from Dwayne here. They bring a lot of that on the social side and we’re doing it on the clinical side, bridging that together, doing it in real time as Waldi talked about, you can’t wait for this information. That information has to be right there at your fingertips. So we’re really bringing that backbone of the data aggregation together.

Stephanie Broderick:
Let’s talk a little bit about bringing the data together. So how does 4medica’s, cloud-based platform facilitate the integration of the clinical and social care data?

Gregg Church:
Yeah, great question. So we have a great alliance up here. Without the partners that are sitting up here, we wouldn’t be able to do this alone. Think of us, we’re doing it on the clinical side for 4medica, right? That’s our focus. You bring in Wellconnected where they’re enhancing now with the social determinants of health data, now you’re creating that picture, you’re creating that whole person view. Then you add clinical architecture and thank you for hosting this morning. Now we’re normalizing and standardizing the data. Now we know that we’ve got reliable data that can be used both on the clinical and on the social side. So for us, it’s a partnership. It’s an alliance that brings that all together. And now we can really stand up and say, it’s not only good tech, but it’s good data, it’s honest data that we’re going to be able to put in front of the important care team providers in front of the case managers and they can make really good decisions on that data.

Stephanie Broderick:
You talked a little bit about why data standardization is critical, but how does form’s approach support real-time data accuracy?

Gregg Church:
Yeah, I mean it’s automated, right? You got to have automated normalization. That stuff cannot happen in the background. It’s got to happen as those transactions are coming in. And that’s one of our key reasons that we partner with clinical architecture. I mean, these are the tools that now we’ve integrated into the clinical viewer. You can’t have the same encounter data multiple times. If a physician or a provider’s looking at it, that’s got to be unified and making sure that the data that they’re looking at is the most accurate at that point right of care. The other is real time validation. You got to have a way to immediately find those errors and correct them. If you don’t have that process in place, again, you’re now not looking at trusted data. And I think the third is the matching. The patient matching is critical to this. If you have data coming in from disparate sources and data sitting in different silos, and a lot of times these are low tech environments that the data’s coming in from, they’re not doing their own patient matching or their own person matching. So I think that’s going to be a critical component. And then just continuous monitoring, making sure that the data that is coming in is trusted data, it’s reliable data, and then you really having the analytics and the dashboards to do that, it’s going to be critical.

Stephanie Broderick:
Great. Dwayne, we’re going to switch over to you. Talk a little bit about Wellconnected. So how does Wellconnected’s platform ensure closed loop referrals and service completion?

Duane Connors:
Yeah. So thank you for having us. Absolutely. And Gregg, awesome working with you so far. Can’t wait to see what we do.

Gregg Church:
Likewise.

Duane Connors:
So a big part of what our platform has really done for social care agencies is provide an entire system for them to run their operations. So a lot of organizations you’re taking from zero to one, and this will all lead into that data quality and how we can get everybody up to speed on sharing information appropriately. So giving people a real tool set is the first step. The second is we not only support the service providers, how they’re doing in the real world, engaging with community members, but we also support the agencies that are maintaining and curating service directories in all of these regions and supporting that work. So now not only do we have an understanding of service coverage, we have an understanding of service delivery where those gaps can take place. And then we also have status mechanics that you don’t even have to pay for a license to understand if you’ve got a referral, how you can manage that at a case note, all of those things. And at the same time, we also have those statuses for service delivery and all that really elevating all of our social care organizations so that they can participate in a full stack continuum of care across an entire region.

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
And I just want to jump in because what Dwayne just mentioned, it’s super important. People are fascinated with closed loop referrals, but a closed loop referral is an output that yes, you need something, you can go there and get it. It’s not an outcome. And what we’re doing here is we’re creating the capability for providers to make that referral, to see what the activity was, to follow up on it and to make sure that that person’s getting a warm handshake to the next episode of care and that no provider ever loses visibility on that. So it’s really care coordination beyond those loop referrals.

Stephanie Broderick:
Right. Great. Dwayne, what challenges exist when you’re trying to integrate social data with clinical data and how are you guys addressing that?

Duane Connors:
Yeah, absolutely. So as an healthcare administrator, I’m really, really aware of the structured coating mechanics and all the different quality measures and the real heavy effort that’s been put in to standardize and really direct clinical information as much as possible. On the social care side, our challenge is onboarding agencies that are using Excel and access databases or Google forms or Post-It notes, really understanding how that workflow works and what that data means when they aggregate it. So the way that we built our system, it’s really, really big because everybody can customize their workflow within that platform. And now with the partnership with clinical architecture and the format team and what we’re doing in Chicago, we have a way to pull that in, understand our headers and our metadata that comes through it and add that quality layer that allows it to seamlessly integrate with the healthcare environment.

Stephanie Broderick:
Fantastic. And how does Wellconnected help track and prevent gaps in care coordination?

Duane Connors:
Absolutely. So just like an HIE, we have a longitudinal record for social care. I think the difference is ours is directly built into the case management suite. So it’s a full stack understanding of if someone walks into my shelter, I have an understanding if they needed ever transportation or childcare or food insecurities because all of those community agencies really need to work together. I can understand now that Jimmy came in, he’s here for housing, but I can see that historically he had lost his job and he needed rent assistance and I saw that that had fallen off, but now I can actually step in and start working with those other providers to make sure that doesn’t happen again. And that’s really the first measure, which is understanding where those gaps are and then addressing them and keeping that from happening again in the future. And I think our platform gives that full view and especially now that we’re going to be able to integrate and pull in some really layman’s terms summaries for health information, giving people even better context on what people might need. I think we’re really reaching new heights here. It’s going to be awesome.

Stephanie Broderick:
Fantastic. Laura, we’re going to switch to you. So talk about Clinical Architecture and the role that we’re going to play in standardizing and normalizing the CIE data.

Laura Nixon:
That’s a really great question and something that I think has been on the forefront of our minds from the very beginning. We are at the Chicago Regionwide CIE, taking in all different types of data that are coming from different sources that as my friends and colleagues have said, they might not have even anything more than an Excel spreadsheet that we’re ingesting. So being able to take in all of these different types of data and then standardize, normalize, transform it into a standardized terminology so that it can be shared across all of the platforms, across all of the care continuum so that everybody’s seeing the same thing and speaking the same language so that we can make those intelligent, informed, knowledgeable decisions to improve the outcomes.

Stephanie Broderick:
And why is terminology management essential for community health and social care?

Laura Nixon:
And it leads right into that question. There are so many different languages coming from behavioral health providers. There are HMIS data coming from the continuum of care centers. There are information coming from clinical providers and all of those different languages are needing to be essentially translated into one standardized language. So like I just said, we can make those informed intelligent decisions to improve the outcomes.

Stephanie Broderick:
Great. So I’m going to direct this one to both Laura and Gregg because each one of you are dealing with a facet of normalization, right?

Laura Nixon:
Yes.

Stephanie Broderick:
Patient matching is normalization. What we do with the clinical data, what we do with the social data that’s also normalization just on different types of data. So how does data normalization impact decision making and reporting in the CIE?

Gregg Church:
Without it data’s flawed. I mean, you’re not going to have the reliable data that we need. So to me it’s a no start. If you don’t have data normalization, I mean, I think it’d be very difficult to provide the insights that are going to be expected and know that there’s a crossover. It’s that bridging of the data bringing in social and clinical. And you cannot sit there as a care provider or as a case manager and wonder if I’m looking at the right data at the right time on this person. So to me that standardization is critical.

Laura Nixon:
Yeah, absolutely. There are. In order to trust the data, we have to understand that it has all of the necessary pillars of quality. So that’s the huge part of our partnership is ensuring that all of those pillars are satisfied and that we can share that data with the people who are providing care to this extremely vulnerable population. The outcomes are better, predictive analytics, better equitable sharing of social services. There’s so many different things that come from being able to take in data, turn it into information, and actually make knowledgeable decisions from that.

Gregg Church:
I have one more comment on that. If you think of data, and we all deal with it every day and just masses of amounts of data, and I like to use kind of the analogy of Legos. You have lots of Legos, you have different colors, you have different ways to build and to build your formation of using your Legos. But if you don’t organize them in such logical ways and put your colors together and put your data elements together, you won’t build what you need to build. And when we talk about outcomes, I think Waldo said it’s not just outcomes from a patient perspective, it’s whether or not this patient actually or person actually gets the care that they need at the right time. And that’s life or death. It can be a life or death situation. And that’s what we’re going to make change is making sure that everyone in Chicago that deserves care gets it at the right time. And that’s the organization of data and making sure we deliver on the data accurately.

Stephanie Broderick:
Fantastic. This is going to be a question that I’m going to direct at all of you, but I’m going to actually direct it at Waldo first. So how do 4medica, Wellconnected and Clinical Architecture collaborate to create a scalable high quality data ecosystem? You chose this group. So

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
I did, but I think that we each chose each other because a lot of the stuff that Gregg and Dwayne have built certainly could solve all kinds of problems, but it specifically addresses the needs of what, in essence, it’s going to be a cascading set of critical care use cases. So if we’re starting, as Laura rightly said, these are the most vulnerable people. When you think about population health, the very top, the super socially complex, hard to care for super expensive patients only exclusively. We don’t have any other ones that’s every client, patient, guest that we’re going to have falls into that category. So we’re going to start with a couple of use cases, but it isn’t like if the next set of use cases will have a different population. These people don’t have the most critical problems. They have every critical problem. So the use cases will grow within that population, but then to other populations.

So what’s super important about this partnership is that we can add other layers of information on if it’s acute care information because they’re in the emergency room, that’s a type of information that is going to be needed for immediate treatment. But then they need transportation. They’re going to need therapy once they get, but they also have chronic diseases that are going to need medically tailored meals. So external nutritionists have to be brought in The fact that we’ll be able to turn on every new channel of need and it’s all in one integrated care, coordinated path is super important. But it’s also really hard to do unless you’re thinking integration from the outset, which I think that this whole team, that’s everything to think about.

Stephanie Broderick:
Okay. Anybody want to add to that?

Laura Nixon:
Yeah, I am happy to jump in. I think just tacking onto what Waldo said, I think, whoops, the partnership between all of us up here works because of the integrations of the different types of languages and the different types of services and the different types of organizations that are involved in the Regionwide CIE. I see Clinical Architecture as being this us. I love analogies, everyone I see us being the middle of the Oreo, the stuffing of the Oreo, we’re the layer that is allowing these different languages to come together and be sticky and create this translation that really does create a longitudinal care record for people who are seeing not just clinical health providers, but also social care providers of all different sorts. And being able to actually see all of that come together as one piece of very important information. That’s how this partnership really works. We’re all working together to create a visual of a person. So this translation layer is huge.

Duane Connors:
I’ll go. Okay.
Yeah. So I just want to double down that both Waldo and Laura keep using the word partnership. Gregg and I aren’t here to just be vendors. We have a really distinct understanding that we’re doing something that really hasn’t ever been done before in a lot of ways. And it’s going to take an ongoing partnership, ongoing community trust building and building out a lot of those other things. So as we’re working with all these other different groups, that’s where the clinical architecture kind of smooths out the bumps for us, helps those, whether they’re different Lego pieces or cookies, we’ll stick together and make everybody kind of fluidly function together in a meaningful way. And that’s what we’re here for lack of a better term. Me and my team are data nerds for good. That’s literally what we’ve set up to do. And I feel like we’ve met and now found partners that are willing to put in that time, have that skin in the game and really care for an entire community. And I’m excited about what we’re going to do.

Stephanie Broderick:
Alright. I just have to say something. So we’ve got Oreos, we’ve got Legos, we’ve got data nerds for good. And what you’re talking about this altruistic vision for what this is, it reminds me of something that Charlie, our CEO has been saying is we’ve been introducing our new PIQXL Gateway and the PIQI Framework and he said, well, we can make a product or we can make a difference. And that’s kind of what I hear you guys communicating.

Gregg Church:
Well, I’ll bring it home. I’m going to bring it together. Saving a person’s life cannot have egos and you cannot have a partnership with egos. And when we’re talking about bridging data gaps, it’s about an alliance. It’s about working together and knowing where your strengths are and knowing where your weaknesses are. And this group knows where their strengths are and we know how to play off of each other’s strengths. And we’re bringing a solution that really is going to save lives. It’s going to make matters better, and it’s going to make it easier for people to have access to the care that they need. And that’s what I love about this group, and I haven’t seen a group like this out there yet. And we’re excited to see this go live and really bring not only the initial two use cases together, but I think there’s so many more ways that we can bring care and really help people. So I’m excited about this

Stephanie Broderick:
And I think that’s fantastic. That actually, and Waldo, were you going to add on?

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
Well, Gregg brought it home, but I’ll close the door. I don’t know what if this analogy thing is out of control. Put the dinner on the table. Oh, bring the wine. There’s one thing that we haven’t really touched on that really clinical architecture is going to play a big role in, and you touched on it a little bit, the standardization of the data at scale, the amount of information across these vulnerable populations across multiple programs that’ll be generated by this system. There’ll be clinical data, social data as Laura was saying, that have different standards or code sets that don’t generally co-mingle well together. So that translation is going to be super important at scale because these are people who are moving through programs that deliver care, but those programs generally aren’t looked at together either. And these are the social nets, the safety nets that those systems operate in.

But we have no good way at looking at the system because we have the siloed, we have the health information over here, we have the HMIS information over here, and we can do point in time studies that takes two years to normalize the data or we could do it in real time. What’s the snapshot today of the load on the system of how many people are moving through and how many are getting moved through or how many are stuck or where is stuff just not happening? And being able to go back to our civic partners, our governmental partners who are funding these activities and be able to use the clinical architecture terminology normalization, that is going to give us a whole new way of helping creating systems change in closer to real time rather than it taking years and guesses.

Stephanie Broderick:
Yeah. Great. So again, this is, I’m going to direct this one to Waldo and Laura, but I want any of you guys to weigh in on this. I know that as we’ve talked, we’ve talked about the fact that this is really very, very brand new, right? Yeah. You’ve got San Diego 211, but you have CIEs that are kind of popping up all over the place and everybody’s, because there is no recipe for this. And so people are just kind of finding their way. And I think that the hope is that this is going to create a recipe or a repeatable architecture and approach that could be used elsewhere. So what are the lessons learned from this initiative that can be applied nationwide?

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
I’ll keep it short. I’ve been talking a lot, but I think that it’s got to be more than information. Referral information and referral is important as a triage measure. But we have to think about, and you ask folks providing social care out in the field, they don’t understand why what they do is not referred to as care coordination. That why is that a clinical term? Only because they see it as they’re wrapping as much services as they can around these people without systems to help them do it. So we have to think about care coordination. We have to think about long-term outcomes that these lives are moving through systems, not just isolated episodes of care. And we have to think about how we can easily manage the data necessary to do that. And that’s super important that you have to think about what the architecture is supposed to look like for the result you want, not if you think small, you’re going to wind up with a simple system that is not scalable.

Stephanie Broderick:
Okay.

Gregg Church:
I know you said Waldo and Laura, but I want to comment on that. I mean, the care journey has a timeline. Data has a timeline and data goes back historically retrospectively as much as today. And if you have a gap in there and you don’t have the full picture, you miss out on critical things, especially if somebody has a medical condition. And that medical condition is what’s driving some of their social needs right now. If you don’t know that and that care giver, that care person that’s really managing that person doesn’t have that full timeline, think about what you’re missing and think about the potential that you can actually put that person more at risk. So I think the timeline of what we’re doing and how we’re doing it also is about the timeline of making sure that you don’t leave out anything important about that person that you can capture.

Laura Nixon:
Fantastic. I’m going to circle that altogether. So with that stakeholder engagement and continuous touch in the community, really bringing all of those players together. This is outside of the technology, right? The technology is there and the infrastructure is there and it’s going to work. And we have those plans, but we also have to drive stakeholder engagement and really look at it from a very holistic perspective so that we are engaging all of those players that are in that person’s care continuum so that those gaps are not presented. So on top of that, working with people with lived experiences that is so huge in our Chicago region-wide, CIE, having that perspective of those people who are living in that experience or who have lived through that experience and then addressing those pain points in a way that is full of respect and provides them the dignity that they need in order to continue on their journey to an improved life. So I think the technology is there, but really coordinating all of those stakeholders is also vitally, vitally important.

Duane Connors:
I couldn’t say that more because honestly we will know that we’re doing it right if people barely know we’re there.

Laura Nixon:
Yes,

Duane Connors:
We are the toolset and the conduit to help humans help other humans with the right information in the right context, designing better information interventions on the fly. And if we’re doing all the things that we talk about building and we’re doing it right, we’re just the mouse click or the phone move that makes sense for them and it gives them the right information at the right time to do the right thing. And so the people part is huge, but we got to nail down this part to allow them to engage with each other in the way that they really need to support their community.

Stephanie Broderick:
That’s great. That’s great. I want to give the audience the chance to ask some questions before we get some final thoughts from our panelists. Go ahead, Evan.

Audience Member:
How do you guys approach the digital health equity? How do you guys work with digital health equity, meaning underserved populations? And when I come at this, I think of race data and having that tied to different populations. So you can do true population health. Sometimes people can fall under different categories for Alaska native or American Indian, Alaskan native, but also claim to be Hispanic or in another underserved population just to have true population health level data. So I guess in general, just true digital health equity. What does that mean for you and your product?

Duane Connors:
So that’s a core foundation of what we built at Wellconnected in Alco our product because of that exact example. That’s why we did a lot of, if you build it, they will come. We spent two years with dozens of agencies figuring out workflow and trust mechanics and consent language and all those things. And we realized everybody had the same mission, but everybody had a different way of doing it. And so our tools that allows them to customize the data fields that match or meet the needs of their communities, so you can fall into those separate buckets. Now that being said, everything in our system runs on a standardized taxonomy that the end user basically doesn’t know is happening in the background. Then we roll that into semantic models to help that population health understanding across the board, see where those service gaps are or where things are falling off, understanding the communities as a whole or even very, very specifically.

So I can find someone that is a native American Alaskan native Latino in census block, this and this. How did their navigation and care journey go? And that’s really what we designed ours for. And then if you marry that with the power that comes with information from anytime they went to a clinic or a hospital or they are on Medicaid or Medicare and we can get that claims information and base level information, now we can get to a place where we normalize that across structured systems, unstructured systems, and real world experience. And that’s really a core element of what we designed our platform for and what we as a team can bring to everybody that’s involved in that process.

Stephanie Broderick:
That’s a great question. Any other questions? All right. Well, do you guys have any closing thoughts or anything additional that you want to add?

Laura Nixon:
I’m just really grateful for this partnership. This Chicago Regionwide, CIE is a initiative that’s very, very important and near and dear to Waldo and I and many, many people. But being able to create a lasting, intelligent, innovative, creative partnership that’s going to drive system change not only in the Chicago Regionwide area, but also throughout the entire country because we do intend to make this scalable and repeatable and a model for the gold standard across the nation. So I’m really grateful for this partnership.

Gregg Church:
Yeah, likewise. Excuse me. Likewise. The only thing I’d like to say is as we do this, Laura, you mentioned people with lived experiences. We can never forget about the individual. Never. No matter what we want to try to do with tech and no matter what we want to try to do to create a model that we think is a tech model and a digital model for managing these type of opportunities, at the end of the day we have to always think how does this help the person? And are we helping the person? And we’ll know that you’re right. We’ll know that because the people will tell us that. And that’s what I’m excited about this partnership. I think it’s going to be great.

Duane Connors:
Once again, I’ll let Waldo bring it home. At the end of this.

Stephanie Broderick:
We’re doing more wine or are we doing Oreos,

Duane Connors:
Wine and Oreos. Nice. Now I totally forgot what I was going to say. Alright. Either way, I can’t even say how much we are excited to be part of an initiative like this that is taking this approach. It’s not a random vendor selection that we all went through a thing and we do this. It became a partnership of people who care, who understand, who want to get into the thick of it and work to make it happen. And if we can help the people who help people, that means we’re doing it right. So yes, lives and outcomes and things like that, but on our side, on the social care side, most of the people who are going to use this entire stack are parts of that community, are members of that community, have that lived experience of the people that they’re supporting. And I just want to have that moment where they just are like, yeah, there it is. That’s awesome. Let’s go do this. And off and running they go. And I think we’re getting really, really close to it and focusing and fierce execution over the next six to eight months is going to be really important. But I think we got it. Wonderful.

Waldo Michaels Carrasco:
So the wine for this evening, I want to back up a little bit because the center that we run at Illinois Public Health Institute and have run for several years has done the Rub Wood Johnson data cross sector for health. We have been a refunder in that program where we provide technical assistance and funding to communities to do multi-sector data sharing, to improve health. We funded part of San Diego’s work. We funded other HIEs that are now part of the data exchange framework in California to support aim. So we come to this work with some pretty good understanding of what the components should be in a community to do this. And when you’re talking about technology to support that work, what kind of characteristics it should have. So when I reached out to Laura and I said, Hey Laura, we need to do an RFQ to identify this.

It was months of teams of people meeting, talking about different requirements from people from different aspects of it. Met clinical people, HMIS people, and we saw stuff come through. I have never seen anything when they did the demo for, it was like they read our mind, this is what a solution is supposed to look like. So we’re just really excited because the technology should solve the problem, but it should understand the problem that it’s trying to solve, not have the problem adjust to the limitations of what the technical solution is. I think we got it right here.

Stephanie Broderick:
I think that’s fantastic and I think that that’s a great ending. I’d like to suggest next year we do this again, but next year we come and we show what we actually accomplished and what some of the results are. Maybe we have some stories from some of the patients or some of the people because they’re not necessarily patients, how they’ve been helped by the solution that’s been put in place. I think that that would be a really great follow up. So I want to thank you guys very much and that’s all we got. Thank you.