U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

44–649 PDF 2009

S. HRG. 110–714 

HEARING ON SHARING OF VA/DOD ELECTRONIC 

HEALTH INFORMATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia 

PATTY MURRAY, Washington 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

BERNARD SANDERS, (I) Vermont 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

JIM WEBB, Virginia 

JON TESTER, Montana 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina, Ranking 

Member 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

LARRY E. CRAIG, Idaho 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas 

LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

WILLIAM E. BREW, Staff Director 

LUPE WISSEL, Republican Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

SENATORS 

Page 

Akaka, Hon. Daniel K., Chairman, U.S. Senator from Hawaii ........................... 1 

Burr, Hon. Richard, Ranking Member, U.S. Senator from North Carolina ....... 34 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 34 

Murray, Hon. Patty, U.S. Senator from Washington ........................................... 68 

Wicker, Hon. Roger F., U.S. Senator from Mississippi ......................................... 52 

WITNESSES 

Melvin, Valerie C., Director, Human Capital and Management Information 

Systems, U.S. Government Accountability Office .............................................. 2 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 4 

Kussman, Michael, M.D., Under Secretary for Health, U.S. Department of 

Veterans Affairs; accompanied by Paul A. Tibbits, M.D., Deputy Chief Information Officer, Enterprise Development, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; Cliff Freeman, Acting Deputy Director, DOD/VA Interagency Program 

Office; and Ross Fletcher, M.D., Chief of Staff, VA Medical Center, Washington, DC ............................................................................................................. 39 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 43 

Response to written questions submitted by: 

Hon. Daniel K. Akaka .................................................................................. 46 

Hon. Patty Murray ........................................................................................ 48 

Hon. Roger F. Wicker ................................................................................... 49 

Casscells, S. Ward, M.D., Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs, 

U.S. Department of Defense; accompanied by Charles Campbell, Chief Information Officer, Military Health System, U.S. Department of Defense ....... 52 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 54 

Response to written questions submitted by: 

Hon. Daniel K. Akaka .................................................................................. 59 

Hon. Patty Murray ........................................................................................ 60 

Hon. Roger F. Wicker ................................................................................... 61 

(1) 

HEARING ON SHARING OF VA/DOD 

ELECTRONIC HEALTH INFORMATION 

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON VETERANS’ AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:32 a.m., in room 

418, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Akaka, Murray, Burr, and Wicker. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA, CHAIRMAN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII 

Chairman AKAKA. The hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on 

Veterans’ Affairs is now in order. 

Good morning, aloha, and welcome to all of you to today’s hearing on the state of health information sharing between the Departments of Veterans Affairs and Defense. This is historic. I will tell 

you that Veterans Affairs and also the Department of Defense have 

been talking to each other, have been working together, and here 

is another area that we are getting to where we are working together. And so, this is why I said historic. 

Even in the waning days of this Congressional session, we must 

continue to strive to improve care for servicemembers and veterans. An essential ingredient to reaching that goal is the sharing 

of personal health care information between the two Departments. 

The merits of Electronic Health Records are well documented. 

While VA is considered to be a leader in using Electronic Health 

Records, much work remains before the two Departments can 

achieve the ultimate goal—the goal of sharing medical information 

in real time. Until this goal is reached, military and VA medical 

practitioners simply will not have access to the most accurate personal medical information on their patients. 

Technology is not necessarily the problem. The technology exists, 

as we will see today. Indeed, the Electronic Health Record systems 

of the two Departments are each remarkable in their own right. 

The biggest challenge is the development of common standards so 

the two systems can talk to each other easily and in real time. 

DOD and VA have been working toward achieving interoperable 

systems for over a decade at a rate that can charitably be described 

as glacially slow. Only recently has there been significant progress. 

It appears that, for the first time, there is the needed commitment 

for full data sharing of electronic medical information; and the results of that commitment are visible. 

2 

I encourage the Departments to continue to work together in 

order to extend the progress we have already observed. When VA 

and DOD finally have the ability to fully exchange medical information in real time, the best interests of servicemembers and veterans will be served. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today and learning 

their views on the most effective way forward on this important 

issue and what this Committee can do to reach our shared goal. 

We are delighted to have joining us this morning on our first 

panel Valerie Melvin, who is the Director of Human Capital and 

Management Information Systems Issues at the Government Accountability Office. For me, human capital really rings a big bell 

because we really need to help develop that, and I am glad we have 

somebody in that kind of position here. GAO recently released a 

Congressionally-mandated report on data sharing between VA and 

DOD. 

I want to say aloha, Ms. Melvin. I am pleased that GAO is actively tracking the Departments’ progress in this area. We look forward to hearing from you this morning. So, will you please begin 

with your statement now. 

STATEMENT OF VALERIE C. MELVIN, DIRECTOR, HUMAN CAPITAL AND MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE 

Ms. MELVIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to participate in today’s hearing to discuss the sharing of electronic medical 

information between DOD and VA. As you know, the two Departments have been pursuing initiatives to share data between their 

Health Information Systems for the last decade. However, while 

important progress has been made, questions have remained concerning when and to what extent the intended electronic sharing 

capabilities will be fully achieved. 

To expedite the Departments’ efforts to exchange electronic medical information, as you mentioned, the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2008 directed DOD and VA to jointly develop and implement by September 30, 2009, electronic health 

records systems or capabilities that are compliant with applicable 

interoperability standards and it established an interagency program office to be a single point of accountability for the Departments’ efforts. 

Further, the Act directed GAO to semiannually report on the Departments’ efforts. Thus, on July 28, as you have stated, we issued 

our first report highlighting the Departments’ progress in sharing 

electronic health information, developing electronic records that 

comply with national standards, and establishing the Interagency 

Program Office. As you have requested, my testimony today summarizes our report findings in these three areas. 

In brief, DOD and VA are sharing selected electronic health information at different levels of interoperability. Pharmacy and drug 

allergy data on almost 19,000 shared patients are exchanged at the 

highest level of interoperability, that is in computable form or a 

standardized format that a computer application can act on to, for 

example, alert clinicians of a drug allergy. 

3 

In other cases, data can be viewed at a lower level of interoperability, but one that also provides clinicians valuable information, 

which has been achieved through various short-term initiatives involving the Departments’ existing systems. Among these, the Laboratory Data Sharing Interface Project has produced an application 

that allows the Departments to share medical laboratory resources. 

Another, the Bidirectional Health Information Exchange, has enabled a two-way almost instantaneous view of selected categories 

of health data on shared patients. 

The Departments have agreed on numerous standards that enable them to share data and are participating in initiatives led by 

HHS’s Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT that are 

aimed at promoting broader use of Electronic Health Records, 

which is important to aligning their Electronic Health Records with 

emerging Federal standards. 

Nonetheless, questions remain concerning the extent to which 

the Departments will achieve full interoperability by next year, as 

they have not yet articulated an interoperability goal. This is significant, as not all health information is currently shared electronically and information is still being captured in paper records at 

many DOD facilities. Further, not all shared patients who could 

benefit from these electronic exchanges have been identified and 

activated. 

The DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan that the Departments recently completed is supposed to address these and other 

issues, including the establishment of schedules and benchmarks 

for developing an interoperable health record capability. However, 

while an important accomplishment, on preliminary review, the 

plan’s high-level content provides only a limited basis for understanding and assessing the Departments’ progress toward full 

interoperability by the September 2009 date. 

Further, once fully established, a new Interagency Program Office is to play a crucial role in accelerating the Departments’ efforts. However, this office is not expected to be fully operational 

until the end of this year and some milestones in the office’s plan 

for achieving interoperability have yet to be determined. 

Thus, Mr. Chairman, through all of their efforts, DOD and VA 

have made important progress in sharing electronic health information. Moreover, they are sharing more data than ever before. 

Nonetheless, work remains to plan and implement new capabilities 

that could further the Departments’ efforts and a clearer understanding of the extent to which these capabilities are expected to 

be in place by September 2009 is essential. The Departments could 

benefit from more detailed planning and benchmarks for measuring progress and success toward achieving their intended electronic sharing capabilities. 

This concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to respond to any questions that you have. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Melvin follows:] 

4 


44649.001
5 


44649.002
6 


44649.003
7 


44649.004
8 


44649.005
9 


44649.006
10 


44649.007
11 


44649.008
12 


44649.009
13 


44649.010
14 


44649.011
15 


44649.012
16 


44649.013
17 


44649.014
18 


44649.015
19 


44649.016
20 


44649.017
21 


44649.018
22 


44649.019
23 


44649.020
24 


44649.021
25 


44649.022
26 


44649.023
27 


44649.024
28 


44649.025
29 


44649.026
30 


44649.027
31 


44649.028
32 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you very much, Ms. Melvin, for your 

statement. 

I must tell you that I am thrilled at the progress that has been 

made and certainly encourage that here. Let me ask you, in your 

view and based upon the recent progress, are VA and DOD on the 

right track for fully sharing electronic medical information by September 2009, the date set by Congress? 

Ms. MELVIN. They are on a good track, and I would say it is a 

positive track and a track in the right direction. The concern that 

I have at this time is that the definition of full interoperability remains unclear. In my statement, I made the point that VA and 

DOD had not yet defined an interoperability goal. For us at GAO, 

that is a very important step that needs to be taken from the 

standpoint of really knowing what it is that the Departments intend to have in place by September 2009. 

I think they have made critically important progress as far as 

moving in the direction of interoperable sharing. They are sharing 

at various levels of interoperability, as I have stated. However, how 

much more they intend to share, across what facilities and across 

what percentage of their population of patients is still unclear. 

Once that is defined, I believe that there will be a better case for 

stating whether or not they will be able to reach the September 

2009 date for full interoperability. 

Chairman AKAKA. Well, you just mentioned interoperability as 

being unclear. Ms. Melvin, GAO identified one of the major challenges for DOD and VA as the ability to develop common standards 

for shared data. Please explain for the Committee why these common standards are so necessary. 

Ms. MELVIN. I might start by saying that in developing standards, that is a difficult task, not just for VA and DOD, but even 

at the national level in which the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology is involved and which 

DOD and VA are, by the way, involved with. Identifying standards 

and agreeing to standards across multiple entities—in this case, 

two very large Federal agencies—is a complex task that does involve understanding the data that each agency views or deems as 

most important to meet their needs in caring for veterans and in 

caring for active duty patients. 

But, common standards are essential from the standpoint of allowing VA and DOD systems essentially to talk to each other. At 

the very basic, these standards are needed so that if you are talking about a particular type of medication—for example, let us say 

an aspirin—in terms of sharing data and being able to have computerized data, for example, where we have talked about being able 

to provide alerts for allergies to certain medications. It is important 

that VA’s system be able to read an aspirin as aspirin and see that 

data in DOD’s system, and know that that is the same aspirin or 

the same type of medication. 

At the same time, standards are important for establishing how 

data is communicated between those two computers. For example, 

from the standpoint that there are standards for messaging, there 

are standards for establishing specific data elements for how data 

transmits and what order specific types of information comes over 

to another computer or is read by another computer. It is imporVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:59 Feb 19, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 H:\PS41451\DOCS\44649.TXT SVETS PsN: PAULIN
33 

tant, for example, that if VA’s computer is looking at information 

on a patient and they are looking for a date of birth, that they, in 

fact, understand where—that that system understands where to 

read that date of birth from DOD’s information—that reads it as 

a date of birth, not perhaps as a Social Security number. 

So, having standards allowed those systems to have a common 

way to talk to each other and to make sure that they understand 

those systems can read the data from each other and produce results that are informative in making decisions. 

Chairman AKAKA. I know you have made some progress in reaching the common standards of interoperability. Let me further ask, 

how far do the Departments have to go toward achieving these 

common standards for shared electronic health information? Are 

we a year away, or is it closer to 5 or 10 years before complete 

standardization can be achieved? 

Ms. MELVIN. That is really a question that the agencies will have 

to answer. It really goes to the heart of the work that those agencies are undertaking and will have to continue to undertake to 

really establish what their needs are. It is rooted in their need to 

understand what the user’s requirements are, rooted in understanding how best to serve their patient population. And so knowing what their needs are will have to drive what types of data they 

want—will have to drive the harmonization related to that data— 

and, ultimately, what they decide will be the standards that establish the specific data and how it is communicated. 

Chairman AKAKA. What about the levels? Again, back to these 

common standards—— 

Ms. MELVIN. Yes. 

Chairman AKAKA [continuing]. Are DOD and VA developing 

standards in a vacuum or are they in line with emerging Federal 

standards? We obviously don’t want a situation whereby VA and 

DOD won’t be able to interact with the private sector where so 

many patients receive their care. Are we in a vacuum or are we 

in line with emerging Federal standards? 

Ms. MELVIN. Based on our work, I think they are in line with 

Federal standards. Certainly, VA and DOD were out in front of the 

Federal Government overall in preparing, or in terms of defining 

standards, because they have been at work for about a decade on 

trying to find ways to share their data. So, at the same time that 

they have identified standards that are unique to their capabilities, 

both agencies have been working and continue to work with the Office of the National Coordinator for Health IT in establishing and 

defining standards. 

So, no, they are not working in a vacuum, and your point is perfectly correct: that they don’t want to work in a vacuum because 

it is important that their standards are aligned with the national 

standards so that, as we move forward in the future, their systems 

are consistent with the other systems and those in the private sector as well as their own. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you very much. 

Let me invite my good friend, Senator Richard Burr, for his 

statement and questions. 

34 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, RANKING MEMBER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA 

Senator BURR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would ask unanimous consent that my opening statement be included in the record. 

Chairman AKAKA. Without objection, it will be included in the 

record. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Burr follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD BURR, RANKING MEMBER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH CAROLINA

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this very important hearing. And welcome 

to our witnesses for being here today. I appreciate you all being here to discuss your 

progress in the sharing of VA/DOD electronic health information. 

Mr. Chairman, we have been talking about electronic health information-sharing 

between VA and DOD since November 2001, when the DOD first began to send selected pieces of electronic health information to VA for separated servicemen and 

women. Unfortunately, it wasn’t until late 2006 that we began to see the first real 

signs of movement toward robust electronic health information-sharing. I single out 

late 2006 because it was at that time when new programs came online to enable 

both Departments to view DOD inpatient discharge summaries, electronic post-deployment health reassessments, and computable outpatient pharmacy medication allergy data. 

Mr. Chairman, there is still much work to be done, but I am pleased to hear about 

the steady progress in 2007, as DOD began sharing its patient tracking data with 

VA, and DOD began sending radiology images and scanned medical records to VA 

polytrauma centers. 

A year ago, Assistant Secretary Robert Howard provided this Committee with a 

list of seven priorities that he was using as benchmarks to guide the realignment 

process. On a scale of one to ten, he rated where he believed the Departments were 

on each of those priorities. This year, I’d like to find out about what progress has 

been made on those benchmarks. 

These benchmarks overlap with a new ‘‘DOD/VA Interoperability Plan’’ that 

charts the way forward. This plan identifies over twenty essential software systems, 

computer programs, networks, new management offices and other initiatives where 

work needs to be done to achieve our interoperability goals. 

I believe we’re on the right path, but DOD and VA must continue to take advantage of changes in the rapidly evolving world of information technology if we are 

to continue to provide state-of-the-art health care to our servicemen and women and 

to veterans. The two Departments must work together as they adopt new patient 

records technologies. 

Regardless of what new health care information technologies are adopted, the 

days of DOD and VA working independently to develop and adopt new health care 

data collection systems should be a thing of the past. Close collaboration between 

the two Departments is essential to solving the interoperability challenges of today, 

and it is equally essential to ensuring that we don’t run into similar problems in 

the future. 

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing today about the coordination that the 

two Departments have been engaged in to solve both the near-term and the midterm interoperability challenges. 

Senator BURR. I apologize to Ms. Melvin for missing her testimony, and thank GAO for a very complete review. This is not the 

first time GAO has been asked to look at this, is it? 

Ms. MELVIN. No. We have actually been looking at this issue 

since about 2001 across the whole spectrum of VA and DOD sharing. The report that we issued on July 21, however, was the first 

one in response to the National Defense Authorization Act for 2008. 

Senator BURR. You haven’t been involved since 2001, though, 

have you? 

Ms. MELVIN. I have not personally been involved through all of 

it, but through most of it, yes. 

35 

Senator BURR. Share with us what is different today. Highlight 

the progress. Highlight why we should be optimistic that they are 

headed in the right direction. 

Ms. MELVIN. I think that what we have seen in the way of 

growth has certainly been in terms of their ability to find solutions 

that have enabled them to share increasing amounts of information. I stated earlier that the Departments are now sharing more 

data than ever before, and that has come through the ability for 

these two Departments to come to more common understandings, 

relative to collaborating on the issues that are important, understanding what their data needs are across the spectrum of the two 

agencies. 

One caveat that I would introduce, however, is that even as they 

have done this, there is more work to be done from the standpoint 

of collaboration. We do see the need for them to continue. This is 

an important establishment in terms of being able to talk to each 

other; and we will be looking to see how these organizations continue to collaborate, to speak as one voice. I think that is going to 

be the most critical aspect. 

Senator BURR. I am not sure that any of us believe that GAO 

would come in and say, ‘‘You know what? They are there. They 

have completed the whole process.’’ I don’t think—— 

Ms. MELVIN. No, we haven’t said that. 

Senator BURR [continuing]. VA or DOD would have suggested 

that. What I am after, though, is: one, you have assessed that they 

have made progress. 

Ms. MELVIN. They have made progress. 

Senator BURR. Two, is there a private sector blueprint that you 

compare where they are in the progress that they have made, that 

you compare it to the private sector blueprint, or have we really 

designed a pathway that we think we need to go, but there is no 

real understanding yet of—whether it is DOD and VA or whether 

it is the private sector and a hospital—how long it takes you to get 

there? 

Ms. MELVIN. We have looked at, on some limited basis, the private sector. Obviously, with the work that the National Coordinator is doing, there isn’t a blueprint that we have used. Most of 

our work has been driven by what VA and DOD have established 

as their goals for increasing their sharing capabilities. Over this 

time we have seen their progress grow, in large measure out of the 

need to establish interim short-term solutions to meet immediate 

needs for serving their patient populations. 

But, at the same time, they are working in a way that they are 

actually able to provide some type of input to what the national 

level is trying to do, and I think it is important that VA and DOD 

continue to be in a place where they can actually use their experiences as an example to help form the blueprint, if you will, for how 

the national sharing of data is accomplished and how the private 

sector actually interacts in that. 

Senator BURR. You stated a very important thing. They had a 

plan as to how they were going to proceed, right? 

Ms. MELVIN. VA and DOD? 

Senator BURR. Yes. 

36 

Ms. MELVIN. We have actually had concerns with VA and DOD’s 

planning across the years. That is one other area that we have consistently stressed increased effort be placed on. I continue to feel 

that there is a stronger need for planning. 

I mentioned earlier that in terms of the concept of full interoperability, one of our concerns is: how is full interoperability defined? 

I think when we get to September 2009, DOD and VA will certainly be in a position that they are sharing interoperable data and 

they are sharing it at different levels, because they are already 

doing that. 

What we would like to see, though, is a clearer plan for how they 

plan to put discipline around all the various initiatives that are enabling them to, at this point, achieve that capability, and at the 

end of the day on September 30, 2009, to have established benchmarks to have a path that clearly shows the milestones, the timeframes, the activities, and how they all match up to some established end state that the Departments say they want to have at 

that point. 

So, planning is still critical. It is important. Where we have seen 

them integrate planning very heavily into their various activities, 

there has been a success with those efforts, going all the way back 

to their early initiatives to put the FHIE system in place. We want 

to see that continue at this point. 

Senator BURR. From the standpoint of the current effort—— 

Ms. MELVIN. Yes? 

Senator BURR [continuing]. Would you agree that VA and DOD 

are on a pathway to meet their goals on the time line that they 

have agreed to? 

Ms. MELVIN. They are on a pathway to meeting a goal. I am not 

sure what that time line is, to be quite honest with you. They have 

high-level milestones at this point. What we are looking for are 

more detailed ones. We do believe that when September 2009 gets 

here, that yes, they will be in a position of saying they have interoperable capability for sharing data. There is no doubt with that 

because they are already there. How much beyond where they are 

is still a question for us. 

Senator BURR. OK. As I was preparing and the Chairman was 

asking questions, you talked about standards, and again, I think 

the only thing we have to compare this to is the private sector. I 

guess my question would be this: are the standards that they are 

having difficulty working out standards that have been adopted by 

entities in the private sector, or are these standards that the private sector is still debating and discussing as to what the correct 

standard is going to be? 

Ms. MELVIN. We have not yet looked in depth at how they are 

actually defining their standards; but, based on our understanding 

of just the issue of standards in general, it is a very difficult task 

to define standards within and also to make sure that they complement those that are in the Federal sector. So, I think it is a little bit of both in terms of what they are doing. But, it is a difficult 

task and I don’t want to, by any means, discount the difficulty that 

goes into actually making those determinations as to what is appropriate for sharing data. 

37 

Senator BURR. Great. We have got a long period, Mr. Chairman, 

so I want to proceed. I do want to make a statement, even though 

I didn’t make an opening statement. 

I think what the Committee has asked DOD and VA to do is to 

begin to make progress, to begin to establish where it is that both 

are trying to go. I think it is safe to say—as involved as I am in 

the private health care side of the policymaking—it is very difficult 

to map every milestone that you are going to hit along that road, 

but it is absolutely essential that both parties know where the final 

point is that they are trying to get to. I think that has been established. 

It is going to be important that GAO work with us, as well as 

VA and DOD, to try to acknowledge the completion of certain steps. 

I do that with the full knowledge, Mr. Chairman, of realizing that 

we can’t even produce an IT bill for private health care out of Congress. So, I know how difficult it is to talk about the advances in 

technology and how we incorporate those advances into medicine 

broadly. We have done it well in the delivery of care. We have not 

done it well in the sharing of the outcome of that delivery and that 

is what we are here discussing; and it is something the private sector is still and will continue to be challenged on how they get there. 

I thank the Chair. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you very much, Senator Burr. 

Let me continue on a second round here quickly, Ms. Melvin. 

GAO has raised concerns about whether or not the Departments’ 

IT initiatives are plugged into a comprehensive strategy for 

seamlessly sharing health information, and my friend and partner 

here has asked about a road map. Along similar lines, does the current data sharing plan address these concerns? 

Ms. MELVIN. At a high level, it does address the concerns. Again, 

as I stated, what we would want to see, in addition to what they 

have done, is to have some more details. I would agree that they 

have identified their plan as a living document, and, in essence, 

that is what a plan would have to be, because you are making adjustments along the way. So, that is very fair and that is very important to recognize. 

At the same time, there must be a standard, or a starting point, 

I should say, relative to specifically what milestones from an interim nature the agencies work against to make sure that as they 

move forward, they are coming to an end state that they have 

agreed to; and that they can do so successfully. Without benchmarks, for example, to really gauge their progress, there is no way 

to really know whether, at the end of the day they will have 

achieved what it is that they set out to achieve and whether it is 

accomplishing the objectives that they intend to. 

Chairman AKAKA. I know that DOD does not have an integrated 

inpatient electronic cord system. It would appear that this is a 

major, let me say, stumbling block for the prospect of VA and DOD 

fully sharing electronic medical information. Will you please share 

your view on that? 

Ms. MELVIN. Well, we do understand that they have now developed or completed a study that relates to their joint inpatient 

record. Certainly, that is a critical piece of information that must 

be weighed, or should be weighed, I should say, in terms of having 

38 

a complete assessment or a complete picture of the patient’s health 

history. We look forward to examining their study in more detail 

to understand more clearly just what their plan is at that point, 

to look more closely at what types of solutions they are considering 

to make this happen. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

Senator Burr? 

Senator BURR. No further questions. 

Chairman AKAKA. Well, I want to thank you so much. You have 

done a splendid job here representing GAO. We certainly appreciate it and thank you for your statement and your responses. 

Ms. MELVIN. Thank you, Chairman Akaka. I appreciated being 

here. 

Chairman AKAKA. Let me introduce our second panel here. On 

our second panel this morning are representatives from the Department of Defense and Veterans Affairs. Joining us from VA is Dr. 

Michael Kussman, Under Secretary for Health. From DOD, we are 

pleased to welcome Dr. Ward Casscells, who is Assistant Secretary 

of Defense for Health Affairs. I want to welcome both of you. 

This hearing is especially timely, given that the Departments 

have recently completed their data sharing plan and received recommendations on a joint inpatient record system from an outside 

contractor. 

Aloha, gentlemen. I see you each have a number of individuals 

accompanying you this morning and would invite you to introduce 

them to the Committee. Dr. Kussman? 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Aloha, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member. 

Chairman AKAKA. Aloha. 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Thank you very much for inviting us. Let me introduce the people to your right and my left. First is Dr. Paul 

Tibbits, who is the Deputy Chief Information Officer for Development in the Office of Information and Technology; and Mr. Cliff 

Freeman, who works for us in IT in the VHA, but is now the Acting 

Deputy Director for the Joint Integrated Information Office which 

the GAO discussed and we will discuss, as well. 

I have a third person sitting back there: Dr. Ross Fletcher, who 

is the Chief of Staff and a physician at the Washington VA, who 

with your support and agreement, will give us a demonstration this 

morning on the interoperability of IT with DOD and the VA. 

Chairman AKAKA. Dr. Casscells? 

Dr. CASSCELLS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Burr. I am 

delighted to be here representing the Defense Department. With 

me is our Chief Information Officer, Mr. Charles Campbell. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you. Thank you very much. 

Will you please begin with your statement, Dr. Kussman. 

39 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL KUSSMAN, M.D., UNDER SECRETARY 

FOR HEALTH, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; ACCOMPANIED BY PAUL A. TIBBITS, M.D., DEPUTY CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER, ENTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; CLIFF FREEMAN, ACTING DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DOD/VA INTERAGENCY PROGRAM 

OFFICE (IPO); AND ROSS FLETCHER, M.D., CHIEF OF STAFF, 

VA MEDICAL CENTER, WASHINGTON, DC 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Again, aloha, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Ranking 

Member. Thank you for the opportunity to update you on the status of our efforts to exchange electronic medical information with 

our partners at the Department of Defense. We appreciate this 

Committee’s continuing support of our efforts. 

I would like to request my written statement be submitted for 

the record. 

Chairman AKAKA. Without objection, it will be included in the 

record. 

Dr. KUSSMAN. There was a time when clinical care was recorded 

on paper and files had to be copied and transferred in person. This 

system was fraught with inefficiencies and patient care suffered as 

a result. Records were incomplete, unreadable, or inaccurate. Our 

physicians recognized this and helped develop VA’s Electronic 

Health Record, which is now known the world over as the standard 

for electronic medical records. 

A similar phenomenon has happened in our collaboration with 

DOD. We understand we share patients, and there are times when 

VA treats active duty servicemembers and times when DOD treats 

veterans. Our clinicians, again, have led the way through forums 

like the Joint Clinical Information Board, where VA and DOD providers discuss what they need and technical engineers figure out 

how to meet those needs. 

It is important to note that there is a difference between the 

technical definition of interoperability and the functional definition. 

If you will permit me to use a simple analogy, I think you will understand my point a little more clearly. When you pick up a cell 

phone and call someone, it doesn’t matter if you use one phone 

company or they use another. The cell call connects just the same. 

Similarly, it really doesn’t matter to our providers if DOD uses 

AHLTA or VA uses VistA, as long as the patient’s needs are met 

and they can connect the information they need. Delivering information across the continuum of care in DOD and VA is the true 

priority. 

In this regard, I think DOD and VA are succeeding. We have 

come a long way. Almost all essential health information is accessible across the systems. Providers can see pharmacy information, 

surgical reports, lab results, allergies, vital signs, and discharge 

summaries. This is true at every VA medical center in the country. 

We know there is still more to do, both in terms of communicating these advances to our clinicians and filling in gaps in the 

system. But some of the biggest hurdles have already been passed. 

A VA provider in Dubuque, Iowa, can access clinical data on a patient added to a health record by a physician in Baghdad. Radiologic images and inpatient information from Walter Reed or BeVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:59 Feb 19, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 H:\PS41451\DOCS\44649.TXT SVETS PsN: PAULIN
40 

thesda Naval Medical Center can be seen by our polytrauma facilities for seriously injured veterans and servicemembers. 

All of these efforts are made easier by the Veterans Tracking Application, a case management tool used to track patients and ensure they are receiving the care that they need, even if it is not 

from us. And Healthy Vet will extend these capabilities even further by supporting data sharing between VA, DOD, and private 

providers. 

Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a moment to do something 

that is a little unconventional. I would like to share the view of a 

clinical provider to show you how clinical care has directly improved through advances in data exchange between VA and DOD. 

Dr. Ross Fletcher, who I already acknowledged is the Chief of Staff 

at the DC VA Medical Center and a primary care physician there, 

will walk through a demonstration that shows you the information 

our clinicians can see and how they use that information to better 

provide care to our patients. 

Dr. Fletcher? 

Dr. FLETCHER. One of the best ways to let you know how things 

are going is to describe the care of some patients that we take care 

of just down the road at the VA hospital in Washington; and realize that what we can do in Washington can be done across the system in San Francisco, Miami, anywhere in the VA. This is not 

unique to our place at all. 

[Dr. Fletcher begins projecting a slideshow for all to see.] 

Dr. FLETCHER. The first patient I am going to describe is a dualuse patient. He actually came over when he was still a servicemember and we treated him for his Traumatic Brain Injury. He 

was, as he told me, exposed to blasts at least 11 times—the last 

one in Afghanistan rupturing his eardrum, the tympanic membrane, and causing the TBI that we were treating him for. 

This is the way I view his chart, and this is actually redacted, 

but is the way it would come to me just as I would see him. If I 

see this button up above saying, ‘‘remote data is available,’’ I merely click on it and see this list of where that data is present, and 

the Defense Department is frequently an area that I can check off 

and then see. When I do that and then go to ‘‘reports,’’ I see the 

list of things I can get from the DOD, including the progress notes. 

You can see that in this progress note—this is from the field hospital in Afghanistan—describing his original operation to remove 

fragments of shrapnel from his right scalp and describing him able 

to hear, but later in his course he became unable to hear, as well, 

and had a ruptured tympanic membrane, which was repaired. 

I can see it this way or I can see it through the VistA website. 

On the VistA Web, everywhere across is present. Over here, there 

is DOD data. This is the standard way I look at any patient’s films 

and records anywhere in the VA, whether it is in Miami or DOD. 

It is seamless to me as a doctor to look at the data I see from DOD. 

I can pick up his pharmacy orders, and initially I will pick up 

the local orders. It is done in Baltimore, so there were none. The 

Defense Department is still new, but, as I move forward, on the 

next line, you can see that the Defense Department is now done 

and a whole list of medicines from Bethesda Navy, Walter Reed appear. I just simply click on this button. It opens up to show me that 

41 

in July 2008, we can see all of his active medications. He is now 

a veteran and I am treating him. If I were unable to see which 

drugs he was getting from VA, it would be a very dangerous situation for us, indeed. And the other thing that it assures me is these 

drugs are available on the database, which allows me to give the 

right prescriptions. 

If I go down on the list showing ‘‘DOD and third party medications,’’ I can see that Landstuhl, Germany, Walter Reed, Eisenhower, Camp Shelby, even a CVS pharmacy in the private sector 

are medications that are available. There is an agreement with 

DOD that if the patient gets medications from the private sector, 

they need to be sent to them electronically. Needless to say, I am 

delighted when I am seeing them sent to me, as well, over at the 

VA. It is automatic. I am seeing all of the medications from Washington and everywhere else in the same list. 

If I go to another patient on the next slide, where there were 

many—there are about 4.2 million such patients where DOD has 

sent their data over to the VA, and I can simply look at the list 

of, say, pharmacy outpatients, as well. This patient got his medications at Costco, CVS pharmacy, and the DiLorenzo TRICARE 

Health Clinic at the Pentagon. I like to show this because I worked 

with Colonel DiLorenzo for many years when I was in the Army 

several years ago. 

This is the same patient. If I simply click the flag, I can isolate 

the abnormal lab values. All the lab values are in a line, whether 

they are from DOD or Washington, and any of the abnormally high 

or low values I can see immediately. I don’t have to look at the rest 

of the list, which now is normal. So, it is a very easy way for me 

to take care of the patient and see his lab chemistries. 

This next patient is a severely wounded warrior. He is one of the 

patients, when he goes from Walter Reed to one of our polytrauma 

sites, they send all of his images as well as all of his tests to us. 

This particular patient suffered an IED blast, causing Traumatic 

Brain Injury and a fractured spine. 

If I go to allergies, I can see that Washington has not assessed 

them yet because he has not arrived at our place. But if he had 

come into the emergency room and I looked at this list and waited 

for the initialization to stop at DOD and become done, I can see 

that he had a penicillin allergy at Brooke, at Martin, and Bethesda. 

The beauty is that this fact is in our combined health data repository, the Clinical Health Data Repository, which allows me—when 

I am giving him or trying to give him penicillin—to have the next 

window come up saying that wasn’t assessed at my place, but at 

remote sites. Penicillin is an allergy that is noted, and I would immediately then cancel the order and go forward. This is computable 

data in the CHDR, as we now call it, the combined database that 

exists on both sides—the DOD and the VA—for immediately taking 

computable data and guiding what I do for writing orders. 

The images that are sent over in the Severely Wounded Warrior 

Program are seen here. This is his abdomen, and I can manipulate 

this just like I can manipulate it on the VA side. They sent it to 

Richmond, but there is a remote image view, which means that if 

the patient was seen in my hospital, I can see into Richmond or 

anywhere else in the VA. Notice that I can see actually where the 

42 

screws are placed into his spinal column. As a matter of fact, here 

is an intact vertebra and down here it is split, so the fracture of 

the vertebra is easy for me to see on the films that were originally 

taken in Walter Reed, now distributed across the entire VA, because they were simply sent to one of our hospitals. 

There is an Acrobat file, 1,658 pages, as I recall, which I won’t 

show you today, but that comes across with all of the data to the 

VA. And as a matter of fact, I have been told that some of the— 

we see it nicely at our site, and now the Walter Reed doctors want 

to see this same file on their site. So, we might have to send it back 

to them and we would be delighted to do so. 

This third patient is a dual-care patient, now with the VA. She 

was hit by a truck in Kuwait, suffered severe Traumatic Brain Injury, was in a coma for many months and hydrocephalus was diagnosed and was relieved and she woke up, and I will go through 

that story. 

Again, this is the way we see the patient. The Department of Defense data is available and I can see the chemistries and 

hematologies from anywhere she is, Bethesda Navy or the Palo 

Alto VA. I can see remote consults. This is Landstuhl, Germany. 

I can see discharge summaries from the military or Palo Alto. They 

are both seen. And I can see radiology reports. 

If I activate Richmond to see the films from Richmond, I can 

compare at my hospital the earlier March 18 films against the later 

August 21, 2005, films. Notice there are these big openings in the 

brain. These are the ventricles and they are markedly dilated. 

They should look more like this. You can see that dilatation is putting pressure on the brain and this patient is staying in a coma. 

But once we saw this, we knew there was a way out for this particular individual. A catheter was placed inside the ventricle and 

a shunt to the outside was then established, decompressing this 

area and allowing the brain to not be under pressure. She woke up. 

She could then talk, move around. That was 2005. 

I got an e-mail from this patient just this month saying that she 

was leaving Livermore VA; she had gone out to Palo Alto and is 

going home. So, this is a real good story. Her coma changed to a 

much better function. 

This is an x-ray that we are now able to see into DOD just like 

we can see into Albuquerque or Miami. If you weren’t able to see 

the films across the entire spectrum where they were taken, you 

would not be able to follow them well; and now simply by clicking 

on DOD, we see ‘‘DOD films,’’ which shows us the knee on the right 

side with the prosthesis and the knee on the left side without. This 

is very, very valuable. I can actually go to the Albuquerque films 

and see that this knee is not lining up properly and I am going to 

have to worry about the fact that this knee could go the same 

course as the one that had a replacement. But, being able to follow 

them all allows me to see the patients quite well. 

Using all of these techniques, which I won’t elaborate on, we are 

now able to see a large amount of data. Not only can we access it 

easily and well, but we are able to see a lot more of it and are able 

to return the veteran to his best possible recovery with this high 

degree of interoperability that we are already seeing and is available to us as clinicians. Thank you very much. 

43 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you very much, Dr. Fletcher. I am very 

encouraged by your view that you have some excellent clinical tools 

to work with, and we are delighted to see this. 

Dr. Kussman, anything else to add before we move to Dr. 

Casscells? 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ross, for that 

presentation. I hope that you and the Ranking Member and other 

people here found this presentation helpful in the degree of interoperability of information. 

This is an area obviously that is vital to patient care, and sometimes it is easy to forget what this is all about, focusing on the delivery of care from one system to another. At the end of the day, 

we believe that the interoperability that exists has made the care 

much better. It is an exciting opportunity for us to lead the Nation, 

and the VA and DOD’s leadership are equal to the task. When we 

establish a common consensus, an infrastructure for interoperability of records, millions of patients, veterans and non-veterans 

alike, will benefit. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you again for your time. I am prepared to 

answer any questions you may have. Aloha nui loa. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Kussman follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL J. KUSSMAN, M.D., UNDER SECRETARY FOR

HEALTH, VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS

Mr. Chairman, Thank you for the opportunity to update you on the status of our 

efforts to exchange electronic medical information with our partners at the Department of Defense (DOD). This Committee has always been supportive of our efforts 

and I look forward to providing you the information you need. Accompanying me 

today are Dr. Paul Tibbits, VA Deputy Chief Information Officer for Enterprise Development, and Mr. Cliff Freeman, Acting Deputy Director of the newly formed 

DOD/VA Interagency Program Office (IPO). 

VA and DOD continue to work toward improving the exchange of medical information to best serve our active duty servicemembers and veterans who come to us 

for medical care. Today, we are sharing more information than ever before. Although our data exchanges are unprecedented in the scope and amount of data we 

share, we realize there is more work to be done and believe we are taking the steps 

necessary to meet our goals and comply with the direction provided by the National 

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Section 1635. I will address some of the issues 

facing VA as we work with DOD to expand our access to shared electronic medical 

information. 

The NDAA mandates that both Departments achieve full interoperability of electronic health record capabilities and systems by September 2009. The NDAA includes the requirement to establish a DOD/VA Interagency Program Office (IPO) to 

oversee the development of interoperable electronic medical record systems by September 2009. 

INTERAGENCY PROGRAM OFFICE AND INFORMATION INTEROPERABILITY PLAN

The Government Accounting Office report GAO–08–954 recommended that VA 

and DOD give priority to fully establishing the IPO and finalizing the implementation plan. The IPO is operational, has developed high level milestone activities, is 

fully engaged with the appropriate offices in VA and DOD, and is developing a detailed implementation plan to assist the Departments in meeting the NDAA data 

sharing goal by September 2009. 

The DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan (IIP) was recently signed and delivered to Congress. It was also released to GAO. The IIP describes the current state 

of electronic data sharing between the Departments and identifies the gaps that 

must be addressed to achieve the level of information interoperability necessary to 

support the clinical and benefits needs of our veterans and members of the Armed 

Forces. The IIP provides the strategic organizing framework for current and future 

work and establishes the scope and milestones necessary to measure progress toward intermediate and long term goals. 

44 

The IIP also emphasizes leveraging our existing data exchanges through which 

we already share almost all essential health information in viewable format. By 

September 2009, we will enhance the existing data exchanges to share those additional types of information identified and prioritized by our newly formed Joint Clinical Information Board (JCIB). The JCIB is comprised of clinicians from both DOD 

and VA. It is responsible for identifying and prioritizing the types and format of 

electronic medical information that needs to be shared by DOD and VA to care 

for our patients. This group ensures our data sharing is focused on needs identified 

and prioritized by clinicians for clinicians. Thus, we have used our clinician community to define for us those high priority items that must be shared by September 

2009. Once prioritized and approved by the Health Executive Council, the requirements are handed off to requirements definition teams and then to our information 

technology teams to develop applications and tools to put these requirements into 

operation. 

DOD and VA have seen an increase in the types of electronic data shared and 

the availability of tools to view this information. Now more than ever, it is critical 

that we inform our clinical community of our good work in this area and the availability of this information. Recent visits to some of our local facilities have shown 

us we can do a better job of getting out the good news about these new capabilities 

and training our providers on how to access this information. Both DOD and VA 

providers are busy with their number 1 priority, taking care of patients. However, 

it is incumbent upon us to ensure our providers are not only aware of the health 

care data available to them for viewing but are skilled in using the tools to obtain 

this data. VA is developing comprehensive communication and training strategies 

to remove some of these process-based barriers to using the excellent tools available 

to access DOD information on our patients. I will discuss the specific types of data 

sharing occurring in more detail below. 

EXCHANGE OF ELECTRONIC MEDICAL INFORMATION

VA and DOD are successfully sharing electronic medical information on separated 

servicemembers and shared patients who come to both VA and DOD for care and 

benefits. Since 2001, the Federal Health Information Exchange or ‘‘FHIE’’ has accomplished the one-way transfer of all clinically pertinent electronic information on 

more than 4 million separated individuals—approximately half of these individuals 

have come to VA for health care or benefits as veterans. In addition to FHIE, VA 

and DOD clinicians are using the Bidirectional Health Information Exchange or 

‘‘BHIE’’ to view medical data on shared patients, including veterans, active duty 

personnel and their dependents from every VA and DOD facility. Today, VA and 

DOD continue to share bidirectional viewable outpatient pharmacy data, allergy information, inpatient and outpatient laboratory results (including chemistry, hematology, microbiology, surgical pathology, and cytology), inpatient and outpatient radiology reports, ambulatory progress notes, procedures, and problem lists. 

Most recently, at the end of 2007 and in 2008, we enhanced our bidirectional exchange by adding vital sign data (including blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory 

rate, temperature, height, weight, oxygen saturation, pain severity, and head circumference) from all VA and DOD facilities, DOD Theater clinical data (including 

inpatient notes, outpatient encounters, and ancillary clinical data such as pharmacy 

data, allergies, laboratory results, and radiology reports), and inpatient discharge 

summaries from 18 of the largest military treatment facilities. 

Additionally, to support our most seriously injured wounded warriors, DOD is 

transferring digital radiological images and scanned inpatient information for every 

patient being transferred from Walter Reed and Brooke Army Medical Centers and 

Bethesda National Naval Medical Center to one of our four polytrauma centers in 

Richmond, Tampa, Palo Alto and Minneapolis. Our polytrauma doctors find this information invaluable for treating our most seriously injured patients and we are 

continuing to work to improve the presentation of this information. 

In addition to the viewable text and scanned information we receive and share 

with DOD, VA and DOD are sharing computable allergy and pharmacy information 

on patients who use both health care systems. The benefit of sharing computable 

data is each system can use information from the other system to conduct automatic 

checks for drug interactions and allergies. In VA, we have implemented this capability at seven of our most active locations where patients simultaneously receive 

care from both VA and DOD facilities. Once a patient is ‘‘turned on’’ with this capability, his or her pharmacy and allergy information is computable enterprise-wide 

in DOD and VA and available for this automatic clinical decision support. 

Finally, our social workers, transition patient advocates, and other military liaison staff continue to use the Veterans Tracking Application or ‘‘VTA’’ successfully 

45 

in order to improve the coordination of care for patients transitioning from DOD to 

VA. VTA provides our staff with key patient tracking and patient coordination information on a near real-time basis. 

DETAILS OF THE DOD/VA INFORMATION INTEROPERABILITY PLAN (IIP)

The DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan was developed in response to the 

NDAA directing the Departments to develop a single point of accountability in the 

rapid development and implementation of capabilities that allow for full interoperability of personal health care information. The IIP provides a roadmap to guide our 

Departments’ information technology investment decisions and establish a shared 

understanding of interoperability principles, practices, enablers, and barriers. 

The IIP is a living document whose ultimate purpose is to identify and address 

the information needed by the Departments to improve continuity of care and benefits administration for our Nation’s servicemembers, veterans, and their beneficiaries. To that end, the plan aligns our goals with twenty-two specific initiatives 

that make up the pathway to information interoperability. Eleven initiatives focus 

on the goal of improving continuity of patient care. Five initiatives focus on the goal 

of improving benefits administration. Three initiatives focus on the goal of improving the information technology infrastructure, and two initiatives focus on the goal 

of improving population health and research. One initiative cuts across all four 

goals, establishing an Interagency Program Office to help ensure our efforts remain 

coordinated, focused, and responsive to the direction received in the NDAA. 

Each initiative has a description and high level implementation timeline. While 

we are moving forward to flesh out the specifics for all of the initiatives, the Interagency Program Office, as specifically mandated in the NDAA, is almost completed. 

As discussed earlier, the Interagency Program Office is operational, functioning 

within its charter, and is on target to complete the few remaining implementation 

action items in the next few months. 

In addition to identifying those actions necessary to achieve inter-Departmental 

interoperability, the IIP also identifies the barriers to success that need to be overcome. These barriers include concerns about data standardization and quality, information privacy and confidentiality, the investment cost to implement the initiatives, 

and the investment cost to upgrade legacy systems and infrastructure. 

INTEROPERABILITY BY SEPTEMBER 30, 2009

VA is committed to working with our DOD partners to implement the provisions 

of the NDAA requiring interoperability by September 2009. Our main commitment 

is to ensure doctors and health care staff from both Departments have the information they need from each other to treat our common patients. Prior to the passage 

of the NDAA, the Dole-Shalala Presidential Commission on Care for America’s Returning Wounded Warriors recommended the VA and DOD accelerate efforts to 

share data by ensuring all essential health information is viewable, bidirectional, 

between our providers. The departments anticipate that by the end of fiscal year 

2008, we will meet this goal. This is not to say all electronic medical data will be 

shared; only to emphasize that everything deemed essential by our clinicians will 

be shared. 

With respect to the September 2009 target, the JCIB plays a key role by determining from a clinical perspective, the categories and priorities of clinical information that must be shared to most effectively treat our beneficiaries and meet the 

NDAA requirements. The JCIB recommends to the DOD/VA Health Executive 

Council the types and format of health information that is necessary to provide top 

quality, effective care to shared patients, wounded warriors coming to us for treatment and rehabilitation, and veterans transitioning to VA for care and benefits. The 

HEC approves/disapproves the JCIB recommendations. 

To attain full interoperability of electronic health record capabilities and systems 

by September 2009, the HEC approved the JCIB recommendation to add to the list 

of essential data requirements, family and social history data, and expanded types 

of patient questionnaires and forms. DOD has undertaken plans to pilot test a capability to scan paper documents and associate them with a specific patient so that 

providers are aware that the documents are available. In addition, DOD intends to 

implement their inpatient clinical documentation system at additional military 

treatment facilities in fiscal year 2009, enabling VA providers to view inpatient clinical documentation on a greater number of patients. Additional inpatient documentation such as operative notes, inpatient consultations, transfer summary notes, 

and inpatient history and physical reports, currently piloted in the Puget Sound 

area, will also be viewable by VA sites. 

46 

Under the purview of the Senior Oversight Committee or ‘‘SOC,’’ and in conjunction with the ongoing efforts of the DOD/VA Joint Executive Council, we are continuing to accelerate efforts to meet the immediate needs of the seriously injured 

transitioning to VA as a result of the current operations in theater settings. All 

transitioning servicemembers will benefit from this work. Line of Action 4 under the 

SOC continues to focus on data sharing needs in the areas of disability evaluation, 

Traumatic Brain Injury and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, case management, and 

reserve component records. The SOC has been instrumental in defining requirements and implementing acquisition activities to support these key critical business 

needs. 

Despite these accomplishments, we realize our work is not done and continue to 

expand the types of electronic medical data we share. For example, we have expanded a pilot program to share digital radiology images bidirectionally, beyond the 

initial test site in El Paso, Texas, to Evans Army Community Hospital and VA Eastern Colorado Health Care System and Naval Health Clinic Great Lakes and North 

Chicago VA Medical Center where images are key to critical medical sharing programs. Over the next several months, we will expand this capability to additional 

sites including Washington DC, VA Medical Center, Walter Reed Army Medical 

Center, and National Naval Medical Center where VA providers will use DOD radiology images to conduct service disability rating examinations. 

Additional work is being done to expand the excellent work done in the Puget 

Sound area to develop the capability to share key inpatient documentation. Another 

example of our ongoing efforts is the expansion of the ability to share computable 

health data beyond the initial seven locations listed below. The capability enabling 

the exchange of computable outpatient pharmacy and medication allergy data for 

shared patients was made available to all DOD sites in December 2007. 

• William Beaumont Army Medical Center/El Paso VA Health Care System 

• Eisenhower Army Medical Center/Augusta VA Medical Center 

• Naval Hospital Pensacola/VA Gulf Coast Health Care System 

• Madigan Army Medical Center/VA Puget Sound Health Care System 

• Naval Health Clinic Great Lakes/North Chicago VA Medical Center 

• Naval Hospital San Diego/VA San Diego Health Care System 

• Mike O’Callaghan Federal Hospital/VA Southern Nevada Health Care System 

VA and DOD will enhance this capability by adding computable laboratory (chemistry and hematology) results in 2009. 

I am pleased to inform you that VA and DOD have received the third-party study 

that evaluated our options for developing joint electronic inpatient capability and 

provided the complete report to this committee on September 19th, 2008. As we consider the report’s recommendations for approval by the DOD/VA Joint Executive 

Council, we are simultaneously exploring a forward moving strategy. 

MEETING THE NDAA REQUIREMENTS

VA and DOD’s current plan to meet NDAA requirements includes leveraging existing data exchanges to support the expansion of additional data sharing capabilities. Most importantly, VA appreciates the continued support of this Committee and 

those at the national level, including the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, as we work to ensure VA health care remains state-of-the-art and 

that our IT tools are capable of supporting our workflow. 

HealtheVet will be the foundational tool allowing us to not only deliver top quality 

care to our patients, but to support data sharing capabilities with DOD and eventually other health care partners that treat our veterans. A significant number of our 

veterans receive care from not only VA and DOD, but private providers as well. Our 

vision is to ensure their medical information is available wherever and whenever 

it is needed. To achieve this goal, we must continue developing HealtheVet and 

therefore, continued funding and support of this comprehensive initiative is needed. 

Thank you once again for the opportunity to address this Committee and provide 

you with an update on the important work we are doing to improve medical record 

sharing with DOD. I and my colleagues will attempt to address any additional questions you might have. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA TO MICHAEL KUSSMAN, M.D., UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

VETERANS AFFAIRS

Question 1. Doctors Kussman and Casscells, I understand that currently 65 percent of the care provided by DOD and 40 percent of the care provided by VA is purVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:59 Feb 19, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\PS41451\DOCS\44649.TXT SVETS PsN: PAULIN
47 

chased from the private sector. Only 9 percent of the physicians in private outpatient practice use electronic medical records. How will you overcome this reality 

and ensure the medical information from this care is included in the servicemembers/veterans electronic health record. 

Response. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) believes that the growth of 

the nationwide health information network (NHIN) an initiative led by the Office 

of National Coordinator for Health Information Technology (ONC) within the Department of Health and Human Services is the best way to get veterans’ data from 

the private sector. VA participated in the NHIN demonstration at the American 

Health Information Community (AHIC) meeting in September of this year, where 

it showed real-time transmittal of actual medical records. NHIN uses a secure, private, standards-based approach to interoperability between Federal and private sector health providers. When NHIN enters into its production phase, any provider 

who has joined the ‘‘trusted network’’ of NHIN will have access to VA/Department 

of Defense (DOD). This document is a list of clinician-approved data elements pertinent to the health care of a veteran or servicemember. Included on the list of data 

elements are items such as an up-to-date list of medications, a list of recent lab 

tests and results, a list of known allergies and demographic information. Both VA 

and DOD have accepted this standard data set for interoperable data exchange. 

As the availability of health information expands and reflects that VA/DOD are 

participating in the development of NHIN, VA believes that private sector providers 

will request their respective networks and health systems to adopt NHIN-compliant 

software. VA has limited ability to influence the information technology (IT) preferences and purchases among private sector providers. We do know, however, that 

there is interest in the provider community to improve the quality of care through 

electronic interoperability among VA/DOD and the private sector. 

Question 2. Doctors Kussman and Casscells, I believe we all can agree that VA 

currently has a world class inpatient electronic health records system. My question 

for the both of you is, what impact would the development of a new joint VA/DOD 

inpatient health records system have on VA’s current system? 

Response. The joint VA/DOD electronic health record solution common services 

strategy has the potential to improve upon VA’s current system. Common services, 

as well as an organizational and technology neutral approach, will allow the departments to develop data and business services once, and expose those services to organizations within and beyond the DOD/VA continuum. It will engender the level of 

collaboration and commitment most likely to institutionalize DOD/VA data sharing 

and process integration for the long-term. Further, it will allow the departments to 

conduct business with providers outside DOD/VA efficiently. The DOD/VA investment could lead to a groundbreaking solution that accelerates national strategic objectives for patient-focused health care and population health. The terms ‘‘business 

services’’ and ‘‘conduct business’’ refer to those clinical activities and processes that 

are common to all care environments. For example, admitting patients, tracking bed 

availability, ordering pharmaceuticals, securing health data, etc. are services that 

are common to health care environments, including VA, DOD and private sector. A 

common services approach permits individual environments to use and re-use common technology packages that support common business activities, while simultaneously using other technologies that support individual needs. In the long term, 

such an approach provides more flexibility in technology resource planning and improves cost effectiveness for sharing partners. 

Question 3. Doctors Kussman and Casscells, as a result of merging the Great 

Lakes Naval Hospital and the North Chicago VA Medical Center in 2010, the number of shared VA/DOD patients will increase roughly five-fold from 18,000 to 

100,000. Isn’t this the real test of VA/DOD interoperability? And how are we doing 

to ensure that it works. 

Response. VA does not anticipate the increase in shared patients to be an issue. 

VA and DOD have teamed up on information sharing initiatives since 2000 and currently share a significant amount of health information, however, the North Chicago 

Federal Health Care Center (FHCC) initiative is very different from previous VA/ 

DOD sharing efforts due to the challenges of addressing local information sharing 

requirements as a combined facility treating both VA/DOD beneficiaries. To ensure 

success, VA/DOD will continue to work with local and enterprise teams to address 

the highest priority needs and ensure FHCC is successful. 

Question 4. Dr. Casscells, I understand from recent news reports that DOD is actively pursuing alternatives to its current electronic health records system. Will the 

problems you have identified with DOD’s current electronic health record system affect VA/DOD’s ability to share data in the near- or long-term? 

Response. To be provided by DOD. 

48 

Question 5. Doctors Kussman and Casscells, I understand electronic health 

records for Reserve soldiers are less than complete. How do we address the issue 

of establishing a comprehensive electronic health record for these part-time soldiers. 

Response. The health care provided to the Reserve/Guard when they are deployed 

with the active duty forces, is documented in the Armed Forces health longitudinal 

technology application (AHLTA). If the Reserve/Guard soldier receives care in VA 

post-deployment, DOD is able to access that data. When reserve members come to 

VA for care while on reserve status, their medical information is captured electronically in VA’s VistA computerized patient record system (CPRS). By way of existing 

data exchanges such as bi-directional health information exchange (BHIE), VA’s 

electronic health record (EHR) information is already available to DOD if that reserve member returns to active status. 

For care received in the private sector, in fiscal 2009, DOD will provide an image 

scanning capability to enable DOD to scan information from the managed care support contractors, such as specialty care consults, so it is available to DOD providers. 

For the long term, DOD will continue to support Department of Health and Human 

Services’ efforts to foster health information sharing with the private sector. Specifically, VA/DOD will support NHIN activities to leverage recognized interoperability 

standards and promote the exchange of health information with private health care 

organizations and provider networks. These efforts will help to ensure the capture 

of private sector health care information to enhance the overall quality of DOD’s 

longitudinal health record. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. PATTY MURRAY TO MI- CHAEL KUSSMAN, M.D., UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

VETERANS AFFAIRS

Question 1. If access control alone will not insure the security of the core database 

information, what steps have been taken by the VA to protect the integrity of the 

core information once it has been accessed? 

Response. In VA’s veterans health information systems technology architecture 

(VistA) environment, access control mechanisms currently in place limit a user’s access to specific applications, files, and data fields, and security keys limit a user’s 

ability to take actions in specific application areas. Once a user is in the system, 

there is limited data field auditing functionality in place in VistA to record information on who and when changes are made to audited data fields. When data fields 

are ‘‘set’’ to be audited, the date and time the change was made, the user’s name, 

and the old and new data values are stored in an audit file that can be queried and/ 

or printed to obtain the audit data. This functionality enables an ongoing chronological list of who made what changes to data values of fields that have been selected to be audited. 

Another step being taken by VA to expand on the limited auditing functionally 

described above, is an audit service project. It will provide the capability to document and maintain a permanent record of all authorized and unauthorized access 

to health information systems, as well as disclosure of confidential health care information. A workgroup has been formed to identify and implement an enterprise 

audit solution consistent with Federal, regulatory, and VA policies. 

Techniques used to protect VA databases include authentication, password security, logging and auditing. Role-based access and biometrics initiatives are also 

being incorporated into VA’s application design and development strategies. Finally, 

certification and accreditation through VA’s Certification Program Office ensure security controls are implemented and working as intended with respect to information security. This includes a review of controls to ensure the integrity of the data 

and publishing an assessment report to document the current level of security. 

Question 2. Has the VA considered augmenting the encryption access with standalone security within the database that would force compliance with policy and procedures as a self governing action embedded into the very content that is being protected? 

Response. VA has implemented several encryption solutions. One solution 

encrypts hard drives on laptops, and another encrypts the content of email messages 

and attachments and is used to transmit sensitive data across the VA network and 

to our business partners. While these are point solutions, they can be combined with 

other security controls to provide for a defense-in-depth environment for VA information systems and data. 

VA is very active in the NHIN and the Organization for the Advancement of 

Structured Information Standards (OASIS) health care profile efforts, and is 

leveraging those efforts in the current and future specifications and design for the 

49 

electronic health record (EHR) interoperability that is underway with DOD. These 

initiatives are aimed at development of standard formats for secure exchange of 

health care data to further the interoperability of information systems in both the 

public and private sectors. 

Question 3. Would the VA consider the combination of Encryption and ‘‘self governing content’’ to create a total security protocol. 

Response. VA will be leveraging the work done by subject-matter experts in both 

the public and private health care sectors relative to the NHIN and OASIS health 

care profile efforts. Development of security, privacy and information assurance requirements for the electronic health record (EHR) interoperability, underway with 

DOD, will be in accordance with common standards and certification criteria that 

will enable secure exchange of health care data, furthering interoperability of information systems in both the public and private sectors. The goal is to create a total 

security protocol associated with interoperability and data exchange between public 

and private section health information systems. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROGER F. WICKER TO MI- CHAEL KUSSMAN, M.D., UNDER SECRETARY FOR HEALTH, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF

VETERANS AFFAIRS

Question 1. Please provide for the committee an overview of the decisionmaking 

and governance structure currently employed by and scheduled to be used by the 

departments with regard to health information technology. 

Response. VA/DOD health information technology initiatives are jointly governed 

at the highest levels of the Departments. The VA/DOD Joint Executive Council 

(JEC), co-chaired by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness 

and the Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs, is comprised of senior leaders from 

VA/DOD. The JEC was chartered to enhance VA/DOD information sharing and collaboration activities, to ensure the efficient use of Federal services and resources, 

and to identify opportunities such as policy, operations, and capital planning to advance seamless transition initiatives. The JEC provides leadership oversight of the 

Health Executive Council and Benefits Executive Council, and all other councils or 

workgroups designated by the co-chairs. Through a joint strategic planning process, 

the JEC makes recommendations to the Secretaries regarding the strategic direction 

for the joint coordination and sharing efforts between the agencies, and oversees the 

implementation and progress of those efforts through the VA/DOD joint strategic 

plan. 

The VA/DOD Health Executive Council (HEC), co-chaired by the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) and VA’s Under Secretary for Health, was created 

to establish a high-level program of interagency cooperation and coordination in a 

joint effort to improve health care and reduce costs for VA/DOD beneficiaries. The 

HEC is responsible for identifying changes in health care-related policies, procedures, and practices and assessing further opportunities for the coordination and 

sharing of health-related services and resources. 

The VA/DOD Benefits Executive Council (BEC) is co-chaired by the DOD’s Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel and Readiness) and VA’s Under 

Secretary for Benefits. The BEC collaborates on initiatives to expand and improve 

information sharing, refine the process of records retrieval, and identify procedures 

to improve the benefits claims process. 

Since 2003, the VA/DOD joint strategic plan (JSP) has served as a roadmap for 

the JEC and its sub-councils to guide the implementation of the goals and objectives 

related to sharing data and improving care and benefits administration. The JSP 

articulates a vision for collaboration, establishes priorities for partnering, launches 

processes to implement interagency policy decisions, develops joint operation guidelines, and institutes performance monitoring to track the progress in meeting the 

specific goals and objectives defined in the plan. 

Under the leadership of the JEC and the clear goals contained in the JSP, VA/ 

DOD have successfully met JSP health data-sharing milestones in fiscal 2008. 

The HEC information management/information technology (IM/IT) work group, 

co-chaired by the chief information officers (CIOs) of the Military Health System 

(MHS) and Veterans Health Administration (VHA), maintains day-to-day responsibility for health data-sharing and electronic health record (EHR) interoperability 

initiatives. The HEC IM/IT work group was established to ensure that appropriate 

beneficiary and medical data is visible, accessible, and understandable through secure and interoperable information management systems. 

The Senior Oversight Committee (SOC), co-chaired by the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs directly engages senior military 

50 

and civilian officials to ensure interagency collaboration to effectively respond to the 

recommendations of the various commissions and review groups looking at wounded 

warrior issues to include: the task force on returning Global War on Terror heroes; 

the independent review group on rehabilitative care and administrative processes at 

Walter Reed Army Medical Center and National Naval Medical Center; the President’s Commission on Care for America’s Returning Wounded Warriors; the DOD 

task force on mental health; and the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission. Underneath the SOC, VA/DOD organized several lines of actions (LOA), with one specifically focused on data sharing. 

In April 2008, the departments established the VA/DOD interagency program office (IPO) to provide direct operational oversight and management of EHR interoperability initiatives and ensure compliance with jointly coordinated, prioritized, 

and approved VA/DOD requirements. Additionally, the VA/DOD interagency clinical 

informatics board (ICIB) was established to enable clinicians to have a direct voice 

in the prioritization of recommendations for VA/DOD interoperability initiatives. 

The ICIB is a VA/DOD clinician-led group with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of 

Defense for Clinical and Program Policy and VHA’s Chief Patient Care Services Officer as proponents. The ICIB guides clinical priorities for what electronic health information the departments should share next. 

Question 2. Are these structures capable of enforcing the timelines presented in 

the IIP? 

Response. Yes, these structures are capable of ensuring that the items that have 

been jointly approved, funded, and scheduled are met. The VA/DOD information 

interoperability plan (IIP) is a ‘‘vision’’ document, not an ‘‘execution’’ document. Not 

all initiatives described in appendix D of the IIP are approved and funded. 

The IIP is a roadmap that the two departments will follow to improve interoperability. It establishes an organizing framework for dialog and strategic direction between the department’s senior leadership. As such, the initiatives described in the 

IIP project an overall direction with incremental targets. It provides a mechanism 

to guide prioritization discussions and enables technologists to propose potential solutions to incrementally enhance interoperability. Some targets will not have fully 

defined technical approaches, nor will some be funded. However, the document provides the pathway for facilitating the decisionmaking process to fully define the incremental technical solutions; identify the amount and source of funds required to 

implement those solutions; and in turn codify them in execution project plans. 

Question 3. What mechanisms are available to these groups to enforce the IIP. 

Response. The items in the VA/DOD IIP that have been approved and funded are 

incorporated into the VA/DOD joint strategic plan. The VA/DOD JEC provides the 

necessary leadership oversight over the Health Executive Council (HEC), Benefits 

Executive Council (BEC), and all other councils and work groups responsible for the 

implementation and progress of the VA/DOD joint strategic plan. The scope of these 

responsibilities includes oversight of joint strategic plan performance measures and 

associated project timelines. The VA/DOD Interagency Program Office (IPO), established April 17, 2008, provides joint management and oversight for the IIP to help 

ensure the agencies meet interoperability compliance requirements. 

Question 4. Can any of these groups veto the creation or implementation of a noninteroperable or less-than-ideal system in either department. 

Response. The JEC is the senior executive managing authority for achieving interoperability. Per the legislative mandate established by Section 1635 of the 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, the IPO was established to provide management 

oversight of the implementation plan to achieve interoperability. The IPO is organizationally aligned under the umbrella of the JEC. 

Question 5. What are the incentives to compliance with the IIP? 

Response. The Departments are committed to creating interoperable systems that 

support the individual business needs of both organizations. This strategy will improve patient care and ensure the seamless transition of military servicemembers 

from active to veteran status. The IIP is not an execution document for which the 

departments seek compliance. It is a strategy or blueprint that documents key long 

term initiatives that will contribute to VA/DOD information interoperability as defined by the clinical and administrative/business functional communities. 

Question 6. How many programs or systems currently exist within the DOD for 

capturing patient health data? Please provide a simple description of these systems. 

Response. To be provided by DOD. 

Question 7. How many programs or systems currently exist within the VA for capturing patient health data? 

51 

Response. Currently, VA uses VistA, which is our hospital information system. 

VistA consists of more than 100 modules, which are described in the soon-to-be released 2008 VistA monograph, a copy of which will be forwarded to the Committee 

by November 30, 2008. 

Question 8. I am concerned that the more interfaces and systems there are, the 

higher the potential to for failure and the harder it will be have seamless interoperability. After decades of independent pathways to electronic record keeping, I want 

to be certain that by allowing these two departments to continue to develop multiple 

systems we are not setting ourselves up for failure. I would like to know how we 

are making sure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated. 

Response. With respect to implementing Section 1635 of the NDAA and the IIP, 

VA/DOD have a joint plan to achieve interoperability, and are no longer engaging 

in unrelated activities for electronic record keeping. 

Question 9. I hope that we will soon arrive at the day when a servicemember can 

grow-up as a dependent in one service, join another service in adulthood, be deployed around the world, stationed across the country, retire, and have a record that 

he or she can view and that each doctor and facility along the way can have full 

access to without the involvement of paper records or the requirement of data 

dumping from one system to another. I believe our servicemembers and veterans deserve this kind of seamless treatment. We must be sure that we are creating a system that does not place a burden on the patient. 

Response. This is a goal to which the VA vigorously subscribes. Though a significant amount of work remains in the areas of data standards and terminology, the 

VA is at the forefront of efforts to accomplish this work. Within the IPP, the initiative to develop the nationwide health information network (NHIN) is targeted as a 

major step toward achieving this vision. Over time, as standards mature and EHR 

products implement those standards, the NHIN architecture will provide the framework within which a lifetime record will grow. 

Question 10. In this push to force these two huge agencies to work together and 

achieve parity in the area of electric health records, I am concerned that the ‘‘customer,’’ our veterans, the men and women of our Armed Forces, and all the families 

that rely on these health care systems might see a reduction in the quality of the 

service they are provided. What steps are being taken so that our effort to improve 

services to the ‘‘customer’’ does not do more harm than good? 

Response. VA has an extensive quality program that continually monitors the 

quality of care provided. VA is a leader in the delivery of quality care as exemplified 

by performance measures and by the results of the customer surveys that are conducted on a continual basis. 

VHA established an office that focuses on monitoring the safety of the systems 

in the health care and in application of usability principles and best practices to future development. The Information Technology Office of Patient Safety works closely 

with VHA’s National Center for Patient Safety and VA’s Office of Information Technology to ensure the technology that is introduced into health care promotes the 

safe delivery of care. 

Question 11. The ability to utilize non-military providers is especially important 

for veterans (who live far away from VA facilities), servicemembers with special 

needs children (who need expert care only available in the private sector), and 

servicemembers stationed more than 50 miles from treatment facilities (who are required to rely on the private sector). Secure portals that allow private doctors who 

accept TRICARE to access the VA/DOD health records system is essential for ensuring that our servicemembers, their families, and our veterans have the highest quality of care possible. Please explain the departments’ efforts to achieve interoperability with the private sector. 

Response. As part of the NHIN, VA/DOD are pursuing the ability of a servicemember or veteran to authorize the release of a standards-based ‘‘summary of care’’ 

electronic document to the provider/system of his or her choice. When privacy and 

security protections are in place within VA, it will be on the My HealtheVet personal health record web portal and the veteran will be able to elect to ‘‘send’’ the 

document to another personal health record. The veteran will also have the ability 

to authorize family, friends, providers, and advocates access to as little or much VA 

health and benefits information through the delegation feature. By becoming early 

participants in the NHIN, VA/DOD hopes to achieve interoperability with private 

sector providers. VA/DOD are working on ways to make data available from both 

electronic health records and personal health records as a standard document. It 

will also expect a return of data from private networks in standard. 

52 

Chairman AKAKA. Aloha and thank you so much for the presentation from your team. 

Let me call on Senator Wicker, who is here, for any statement 

or questions. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER F. WICKER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI 

Senator WICKER. I will waive an opening statement in lieu of listening to the testimony. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you, Senator Wicker. 

Let me call on Dr. Casscells for your presentation. 

STATEMENT OF S. WARD CASSCELLS, M.D., ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE; ACCOMPANIED BY CHARLES CAMPBELL, CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER, MILITARY HEALTH 

SYSTEM, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Dr. CASSCELLS. Mr. Chairman, Senator Burr, and Senator 

Wicker, thank you again for this opportunity to represent the Defense Department specifically in the capacity as Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs with our Chief Information Officer, Charles Campbell, to my right. 

Sir, I would like to ask that my written statement be submitted 

for the record—— 

Chairman AKAKA. Without objection, it will be included. 

Dr. CASSCELLS [continuing]. And I would like to just speak informally, if I may, and first say that we take no exception, no disagreement with the GAO testimony and certainly are appreciative 

of Dr. Kussman and Dr. Fletcher’s testimony and demonstration. 

I also want to acknowledge, sir, your term ‘‘glacial.’’ It is, in fact, 

an apt term for something that really began in 2001 and could 

have proceeded faster than it has. I think it is also worth acknowledging that Congressional guidance to the Veterans Department 

and the Department of Defense have been instrumental in getting 

us to work more closely together, and having been forced to do so, 

we found out we like it. In fact, Dr. Kussman and I spent almost 

all of yesterday together and now all of this morning. We have actually learned, I would have to say, more from the VA than they 

have from us, and that should also be acknowledged. 

But, we are in catch-up mode. We had lost our way a bit. We 

have, perhaps, too long been inclined to go with what the big contractors recommend, and more recently, we have empowered our 

clinicians, our practicing doctors, to take a more active role, and 

that is the Joint Clinical Integration Board that we have put together with the VA starting last May. 

In addition, sir, we have had tremendous guidance from HHS. 

The AHIC (American Health Information Community), has really 

taken the lead in setting these standards, including standards of 

interoperability that you asked about earlier of GAO and of Dr. 

Kussman. And indeed, the analogy, I think, is very apt that it 

doesn’t matter whether my e-mail is AOL and yours is Gmail. We 

can still communicate using standards. But, as you well can imagine, it is more complicated than that. 

53 

People frequently say to me, and they said it very loudly in a 

town hall that we had on our website a few months back, why don’t 

you just yank the system and replace it with this commercial system or that one? And my response is, you know, I am as frustrated 

sometimes with AHLTA as a military doctor, an Army Reserve doctor, and as a military patient. And I have worked with the systems 

at Harvard where I trained, and the University of Texas, and 

demo-ed the systems at the Cleveland Clinic, at Kaiser 

Permanente, and Mayo. And indeed, some of these commercial systems are simpler to use and simpler to learn. 

But, as you can imagine, we have unique requirements related 

to the war zones and related to the frequency and ferocity of the 

cyber security attacks on our system. So, our requirements are 

more demanding even than those of the average, say, Cleveland 

Clinic patient, for example. So, this has been a challenge for us. 

One of the things we have done is to recognize that the popularity of the CPRS VistA System used by the VA is a function of 

two things: first, the fact that the doctors were involved early on 

in the design; and, second, the graphical user interface—the way 

you look at it and can navigate it—is more intuitive. Mr. Campbell 

has now made it a priority to make AHLTA look like the CPRS 

VistA System. It has been very popular with the VA doctors. 

Another issue that I think is terribly important is that he is developing for the first time the watchdog capabilities to really hold 

our contractors as accountable as the soldiers, the sailors, the Marines, the taxpayers deserve. When you build an enormous enterprise and you have basically only one or two bidders, it becomes 

difficult to hold them to account in some ways. As a consequence, 

I want to applaud what Mr. Campbell has done in getting outside 

opinions, outside contractors to assess, with no possibility of their 

competing for the other business, how we are doing. So, like the 

GAO contract, having an independent contractor assess our work 

with the VA has been very helpful. 

And to my surprise, they did not come back and say, yank the 

whole system and replace it with a commercial system. They said, 

frankly, that is a bit dangerous to do that and it would be actually 

more billions in the end. So, the recommendation has been to continually upgrade these systems, both of which have, frankly, antiquated infrastructure and software basis—what I call convergent 

evolution—to grow them toward common standards, again, consistent with the Health and Human Services standards, which will 

be applicable in the private sector, as Senator Burr alluded to. 

So, this is our direction, sir. We recognize that an electronic 

health system will be legible, secure, and must be private. It must 

fail rarely, if ever. Ideally, it should be easy to learn and easy to 

use. 

We are getting there. We are not there. I used it this morning 

as a practicing doctor; and I actually had a visit with my doctor 

today, so I was on the other end of AHLTA, as a patient. I was 

pleased in asking my doctor, could you see my records from theater? He said, ‘‘Yes, I see you twisted your ankle in Iraq and you 

also had an operation on your elbow.’’ I said, thank heaven. I need 

to be able to say that today in my testimony. 

[Laughter.] 

54 

Dr. CASSCELLS. Because 2 years ago, sir, when I came back from 

Iraq as a doctor-soldier, my records did not come back with me. We 

used to load patients into the C–17s and give them a CD-ROM and 

paper copies of their chart, and we would roll them over on their 

side and put the chart under their hip. We would often write on 

the cast with a magic marker what had actually been done. These 

days are behind us now. Patients’ electronic records are preceding 

the patient to Landstuhl. They are viewable from the VA. I can see 

my own records as a patient in Iraq. 

With the acknowledgement that it has been glacial, sir, I would 

submit that we are making progress; and I do believe over the next 

5 years that we will have such a totally different system that we 

won’t even use the same name. I also would like to commit that 

by the end of next September—a year and a week from now—the 

deadline of the NDAA 2008, we will be fully interoperable in every 

sense that is important to the practicing doctor and to the patient. 

Sir, with that, I would like to thank you again for this opportunity to tell you about our progress and look forward to your questions and guidance. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Casscells follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. S. WARD CASSCELLS, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE (HEALTH AFFAIRS) AND MR. CHARLES CAMPBELL, MILITARY HEALTH SYSTEM, CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

INTRODUCTION

Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished committee, thank you for this 

opportunity to discuss the sharing of electronic health care information between the 

Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). We continue to make great strides in sharing electronic health care information—and have 

plans to do even more in the near future. 

Cooperation between DOD and VA in the area of health care information sharing 

is vital for effective management and efficient delivery of programs and benefits 

that our Nation’s Veterans and Servicemembers deserve. DOD recognizes Congressional concerns regarding the time it has taken the two Departments to establish 

the current level of interoperability. Let me assure you that DOD and VA share the 

ultimate goals of this and other Congressional bodies seeking to address the needs 

of the Nation’s heroes. We have been working together in earnest and have made 

significant progress in sharing electronic health care information since our first efforts in 2001. Today, I would like to provide a historical overview of our joint efforts, 

outline some of the initiatives that form the foundation for sharing efforts moving 

forward, offer some details regarding the draft DOD/VA Information Interoperability 

Plan, and discuss some other steps we have taken to accelerate initiatives to lead 

us to ‘‘full interoperability of personal health care information’’ by September 30, 

2009, as mandated in section 1635 of the National Defense Authorization Act for 

Fiscal Year 2008. 

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

DOD and VA began laying the foundation for interoperability in 2001 when our 

Departments first shared health care information electronically, and we have continually enhanced and expanded the types of information we share as well as the 

ways in which we share. At times it has not been an easy road, and there is always 

room for improvement in an effort as large and as crucial as this one. Nonetheless, 

DOD and VA have come a long way in the areas of health information technology, 

interoperability standards, and health care information sharing. By working together at the top levels of DOD and VA, we have established policies that enable 

each Department to address its unique requirements while also addressing requirements that we share. We have now taken this coordination and cooperation to new 

levels with oversight and governing bodies formed to ensure that our sharing efforts 

continue to move in the right direction at a pace that meets and, we hope, exceeds 

the expectations and needs of all our stakeholders. 

55 

THE FOUNDATION FOR INTEROPERABILITY

The foundation of current and future health care information sharing includes initiatives that have enhanced continuity of care for our patients, enabled our providers at the point of care to view health care information originating in the other 

Department’s electronic health record, and even provided real-time safety checks 

and alerts at some sites. 

Continuity of Care for Shared Patients 

For patients treated at both VA and DOD facilities, providers can view electronic 

health data from both Departments. The Departments anticipate the addition of 

family history and social history by the end of fiscal year 2008, all ‘‘essential’’ health 

data, as determined by a team of DOD and VA health care providers, will be immediately viewable by clinicians, at a DOD or VA facility as called for by the President’s Commission on Care for America’s Returning Wounded Warriors. Health data 

accessible by DOD and VA providers includes allergy information, outpatient medications, inpatient and outpatient laboratory results, radiology reports, demographic 

details, clinical notes, procedures, problem lists, and vital signs. In addition to those 

typical bits of health care information, DOD and VA exchange Pre- and Post-Deployment Health Assessments and Post-Deployment Health Reassessments as well as 

vital clinical data captured in the Theater of operations. Health care information 

from Theater includes inpatient notes, outpatient encounters, and ancillary clinical 

data, such as pharmacy data, allergies, laboratory results, and radiology reports. 

Exchanging this Theater clinical information is a significant accomplishment in our 

efforts to enhance continuity of care for Servicemembers returning from Iraq, Afghanistan, Kuwait, and other forward locations. 

DOD also now has an inpatient documentation system in use at 20 of its inpatient 

facilities, accounting for more than half of our inpatient beds, with plans to expand 

use of the current system to additional facilities in the next year. This capability 

is now in place at Landstuhl Regional Medical Center, which, as the primary receiving location for patients coming out of Theater, is a critical link in the electronic 

health care information chain. 

Drug-Drug and Drug-Allergy Interaction Checking 

Beyond having viewable data available, DOD and VA are also exchanging some 

data at the highest, most complex level of interoperability. Outpatient pharmacy 

and drug allergy data are now available in a standardized format for patients receiving treatment from both DOD and VA. This standardization enables our information systems to run vital safety checks. Drug-drug interaction and drug-allergy 

checks can now be run using data from both Departments, further enhancing patient safety. Currently, this capability is operational in the following seven locations: 

• William Beaumont Army Medical Center/El Paso VA Health Care System; 

• Eisenhower Army Medical Center/Augusta VA Medical Center; 

• Naval Hospital Pensacola/VA Gulf Coast Health Care System; 

• Madigan Army Medical Center/VA Puget Sound Health Care System; 

• Naval Health Clinic Great Lakes/North Chicago VA Medical Center; 

• Naval Hospital San Diego/VA San Diego Health Care System; and 

• Mike O’Callaghan Federal Hospital/VA Southern Nevada Health Care System. 

For this capability to work properly, the individual must have a record in the Defense Manpower Data Center/Defense Enrollment and Eligibility Reporting System 

(DEERS). More than 6 million veterans, primarily those who separated from Service 

prior to the establishment of DEERS, were added to the DEERS database this year. 

With that completed, DOD sent instructions that allow any DOD site to now utilize 

this capability of dug-drug and drug-allergy interaction checking. In addition, all 

DOD and VA facilities—not just those listed above—have access to the shared DOD 

and VA pharmacy and allergy data for a patient if that patient should present to 

their facility for care. To further expand the use of this functionality, DOD will 

begin implementation of an automated process for identifying patients receiving 

care at both DOD and VA so manual intervention for this level of data exchange 

is no longer necessary. 

Continuity of Care for Polytrauma Patients (Wounded Warriors) 

In response to the urgent need for VA providers at Polytrauma Centers to have 

as much information as possible on inpatients transferring to their care, DOD sends 

electronic health care information directly to the Polytrauma Centers. When providers determine that a severely wounded, injured, or ill patient should be transferred to a VA Polytrauma Center for care, DOD sends radiology images and 

scanned paper medical records electronically to the receiving facility. This effort 

56 

began in March 2007 with a pilot project, sharing information from one DOD facility 

to one VA Polytrauma Center, and quickly expanded to include the three primary 

DOD facilities treating incoming severely wounded warriors—Walter Reed Army 

Medical Center, National Naval Medical Center, and Brooke Army Medical Center— 

and the four level 1 VA Polytrauma Centers-Tampa, Richmond, Palo Alto, and Minneapolis. 

Separated Service Members (Potential VA Patients) 

More than 4 million former Servicemembers eligible for VA health care now have 

electronic health care information accessible to their new provider should they seek 

care at a VA facility. In 2001, DOD transmitted electronic health care information 

for Servicemembers who had separated since 1989. Monthly transfers of health care 

information for newly separated Servicemembers began in 2002 and continue today. 

Historical electronic health care information available to VA providers includes the 

following data elements: 

• Outpatient pharmacy data, laboratory and radiology results; • Inpatient laboratory and radiology results; • Allergy data; • Consult reports; • Admission, disposition, transfer data; • Standard ambulatory data record elements (including diagnosis and treating 

physician); • Pre- and post-deployment health assessments; and • Post-deployment health reassessments. 

When the former Servicemember presents to VA for care or evaluation, the VA provider can access this information from within the VA electronic health record. 

NATIONAL DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION ACT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2008

DOD and VA have worked hard to implement, enhance, and expand health care 

information sharing initiatives to support all of our beneficiaries since we first started sharing data in 2001. In the past couple of years, with evolving needs and technological advances, we have accelerated our collaborative efforts. Although DOD and 

VA both want to do whatever necessary to provide our beneficiaries with the best 

possible care, our Departments and our beneficiaries have benefited from muchneeded Congressional guidance and direction. We are grateful for your devotion to 

our beneficiaries, the Nation’s heroes, and your assistance in helping us find ways 

to enhance the care we can offer them. To that end, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008 has set a timeframe for reaching the goal of full information interoperability. The Act specifically calls for the establishment of a DOD/ 

VA Interagency Program Office whose function ‘‘shall be to implement, by not later 

than September 30, 2009, electronic health record systems or capabilities that allow 

for full interoperability of personal health care information.’’ To meet this deadline, 

DOD and VA have taken a number of key steps that will help us further accelerate 

our efforts to achieve interoperability, including drafting an Information Interoperability Plan. 

DOD/VA INFORMATION INTEROPERABILITY PLAN

The DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan serves as the strategic organizing 

framework for current and future information technology projects and information 

needs. The purpose of the Information Interoperability Plan is to guide DOD and 

VA leadership, policymakers, and information management and technology personnel in achieving the shared vision for DOD and VA health, personnel, and benefits information interoperability. The Plan discusses issues and opportunities for 

interoperability: what it involves, why we should care about it, and how it can be 

achieved. It explains the benefits for stakeholders; identifies the main issues that 

lie on the road to achievement; and provides an initiative-focused, problem-oriented, 

phased implementation schedule, though not all initiatives described in the Plan are 

funded. The Information Interoperability Plan specifically seeks to accomplish the 

following objectives: 

• Define VA and DOD strategic interoperability maturation and organizing 

framework; • Map the current and future health, administrative, and benefit information 

sharing through a problem-oriented approach to establish an interoperability roadmap; 

• Identify information capability gaps to guide future investment portfolio decisions and prioritization of initiatives and influence information technology design 

solutions; 

57 

• Set milestones to measure progress of near-, mid-, and long-term interoperability goals; and 

• Leverage the national standardization activities led by the Department of 

Health and Human Services to foster health care information sharing with the private sector. 

To realize our shared vision of information interoperability, the two Departments 

will leverage our current, robust information sharing programs and infrastructure 

to close remaining gaps in information coverage. We will expand upon existing initiatives and incrementally implement greater capabilities as determined by the 

health, benefits, and personnel communities and as technology advances. Wherever 

possible, our solutions will leverage harmonized interoperability standards recognized by the Secretary of Health and Human Services in an effort to ensure we do 

not create a sharing solution that will work between the DOD and VA but not with 

our private sector partners and other Federal agencies. The initiatives outlined in 

the Plan address the following constraints relating to the implementation of interoperable systems between DOD and VA: 

• Incompatible legacy computing and communications infrastructure. 

• Lack of a robust, joint architecture facilitating interagency data sharing; 

• Existing data in unstructured formats difficult to discover and access; 

• Undefined standards and maturing standards that are neither implemented nor 

robust; 

• Large amounts of existing data with limited documentation and non-standardized access mechanisms; 

• Workforce insufficiently trained regarding available information; 

• Shared information often not effectively integrated into the workflow of clinicians and administrators; 

• Different levels of policy and governance that vary based on organizational culture; 

• Resource availability, both manpower and dollars; 

• Contracting and acquisition policies and vehicles; and 

• Industry and market place divergence. 

In establishing this first version of the Information Interoperability Plan, the two 

Departments agreed to goals that fall in four main categories: continuity of care, 

benefits, infrastructure, and population health and research. Each of the 23 interoperability initiatives detailed in the Plan aligns with one of these four categories 

as shown in the following table. 

Initiatives to Achieve Our Shared Vision 

Image Sharing 

Inpatient Electronic Health Information 

Reserve Component Access to Electronic Health Information 

Enhancements to Health Information Exchange between Clinical Information Systems 

Clinical Case Management 

Psychological Health Treatment and Care Records 

Immunizations Records and History 

Integrated Personal Health Data with Patient Self-Assessment 

Nationwide Health Information Network 

Personalized Health care (Family History) 

Interagency Program Office 

Integration of Interagency Data Sharing into DOD and VA architectures 

Trusted Partnership and Communication Infrastructure 

Exposure History (Environmental and Occupational Hazards) 

Data marts to support Clinical Research, Quality, and Population Health Management 

Knowledge sharing for Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury 

e-Benefits Portal 

Disability Evaluation System 

Non-Clinical Case Management 

Pay Systems Enhancements 

Identity Management 

Federal Health Center Information Technology Support 

The DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan is an implementation roadmap of 

potential phased initiatives that will help the Departments achieve a shared vision. 

58 

The success of this roadmap will depend on many factors and will require collaboration at all levels of both Departments. The Plan is only the first step in the process. 

As we move forward, the continuing diligence of governing bodies and the functional 

and technical communities will be vital to identifying and bridging all information 

gaps. 

MEETING THE INTEROPERABILITY DEADLINE

Drafting the DOD/VA Information Interoperability Plan is one of several recent 

steps the Departments have taken to meet the deadline set forth in the National 

Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008. Other steps designed to accelerate 

sharing efforts include establishing the DOD/VA Interagency Program Office and 

the DOD/VA Joint Clinical Information Board. 

Interagency Program Office 

The Interagency Program Office was established in April 2008 to ‘‘act as a single 

point of accountability’’ for cross-organizational coordination and collaboration to 

support health, personnel, and benefits data sharing. This office will report progress 

to the DOD/VA Joint Executive Council and incorporate key milestones into the 

DOD/VA Joint Strategic Plan. The Interagency Program Office will be responsible 

for management and oversight but will not be the technical execution organization. 

It will help resolve conflicts in the DOD and VA sharing requirements for health, 

personnel, and benefits functional communities; ensure DOD and VA schedules are 

coordinated for technical execution of initiatives; assist in coordinating funding considerations; obtain input and concurrence of other DOD and VA stakeholders; and 

report to Congress on progress and plans. Technical execution remains in the appropriate DOD and VA offices using the established Departmental statutory and regulatory processes for acquisition, funding, management control, information assurance, and other execution actions, which are significantly different for each Department. 

Joint Clinical Information Board 

The Joint Clinical Information Board enables clinicians to have a direct voice in 

the prioritization of recommendations for DOD/VA interoperability initiatives. The 

Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Clinical and Program Policy and the 

Chief Patient Care Services Officer, Veterans Health Administration, serve as the 

lead functional proponents. The Board guides clinical priorities for what electronic 

health care information the Departments should share next and reviews planned 

clinical information system solutions for DOD/VA sharing to ensure alignment to 

clinical sharing priorities as defined by the Board. To support efforts to meet the 

September 2009 deadline, the Joint Clinical Information Board submitted recommendations to the Interagency Program Office and DOD/VA Health Executive 

Council Information Management/Information Technology Work Group in July 2008. 

The Board will refine and prioritize new requirements to ensure continued improvements in DOD/VA electronic health data sharing in a manner that supports clinicians in health care delivery. 

CONCLUSION

The initial movement toward interoperability was a struggle. In the past several 

years, however, the efforts of DOD and VA to share health care information have 

gained undeniable momentum. We continue to build on this momentum and a solid 

foundation of sharing initiatives as we move toward next September and the goal 

of full interoperability of health care information and beyond. The journey has been 

long and arduous and will not end when we achieve interoperability. Rather, our 

journey will continue as DOD and VA strive to enhance the care we provide for all 

of our beneficiaries. 

As always, we appreciate the insights, recommendations, and guidance of this 

Congressional committee. We are all working toward the same end—to provide the 

highest quality care for our Nation’s heroes, past and present—and we need to work 

together to achieve our goals as efficiently and effectively as possible. 

Thank you again for allowing us the opportunity to appear before you and testify 

about DOD/VA electronic health care information sharing achievements, goals, and 

plans. 

59 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA TO DR. S. WARD CASSCELLS, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Question 1. Doctors Kussman and Casscells, I understand that currently 65 percent of the care provided by DOD and 40 percent of the care provided by VA is purchased from the private sector. Only 9 percent of the physicians in private outpatient practice use electronic medical records. How will you overcome this reality 

and ensure the medical information from this care is included in the servicemembers/veterans electronic health record? 

Response. DOD fully supports efforts to exchange health information with the private sector to ensure medical information is included in the Servicemember’s longitudinal health record. In fiscal year 2009, DOD will provide an image scanning capability to enable DOD to scan information from the Managed Care Support Contractors (MCSCs), such as a Specialty Care Consultants, so it is available to DOD 

providers. The private sector continues to mature in its use of electronic documentation and DOD is committed to private sector health information exchange coordinated through the Office of the National Coordinator (ONC), Health and Human 

Services (HHS). Specifically, DOD, VA, and the ONC are active partners with other 

Federal agencies and private health care organizations deploying and expanding 

HHS’s National Health Information Network (NHIN). The NHIN private health 

care participants currently include over 20 organizations geographically located 

across the continental United States. Utilizing nationally recognized standards, 

DOD and VA recently successfully tested the exchange of health records with these 

entities and between each other. DOD plans on using the NHIN as the communication device with our MCSCs in future years. 

Question 2. Doctors Kussman and Casscells, I believe we all can agree that VA 

currently has a world class inpatient electronic health records system. My question 

for the both of you is, what impact would the development of a new joint DOD and 

VA inpatient health records system have on VA’s current system? 

Response. The DOD defers to the VA regarding this question. 

Question 3. Doctors Kussman and Casscells, as a result of merging the Great 

Lakes Naval Hospital and the North Chicago VA Medical Center in 2010, the number of shared DOD and VA patients will increase roughly fivefold from 18,000 to 

100,000. Isn’t this the real test of DOD/VA interoperability? And how are we doing 

to ensure that it works? 

Response. We do not anticipate the increase in shared patients to be an issue. The 

DOD and VA have teamed on information sharing initiatives since 2000 and currently share a significant amount of health information today. However, the North 

Chicago Federal Health Care Center (FHCC) initiative is very different from previous DOD/VA sharing efforts due to the challenges of addressing local information 

sharing requirements as a combined facility treating both DOD and VA beneficiaries. To ensure success, DOD/VA will continue to work with local and enterprise 

teams to address the highest priority needs and ensure FHCC is successful. 

Question 4. Dr. Casscells, I understand from recent news reports that DOD is actively pursuing alternatives to its current electronic health records system. Will the 

problems you have identified with DOD’s current electronic health record system affect DOD and VA’s ability to share data in the near- or long-term? 

Response. DOD is pursuing enhancements to AHLTA, not replacement of AHLTA. 

DOD does not anticipate upcoming AHLTA-related enhancements will adversely impact DOD/VA information interoperability goals and objectives. We anticipate that 

the proposed architecture and usability improvements will continue to support DOD/ 

VA sharing initiatives. The Department fully recognizes the importance of DOD/VA 

electronic health information sharing and is including these requirements in the 

AHLTA improvement and modernization efforts. 

Question 5. Doctors Kussman and Cassells, I understand electronic health records 

for Reserve soldiers are less than complete. How do we address the issue of establishing a comprehensive electronic health record for these part-time soldiers? 

Response. The health care provided to the Reserve/Guard when they are deployed 

with the active duty forces are documented in AHLTA. If the Reserve/Guard soldier 

receives care in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) post-deployment, the Department of Defense (DOD) is able to access that data. For care received in the private sector, in fiscal year 2009, DOD will provide an image scanning capability to 

enable DOD to scan information from the Managed Care Support Contractors 

(MCSCs), such as Specialty Care Consultants, so it is available to DOD providers. 

DOD, VA, and the Office of the National Coordinator (ONC), Health and Human 

Services (HHS), are active partners with other Federal agencies and private health 

60 

care organizations deploying and expanding HHS’s National Health Information 

Network (NHIN). The NHIN private health care participants currently include over 

20 organizations geographically located across the continental United States. Utilizing nationally recognized standards, DOD and VA recently successfully tested the 

exchange of health records with these entities and between each other. DOD plans 

on using the NHIN as the communication device with our MCSCs in future years. 

Question 6. Dr. Casscells, I have been told that DOD has objected strongly to language in the 2009 Defense Authorization bill that would require the Departments 

to be interoperable with their transaction partners. I understand this to mean that 

the DOD and VA electronic health record systems must maintain the flexibility to 

achieve interoperability with other government agencies and private care providers 

in the future. Please discuss your position on the importance of future interoperability with potential transaction partners. 

Response. The DOD fully supports interoperability with other Federal agencies 

and our transaction partners. The Department is firmly committed to working with 

the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) through the Office of the National Coordinator (ONC) to actively collaborate on and advance the development, 

adoption, and implementation of health information technology and standards. The 

Department continues to actively support the efforts of the ONC. The Department 

representatives contribute to ONC’s Health Information Technology Policy Council, 

Federal Health Architecture Managing and Lead Partners Council and Leadership 

Council, and Health Information Technology Standards Panel initiatives. 

Currently, DOD is engaged in several initiatives to explore alternative solutions 

to electronic information sharing with transaction partners. DOD and Microsoft are 

exploring the use of the Health Vault application as one possible solution that would 

allow those who receive care via contract providers to store and organize their 

health information and then share that information with trusted entities such as 

physicians and hospitals. Pilot studies are underway in Pensacola, Florida and 

Spartanburg, South Carolina and as part of the National Health Information Network Trial Implementation to examine the feasibility of sharing clinical data from 

DOD medical facilities with non-Federal partners. 

Question 7. Dr. Casscells, I understand from recent news reports that DOD is actively pursuing alternatives to its current electronic health records system. Will the 

problems you have identified with DOD’s current electronic health record system affect DOD and VA’s ability to share data in the near- or long-term? 

Response. DOD is pursuing enhancements to AHLTA, not replacement of AHLTA. 

DOD does not anticipate upcoming AHLTA-related enhancements will adversely impact DOD/VA information interoperability goals and objectives. We anticipate that 

the proposed architecture and usability improvements will continue to support DOD/ 

VA sharing initiatives. The Department fully recognizes the importance of DOD/VA 

electronic health information sharing and is including these requirements in the 

AHLTA improvement and modernization efforts. 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. PATTY MURRAY TO DR. S. 

WARD CASSCELLS, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Question 8. If access control alone will not insure the security of the core database 

information, what steps have been taken by the VA to protect the integrity of the 

core information once it has been accessed? 

Response. The Department of Defense defers to the VA regarding the answer to 

this question. 

Question 9. Has the VA considered augmenting the encryption access with standalone security within the database that would force compliance with policy and procedures as a self governing action embedded into the very content that is being protected? 

Response. The Department of Defense defers to the VA regarding the response to 

this question. 

Question 10. Would the VA consider the combination of Encryption and ‘‘self governing content’’ to create a total security protocol? 

Response. The Department of Defense defers to the VA regarding the response to 

this question. 

61 

RESPONSES TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. ROGER F. WICKER TO DR. S. WARD CASSCELLS, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR HEALTH AFFAIRS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Question 11. Please provide for the committee an overview of the decisionmaking 

and governance structure currently employed by and scheduled to be used by the 

departments with regard to health information technology. 

Response. The Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA) health information technology initiatives are jointly governed at the highest 

levels of the Departments. The DOD/VA Joint Executive Council (JEC), co-chaired 

by the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and the Deputy Secretary of VA, is comprised of senior leaders from DOD and VA. The JEC was chartered to enhance VA and DOD information sharing and collaboration activities, to 

ensure the efficient use of Federal services and resources, and to identify opportunities such as policy, operations, and capital planning to advance seamless transition 

initiatives. The JEC provides leadership oversight of the Health Executive Council 

(HEC) and Benefits Executive Council (BEC), and all other councils or work groups 

designated by the co-chairs. Through a joint strategic planning process, the JEC 

makes recommendations to the Secretaries regarding the strategic direction for the 

joint coordination and sharing efforts between the agencies and oversees the implementation and progress of those efforts through the DOD/VA Joint Strategic Plan 

(JSP). 

The DOD/VA HEC (HEC), co-chaired by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for 

Health Affairs and VA Under Secretary for Health, was created to establish a highlevel program of interagency cooperation and coordination in a joint effort to improve health care and reduce costs for DOD and VA beneficiaries. The HEC is responsible for identifying changes in health care-related policies, procedures, and 

practices and assessing further opportunities for the coordination and sharing of 

health-related services and resources 

The DOD/VA BEC is co-chaired by the DOD’s Principal Deputy Under Secretary 

of Defense for Personnel and Readiness and VA’s Under Secretary for Benefits. The 

BEC collaborates on initiatives to expand and improve information sharing, refine 

the process of records retrieval, and identify procedures to improve the benefits 

claims process. 

Since 2003, the VA/DOD JSP has served as a roadmap for the JEC and its subcouncils to guide the implementation of the goals and objectives related to sharing 

data and improving care and benefits administration for beneficiaries. The JSP articulates a vision for collaboration, establishes priorities for partnering, launches 

processes to implement interagency policy decisions, develops joint operation guidelines, and institutes performance monitoring to track the Departments’ progress in 

meeting the specific goals and objectives defined in the plan. 

Under the leadership of the JEC and the clear goals contained in the JSP, DOD, 

and VA have realized success in meeting JSP health data sharing milestones in fiscal year 2008. 

The HEC Information Management/Information Technology (IM/IT) Work Group, 

co-chaired by the Chief Information Officers (CIOs) of the Military Health System 

and Veterans Health Administration, maintains day-to-day responsibility for health 

data sharing and electronic health record interoperability initiatives. The HEC IM/ 

IT Work Group was established to ensure that appropriate beneficiary and medical 

data is visible, accessible, and understandable through secure and interoperable information management systems. 

The Wounded, Ill, and Injured Senior Oversight Committee (SOC), co-chaired by 

the Deputy Secretary of Defense and the Deputy Secretary of Veterans Affairs, directly engages senior military and civilian officials to ensure interagency collaboration to effectively respond to the recommendations of the various commissions and 

review groups looking at wounded warrior issues to include: the Task Force on Returning Global War on Terror Heroes; the Independent Review Group on Rehabilitative Care and Administrative Processes at Walter Reed Army Medical Center and 

National Naval Medical Center; the President’s Commission on Care for America’s 

Returning Wounded Warriors; the DOD Task Force on Mental Health; and the Veterans’ Disability Benefits Commission. Underneath the SOC, DOD and VA organized several Lines of Actions, with one specifically focused on data sharing. 

In April 2008, the Departments established the DOD/VA Interagency Program Office to provide direct operational oversight and management of electronic health 

record interoperability initiatives and ensure compliance with jointly coordinated, 

prioritized, and approved DOD/VA requirements. Additionally, the DOD/VA Interagency Clinical Informatics Board (ICIB) was established to enable clinicians to 

have a direct voice in the prioritization of recommendations for DOD/VA interoperVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:59 Feb 19, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\PS41451\DOCS\44649.TXT SVETS PsN: PAULIN
62 

ability initiatives. The ICIB is a DOD/VA clinician-led group with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Clinical and Program Policy and the Veterans 

Health Administration’s Chief Patient Care Services Officer as proponents. The 

ICIB guides clinical priorities for what electronic health information the Departments should share next. 

Question 12. Are these structures capable of enforcing the timelines presented in 

the IIP? 

Response. Yes, these structures are capable of ensuring the items that have been 

jointly approved, funded, and schedules are met. The Department of Defense (DOD) 

and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) IIP is a ‘‘vision’’ document, not an ‘‘execution’’ document. Not all initiatives described in Appendix D of the IIP are approved 

and funded. 

The IIP is not an execution plan, but rather, a roadmap that the two Departments 

will follow to improve interoperability. It establishes an organizing framework for 

dialog and strategic direction between the Departments’ senior leadership. As such, 

the initiatives described in the IIP project an overall direction with incremental targets. It provides a mechanism to guide prioritization discussions and enables technologists to propose potential solutions to incrementally enhance interoperability. 

Some targets will not have fully defined technical approaches, nor will some be 

funded. However, the document provides the pathway for facilitating the decisionmaking process to fully define the incremental technical solutions; identify the 

amount and source of funds required to implement those solutions; and, in turn, 

codify them in execution of project plans. 

Question 13. What mechanisms are available to these groups to enforce the IIP? 

Response. The items in the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) IIP that have been approved and funded are incorporated into 

the DOD/VA Joint Strategic Plan. The DOD/VA Joint Executive Council provides 

the necessary leadership oversight over the Health Executive Council, Benefits Executive Council, and all other councils and work groups responsible for the implementation and progress of the DOD/VA Joint Strategic Plan (JSP). The scope of 

these responsibilities includes oversight of JSP performance measures and associated project timelines. The DOD/VA Interagency Program Office, established April 

17, 2008, provides joint management and oversight for the IIP to help ensure the 

agencies meet interoperability compliance requirements. 

Question 14. Can any of these groups veto the creation or implementation of a 

non-interoperable or less-than-ideal system in either department? 

Response. The Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA) senior leadership and supporting councils and work groups are charged with 

the responsibility and authority to ensure compliance with DOD/VA information 

sharing policies and guidance, plans, and agreements to improve health care benefits and services. Based on the established governance structure, multiple levels of 

oversight have been put in place to ensure the development and implementation of 

interoperable health care information sharing capabilities. 

The DOD/VA Interagency Clinical Informatics Board (ICIB), established in May 

2008, ensures clinicians have a direct voice in the prioritization of recommendations 

for DOD/VA interoperability initiatives. The ICIB is responsible for identifying the 

essential health information that will be shared between the DOD/VA and reviewing 

all joint clinical information system solutions prior to development to ensure alignment with clinical information sharing priorities. 

These governance, oversight, and management mechanisms will help to ensure 

compliance with joint interoperability requirements. 

Question 15. What are the incentives to compliance with the IIP? 

Response. The Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs 

(VA) are fully committed to continuing efforts to improve and expand information 

sharing capabilities to enhance health care delivery and continuity of care for 

shared patients. The DOD/VA Joint Executive Council Strategic Plan provides the 

necessary strategic goals, objectives, strategies, and their corresponding performance measures that will help ensure the Departments meet DOD/VA electronic data 

sharing requirements, including those from the DOD/VA IIP that have been approved and funded. 

The DOD/VA Interagency Program Office, which was established on April 17, 

2008, provides joint management and oversight for the IIP to help ensure the agencies continue to focus on further enhancing electronic data sharing to meet the requirements of the Departments. 

The DOD/VA Interagency Clinical Informatics Board (ICIB), established in May 

2008, ensures clinicians have a direct voice in the prioritization of recommendations 

for DOD/VA health interoperability initiatives. The ICIB is responsible for identiVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:59 Feb 19, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\PS41451\DOCS\44649.TXT SVETS PsN: PAULIN
63 

fying and prioritizing the essential health information that will be shared between 

DOD/VA. 

Question 16. How many programs or systems currently exist within the DOD for 

capturing patient health data? Please provide a simple description of these systems. 

Response. The DOD provides three key capabilities, AHLTA, AHLTA-Theater 

(AHLTA-T), and Essentris, to capture outpatient and inpatient health care information. 

AHLTA is the military’s electronic health record (EHR), an enterprise-wide medical and dental clinical information system. AHLTA generates, maintains, stores, 

and provides secure online access to comprehensive patient records. This EHR 

began worldwide deployment in January 2004 and is becoming a key enabler to 

military medical readiness. It supports uniform, high-quality health promotion and 

health care delivery to more than 9.2 million Military Health System (MHS) beneficiaries. In response to health care provider feedback, the MHS is upgrading 

AHLTA to improve the clinical encounter documentation process and provide userrequested functional capabilities. Several of these enhancements are designed to improve health care provider workflow processes and minimize the time required to 

document clinical encounters. 

AHLTA-T, which is operational in Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan, collects and 

transfers inpatient and outpatient encounters to the Theater Medical Data Store. 

Outpatient encounters are then transferred to the AHLTA Clinical Data Repository 

for use in AHLTA worldwide, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. AHLTA-T also provides DOD and the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with online access to inpatient and outpatient theater medical information. 

Essentris, DOD’s inpatient documentation capability, is operational at 18 medical 

treatment facilities representing 47 percent of DOD’s inpatient workload. Fiscal 

year (FY) 2009 plans target expanding to 80 percent of DOD’s inpatient workload. 

Currently, discharge summary data is shared with the VA. Additional inpatient 

data has also been made available to VA. In fiscal year 2009, VA will expand their 

ability to see this data at their facilities. DOD and VA recently completed a study 

to determine prioritized recommendations and potential technical solutions for inpatient EHRs. These efforts have been extended through December 2008 to support 

development of a DOD/VA inpatient EHR concept of operations, common services 

framework, and action plan. 

Question 17. How many programs or systems currently exist within the VA for 

capturing patient health data? 

Response. The Department of Defense respectfully defers to the VA regarding the 

response to this question. 

Question 18. I am concerned that the more interfaces and systems there are, the 

higher the potential to for failure and the harder it will be have seamless interoperability. After decades of independent pathways to electronic record keeping, I want 

to be certain that by allowing these two departments to continue to develop multiple 

systems we are not setting ourselves up for failure. I would like to know how we 

are making sure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated. 

Response. Over the past few years, the Department of Defense (DOD) and Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) have made significant progress in sharing electronic 

health care information. DOD/VA senior leadership, governance structures, and supporting councils and workgroups are fully committed to providing secure, reliable, 

and interoperable information sharing capabilities to enhance health care delivery 

and continuity of care for shared patients. The current DOD/VA electronic medical 

records, usage of these records, and health information exchange capabilities function around the globe and are well ahead of those of the private sector, enabling 

the exchange of legible, accurate, and relevant electronic health information when 

and where needed. 

Question 19. I hope that we will soon arrive at the day when a servicemember 

can grow-up as a dependent in one service, join another service in adulthood, be deployed around the world, stationed across the country, retire, and have a record that 

he or she can view and that each doctor and facility along the way can have full 

access to without the involvement of paper records or the requirement of data 

dumping from one system to another. I believe our servicemembers and veterans deserve this kind of seamless treatment. We must be sure that we are creating a system that does not place a burden on the patient. 

Response. The Department of Defense (DOD) is fully committed to enhancing and 

expanding health information sharing capabilities that will improve the delivery 

and continuity of health care services. We believe that a number of key and significant initiatives have ensured the continued advancement of DOD and Department 

of Veterans Affairs (VA) information sharing efforts to benefit the continuity of care 

64 

for our patients. The DOD/VA Joint Executive Council and supporting governance 

structure provide the senior leadership and oversight necessary to ensure we 

achieve the goals and objectives of the DOD/VA Joint Strategic Plan. 

The DOD/VA Interagency Program Office, which was established April 17, 2008, 

provides joint management and oversight for the Information Interoperability Plan 

(IIP) to help ensure the agencies continue to focus on further enhancing electronic 

data sharing to meet the requirements of the Departments. The DOD/VA Interagency Clinical Informatics Board (ICIB), established in May 2008, ensures clinicians have a direct voice in the prioritization of recommendations for DOD/VA 

health interoperability initiatives. The ICIB is responsible for identifying and 

prioritizing the essential health information that will be shared between DOD/VA. 

DOD is fully committed to working with the Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS) through the Office of the National Coordinator (ONC) to help advance national health information sharing capabilities. For example, DOD is currently engaged in several initiatives to explore alternative solutions for sharing 

health information with the private sector. Pilot studies are underway in Pensacola, 

Florida and Spartanburg, South Carolina, to examine the feasibility of sharing clinical information between DOD medical facilities and non-Federal partners. DOD 

and Microsoft are exploring the use of the Health Vault application as one possible 

solution that would allow those who receive care via contract providers to store and 

organize their health information and then share that information trusted entities 

such as physicians and hospitals. 

Question 20. In this push to force these two huge agencies to work together and 

achieve parity in the area of electronic health records, I am concerned that the ‘‘customer’’, our veterans, the men and women of our Armed Forces, and all the families 

that rely on these health care systems might see a reduction in the quality of the 

service they are provided. What steps are being taken so that our effort to improve 

services to the ‘‘customer’’ does not do more harm than good? 

Response. The health care customers served by the Department of Defense (DOD) 

represent a large, varied, and mobile population. The use of electronic health 

records provide this customer base with health records that are legible, available 

worldwide, accessible by multiple providers simultaneously and are available 24 

hours a day, 7 days a week. In post-disaster situations such as hurricanes, beneficiaries with electronic health records have been able to recover their health histories and have been able to have needed prescriptions renewed or refilled 

seamlessly due to our worldwide accessibility to the electronic health record, regardless of where the care was originally delivered. Often, prescriptions have been filled 

at locations far removed from the beneficiaries’ home location. Further interoperability between DOD and Department of Veterans Affairs systems will continue to 

support improved care to our ‘‘customers.’’ 

In response to health care provider feedback, DOD is enhancing AHLTA to improve the clinical encounter documentation and workflow process and provide the 

necessary architecture to ensure overall performance and stability. 

Question 21. The ability to utilize non-military providers is especially important 

for veterans (who live far away from VA facilities), servicemembers with special 

needs children (who need expert care only available in the private sector), and 

servicemembers stationed more than 50 miles from treatment facilities (who are required to rely on the private sector). Secure portals that allow private doctors who 

accept TRICARE to access the DOD/VA health records system is essential for ensuring that our servicemembers, their families, and our veterans have the highest quality of care possible. Please explain the departments’ efforts to achieve interoperability with the private sector. 

Response. DOD fully supports efforts to exchange health information with the private sector to ensure medical information is included in the Servicemember’s longitudinal health record. In fiscal year 2009, DOD will provide an image scanning capability to enable DOD to scan information from the Managed Care Support Contractors, such as Specialty Care Consultants, so it is available to DOD providers. 

For the long term, DOD will continue to support Department of Health and Human 

Services efforts to foster health information sharing with the private sector. DOD 

is engaged in initiatives to explore alternative solutions to electronic information 

sharing with the private sector. DOD/VA support Nationwide Health Information 

Network (NHIN) ‘‘pilot projects’’ to leverage recognized interoperability standards 

and promote the exchange of health information with private health care organizations and provider networks. Projects are underway in Pensacola, Florida and 

Spartanburg, South Carolina and are part of the NHIN Trial Implementation to examine the feasibility of sharing clinical data from DOD medical facilities with nonFederal partners. DOD and Microsoft are exploring the use of the Health Vault apVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:59 Feb 19, 2009 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 H:\PS41451\DOCS\44649.TXT SVETS PsN: PAULIN
65 

plication as one possible solution that would allow those who receive care via contract providers to store and organize their health information and then share that 

information with trusted entities such as physicians and hospitals. These efforts will 

help to ensure the capture of private sector health care information and enhance 

the overall quality of DOD’s longitudinal health record. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you very much, Dr. Casscells. 

Let me ask my good friend, Senator Burr, for his questions of 

this panel. 

Senator BURR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a scheduling 

problem, so I will be brief, and I thank the Chair for letting me 

go first. 

Doctors, both, thank you, and to the complement of folks who 

surround you and to the other individuals that I know are involved 

in this project, we are extremely pleased with the progress that has 

been made. I will summarize what I take from GAO: some 

progress, much left to do. I think we probably all agree with that— 

it lacks clarity of plan and time line. Agreements at the highest 

level needs to come down the chain. That is where I might disagree 

with them. 

I grabbed this document, DOD/VA Information Interoperability 

Plan. I have had the opportunity to browse through it. I won’t tell 

you that I understand everything from it, but, I want to point out 

a few things that are stated or included in this. 

In the Executive Summary, it says the Information Interoperability Plan identifies more than 20 initiatives that close the remaining gaps in information sharing and allows us to achieve a 

shared vision of information interoperability. 

Down further, it says the document is formed from a recent comprehensive analysis of interdepartmental information sharing. Not 

all defined initiatives are currently funded programs, something 

sometimes we forget about. Independent of resource constraints, 

implementation target milestones are identified based upon their 

expected value as determined by the functional committees and the 

feasibility of their implementation. 

It goes on to say, the plan has been approved by the line of action co-leads, submitted to the Wounded Three, I think it is, and 

Injured Senior Oversight Committee’s overarching integrated product team—that must have been a Defense piece—— 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BURR [continuing]. And subsequently its implementation 

will be overseen by DOD and VA governance structure of the Joint 

Executive Council, Benefits Executive Council, and the Health Executive Council. This plan serves as the strategic organizing framework for current and future work to set the scope and milestones 

necessary to measure progress toward intermediate goals and a 

target state needed to continuously improve service to veterans and 

members of our Armed Forces. 

I am not sure if GAO read that part, and I am not sure if they 

actually looked at this document. If they did, I am not sure that 

there would have been a blanket implication that: one, there was 

lack of clarity of a plan; or, two, that there weren’t time lines. I 

turn to, out of Appendix B, page 24, where there clearly are milestones and plans. I think it is laid out for all members to look at. 

I don’t disagree with you, Dr. Casscells. For a period from 2001, 

there was a pitiful effort put toward what I think the private sector 

66 

was still looking at trying to decide whether they wanted to do or 

not. So it is not without understanding that I look at a reluctant 

DOD at participation with VA. I think had the partner been anybody, there would have been a reluctance on the part of DOD. 

But, clearly, today there is a plan. It has clarity. It has time 

lines. 

And then, I went not too far back in the book and I found Appendix D. Appendix D is 21 areas: Information sharing, inpatient electronic health information, Reserve component access to electronic 

health information—I won’t read them all—personalized health 

care, Interagency Program Office, interagency data sharing architecture, benefits portal, Disability Evaluation System. That is really the meat of the rest of the report. It is the specifics on each of 

those 20 or 21 areas: about how you get there, how you go from 

here to there. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I really don’t have questions. I have a statement, and that statement is what we have done in the last 12 

months is working. What has changed in my estimation is you 

have the heads who both agree where we go. What I don’t think 

GAO understood was, I think, there is not only an exchange of 

ideas, but there is an active effort underneath those heads to implement what the heads have agreed to. It is not limited to the top 

of the chart. But, the top of the chart for the first time is in agreement, even though from 2001 to a year ago, I think people underneath the top were trying to figure out how they could incrementally talk to each other and share information. Without the buy-in 

at the top, it was impossible, because you would always get caught 

short with the resources needed to implement even the easy 

things—the things that you were just merely replicating from the 

private sector. 

So, this is not an endorsement that we are there. This is an endorsement that I think we have made tremendous progress in the 

last 12 months. I think the next 12 months are going to be extremely challenging and I, for one, now know exactly which chart 

I am going to look at to try to figure out, month by month, almost, 

if we are hitting the time lines that are set for us. 

The demonstration we went through is impressive and the fact 

is, I have sat at Womack Hospital. I have seen the troops come in. 

I have seen the packet of information with their health records. I 

have seen as they entered Womack the fact that it still went—and 

this is over a year ago, so don’t hold me to it—that it still went 

into a paper form versus an electronic form. Yet the individuals 

that I saw were definitely individuals that in the near future were 

going to be discharged and be the recipient of the VA system. A 

lack of acknowledgement at that period that it was even important 

to get the records in a form that could be defined as seamless. 

I think, not only is the plan designed in a way that the end result is seamless, I think the progress that we have made gives me 

tremendous optimism that we can come extremely close, if not 

across the goal line, with the target of 2009. So, I commend you 

for what you have done. I encourage you to continue to do what you 

are doing. 

And I hope that next time we get together on this, that truly we 

can hold this up as a model not just for two Federal agencies, but 

67 

actually something that I personally think the private sector will 

see as an endorsement as to why the private sector needs to have 

the capabilities of sharing medical data from doctor to doctor, from 

facility to facility, from rural health clinic to the hospital, because 

the overall result of that is a lower cost for the delivery of health 

care and for a better outcome for the patient. I have got to think 

that somewhere in this packet of information, those are probably 

the two things that are the foundation of why you are doing what 

you are doing. Clearly, it is to make sure that the outcome is as 

optimal for the patient, for the warrior, as it possibly can be. 

I thank all of you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you very much, Senator Burr, for your 

views here. 

Before I call on Senator Murray, let me address Dr. Kussman 

and Dr. Casscells. The slow progress made by VA and DOD in fully 

sharing electronic medical information led Congress to mandate the 

September 2009 deadline. However, in a report sent to Congress 

this past April, the Departments appeared to already be backing 

away from the deadline. Now, my question to you in follow-up to 

this view is, is this an accurate assessment or do you believe that 

you will meet the deadline? Dr. Kussman? 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Mr. Chairman, I think that as even GAO commented on, and what both Dr. Casscells and I have commented on, 

that again, part of it is the determination and definition of interoperability. We believe that through the Joint Clinical Information 

Board that we have established, where physicians and clinicians on 

both sides establish what they think they need for interoperability 

to take care of patients, which is, after all, the goal here—there are 

always going to be some challenges as we move forward. But, we 

believe that to a large degree, as Dr. Fletcher already showed you, 

there is a tremendous amount of interoperability; and that the gaps 

that still exist, we have a plan to get those done by the end of September 2009. So, I feel very confident, as Dr. Casscells has mentioned, that we will have clinical interoperability by the end of September 2009. 

Let me just add to that the fact that we are very appreciative 

of what we have done. I always use the term ‘‘glacial,’’ as well, Mr. 

Chairman, on a lot of the things that happen. But, over the last 

couple of years, with the commitment of Dr. Casscells, myself, and 

the two Secretaries, that there is clearly a tremendous emphasis 

from the leadership to get this done and get it done right. I believe 

with the other people who are sitting here with us, we have made 

a tectonic shift or a quantum leap to where we are. 

It is not perfect yet. We have things that we need to do and will 

continue to do them. Because a lot of the strategic plan is a work 

in progress, we will learn more things and we will evolve what we 

are doing. But, I believe we—practically, from day to day—have 

made huge strides in making sure that the most deserving patients 

in the world—people who are hurt in defense of their country—do 

not suffer in any way by a lack of information flow. 

Chairman AKAKA. Dr. Casscells? 

Dr. CASSCELLS. Mr. Chairman, Senator Murray, by the end of 

September next year, we will add to the current bidirectional 

health information exchange the remaining major pieces—family 

68 

history, social history, and so forth—because we already are exchanging the problem lists, the clinical notes, the radiology reports, 

the lab reports, the pharmacy data, the allergies, the operative 

notes. So, we will have all the basic clinical information that the 

doctors and the patients want. 

In parallel to this, of course, we have some other things going on. 

We are rolling out the inpatient record, which is, in our case, a 

commercial off-the-shelf product, as at least an interim step so that 

we, too, have an inpatient electronic record. This one is called 

Essentris. We are also rolling out AHLTA Version 3.3 and we will 

be offering at the end of this calendar year web-based personal 

health records, which patients can use in a secure and confidential 

private way as their own backup. 

So, we are doing several things at the same time, and yet I am 

confident that we will—one year from today plus a week—have all 

the real-time exchange that any clinical doctor or patient would 

want. So, they could say, it doesn’t matter whether I am seen today 

at the VA or at Walter Reed or Brooke Army Medical Center. Some 

patients do go back and forth. 

I can not promise yet that we will have interoperability a year 

from now with the average civilian hospital. I would say that yesterday’s demonstration at HHS was very, very successful, and that 

is coming along faster than I had hoped. 

We will, I think, have interoperability with many of the major civilian hospitals, as well, over the next year. But the key one is the 

DOD/VA transition and bidirectional. That, we will have a year 

from now. 

Chairman AKAKA. I have questions to ask, but let me pass it on 

to Senator Murray and ask for her statement and questions. 

STATEMENT OF HON. PATTY MURRAY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator MURRAY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for being late. There is a lot going on. We are working our way 

through here. 

I was interested because I did see the discrepancy between the 

Defense Authorization Bill time line of a year from now and several 

of the time lines that were included in the DOD/VA Information 

Interoperability Plan that were confusing to me because they were 

different. So, I think what you are saying, if I heard you correctly, 

is that you do expect the major parts of this to be done by next 

September, but as far as the civilian exchange, that will extend beyond next year? 

Dr. CASSCELLS. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator MURRAY. OK, and that is achievable? 

Dr. CASSCELLS. Yes. 

Senator MURRAY. OK, because I know that you don’t expect to 

have the Interagency Program Office that is tasked with overseeing 

this in place until the end of this year, so it just gives you 9 

months, and that time line is workable? 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Can I jump in here? 

Senator MURRAY. Sure. 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Sorry. Thank you, Senator Murray. The office has 

already been established and set up. We have acting people in 

69 

those positions. Mr. Freeman here is the Acting Deputy of that. So, 

it is not that the office hasn’t been established and nobody is doing 

anything, but we have been developing position descriptions and 

hiring people, and we believe that will be completed by the end of 

the calendar year. But the office is already up. Cliff, would you like 

to say something? 

Mr. FREEMAN. We have actually been doing this work for 4 or 5 

years, just out of different offices. So, from where I was detailed— 

the DOD/VA Health IT Sharing Office—much of the work that the 

IPO will do at a higher level was already being done. So, as we 

move forward and put the permanent staff in place—we have military staff in uniform detailed to us, we have contract staff accessible to us, and then a lot of the staff that were doing the work 

previously are still moving this forward. So, we do have in process 

reviews with some of the DOD/VA projects to make sure that they 

are making adequate progress as we move forward. 

Obviously, once we are fully stood up, it will be very powerful. 

We will have everybody we need at that point. We are making 

progress. We are moving forward. 

Senator MURRAY. OK. And the GAO testified that the definition 

of full interoperability is unclear. Can you comment on what that 

means for your efforts and how we should interpret that? 

Dr. KUSSMAN. As the GAO representative testified, is that it is 

partly a definitional term. 

Senator MURRAY. Right. 

Dr. KUSSMAN. If one looks at interoperability as a single system, 

you know, that is not practical and is not going to be achievable 

over this short period of time, if ever. We are talking about clinical 

interoperability that allows the important information flow to be 

sure that the patients get what they need as they transition; and 

we believe, and even the GAO person acknowledged, that we already have a tremendous amount of interoperability. And the question was, where will we be a year from now? And as you have 

heard, we are going to fill in the gaps about the social histories, 

the other things that we believe are valuable to the clinicians. 

What we have tried to do is have this interoperability driven by 

the people who are taking care of patients to determine what information really needs to be transferred. And we believe that we have 

already achieved a great deal, as the demonstration showed, but 

also have some ways to go. We expect by the end of September 

2009 we will have filled in those gaps. 

Senator MURRAY. Is anything being done to put in place a definition so we all are on the same page and know where we are going? 

Mr. FREEMAN. We used the Joint Clinical Information Board, 

which is a board composed of both VA and DOD clinicians, and for 

this milestone, we went through an inventory with them to review 

what was already available; and the question they were asked was, 

what, in addition to what you get now, do you need to provide quality care to patients across the VA/DOD continuum of care? They 

came back with five or six additional pieces of either data or interoperability that they needed to meet that definition of quality care. 

So, that was really the definition we have used to this point. 

Dr. TIBBITS. Maybe it would be useful to just interject here that 

the definition we are aiming for is a clinical definition. It is not a 

70 

technical or a computer definition. So, it is not all data or all real 

time or any of those technical terms. It is a clinical definition that 

we are after, which I think is what you are hearing described here. 

Senator MURRAY. OK. All right. And finally, just quickly, on the 

security issue, what are we doing to ensure that this information 

is secure? Is it encrypted? What are we—can you just give me a 

quick glimpse of that? 

Dr. TIBBITS. Well, let me—I am going to have to answer you in 

general terms. We are working very closely on both sides with our 

respective security experts. We are very aggressive in both Departments in enforcing security provisions. 

These information exchanges are no exception to any of those 

provisions, so on our side, for example, we have our points of contact that work very closely with DISA to make sure we meet the 

gateway specifications and all of those things to exchange the information. Where encryption is necessary, we either do it or will do 

it, if that turns out to be a necessity. We have certain monitoring 

devices on our laptops and what not to make sure inappropriate information is not sent inadvertently. 

There are a variety of things, initiatives we have underway. 

There is no end run around all of that. We are working very closely 

with our respective security communities to make sure that we do 

that. In the Department of Veterans Affairs OI&T, we have an entire division under an SES to lead information protection initiatives 

in the Department and we follow all the standards and rules that 

they set, provide the systems capabilities to achieve the necessary 

Authority to Operate, and so forth. 

Senator MURRAY. OK. All right. Yes, sir? 

Mr. CAMPBELL. Just to follow on to that, on the DOD side, we 

have to take our plans of how we are going to share that information and the architecture of how we are going to do that and we 

have to run those through the DOD security folks. They review all 

that and approve it before we can go ahead, and they have done 

that. 

Senator MURRAY. OK. I just wanted to clarify it. So, thank you 

very much. I really appreciate all of your work on this. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman AKAKA. Thank you very much, Senator Murray. 

Dr. Kussman and Dr. Casscells, let us move fast forward to January and let us assume that neither of you will be in your current 

positions. [Laughter.] 

Well, I am saying that because I don’t want the progress to stop. 

We want to move as close as we can. Let me ask you this. What 

can you leave behind in terms of resources and more information 

to ensure that your good work to date is not lost? I was thinking 

in terms of something you mentioned, Dr. Kussman—you said, position description. I was thinking of a job description that can help 

whoever comes on so that there is no loss and that there would be 

a benefit from what you have gained and what you think will be 

coming. Dr. Kussman? 

Dr. KUSSMAN. Yes. Mr. Chairman, obviously, people sometimes 

get concerned about this. I think if you look at the people who are 

sitting here, there is no accident why we have been successful. 

Chuck was on active duty, came over to the VA, he is now back 

71 

in DOD. Paul is former Navy—I won’t hold that against him—and 

Cliff was former Army. I believe that the commitment and the inculcation into the culture is now beyond Trip or myself. It is not 

a personality-driven thing and that work will go on because it is 

the right thing to do. 

We have now got the momentum going forward and I believe 

there is great enthusiasm up and down, for lack of a better term, 

the bureaucracy on both sides that want to make this happen. So, 

whoever comes in in the leadership positions would find it extremely difficult to change any of it because it is moving forward 

in the right way. 

Chairman AKAKA. Dr. Casscells? 

Dr. CASSCELLS. Sir, I would just add that the two Secretaries 

have made this a priority and both the Secretary of the VA and the 

Secretary of Defense are people who mean business. Their reminders plus the Congressional requirements have really kept this issue 

on the front burner for Dr. Kussman and myself. 

So, I think I would just add that it would be great if the succeeding Secretaries recognized that electronic health records are 

critical to providing quality and reliable, secure, cost-effective care, 

because there are people who doubt this. But, as you mentioned in 

your opening statement, this is really proven and it just needs to 

be made a priority. It is now. We hope it is maintained as a priority. 

Chairman AKAKA. Well, I thank you very much. As Chairman of 

the Subcommittee on Federal Workforce and Government Management, I have been spending time on transition and this is part of 

the transition, because I feel it is so important to whoever is going 

to be the next President to have this kind of information so that 

he can move forward. 

I thank you for what you folks are doing. It is really tremendous—the progress that you have made; however, we are still looking at the deadlines. 

In closing, I again thank all of our witnesses for appearing today. 

And by the way, I have other questions that I will submit. Your 

input on these issues is valuable to the Committee as we work to 

ensure that veterans and servicemembers receive the best health 

care possible. I believe that effective data sharing between the Departments is really a key component toward reaching that goal. 

As the session winds down, so does this administration, and I do 

not know where all of our department witnesses will be come January. For those who will be moving on, I urge you to leave behind 

good people, and you have mentioned that, Dr. Kussman and Dr. 

Casscells—good people and a road map for success. So, that is what 

we are looking at for the future of our great country and for our 

troops as well as our veterans. 

So, thank you again very much, and this hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 10:55 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

Æ