Comments on the Office of the National Coordinator's Preliminary Definition of 'Meaningful Use'

June 26, 2009 | Collaborative Comment
Markle Foundation, Center for American Progress (CAP), Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at Brookings, Collaborators

Markle, the Center for American Progress, the Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at Brookings, and others respond to first draft of the 'meaningful use' definition issued by the HIT Policy Subcommittee of the US Department of Health and Human Services.


These comments are a response to the request for comment on the meaningful use definition released by the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).  They are the result of a joint effort by the Markle Foundation, the Center for American Progress, and the Engelberg Center for Health Care Reform at Brookings. On April 30, 2009, the three organizations participated in a forum to issue a Markle Connecting for Health consensus paper on ‘meaningful use’ and ‘qualified or certified EHR’ —pivotal concepts for determining how more than $30 billion in health information technology (IT) incentives should be paid out under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). Representatives from 70 organizations supported the consensus paper.

This collective response is organized according to the five key implications derived from the Markle consensus paper:

  1. Set Clear and Achievable Health and Cost Goals
  2. Tie Payment Tightly to Results
  3. Engage Patients in Achieving Meaningful Use Goals
  4. Focus on Information Use, Not Technology Functions or Features
  5. Ensure that Standards and Certification Directly Support Meaningful Use and Foster Innovation