West Virginia Rural Health Education Partnerships
LRC Committee Meeting

July 13, 1998

Attendees: Robert Blake, Arnie Hassen, David Martin, Mike McCarthy; Anna Reno, Elaine Mason; Amy Reasinger; Parr Thacker; April Vestal, Carla Campbell; Alex Yohn, Hilda Heady
Invited but absent: Randy Lowe, Cecil Pollard, Rusty Russell

Hilda thanked everyone for their attendance and reviewed the purpose of today's meeting as one to initiate the process to revitalize the LRC committee function within WVRHEP. She then asked Arnie Hassen to give the group some history of the LRC Committee and its original charge.

Hilda reviewed the history of the ARC Technology Advantage grant and where the committee has a role. Mike McCarthy, Hilda Heady, and Alex Yohn attended one meeting of all the grantees under this ARC project and Hilda attended a follow up meeting. Mike and Hilda then shared some further information about the ARC grant and their concerns about the use of resources from ARC. They have concerns that the courses developed under the ARC mini-grants are not appropriate for WVRHEP students and the LRC's and rural populations they serve. Also, it is unknown at this time what the expectations are regarding the demands for the server capabilities to provide these courses once they are fully developed. The greatest concern expressed by Mike and Hilda is that the courses are and have been developed without the direct input of the potential audience to receive and use such courses. Hilda also discussed her efforts to gauge the appropriateness of these course for the HSTA program. Regarding the grant, Alex Yohn suggested offering a test for 3 months for each course at selected sites using WVU/ Consult & Marshall band width if this is possible. Hilda will ask Dr. Wilcox for more detail concerning the needed band width to deliver the courses developed under the ARC grant.

The then group discussed the possible future roles of the LRC committee or sub groups of the committee. Site coordinators were asked specifically about their ideas and others discussed responsibilities and needs for an LRC committee. These ideas are as follows:

  1. Software applications for students
  2. Coordination of requirements and expectations between schools and sites regarding software and equipment, i.e. students
  3. Making technology (education, productivity, communications)recommendations and applications most useful for sites. Models of great ways to use your LRC i.e. more used by students, community, faculty, etc.( Productivity means community service materials; knowledge base searches; collaborative projects; palm pilots for time management, e-mail, collaborative research, patient encounters, etc.)
  4. A resource to turn to for all technology questions and one that stays up to date - training of site personnel, students and faculty
  5. Consistency with e-mail, consistency with students use of software to be more responsive
  6. Most cost efficient use of technology.
  7. Advocacy in some areas for improved services from carriers. (i.e. Webster County busy lines; adequate phone lines to carry connections and data; Marshall County; Little Kanawha - long distance charges.) saturation of local smaller phone companies & link up costs with Bell Atlantic/AT&T is prohibitive
  8. Requirements/advise on updating LRCs - assess licensing arrangements for greater access for all sites, or assess some level of networking LANs & WANs for some sites; assess group purchasing of software.
  9. Guidance on technology training of students while at the sites; particularly with MDTV; Computer usage.
  10. Evaluate the support needs of LRCs and sub-sites at different levels. Not all will have same needs
  11. Find some entity to look at maximizing web-page opportunities and resources.
  12. Need to get clinician perspective when assessing needs for software and equipment - i.e. a review function by clinicians needs to be part of the process
  13. Detailed listing of LRC capabilities to each information officer at each school
  14. Technology exists to have a CD-ROM centralized host without licensing individual users.
  15. Create an on-line health informatics training course.
  16. Pulling faculty development committee in-put into the work of the LRC committee function.

Then group then began discussing next steps in the process to revitalize and further define the role and function of the LRC Committee. Robert Blake suggested we first divide the list of ideas into long and short term issues. Parr Thacker suggested that we define the ideal LRC and the process to get there and support it.

Hilda asked for someone to volunteer to serve as the chair of this new developing committee at least for the development process and possibly to continue in that role. Parr Thacker volunteered and will serve as interim chair of this committee.

The group then began suggesting membership. It was felt that each school should have a representative and that providers should be represented. April Vestal suggested Dr. Suresh Kameth from the Rainelle Medical Center. The group discontinued any further discussion recognizing that this needed more time to be developed at a future meeting. Hilda directed everyone's attention to the proposed meeting schedule in the memo calling for this meeting and all agreed. This schedule is as follows:

Meeting Schedule for Learning Resources Committee Workgroup

Monday, September 14 12:30 pm to 2:00 pm Days Inn, Flatwoods

Monday, October 12 12:30 pm to 2:00 pm Days Inn, Flatwoods

Monday, November 16 12:30 pm to 2:00 pm Days Inn, Flatwoods

The meeting adjourned at 2:20 pm.