ICF Update Platform

Built environment, private use, deletion of code e155

Help

Descriptions of the Fields of a Proposal

The title of the proposal

Proposal ID: A numerical ID automatically given by the system.

Proposal State: The state that the proposal is in (see the Proposal Lifecycle and the Changing the State of a Proposal sections of the User's Guide for more information)

Update or Revision Proposal: This field shows whether the proposal suggests an update that can be achieved in the usual ICD update cycle or whether it is made for the ICD-11 revision.

Primary Code affected: The primary ICD cide affected by this proposal. (See also the section: Selecting where to attach the proposal in the user's guide)

Secondary Codes affected: See the section: Selecting where to attach the proposal from the User's guide. Volumes Affected: The list of ICD volumes that will be changed as a result of this proposal.

Proposal Type: The type of this proposal. The originator selects this from a predefined list

Change Reason: Similar to above, the originator selects this from a predefined list

Updates Specific to a Language Version*: This field is dislayed only when the proposal is suggesting a change to a specific language version of ICD. Not having this field means that the proposal applies to all language versions.

Detailed Description: This is where the user explains the proposal. He/She may provide the updated version of the ICD text using strikethrough text for the removed parts.

Rationale: This field includes the information on why this change is necessary.

Supporting web links*: Some web links attached to the proposal which are related to this proposal.

Supporting Publications *: A list of uploaded files that related to this proposal. They can be in one of these formats: pdf, doc, rtf, txt, or xls.

Proposal Summary: If the proposal is a revision proposal, a summary of the proposal and the discussions are prepared by the editor and placed in this field after the discussions.

Reason for Deletion*: If the proposal is deleted or rejected, the reason can be placed in this field. This field is accessible only when the proposal is Deleted or Rejected.

Scheduled Implementation Date*: Available only after the state of the proposal is changed to "Accepted".

VOTES*: Displayed only when the proposal is voted by the Update and Revision Committee. The summary of the voting is dislayed here. If the user clicks on "Show details" text then the page includes all votes given by the voting members together with their voting comments.

COMMENTS*: Displayed if there are comments attached sent by other users of the platform.

Add a new comment: Users may write their comments on the proposals by clicking on this link. If this link is not available, it shows that the proposal is closed for user comments at the moment.

*optional fields: Displayed if relevant information is available

Proposal ID : 360 - Proposal State : In Open Discussion Layer Proposal for Update

Originator : giovanni bassi - Last Update made by : Paula Tonel

Creation Date : 07-Feb-2018 15:42 CET - Last Update : 08-May-2018 21:15 CET

Previously Discussed in the group(s): FDRG, RVW

Primary Code Affected : e155

Secondary Codes Affected : e150,e515

Proposal Type : Deletion of code

Change Reason : Need to improve clarity or reduce ambiguity in the tabular list

Detailed Description

~~e155 Design, construction and building products and technology of buildings for private use~~

Products and technology that constitute an individual's indoor and outdoor human-made environment that is planned, designed and constructed for private use (e.g. home, dwelling), including those adapted or specially designed.

~~Inclusions: design, construction and building products and technology of entrances and exits, facilities and routing~~

~~e1550 Design, construction and building products and technology for entering and exiting of buildings for private use~~

Products and technology of entry and exit from the human-made environment that is planned, designed and constructed for private use, such as entries and exits to private homes, portable and stationary ramps, power-assisted doors,lever door handles and level door thresholds.

~~e1551 Design, construction and building products and technology for gaining access to facilities in buildings for private use~~

Products and technology related to design, building and construction inside buildings for private use, such as washroom facilities, telephones, audio loops, kitchen cabinets, appliances and electronic controls in private homes.

~~e1552 Design, construction and building products and technology for way finding, path routing and designation of locations in buildings for private use~~

Indoor and outdoor products and technology in the design, building and construction of path routing, for private use, to assist people to find their way inside and immediately outside buildings and locate the places they want to go to, such as signage, in Braille or writing, size of corridors and floor surfaces.

~~e1553 Design, construction and building products and technology for physical safety of persons in buildings for private use~~

Indoor and outdoor products and technology for private use (e.g. home, dwelling) to assure safety, such as guardrails, emergency signals, and to assure secure storage of hazardous objects (e.g.weapons) or materials (e.g. solvents, insecticides).

~~e1558 Design, construction and building products and technology of buildings for private use, other specified~~

~~e1559 Design, construction and building products and technology of buildings for private use, unspecified~~

Archived Versions

08/05/2018	Paula Tonel
07/02/2018	giovanni bassi

Rationale

See proposal 358

URC (Mar 21, 2018): Review by Initial Review Group is completed: proposal moved to FDRG layer.

URC (May 8, 2018): proposal moved to Open Discussion layer.

Voting

Show Details

Comments

18-Mar-2018 19:57 CET by Janice Miller

Built environment, private use, deletion of code e155

Review remarks by Janice Miller for proposal #360
Initial Review Period March 2018
1. Has the author correctly entered the “Primary Code Affected” in that field on the Platform? Yes.
2. Are there any “Secondary Codes Affected”? Yes.
3. Has the author correctly entered the “Secondary Codes Affected” in that field on the Platform? Yes
4. Does the proposal affect the Descriptive Note in a given ICF code text? Yes
5. Does the proposal affect Inclusions in a given ICF code text? Yes
6. Does the proposal affect Exclusions in a given ICF code text? Yes
7. Is the proposal age specific? No
8. Does the proposal have plausibility as a classification entity in the ICF? Yes
9. Does the proposal add any additional value as a new classification entity? Yes
10. Would the proposal, if adopted, affect the described ICF situations in all cultures? Yes
11. Does the proposal address a genuine underlying need or deficiency within the ICF? Yes
12. Has the author incorporated sufficient rationale to justify adopting their proposal, as written, into a harmonized ICF? Yes
13. Is the author’s rationale for the proposal evidence-based? Yes.
14. Is the proposal consistent with the existing structure and content of the ICF? Yes
15. Is the proposal consistent with conceptual and taxonomic principles in the ICF? Yes
16. If adopted, would this proposal be consistent with the goal of ensuring standardization and comparability of data reporting? Yes
Additional remark: This proposal should be reviewed with #358 and #359

Initial Reviewer’s recommendation:
This proposal can go to the FDRG layer for further discussion.

12-Apr-2018 16:03 CET by Janice Miller

Proposals 358 359 360 related to e150,e155 and e505, e515

FDRG mid-year meeting, Hamburg April 2018 - Joanne Valerius (US), Susana Castro (UK), Liane Simon (Germany), Janice Miller (Canada)

The group reviewed the three related proposals, #358, 359, 360:

1) changes to e150 changing core content and adding new codes, and removing the public vs private distinction between e150 and e155;

2) deletion of all of e155;

3) the changes to e5150, e5151, e5152 by adding '...for public buildings' to the code title, and the addition of 3 new codes e5153, e51514, e5155 that mirror e5150, e5151, e5152 'for private buildings.

The group agreed that these changes/additions were acceptable, however recommend the following additional work to ensure that content lost in e150 and e155 be captured in the relevant code descriptions in EF. This content includes the following:

entrances, entries and exits, facilities and routing, portable and stationary ramps, power-assisted doors, lever door handles and level door thresholds, washroom facilities, telephones, audio loops, kitchen cabinets, appliances, signage, Braille or writing, size of corridors, floor surfaces, guardrails, emergency signals, secure storage of hazardous objects or materials,entries and exits to buildings for public use (e.g. child care settings, schools, workplaces, shops and theatres), level door thresholds, thermostats (for temperature regulation) and dispersed accessible seating in auditoriums or stadiums, accessible kiosks and other forms of directories.

For example, Braille or writing, emergency signals, accessible kiosks and other forms of directories, telephones, audio loops, signage could be added to:

e125 Products and technology for communication

Equipment, products and technologies used by people in activities of sending and receiving information, including those adapted or specially designed, located in, on or near the person using them, such as audio loops, Braille or writing, emergency signals, accessible kiosks and other forms of directories, telephones, audio loops, signage.

Inclusions: general and assistive products and technology for communication

18-Apr-2018 09:52 CET by Janice Miller

Proposals #358, 359,360

Follow-up discussion: C Sykes, T Maribo, J Miller
We recommend that these three proposals be further developed and discussed with some options to incorporate content that would be lost as listed in the last comment. The proposals should be clustered and considered in a comprehensive way as changes made from one proposal will have significant impacts on the others. In addition, further consideration and discussion is needed regarding the change to the public and private distinction, moving it from e150 and e155 to e515

20-Jun-2018 07:23 CET by Ann-Helene Almborg

comments on proposal 358,359,360

Nordic WHO-FIC CC workshop 2018-06-19 (Solvejg Bang, Heidi Anttila, Thomas Maribo, Ann-Helene Almborg)

We agree with the comment by Ros Madden and Nicola Fortune to proposal 358 and we would reject this proposal and related proposals 358 and 359.

21-Jun-2018 12:30 CET by Christine Haas

#358 to #360 Build environment, public and private use

We received from our German experts the following comments:
- The restructuring seems logical and is supported. It is agreed that distinguishing public form private buildings is not essential.
- The wording of the proposal regarding “building” and “facility” should be reviewed. A native speaker may check whether there is a different meaning for “building” and “facility”. It is proposed to solely use then one of these words consistently.

There is feedback, that this change proposal still needs to be worked on. It should not be voted on in 2019.

25-Jun-2018 09:51 CET by Keisuke TAKAHASHI

Comment on proposal 360

The separate classification of public and private would be important for analysing data for policy making process. This should be kept as it is.

26-Sep-2018 23:19 CET by Coen H. van Gool

Comment attached to the vote of the user for Round 2 of year 2018. Voted:No

Proposal #358 and 360
Accessability and possibility of passing through are aspects of the built environment that are proposed to be deleted. We believe these aspects are crucially informative.

30-Sep-2018 23:12 CET by Ann-Helene Almborg

Comment attached to the vote of the user for Round 2 of year 2018. Voted:No

Disagree to proposal 358, 359 and 360.
Agree with comment by R Madden and N Fortune

16-Jun-2019 17:51 CET by Christine Haas

#358, #359, #360

After consultation with our German experts we can give you the following feedback:

We have difficulties to follow this fundamental change of the concept of categories e150, e155 and e515 and would therefore appreciate further explanation and discussion.

We fully support the comments of Nicola Fortune and Ros Madden from 12-May-2018.

11-Aug-2019 21:36 CET by Ann-Helene Almborg

Comment attached to the vote of the user for Round 1 of year 2019. Voted:No

Disagree to proposal 358, 359 and 360.
Agree with comment by R Madden and N Fortune

06-Sep-2019 12:12 CET by Keisuke TAKAHASHI

Comment attached to the vote of the user for Round 2 of year 2019. Voted:Can't Decide

There is no change in status.

12-May-2020 15:06 CET by Catherine Sykes

Review comments on proposal 360 about e155 Design, construction and building products and technology of buildings for private use

Comment by Catherine Sykes and Ros Madden on proposal 360 relating to deleting e155

We recommend rejecting proposals 358, 359 and 360. We still agree with the reasons set out by Nicola Fortune and Ros Madden in 2018.

There is no support for this proposal from FDRG and other commentators. These proposals should be rejected and should take up no more time of the WHO-FIC Network.

30-Jun-2020 12:55 CET by Ann-Helene Almborg

comments on proposal 360

Comments from Nordic ICF-Network (Jaana P, Solvejg B, Thomas M, Ann-Helene A) 2020-06-24. We suggest that this proposal (and proposal 358 and 359) will be rejected according earlier comments and suggestion at the platform. The proposal has not been updated since 2018