Skip to main content

Claims IDSM field removal

Feature Request2026 Claim Spec Update Queue2026Fixed DevelopmentClaim Spec

Claims IDSM fields removal

As a user, I would like the IDSM fields introduced in the 2024 Claim Specification update to be removed from Claims reporting, as there is currently insufficient guidance on how to populate them and limited value in collecting them in their current form.


Fields for removal:

  • Claim.IDSM_DR

  • Claim.IDSM_DER


Background:

  • Definitions and intended reporting requirements for these fields remain unclear.

  • It is unclear which values should be entered and whether they pertain to incentives, costs, benefits, or other metrics.

  • Current reporting pathways do not adequately support meaningful or consistent use of these fields.

Proposed outcome:

  • Remove both fields from the Claims Specification.

  • Consider alternative IDSM reporting, such as annual narrative reporting.

Select the module in CEDARS
Select user type
Posted by Amyreardon ·
Status: Completed7 comments

Log in to comment and vote

Comments7

  • cedars team

    Team•

    May 6

    We need input on whether IDSM fields should continue to appear in 2023-2025 claim record-level downloads.

    • This decision will directly impact whether the fields remain in the database or are fully removed.

    If IDSM fields should remain in pre-2026 record-level downloads:

    • Fields should remain in the database.

    • Implementation would remove fields only from the reporting specification moving forward.

    • Historical downloads would continue to support existing reporting workflows.

    If IDSM fields are no longer needed in pre-2026 record-level downloads:

    • Fields can be removed from the database.

    • Existing historical data should be archived prior to removal.

  • cedars team

    Team•

    Apr 27

    On the 27th April, the following was discussed at an IDSM-specific meeting

    Current State

    • Fields present in the Claim table

    • For an IDSM audit with no savings claimed, PAs must create a non-savings claim. This is considered a placeholder workaround and is not preferred.

    • IDSM costs and spending currently do not run through the CET.

    • Costs may already be blended within existing ProgramCost fields.

    • There was no clear guidance in the decision on how IDSM should be reported.

    • Until benefits can be matched to costs, the current reporting approach has limited value.

    Suggested Direction

    • Remove IDSM fields from the Claims table.

    • Add IDSM reporting to the Annual Report narrative instead.

    • Consider whether IDSM should instead sit within the ProgramCost table. (Pulling IDSM costs into CET could be duplicative of costs already captured elsewhere.)

    • To be discussed in the May PCG

    • Amy to provide guidance on what annual narrative reporting could look like.

    • Jake noted further conversations are needed regarding IDSM funds and CET treatment.

  • cedars team

    Team•

    Feb 5

    PCG 5th Feb: It was called out that we may want to remove the IDSM fields from the measure table and add them to the program table when the time comes.

    • Jake Richardson (PG&E)

      Team•

      Mar 18

      I vote also that these should be removed and we can implement them once IDSM tracking is properly determined

  • Jennifer Scheuerell

    Team•

    Jan 13, 2025

    Also see ticket

    https://cpuccedars.featurebase.app/p/claims-idsm-field-clarification

  • Jennifer Scheuerell

    Team•

    Jan 13, 2025

    For 2024 we added two IDSM fields to the claim table, see screen shot of the field names and descriptions.

  • Jennifer Scheuerell

    Team•

    Nov 14, 2024

    We will need field names, data types, and descriptions.