***Richard S. Dick, Ph.D**.*

Distinguishing Qualifications:

-   Dr. Dick is the Founder, Chairman, and CEO of You Take Control, Inc.
    (a Delaware C Corporation).

-   Dr. Dick has a unique blend of education and experience that have
    brought him international recognition for advancing electronic
    health record (EHR, EMR, PHR) technologies from multiple
    standpoints: as a visionary, a designer/architect, and as an
    industry spokesperson (long list of speaking engagements).

-   Dr. Dick's Ph.D. is in Medical Biophysics and Computing (under
    Homer R. Warner, MD, PhD) from a world-renowned Medical Informatics
    M.D./PhD program (equates to a Ph.D. in CS + 2yrs Med School)

-   Dr. Dick directed the landmark IOM Study that launched our present
    EHR-era and co-authored the often-quoted, seminal work: *The
    Computer-based Patient Record: An Essential Technology for
    Healthcare* (1991, 1997)

-   According to Dr. Clayton M. Christensen, prominent author on
    disruptive technologies and professor at the Harvard Business
    School, Dr. Dick is "one of our most disruptive innovators"

-   Led and developed some of the most significant and highly successful
    strategic plans for the largest, most successful healthcare IT
    companies (based on actual execution)

-   Veteran of both the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the
    National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine (IOM). Dr. Dick
    also has a Masters of Library and Information Science. He led major
    research initiatives at the National Library of Medicine (NLM) and
    supervised MEDLINE

-   Conceived, designed, and led development of what may arguably be the
    largest pharmaceutical databases in the U.S. (5yrs of Rx data on
    over 200M Americans, updated and current every 24 hours)

-   Designed and built the largest realtime master person indexes (MPI)
    in the U.S. (\>100M people in just one of these MPIs)

-   Conceived, designed, and deployed key technologies that are
    revolutionizing the life, P&C, and health insurance industries by
    transforming underwriting processes: from 90 days to *10 minutes*)

-   Holder of several patents, as well as patents that are now pending

-   "Serial entrepreneur" who has been successful in 1) getting support
    for innovative ideas, and 2) their successful launch

-   Conceived, designed, and now proving the value of the Composite
    Clinical Data Dictionary, or C^2^D^2^. C^2^D^2^ is the true missing
    link for achieving the elusive goal of actual, genuine
    interoperability---in any field, not just healthcare. C^2^D^2^ is
    the fundamental building block that is the final and essential link
    in the effort to achieve true semantic interoperability. Responses
    of Ph.D. Mathematicians who have recently scrutinized it has been:
    "this is very generalized; there's nothing really 'healthcare' about
    it."

-   Conceived and architected some of the most innovative designs for
    healthcare data warehousing applications

-   Served as Functional Co-Chair for the Object Management Group\'s
    (OMG) Healthcare Domain Task Force

-   Recently appointed for three years to the Markle Foundation's new
    Personal Health Technology Council

-   Currently serving on the editorial boards of several healthcare IT
    publications

-   Recipient of the 2006 Award for excellence, outstanding achievement,
    and special recognition in\
    Applied Medical Informatics presented by the Association of Medical
    Directors of Information Systems (AMDIS)

-   Differentiators: conceiving significant innovations that have
    far-reaching impact; finding innovative solutions to the most
    challenging and perplexing problems---and then gathering support for
    ("selling") those innovations

Contact Information:

Richard S. Dick, Ph.D. (his Ph.D. field of study is now generally
referred to as Medical Informatics)

256 North Main Street, Alpine, UT 84004; V: 801-763-9933; C: 801-
362-6952; Fax: 801-763-9966; email: <rsdick@y-t-c.com>

The following is a recently reported statement concerning the world-wide
impact of the IOM's Reports in which Dr. Dick served both as Study
Director and also as Senior Staff Officer at the National Academy of
Sciences' Institute of Medicine (IOM):

"... In the late 1980s, a conference at the National Institutes of
Health (NIH) led to an IOM report dealing with electronic health
records. This report, *The* *Computer-based Patient Record: An essential
technology for health care*, was released in 1991. It explored three key
aspects: uses and users, technology, and policy and implementation. To
meet the emerging needs of health care, a total rethinking of the
medical record was needed. Simply recasting the old record into a
computer-based format would not get the job done. The term
computer-based patient record (CPR) was used to describe this new type
of record. Twelve functions for CPRs were described, and this list has
remained both timely and comprehensive. The future record should provide
a number of necessary functions, and the center of the action should be
the patient and not 'medicine.'" The goal was to improve relevant
communications and then keep an equally relevant record of the
communications. The key was not the technology but how the technology
could be utilized to reinvent healthcare. The report led directly to the
creation of the Computer-based Patient Record Institute, and it became
one of the IOM's most widely-circulated publications. It pointed out the
importance of unique identifiers and other standards. It emphasized the
need for decision support and a concern about how the systems would
create and maintain confidentiality and security. Such was the interest
in the report that it was reissued in 1997 with progress reports on U.S.
and European efforts.

As the IOM CPR Report increased visibility of electronic health records
worldwide, two reactions occurred. Europe, Canada, Australia, and New
Zealand developed national strategies to make electronic health records
a core feature of their healthcare systems. In the United States, the
Department of Defense and the Veterans Administration advanced their
efforts, taking advantage of the confidentiality and security
regulations that had been in place inside government since the late
1970s. However, only a few major private sector organizations, such as
the Kaiser Health System, picked up the challenge of implementing
large-scale electronic health records. At the national level in the
United States, it was apparent that without confidentiality and security
protections, CPRs would not move into widespread use. There was also
growing concern over administrative costs, and information technology
(IT) was seen as a way to simplify administrative procedures. Policy
debates were overwhelmingly focused on privacy legislation rather than
sponsoring CPRs equipped with robust confidentiality and security
systems. However, sensible national privacy legislation for electronic
health systems was not passed despite bipartisan support early in the
process. Provisions were placed in the HIPAA legislation to cover a
number of exigencies in case that specific enabling legislation was not
passed. Examples include unique identifiers for providers, payers, and
patients, as well as desired components for electronic health records.
Court challenges have allowed virtually all dimensions identified in the
HIPAA legislation, short of personal identifiers, to move forward.
Although there is debate as to whether these provisions are adequate or
excessive for the security and confidentiality of electronic health
information, or whether the patient identifiers should have also been
established, these standards did help promote the HICT agenda." Pages
4-5

From: *Will the Wave Finally Break? A Brief View of the Adoption of
Electronic Medical Records in the United States,* ETA S. BERNER, EDD,
DON E. DETMER, MD, MA, DONALD SIMBORG, MD, J. American Medical
Informatics Assoc. 2005;12:3--7. DOI 10.1197/jamia.M1664.