scholarly journals Joint External Evaluation—Development and Scale-Up of Global Multisectoral Health Capacity Evaluation Process

2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (13) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Bell ◽  
Jordan W. Tappero ◽  
Kashef Ijaz ◽  
Maureen Bartee ◽  
Jose Fernandez ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (9) ◽  
pp. e857-e858 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nirmal Kandel ◽  
Rajesh Sreedharan ◽  
Stella Chungong ◽  
Karen Sliter ◽  
Simo Nikkari ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett M. Forshey ◽  
Alexandra K. Woodward ◽  
Jose L. Sanchez ◽  
Stephanie R. Petzing

AbstractMilitaries across the world play an important but at times poorly defined and underappreciated role in global health security. For example, they are often called upon to support civilian authorities in humanitarian crises and to provide routine healthcare for civilians. Furthermore, military personnel are a unique population in a health security context, as they are highly mobile and often deploy to austere settings domestically and internationally, which may increase exposure to infectious diseases. Despite the role of militaries, few studies have systematically evaluated the involvement of militaries in global health security activities, including the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA). To address this shortcoming, we analyzed Joint External Evaluation (JEE) mission reports (n=91) and National Action Plans for Health Security (n=11) that had been completed as of October 2019 (n=91) to determine the extent to which military organizations have been involved in the evaluation process, country military contributions to health security are accounted for, and specific recommendations are provided for the country’s military. For JEE reports, military involvement was highest for the “Respond” core area (73%) but much lower for the Prevent (36%) and Detect (30%) core areas. Similarly, 73% of NAPHS documents mentioned military involvement in the Respond core area, compared to 27% and 36% for Prevent and Detect, respectively. Additionally, only 26% of JEE reports provide recommendations for the military in any of the core areas. Our results indicate the need to more fully incorporate military roles and contributions into the GHSA framework and other health security activities in order to improve national capabilities to prevent, detect, and respond to infectious disease threats.


2018 ◽  
Vol 182 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-13
Author(s):  
Robert C Whitcomb ◽  
Armin J Ansari ◽  
Adela Salame-Alfie ◽  
M Carol McCurley ◽  
Jennifer Buzzell ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viviane Ndoungue Viviane Fossouo ◽  
Mohamed Moctar Mouliom Mouiche ◽  
Christie Tiwoda ◽  
Oumarou Gnigninanjouena ◽  
Serge alain Sadeuh-Mba ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives: The objective of this study was to present the JEE process in Cameroon’s as well as the country capacities to prevent, detect and respond to public health threats in accordance with the IHR (2005). Data for the 48 indicators within the 19 technical areas of the Joint External Evaluation (JEE) tool was examined. Results: Cameroon's overall median score was 2 (Min =1, Max=4) and 34/48 indicators (71%) had scores less than 2 on a 1 to 5 scale. The weakest technical areas in the “Prevent” category were antimicrobial resistance, biosafety and biosecurity, and National legislation, policy and financing. In the “Detect” category, the median score was 2. Technical areas with the lowest median scores were Reporting and National Laboratory System. Emergency Response Operations, Preparedness, Medical Countermeasures and Personnel Deployment had the lowest scores in the “Respond” category. Chemical Events and Points of Entry had the lowest score in “Other IHR-related hazards and Point of Entry” category. Recommendations from the JEE to address the gaps will be aligned in a costed National Action Plan for Health Security (NAPHS) and implemented using national resources, external donors and multilateral agencies. Key words: International Health Regulation, Joint External Evaluation, Health security, Cameroon.


2020 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viviane Ndoungué Fossouo ◽  
Mohamed Moctar Mouliom Mouiche ◽  
Christie Tiwoda ◽  
Serge Alain Sadeuh-Mba ◽  
Roland Kimbi Wango ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 248-250
Author(s):  
Nirmal Kandel ◽  
Rajesh Sreedharan ◽  
Stella Chungong ◽  
Jaouad Mahjour

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-81
Author(s):  
M.J.A Ochoa Oliva ◽  
A. Reyes Martínez ◽  
B.A. Burgos Sánchez ◽  
L.R. Arán Sánchez

El Consejo Nacional de Acreditación en Informática y Computación A.C. (CONAIC) cuenta con las etapas generales en su proceso de evaluación con fines de la acreditación: solicitud, autoevaluación, evaluación externa, dictamen y seguimiento para la mejora continua. En esta última etapa, se presentan observaciones y/o recomendaciones en base a los resultados obtenidos en diversas evaluaciones de la Comisión Técnica de la visita de evaluación, seguimiento de recomendaciones y observaciones de los programas educativos; se verifica el cumplimiento de las mismas, cuando lainstitución ejecuta el plan de mejora y notifica al consejo los avances en la atención a las recomendaciones, mediante las evidencias y elaboración de informes periódicos. The National Council of Accreditation in Computing and Computing A.C. (CONAIC) has the general stages in its evaluation process for accreditation purposes: application, self-evaluation, external evaluation, opinion and monitoring for continuous improvement. In this last stage, observations and / or recommendations are presented based on the results obtained in various evaluations of the Technical Commission of the evaluation visit, follow-up of recommendations and observations of the educational programs; the fulfillment of the same is verified, when the institution executes the plan of improvement and notifies to the advice the advances in the attention to the recommendations, by means of the evidences and preparation of periodic reports.


2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vin Gupta ◽  
John D Kraemer ◽  
Rebecca Katz ◽  
Ashish K Jha ◽  
Vanessa B Kerry ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Viviane FOSSOUO NDOUNGUE ◽  
Mohamed Moctar Mouiche Molium ◽  
Christie Tiwoda ◽  
Oumarou Gnigninanjouena ◽  
Serge Alain Sadeuh-Mba ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives The objective of this study was to present the JEE process in Cameroon as well as Cameroon’s capacities to manage public health threats in accordance with the IHR 2005. Cameroon JEE process and data for the 48 indicators within the 19 technical areas was examined.Results Cameroon's overall score was 1.98 ± 0.93 and 48/34 indicators (70.38%) had scores less than 2 on a 1 to 5 scale. In the “Detect” category the average score was 2.7. Technical areas with the lowest average scores were Reporting and National laboratory system. The weakest indicators in the “Prevent” category were antimicrobial resistance, biosafety and biosecurity, and National legislation, policy and financing. Emergency Response Operations, Preparedness, Medical Countermeasures and Personnel Deployment have the lowest scores in the “Respond” category. Chemical Events and Points of Entry have the lowest score in “Other IHR-related hazards and Point of Entry”. Scores attributed during the country self-assessment were 73% similar to those of the JEE process.


2018 ◽  
Vol 73 ◽  
pp. 36-37
Author(s):  
M. Khan ◽  
M. Salman ◽  
J. ansari ◽  
U. Bashir ◽  
M.S. Malik ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document