Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) FIRST DRAFT OF A PROPOSAL TO IANPHI

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Mandate: UN Global Health Crises Task Force, final report Request for Proposals: Joint Rfp from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Wellcome Trust to be issued soon

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Initial grant from Skoll Global Threats Fund to Chatham House (following proposal in March 2016) Global scoping meeting (March 2017) of stakeholders in external monitoring and accountability of preparedness for to identify gaps (Chatham House and Graduate Institute), Geneva Academic institutions (including Harvard, Johns Hopkins, LSHTM) Regional and global international organisations/development banks (including World Bank, UN office of Disaster Risk Reduction (Sendai Framework), WHO, UN High Commission on Human Rights) Foundations (including Skoll Global Threats Fund, Rockefeller Foundation, Wellcome Trust) National Public Health Institutes (including CDC, PHE, Robert Koch) NGOs (including GHSA, JEE Alliance, WEF) Geneva-based diplomatic mission health attaches representing countries (including Norway, USA, UAE, UK, Haiti, Germany, Sierra Leone, Japan, Thailand, Indonesia, Portugal, India) The Lancet (senior editor)

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Gaps identified (no external monitoring and/or accountability mechanisms) One health platforms Travel and trade restrictions during outbreaks Sharing of data and specimens during outbreaks Research and development for preparedness

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Activities in preparation for global monitoring and accountability since March One health platforms Preparation of background paper reviewing existing indicators from various sources including OIE, WHO and FAO Organisation of roundtable in November to review background paper and come to final set of preliminary indicators Travel restrictions during outbreaks Meeting with WEF in May to review case studies of airlines and discussion of reasons some did not fly to Ebola outbreak countries, why others did fly Preparation of background paper with consdierations as to what needs to be monitored as preparedness so that travek can continue

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Activities in preparation for global monitoring and accountability since March (……..continued) Sharing of data and specimens during outbreaks Participation in WHO blueprint activities at Wellcome Trust, WHO and Chatham House Trade restrictions during outbreaks Background paper on the issues involved being developed Research and Development for preparedness No activities – discussions with WHO planned in mid-November Indicators for other capacities for preparedness To be determined early in the life of the next project if grant proposal successful

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Proposed governance Broad partnership with academic institutions, national public health institutes, NGOs with informal governance Advisory board of global public health experts Physical IANPHI secretariat in one institute, with virtual focal points/partners from other national public health institutes IANPHI external monitoring and accountability of willing countries through technical cooperation among countries The Lancet for regular publication of peer reviewed updates

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Proposed role of partners based on comparative advantage Academia Participate in indicator identification/development Develop background papers/assess quality of data/prepare reports Monitor at global and regional levels/collect indicator information National Public Health Institutes Provide external monitoring at country level Provide data to secretariat IANPHI (as secretariat) Loosely coordinate all partners Prepare annual report from data collected from Academia and National Public Health Institutes

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Points for discussion Does IANPHI feel that this is an appropriate activity – does it fit with its mandate? Is IANPHI able to take on a secretariat role? If so what staffing requirements would be required and where would it be based Which public health institutes would be willing to participate either in the secretaeriat, as representatives of IANPHI at roundtables and other meetings, and in external monitoring activities? What would be the “dream team” for the advisory group?

Monitoring and Accountability for Preparedness (MAP) Potential partners (expressed interest to Chatham House) Graduate Institute Geneva (Centre on Global Health) IANPHI London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine Sendai Framework SciDev The Lancet JEE Alliance World Economic Forum Others to be sought from Africa, Asia and Latin America Chatham House