Test Communication Channel Consolidation
Impact analysis
Calculated from the submitted answers by fixed rules.
77/ 100
Organization-level. Executive visibility before implementation.
- Recommended review route
- Executive Leadership
- Highest individual impact identified
- Major
- What drove this score
- Implementation complexity · Departments affected · How severely those areas are affected
Where the points came from
- How many areas are affected10.9 / 15
8 of the 11 listed areas were rated above N/A.
- How severely those areas are affected11.9 / 15
Across the 8 areas that were rated, the average is 2.4 on the Minor-to-Major scale. Areas marked N/A are excluded here — they are counted in the breadth dimension above.
- Departments affected12.0 / 15
4 of 5 departments were selected.
- Operational categories affected7.5 / 10
6 of the 8 operational categories were answered Yes.
- How many stakeholder groups are affected8.8 / 10
7 of the 8 stakeholder groups were rated above N/A.
- How severely those groups are affected8.1 / 10
Across the 7 groups that were rated, the average is 2.4 on the Minor-to-Major scale.
- Compliance and risk position5.0 / 10
Compliance review: yes. Risk assessment: yes. A completed risk assessment scores zero here — the points reflect what is outstanding.
- Implementation complexity13.0 / 15
Training yes, pilot needs_evaluation, rollback plan no, 4 communication methods, go-live in 44 days.
This score reflects the breadth and severity of the structured impacts identified in the request. Written descriptions provide review context but do not directly change the score.
How this was calculated
Each dimension is scored against its own maximum and the eight are added together. Grid questions are read twice, once for breadth and once for severity, because those are different questions with different denominators:
- Breadth counts rows marked N/A in the denominator. That is what makes a change touching one of eleven areas read as narrow, and a change touching eight read as wide.
- Severity excludes them. One area hit as hard as possible is fully severe; it should not read as mild merely because the form lists eleven areas.
The highest individual impact identified above is a fact about the answers, not a second classification. Its role in the calculation is to trigger the escalation floors below.
- Weighted total
- 77.1 / 100
- After escalation floors
- 77.1 → displayed as 77
- Classification bands
- Minor below 50 · Moderate 50–74 · Major 75 and above
- Scoring version
- change-impact-score-v1
Escalation rules that matched
- At least one affected area is rated Major — sets a minimum of 75 (already exceeded)
- At least one stakeholder group is rated Major — sets a minimum of 75 (already exceeded)
- A Major rating in a critical area — clinical care, patients, compliance, technology, or reporting — sets a minimum of 75 (already exceeded)
These weights are a draft. They were proposed for review and have not been approved as IDEL policy. Changing them produces a new scoring version, so past scores keep meaning what they meant when they were calculated.
Overview
- Organization
- Test Community Health
- Requestor
- Test Submitter Two
- Role
- Clinical Staff
- Executive sponsor
- Sample Clinical Leader
- Date submitted
- Jul 2, 2026
- Target go-live
- Aug 15, 2026in 9 days
- Departments impacted
- Clinical Staff, Patient Services, Administration, Finance
- Rationale
- Technology Initiative, Strategic Initiative
- Assigned reviewer
- Test Reviewer One
Description of change
Fictional demonstration record. Consolidates several notification channels into one, affecting every team that currently sends or receives them.
Affected areas
- Clinical CareMajor
- Patient ServicesMajor
- Billing / Revenue CycleModerate
- TechnologyMajor
- ComplianceModerate
- Reporting (UDS / HRSA)Moderate
- FinanceModerate
- PatientsModerate
Description of impact
Every team that sends or receives a notification is affected on the same date.
Compliance and risk
- Is a regulatory or compliance review required?
- Yes
- Has a Risk Assessment been completed?
- Yes
Operational impact
- Clinical CareYes
- IT & DataYes
- Finance & Revenue CycleYes
- Patient Access & ExperienceYes
- Workforce & StaffingYes
- Operational & AdminYes
- Equity & AccessNo
- OtherNo
Stakeholders
- ProvidersMajor
- Nursing StaffMajor
- Front DeskMajor
- ITMajor
- LeadershipModerate
- PatientsMinor
- AdminModerate
Engagement strategy
Named contact in each department, with a shared checklist for the cutover weekend.
Training, communication, and implementation
- Training required
- Yes
- Training formats
- Live Sessions, Recorded Learning Module(s), Job Aids and Reference Materials
- Communication methods
- Announcement from leadership, Department Meeting(s), Email update(s), Internet posting / Internal Communication
- Pilot
- Needs Evaluation
- Rollback plan
- No
- Target go-live
- Aug 15, 2026
Other milestones
Readiness check, cutover weekend, first week support.
Review activity
- Test IDEL AdministratorJul 23, 2026, 11:20 AMIDEL internal
Internal note (visible to IDEL staff only): scheduled with no fallback plan and an unresolved pilot decision, against a Major impact rating. Recommend raising this before the cutover window.
- Test Reviewer OneJul 24, 2026, 9:15 AM
Call scheduled to confirm the fallback approach. Will update the request once the window is agreed.
History
- DraftTest Submitter Two · Jun 25, 2026, 9:00 AM
- Draft → SubmittedTest Submitter Two · Jul 2, 2026, 12:00 PM
- Reviewer assignedTest Reviewer One · Jul 7, 2026, 9:00 AM
- Submitted → Under ReviewTest Reviewer One · Jul 7, 2026, 9:00 AM
- Under Review → ApprovedTest Reviewer One · Jul 18, 2026, 9:00 AM
- Approved → ScheduledTest Reviewer One · Jul 22, 2026, 9:00 AM
- Comment addedTest IDEL Administrator · Jul 23, 2026, 11:20 AM
- Comment addedTest Reviewer One · Jul 24, 2026, 9:15 AM
Workflow
Recommended next steps
For a Major change. Current status: Scheduled.
- 1.Senior Executive Leadership review
- 2.Consider executive or board approval, as configured for this client
- 3.Confirm organization-wide timing and capacity
- 4.Complete the compliance and risk review
- 5.Confirm stakeholder, training, pilot, communication, and rollback plans
- 6.Review overlap with other Major changes in flight
These steps follow from the impact level. They are recommendations — the platform does not record any of them as complete, and none of them is an approval.
Established impact logic
The earlier reading, kept for continuity. The official classification is the impact score above.
- Highest individual impact identified
- Major
- Recommended review route
- Executive Leadership
How this was reached
- Highest affected-area impact: Major.
- Highest stakeholder impact: Major.
- Overall impact is the higher of the two: Major.
- Recommended review route: Executive Leadership. Overall impact: Major. This is a routing recommendation and does not record an approval decision.
Compliance and risk
- Regulatory or compliance review required
The requester indicated that a regulatory or compliance review is required before implementation.
Implementation readiness
- Pilot decision unresolved
Whether a pilot is required before go-live has not been determined.
- No rollback plan identified
No rollback plan has been identified for this change.
- Moderate areas
- 5
- Major areas
- 3
- Moderate stakeholders
- 2
- Major stakeholders
- 4
- Unresolved items
- 1
- Days to go-live
- 44
These figures describe the answers; they are not a second classification. This request has one official classification, shown with the impact score above. The recommended route indicates who should review this change. It does not record that an approval has been given. Calculated by logic revision cia-logic-v1 from the answers as submitted.
IDEL internal
- Client
- Test Community Health
- Request id
- req_th_009
- Template version
- change-impact-analysis-v1
- Submitted by (member)
- mem_th_submitter2
- Internal notes
- 1 on this request
This panel and every internal note are excluded from client responses by the serializer, not by this page.
Impact reference
- Minor
- Form update, scripting change — Department / Site Manager
- Moderate
- Workflow change across multiple departments — Operations Leader
- Major
- New service line, major EHR change — CEO / Board
Highest individual area rating: Major · Highest individual stakeholder rating: Major