The document outlines the efforts of the Public Health Agency of Sweden to strengthen IHR implementation and assess public health preparedness in low GNI countries. It discusses three main tasks focused on improving collaboration during crises, conducting assessments through workshops and evaluations, and identifying areas for improvement in health systems. The document highlights specific countries involved, key findings from assessments, and planned actions to enhance preparedness and response capabilities across member states.

1. WP 5: IHR core capacity
strengthening and assessment
Anders Wallensten, Deputy State Epidemiologist
Public Health Agency of Sweden
15 October 2019
One Health Security Conference

2. • Background
• Task 5.1 - Improving IHR implementation
• Task 5.2 - International collaboration between authorities
during crisis
• Task 5.3 - IHR assessment using SimEx and AAR
Outline

3. • Objective: Support countries in building capacity required to
fulfill the requirements of IHR and EU Decision 1082/2013
• Achieved primarily by way of:
– A) Workshops aimed to support IHR implementation for low GNI countries
(Task 5.1)
– B) Workshops on international collaboration between authorities during
crisis (Task 5.2)
– C) Continued work on After Action Evaluations (Task 5.3)
• Leaders: Public Health Agency of Sweden
• Co-Leader: Norwegian Directorate of Health
• Affiliate: Norwegian Institute of Public Health
Background

4. Report
improving IHR
imp. M16
Checkpoint 1
M10
Checkpoint 2
M16
Review of JEE,
IHR & ECDC
reports & tools
Gathering input
from WP
Partners
Determining
Work Plan
Start-up
Meeting
4 July
Report
D5.2 M36
Checkpoint 5
M 34
WS SI
M34
WS PL
M22
Checkpoint 4
M28
Checkpoint 3
M22
Report
improving IHR
imp. M24
WS LV
M10
January
M1 M12 M24
Timeline for Task 5.1: Improving
IHR implementation

5. • Twelve low GNI countries are part of the WP:
Task 5.1: Improving IHR implementation
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Croatia
Greece
Latvia
Lithuania
Malta
Republic of Moldova
Poland
Portugal
Serbia
Slovenia
Spain

6. • Overall capacity of WP5 10 countries = 69.5%
– European average is 73%
• The highest scores were in the areas:
– C1 Legislation and financing (84.1%)
– C4 Food Safety (82%)
– C2 IHR Coordination & NFP Functions (79%)
Highest Scores - SPAR Reports
Source: Using results from World Health
Organization. Electronic State Parties Self-Assessment
Annual Reporting Tool. https://extranet.who.int/e-
spar#capacity-score

7. C10 Risk communication (56%) (20%-80%)
C11 Points of entry (57%) (0-80%)
C12 Chemical events (58%) (20%-80%)
C.5.2 Implementation of a laboratory
biosafety and biosecurity regime (60%)
Overall C5.2 range
(33%-100%)
C8 National health emergency framework
(64.7%)
(20%-93)
C13 Radiation (66%) (40%-100%)
C3 Zoonotic events and the human-
animal interface (66%)
(20% - 80%)
Areas for improvement – SPAR Reports
Source: Using results from World Health
Organization. Electronic State Parties Self-Assessment
Annual Reporting Tool. https://extranet.who.int/e-
spar#capacity-score

8. • Five low GNI Countries in WP5 have done a JEE
Within the scope of WP5 the areas seen for improvement
– Antimicrobial stewardship activities (P.3.4)
– Biosafety and biosecurity (P.6.1 and P.6.2)
– Risk Communication (R.5.1 and R. 5.4)
– Chemicals (CE.1 and CE.2)
Areas for improvement – JEE Reports
Source: Using results from World Health
Organization. Joint External Evaluation Reports for
Latvia, Lithuania, Slovenia, Serbia and Republic of
Moldova

9. • Strengthen preparedness and the implementation of IHR
and EU Decision 1082/2013
• Improving cross-sectoral (medical and civil protection)
preparedness and response capacity in Member States and
within EU
• Strengthening information exchange, cross-sectoral
response and mechanisms for rapid mobilization health
personnel and medical countermeasures across borders
Task 5.2 Objectives: International
collaboration between authorities during crisis

10. • Challenges to capacity, preparedness and response
• Gaps in roles and responsibilities; Member States, DG ECHO,
DG SANTE and WHO
• Identify legal and organizational issues in cross-border, cross
sectoral response to health threats and emergencies, for
example:
– Issues on authorization of health care personnel
– Health systems response and cooperation – procedures,
management and confidentiality
– Predictability on financial issues and reimbursement
Implementation Process 5.2 Prioritising WS
Topics

11. • Identify relevant health and civil authorities in the Member
States and invite them to collaborate
• M18 WS on legal issues: what are the main obstacles
against receiving help or assisting others
• M 34 WS in Portugal: Competent authorities from health and
civil protection (one from each) in line with the workshop
objectives.
• Report
Timeline for Task 5.2: Improving IHR
implementation

12. Task 5.3: Using data from SimEx and AAR for assessing
public health preparedness in the EU
• Background
– SimEx and AAR part of IHR monitoring framework
– Highlight more operational gaps and challenges
– Complement Annual self assessment and JEE
• Support WHO EURO in MS survey on SimEx and AAR
conducted in countries
– Overview of what is done in countries
– Main gaps and recommendations identified
– Main challenges in implementation
• Review of EU exercises (tbd with ECDC and the EC)
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/276651/WHO-WHE-CPI-2018.51-eng.pdf?sequence=1

13. Primary contact points WP5
Anders Wallensten Public Health Agency of Sweden
Svein Høegh Henrichsen Norwegian Directorate of Health
Karin Nygård Norwegian Institute of Public Health
Thank you!