Dr. Jack Shere - Traceability Advancement Updates
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•109 views
Jack A. Shere presented a multi-part strategy to achieve four goals for livestock traceability at the 2018 Strategy Forum on Livestock Traceability. The strategy includes increasing data sharing between public and private databases, promoting the use of electronic ID, tracking animals from birth to slaughter, and developing electronic health certificates and data standards. Progress includes pilot projects sharing data between states and private databases, plans to phase out visual tags and support electronic ID, and negotiations to obtain slaughter data from plants. The strategy aims to modernize IT systems and ensure standards for electronic ID performance.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Dr. Jack Shere - Traceability Advancement Updates
Similar to Dr. Jack Shere - Traceability Advancement Updates (20)
More from John Blue
More from John Blue (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Dr. Jack Shere - Traceability Advancement Updates
- 1. Traceability Advancement Updates 1 Jack A. Shere, DVM, PhD Chief Veterinary Officer of the United States Deputy Administrator, Veterinary Services Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service U.S. Department of Agriculture September 25, 2018 National Institute for Animal Agriculture 2018 Strategy Forum on Livestock Traceability
- 2. Multi-Part Strategy to Achieve 4 Goals 2 Data Integration Communication & Outreach Data Standards Financial Accountability Tag Issuance Regulations Tag Retirement Data Sharing Electronic ID Birth to Slaughter Tracing Electronic Health Certificates IT Infrastructure Development
- 3. Private Databases USA HERDS AMS- Certification Programs Third Party Verification Companies **14 STATES UTILIZE USA HERDS USDA Database (Public) Surveillance Collaboration Services(SCS) **29 STATES UTILIZE USDA-Provided SCS Current Status of Databases 3 Data are owned by entities at different levels and locations depending on function and need. SCS CoreOne 3 4
- 4. Private Databases An MOU with the private database holders is needed to establish access to the information in these databases. Priority 1: Data Sharing - AHER 4 Tag Number Date Event Type State or Location PIN State Only 6 key standard data elements are needed Animal Health Event Repository (AHER) Data System Holding Data Private Database
- 5. 5 Data Sharing Goal: To provide a model for other states and private entities to follow, while overcoming many of the privacy issues Progress: Partnership with 2 States for pilot projects with very different ID and data sharing models to provide data to AHER; Agreement with Computer Aid to build report to extract key data elements
- 6. Priority 2: Increase use of Electronic ID 6 Phase out free visual ID tags (2019) Cost-sharing for EID tags Improve tag acquisition process State funds for EID and electronic records management tied to ADT cooperative agreements Electronic is the ONLY way to have an efficient nationwide system.
- 7. 7 Priority 3: Track from Birth to Slaughter • Collaborate with registration and other groups to share few elements from privatized data systems • Veterinarians wand EID tags and enter into system with test data or certificates for veterinary inspection • Test records for programmatic diseases – we already have. • Integration with privately held databases for key elements • Implement tag retirement process for purchasing hardware for ID capture at slaughter facilities • Date, plant number and ID are directly sent to AHER Birth Event Slaughter
- 8. Goal: To implement this into remaining slaughter plants and provide reader hardware for interested participants Progress: • 3.7M tags retired 2012-2018 • APHIS is negotiating with 14 slaughter plants to share tag retirement data. • Six plants verbally agreed to share, in addition to ones that currently share data for VS program testing 8 Tag Retirement
- 9. Goal: Stakeholder collaboration to develop agreed upon data standards to allow various databases to send and receive information Progress: • The United States Animal Health Association (USAHA) group led the development of standards, to be presented in October 2018. • Once approved, USDA will incorporate the standards into its systems. • Anticipate this will set baseline for international standards, expected to be published in 2021. 9 Priority 4: Electronic Health Certificates
- 10. 10 Key Focus Area: IT Modernization July 2018: AIMS Refractor project updates outdated platform and adds automatic tag retirement Aug. 2018: 3.7 million + existing official IDs retired FY20: Modernization of tag management system Sept. 2019: Messaging Service replaces MIM repository, provides information exchange FY20: User-friendly web interface for uploading data and generating official forms; replaces MIM desktop application FY20: Automate messaging from USAHerds to AHER; User-friendly web-interface and mobile apps for editing PINS FY20: Mobile applications for free ICVI and Program disease record submission AIMS MIM Modernization Animal Identification Management System Mobile Information Management
- 11. 11 Key Focus Area: Standards Readability Retention Performance in varied environmental conditions Consistency with national and international standard Standards for Electronic ID tags, Data Element integrations and electronic health certificates
- 12. Key Focus Area: Communication and Outreach • Collaborate with interested States, industry groups • Utilize pilots and partners to demonstrate success • Create common understanding about the benefits of ADT • Communicate expectations of accountability • Find and communicate the incentives for each stakeholder involved 12
- 13. Questions? 13 Jack A. Shere, DVM, PhD Chief Veterinary Officer of the United States Deputy Administrator, Veterinary Services Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service U.S. Department of Agriculture September 25, 2018
Editor's Notes
- ADT is a privately held system relying on Electronic ID from birth to slaughter. APHIS’ implementation strategy for enhancing ADT focuses on voluntary incentives to advance key components of ADT augmented by accountability in state cooperative funding, and minor modifications to current regulations where needed. USDA would NOT dictate technology but would set standards to ensure consistent/standardized collection of the five bits of data we need and how the data is shared.
- Mr. U/S- we recognize your 3 main goals: Data sharing, electronic ID and Birth to slaughter tracing. In order to get there from where we are today, the strategy is multi-part: In order to share data, we need to some minimal integration based on agreed-upon data standards. We have the mechanism to do this, pilots started . 2) Electronic ID- in order to be fully electronic, we need to address our current tagging system. We have a couple options for how to do that in order to achieve fully electronic ID. Tag retirement- is part of the overall electronic ID stragedy. We are have a plan, cooperation, working on IT piece and already started. 3) regulations- changes required for collection of ID at birth 4) Communications and Outreach – because of history, variety of State regs and views- we need to find partners in States and industries to demonstrate success; this coupled with careful communication will help build buy-in 5) Financial- We can work to reform cooperative agreements with States to emphasize requirements and priorities and goals. 6) IT Development- this is underlying much of this- to help with Birth to Slaughter goal, to collect the data Data Sharing Integration Data standards Electronic ID Tag type Tag retirement Communication/outreach Regulations Financial Reform cooperative agreements IT Development
- Who should hold/own data? Private vendor. CURRENT STATE OF PLAY/STATUS: Not all state systems have the ability to talk to us or to each other. 29/50 States utilize public database (USDA-provided SCS 14/50 states utilize private USAHerds 3/50 States utilize CoreOne (private SCS) 4/50 States utilize private-state developed database Under current regulatory program, we get brucellosis and TB data – just depends on how States enter it into the system. When we do a test, we add an electronic ID and capture it. Systems are currently paper-based!! We spend enormous amounts of money and time on data entry. Data are owned by entities at different levels and locations depending on function and need. The critical components of data management are: Data need to be moved electronically between systems and accessed when needed. This requires a standardized code for computers to communicate. Each entity only owns the data they need to perform their role (production, state, and federal regulatory functions). Data are shared as “need to know”. (e.g., in a disease trace or audit) Each entity must have protections in place to guard inappropriate release, restrictions on the number/role of users, and auditing functions to verify accuracy.
- END GAME: A privatized system. Providers can bid for a network to connect all the data. When we need info we go to them to get it. Recommendation: Telling States they have to make data available to the vendor Cooperative agreement money established to the states. They have to have biosecurity plans with data sharing for producers in the state to be eligible for indemnity APHIS must develop standards for how to transmit and receive data so systems can work together. Recommendation: Use the system we developed for databases to talk to each other – we plan investments this year to modernize it. Develop data standards to better share data among private, state, and federal systems Encourage participation by breed registries and other value-added systems (private) Test information sharing with USAHerds (State) Incorporate all APHIS-owned data on program diseases and ICVIs Challenges: Most states will see access to AHER as a value to their state program, but some states will refuse to participate voluntarily.
- States: Michigan and Colorado are 2/17 states that currently use USAHerds database systems. Michigan has mandatory premises, registration, and animal identification with RFID 840-tags; Colorado has legislative regulations restricting the ability to share data.
- How do we increase electronic ID? This increase is dependent on: the ease of use, the comfort level of producers with new technology and processes, and the value provided. Goal is eID at herd of origin and slaughter, then work out how to capture all the data as we condition producers. Biosecurity plan = cornerstone; interstate commerce = a hammer we have 840 Tags are the goal; 900 tags are the transition (and/or register 900 tags with premises) We could add requirements for PIN w/ 900 tags – let them be used as official ID **IF** prem ID associated w/ tag Allow third party verifier to add premises info and/or issue tags to 3rd party Current regulations mandate 840 tags, eID allows/promotes 900 for feeders
- Details: USDA is partnering with a coalition of officials from industry, academia, and the Kansas department of Agriculture for a project that proposes to show there is value in voluntary collection of birth herd data and intends to define a model. A key feature of the pilot is to hold birth herd data at either the state or private level, and share with regulatory officials in event of a disease trace. We expect outcomes of this project in late 2019. Mandatory implementation requires regulation changes.
- States: Michigan and Colorado are 2/17 states that currently use USAHerds database systems. Michigan has mandatory premises, registration, and animal identification with RFID 840-tags; Colorado has legislative regulations restricting the ability to share data.
- States: Michigan and Colorado are 2/17 states that currently use USAHerds database systems. Michigan has mandatory premises, registration, and animal identification with RFID 840-tags; Colorado has legislative regulations restricting the ability to share data.
- Standards for Electronic ID, Data element integrations and electronic health certificates
- ADT is a privately held system relying on Electronic ID from birth to slaughter. APHIS’ implementation strategy for enhancing ADT focuses on voluntary incentives to advance key components of ADT augmented by accountability in state cooperative funding, and minor modifications to current regulations where needed. USDA would NOT dictate technology but would set standards to ensure consistent/standardized collection of the five bits of data we need and how the data is shared.