Acknowledgments
The organizers of the meeting would like to express their gratitude to the authorities of Indonesia for theirsupport in the preparation and conduction of the eventand more particularly to- DG diseases control and prevention MoH RI- DG of Livestock and animal health, MoA- Assistant Deputy Coordinating Ministry of Human Development and Culture- Director Vector Borne and Zoonosis Diseases Control MoH RI- Bali provincial health OfficerTABLE OF CONTENTSTABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ 1
ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS ................................................................................................ 2
INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................ 3
Background ................................................................................................... 3
Objectives of the workshop and expected outcomes ....................................... 4

REPORT ON THE SESSIONS........................................................................................................ 6
Opening session ............................................................................................ 6
Session 1: The One Health Concept and National Perspectives ......................... 6
Session 2: Navigating the Road to One Health – Collaboration Gaps................. 7
Session 3: Bridges along the Road to One Health ............................................ 9
Session 4: Crossroads – PVS Pathway and IHR MEF reports .............................10
Session 5: Road Planning ..............................................................................11
Session 6: Fine-tuning the road-map .............................................................12
Session 7: Way forward ................................................................................15
Closing Session ............................................................................................15

WORKSHOP OUTPUTS ............................................................................................................ 16
Output 1: Objectives and actions identified per technical areas .....................16
Output 2: Prioritization results .....................................................................19
Output 3: One Health Road-map ...................................................................20

WORKSHOP EVALUATION ...................................................................................................... 22
APPENDIX .............................................................................................................................. 23
Annex 1: Workshop agenda ...........................................................................23
Annex 2: List of participants .........................................................................25

1

ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS
AI
BNPB
DG
DG-LAHSDG-PDC
FAO
FELTP
FP
HQ
IHR
IDSR
IT
JEE
MEF
MHDCA
MoA
MoEF
MoH
MoU
NAP
OIE
P2PTVZ
PH
PVS
RAP
SEARO
SOP
TOR
WHO

Avian Influenza
Indonesian National Board for Disaster Management
Directorate General
Directorate General for Livestock and Animal Health Services
Directorate General for Prevention and Disease Control
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
Field Epidemiology and Laboratory Training Program
Focal Point
Headquarters
International Health Regulations (2005)
Integrated Disease Surveillance & Response
Information technology
Joint External Evaluation
Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
Coordinating Ministry for Human Development and Cultural Affairs
Ministry of Agriculture
Ministry of Environment and Forestry
Ministry of Health
Memorandum of Understanding
National Action Plan
World Organisation for Animal HealthDirectorate for Prevention and Control of Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases
Public HealthPerformance of Veterinary Services
Regional Representation for Asia and the Pacific
WHO Regional Office for South-East Asia
Standard Operating Procedures
Terms of Reference
World Health Organization2

INTRODUCTIONBACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) are the two maininternational organizations responsible for proposing references and guidance for the public health andanimal health sectors respectively. WHO and OIE have been active promoters and implementers of anintersectoral collaborative approach between institutions and systems to prevent, detect, and control
diseases among animals and humans. They have developed various frameworks, tools and guidancematerials to strengthen capacities at the national, regional and global levels.
▪ WHO Member States adopted a legally binding instrument, the International Health Regulations (IHR,2005), for the prevention and control of events that may constitute a public health emergency ofinternational concern. Through these regulations, countries are required to develop, strengthen andmaintain minimum national core public health capacities to detect, assess, notify and respond to publichealth threats and as such, should implement plans of action to develop and ensure that the core capacities
required by the IHR are present and functioning throughout their territories. Various assessment andmonitoring tools have been developed by WHO such as the IHR Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (MEF),
which includes inter alia the Annual Reporting Questionnaire for Monitoring Progress and the Joint External
Evaluation (JEE) Tool.
▪ The OIE is the intergovernmental organization responsible for developing standards, guidelines andrecommendations for animal health and zoonoses; these are laid down in the OIE Terrestrial and Aquatic
Animal Codes and Manuals. In order to achieve the sustainable improvement of national Veterinary Services’compliance with these standards, in particular on the quality of Veterinary Services, the OIE has developed
the Performance of Veterinary Services (PVS) Pathway, which is composed of a range of tools to assist
countries to objectively assess and address the main weaknesses of their Veterinary Services.

3

These support tools shift away from externally driven, short-term, emergency response type ‘vertical’approaches addressing only specific diseases, and contribute to a more sustainable, long term ‘horizontal’
strengthening of public and animal health systems. The WHO IHR MEF and the OIE PVS Pathway approaches
enable countries to determine strengths and weaknesses in their respective functions and activities, andpromote prioritization and pathways for improvement. Furthermore, they engage countries in a routine
monitoring and follow up mechanism on their overall level of performance and help to determine their needs
for compliance with internationally adopted references and standards.
The use of the WHO IHR monitoring tools and OIE PVS Pathway results in a detailed assessment of existing
weaknesses and gaps, with the better alignment of a capacity building approach and strategies at country
level between the human and animal health sectors. The two organizations have developed a workshop
format (the IHR-PVS National Bridging Workshops) that enables countries to further explore possible
overlapping areas addressed in their PVS and IHR capacity frameworks and develop, where relevant,appropriate bridges to facilitate coordination. A structured approach using user-friendly materials enables
the identification of synergies, reviews gaps and defines the operational strategies to be used by policy
makers for concerted corrective measures and strategic investments in national action plans for improved
health security.
In Indonesia,- a PVS Evaluation was conducted in 2007;- a PVS Gap Analysis was conducted in 2011;- a Joint External Evaluation (JEE) mission is planned for November 2017 and the country is currently
conducting the preparatory self-assessment exercise.

OBJECTIVES OF THE WORKSHOP AND EXPECTED OUTCOMES
The main objective of the IHR-PVS Pathway National Bridging Workshop (IHR-PVS NBW) is to provide an
opportunity to the human and animal health services of hosting countries to build on the reviews ofperformance, gaps and discussions for improvement conducted in their respective sectors, and to explore
options for improved coordination between the sectors, to jointly strengthen their preparedness for, andcontrol of, the spread of zoonotic diseases.
The IHR-PVS NBWs focus on the following strategic objectives:• Brainstorming: discuss the outcomes of IHR and PVS Pathway country assessments and identify ways
to use the outputs;• Advancing One Health: improve dialogue, coordination and collaboration between animal andhuman health sectors to strategically plan areas for joint actions and a synergistic approach;• Building Sustainable Networks: contribute to strengthening the inter-sectoral collaboration throughimproved understanding of respective roles and mandates;• Strategic planning: inform planning and investments (incl. the National Action Plan for Health
Security) based on the structured and agreed identification of needs and options for improvement

4Expected outcomes of the workshop include:
1. Increased awareness and understanding on the IHR (2005) and the role of WHO, the mandate of theOIE, the IHRMEF and the OIE PVS Pathway, their differences and connections.
2. Understanding of the contribution of the veterinary services in the implementation of the IHR (2005)
and how the results of the PVS Pathway and IHRMEF can be used to explore strategic planning andcapacity building needs.
3. A diagnosis of current strengths and weaknesses of the collaboration between the animal health andpublic health services.
4. Identification of practical next steps and activities for the development and implementation of joint
national roadmap to strengthen collaboration and coordination.
The agenda of the Workshop is available at Annex 1. It was attended by 94 participants (Annex 2), withapproximately one half from the Ministry of Health and the other half from the Ministry of Agriculture withrepresentatives from the Central, Provincial and District level attending the three-day discussions.
Representatives of the environmental sector, legal sector, media and health development partners were alsopresent.

5

REPORT ON THE SESSIONS
The workshop used an interactive methodology and a structured approach with user-friendly material, casestudies, videos and facilitation tools. All participants received a Participant Handbook which comprised of allnecessary information such as the objectives of the workshop, instructions for working groups, expected
outcomes of each session etc. Sessions were structured in a step-by-step process as follows:

OPENING SESSION
The opening ceremony was attended by high level national representatives from both Ministries, Director
General Livestock and animal health MoA RI, head of Bali provincial health Officer, and Assistant Deputy
Coordinating Ministry of Human Development and Culture as well as representatives of internationalorganizations, namely Dr Gongal (WHO SEARO) and Dr Tshering (OIE RAP).
It was highlighted that the flow of tourists and the amount of imports/exports brought significant income toIndonesia but also increased the risk of introduction and spread of diseases. Five of them have been identified
as priority zoonosis in Indonesia: influenza, rabies, leptospirosis, anthrax and plague.
After a prayer in the name of Allah and a group photograph, participants were all given the opportunity tobriefly introduce themselves.

SESSION 1: THE ONE HEALTH CONCEPT AND NATIONAL PERSPECTIVES
A documentary video introduced the One Health Concept, its history, rationale and purpose and how it
became an international paradigm. The video also introduced the workshop in the global and national
context by providing high level background information on the collaboration between WHO, OIE and FAO.
The workshop approach and methodology were explained and the participant handbook was presented.
The Director of P2PTVZ (Directorate for Prevention and Control of Vector-Borne and Zoonotic Diseases)
presented an overview on the epidemiological situation of the main zoonotic diseases whether endemic(influenza, leptospirosis and rabies) or re-emerging (anthrax and plague). As Indonesia is preparing for a Joint
External Evaluation (JEE) to be conducted in November 2017, the country has already worked on their selfevaluation. Results of this self-evaluation for the technical area on Zoonotic Diseases were therefore
presented and discussed.
A second documentary video provided participants with concrete worldwide examples of intersectoralcollaboration in addressing health issues at the human-animal interface. It was followed by presentations by
the MoH on IHR implementation in Indonesia and by the MoA on the PVS assessment missions that havebeen conducted (PVS Evaluation in 2007 and PVS Gap Analysis in 2011).

Outcomes of Session 1:
At the end of the session, the audience agreed that:•••

Intersectoral collaboration between animal and human health sectors happens, but mainly during
outbreaks; with a better preparedness, much more could be done at the human-animal interface.
The two sectors have common concerns and challenges and conduct similar activities. Competencies
exist and can be pooled. This needs to be organized though a collaborative approach;WHO, OIE and FAO are active promoters of One Health and can provide technical assistance tocountries to help enhance inter-sectoral collaboration at the central, local and technical levels.

6

SESSION 2: NAVIGATING THE ROAD TO ONE HEALTH – COLLABORATION GAPS
Participants were divided into five working groups of mixed participants from both sectors (MoH and MoA)
and from different levels (Central, Provincial, District). Groups were provided with one of five case study
scenarios (Table 1) based on diseases relevant to the Indonesian context (avian influenza H5N1, avian
influenza H7N9, rabies, anthrax and leptospirosis) developed in collaboration with MoH and MoA
representatives.
Table 1: Scenarios used for the different case studies
Rabies – A stray dog which was known to have bitten two beef cattle and was behaving aggressively towards
people was reported to have bitten some children in the same neighbourhood. It was shot dead by Police in theoutskirts of Entikong sub-district two days ago. The carcass of the dog was consumed before the Veterinary
authorities were able to take the head of the dog for confirmation of diagnosis.
H7N9 – Two persons were admitted at the RSUD Tangerang Hospital, South Tangerang district, with pneumonia.
Laboratory testing by RT-PCR resulted positive for H7N9 subtype of avian influenza. One of the patients is a semicommercial broiler producer who sells his birds three times a week at the local live bird market. The other patientreported having visited the same market 7 days prior to disease onset and having bought four quails. The
authorities have heard about illegal trading of quails from China.
H5N1 – Two persons were admitted at the RSUD Tangerang Hospital, South Tangerang district, with pneumonia.
Laboratory testing by RT-PCR resulted positive for H5N1 subtype of avian influenza. One of the patients is a semicommercial broiler producer who sells his birds three times a week at the local live bird market. The other patientreported having visited the same market 7 days prior to disease onset and having bought four quails.
Anthrax – At least 60 people who allegedly ate uninspected meat at Dungaliyo in Gorontalo have been screened
for anthrax. The victims, among them school children, were rushed to primary health care center/Puskesmas after
they developed symptoms associated with anthrax and cutaneous lesions. The man who sold the uninspected meat
disappeared after learning that his neighbours had fallen sick.
Leptospirosis – The Health Department has identified a cluster of three cases of leptospirosis in the area of Gunung
Kidul during flood season. One person has died and two others have suffered serious illness as a result of thebacterial disease. All three cases were reported within a 1-block radius—in the suburbs of Wonosari, one of thepoorest neighbourhoods in the region. Cattle are very much present in the area.

Using experience from previous outbreaks of zoonotic diseases, the groups discussed how they would haverealistically managed these events, and evaluated the level of collaboration between the veterinary and the
public health services for 16 key technical areas: coordination, investigation, surveillance, communication,etc. These activities/areas of collaboration were represented by color-coded technical area cards: green for“good collaboration”, yellow for “some collaboration”, and red for “collaboration needing improvement”(Figure 1).

7

Figure 1: Participants working on a case study scenario and evaluating the level of collaboration between the sectors
for 16 key technical areas.

During an ensuing plenary session, each group presented and justified the results of their work. Table 2
summarizes the results from the five groups.
Table 2: Summary of results obtained from Session 2:

Technical area (cards)

RabiesAnthrax

Leptospirosi
s

H5N1

H7N9

Coordination at high Level
Coordination at local Level
Coordination at technical Level
Legislation / Regulation
FinanceCommunication w/ media
Communication w/ stakeholders
Field investigation
Risk assessment
Joint surveillance
Laboratory
Response
Education and training
Emergency funding
Human resources
Logistics
For each disease, the performance of the collaboration between the human health and the animal health sectors is color-coded: green for “goodcollaboration”, yellow for “some collaboration”, and red for “collaboration needing improvement”.

Session 2 was closed by a presentation from the Bali Provincial Animal Health Office on lessons learned from
Bali on their rabies control programme.

Outcomes of Session 2:•••

Areas of collaboration are identified and joint activities discussed.
Level of collaboration between the two sectors for 16 key technical areas is assessed.
The main gaps in the collaboration are identified.

8

SESSION 3: BRIDGES ALONG THE ROAD TO ONE HEALTH
Documentary videos introduced the international legal frameworks followed by human health (IHR 2005)
and animal health (OIE standards) as well as the tools available to assess the country’s capacities: the annual
reporting and JEE tools for public health services and OIE PVS Pathway for veterinary services. The differences
and connections between these tools were explained. A large matrix (IHR-PVS matrix), cross-connecting theindicators of the IHR MEF (in rows) and the indicators of the PVS Evaluation (in columns) was set-up andintroduced to the participants (Figure 2).
Through an interactive approach, working groups were invited to plot their technical area cards onto thematrix by matching them to their corresponding indicators. A plenary analysis of the outcome showed clear
gap clusters and illustrated that most gaps were not disease-specific but systemic.

Figure 2: Participants conducting collective mapping of the gaps by positioning their technical area cards on the IHRPVS matrix.

The main gaps (clusters) identified were discussed and it was agreed that the rest of the workshop would
focus on the following capacities:•

Coordination•

Human resources and Education
Risk Assessment and Surveillance
Response
Communication•••

Note: ‘Finance’ also came-up as one of the technical areas needing most improvement (two red and threeyellow). However, participants agreed that the audience of this workshop would not be able to provide
substantial improvements in that domain. It remains nonetheless one of the major gaps to impair theefficiency of the intersectoral collaboration in Indonesia.

Outcomes of Session 3:••••

Understanding that tools are available to explore operational capacities in each of the sectors.
Understanding of the contribution of the veterinary sector to the IHR.
Understanding of the bridges between the IHR MEF and the PVS Pathway. Reviewing together the
results of capacities assessment may help in identifying synergies and optimize collaboration.
Understanding that most gaps identified are not disease-specific but systemic.

•

Identification of the technical areas to focus on during the next sessions.

9

SESSION 4: CROSSROADS – PVS PATHWAY AND IHR MEF REPORTS
New working groups with representation from all previous groups were organized for each of the five priority
technical areas (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Generic graph describing the organization of working groups for Session 2 (left) and Session 4-5 (right).

The matrix was used to link the identified gaps to their relevant indicators in the IHR MEF and in the PVS
Pathway. Each working group then opened the assessment reports (annual reporting, JEE self-evaluation,
PVS Evaluation, PVS Gap Analysis) and extracted the main findings and recommendations relevant to theirtechnical area (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Results obtained for the technical group focusing on Response. The reporting panel is split into two columns(public health and animal health), orange and green post-its summarize respectively the gaps and the recommendations
described in the assessment reports or identified from case study discussions.

Expected outcomes of Session 4:•••

Good understanding of the assessment reports for both sectors, their purpose and their structure.
Main gaps relevant to each technical area have been extracted.
Main recommendations from existing reports have been extracted.

•

A common understanding of the effort needed starts to emerge.

10SESSION 5: ROAD PLANNING
Using the same working groups as for the previous session, participants were asked to identify, for eachtechnical area, three joint objectives to improve their collaboration. For each objective, they filled Action
Cards, detailing the activities, their dates of expected implementation, the focal points responsible, therequired support as well as measurable indicators (Figure 5).

Figure 5: The group working on “Human resources and education” identified two objectives and five activities toimprove the collaboration between the two sectors in this domain.

The difficulty of implementation and the expected impact of each activity were evaluated using red and blue
stickers respectively and a semi-quantitative scale (1 to 3).

Expected outcomes of Session 5:•••

Clear and achievable objectives and activities are identified to improve inter-sectoral collaboration
between the two sectors for all technical areas selected.
For each activity, a desired completion date, focal points, required support and measurable
indicators have been identified.
The impact and the difficulty of implementation of all proposed activities have been estimated.

11

SESSION 6: FINE-TUNING THE ROAD-MAP
A World Café exercise was organized to enable participants to contribute to the action points of all technicalareas. Each group nominated a rapporteur whose duty was to summarize the results of their work to theother groups. Each group rotated between the different boards to contribute and provide feedback on alltechnical areas. At the end of the cycle, each group returned to their original board and the rapporteur
summarized the feedback and changes or additions suggested by the other participants (Figure 6). Objectives
and activities were fine-tuned accordingly.

Figure 6: World café exercise: the group on “communication” is providing feedback to the rapporteur working on“Response”.

The following paragraphs summarize the results of the five technical working groups, which are fully detailedin Output 1.

Technical area 1: Coordination
Coordination at the central level was assessed as being very functional by all five working groups. However,all participants agreed that coordination at the local and technical levels needed strengthening. One of themain gaps is the lack of regulations and guidelines to coordinate the management of zoonotic disease
outbreaks on the field. The main objective was therefore to develop a legal/regulatory basis for intersectoraland central/local government coordination for the management of these outbreaks. Guidelines have alreadybeen drafted and pilot implementation has been conducted, the need is now mainly to develop a Ministerial
Decree and to deliver awareness and training in the provinces on how to follow the guidelines.

Technical area 2: Human resources and Education
The road-map to improve the intersectoral collaboration in terms of human resources and education has two
main objectives:-to develop and conduct joint trainings on laboratory and epidemiology for both the human andanimal health sector, and-to develop and implement a One Health curriculum in medicine and veterinary medicine faculties.

12Technical area 3: Risk assessment and Surveillance
The first step will be to identify the priority zoonotic diseases in Indonesia via a coordination meeting andfocal group discussions.
The need to develop an information system for zoonotic disease and to implement systematic sharing ofsurveillance data between the two sectors was clearly highlighted. This will require the harmonization of theinformation systems used by the different ministries, the development of SOPs for systematic data sharing
and the delivery of trainings in provinces on the use of this information system, on data management and on
data analysis.
Lastly, both sectors agreed that it was critical to improve the laboratory capacity for the diagnosis of zoonotic
diseases by delivering joint trainings to laboratory personnel from both sectors.

Technical area 4: Response
The strengthening of the animal health and public health collaboration in the response to zoonotic disease
outbreaks had three main cornerstones:-

The delivery of leadership training (for at least one veterinarian and one medical doctor for each of
the 34 provinces) to improve coordination between the sectors in times of outbreaks,
The availability of emergency funds, through the commitment of central and local governments tohaving emergency funds for the response to zoonotic disease outbreaks, andThe delivery of training at province level for joint field investigation and response to outbreaks,
covering all relevant topics (biosecurity, depopulation, tracing forward and backwards, casemanagement etc.).

Technical area 5: Communication
The development of an integrated national communication system and mechanism was a clear priority. This
will require to develop a communication system with appropriate guidelines, and to test and evaluate its
implementation in three pilot locations prior to large-scale implementation.
To improve the technical capacity of communication personnel, a training of trainers will be organized atnational level and will be followed by the delivery of trainings in each province for the four relevant sectors(health, animal health, wild life and information).
Routine stakeholder meetings will also be organized on a 3-months basis.

Prioritization of Objectives
A total of 12 objectives were identified. To prioritize them, an online application was used. Participants wereasked to connect from their own device (Figure 7) or to use computers set-up by facilitators to identify which
five objectives they considered as highest priority. 51 participants voted, results can be found in Output 2.

13

Figure 7: participants using their mobile phones to vote for their priority objectives.

Expected outcomes of Session 6:••

Buy-in and ownership of all participants who contributed to all areas of the road-map.
Prioritization of the activities.

14

SESSION 7: WAY FORWARD
Results of the prioritization vote were presented and discussed.
To further challenge and fine-tune the proposed activities, a role-play trial was organized with a panel madeup of five colleagues role-playing international organizations and donors (Figure 8). Groups presented eachof their activities one by one and the panel’s role was to challenge the proposed activity and make sure thatit met the SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time-bound) and that it was
harmonized with the rest of the road-plan. Once corrections were made, the participant was invited to fix
the activity card on one of three boards representing different timelines (3-6 months / 12 months / 24months). All proposed activities were therefore discussed in plenary, fine-tuned, and assigned to a timeframe which constituted the final road-map (Output 3).

Figure 8: role-play panel where activities proposed by participants are challenged one last time for final fine-tuning

As Indonesia is preparing for a JEE, a documentary movie was shown to present the JEE tool, its structure, its
objective and its process. A final presentation was given to explain how the outputs of the IHR-PVS National
Bridging Workshop will be able to feed into the JEE process and complement the self-evaluation alreadyconducted by Indonesia.

Expected outcomes of Session 7:••

Harmonized, concrete and achievable road-map to improve the collaboration between the animal
health and human health sectors in the prevention, detection and response to zoonotic disease
outbreaks
Understanding of how the outputs of the workshop can feed into the JEE and the IHR MEF process

CLOSING SESSION
The workshop ended with statements from MoH and MoA indicating that both sectors took ownership of
the outcomes of the workshop. They also ensured joint engagement in addressing the gaps identified forcollaboration at the human-animal interface. The WHO, the OIE and the FAO reiterated their full commitment
to support the country in improving this collaboration.
All the material used during the workshop, including movies, presentations, documents of references, resultsfrom the working groups and pictures were copied on a memory stick distributed to all participants.

15

WORKSHOP OUTPUTSOUTPUT 1: OBJECTIVES AND ACTIONS IDENTIFIED PER TECHNICAL AREAS
ActionTimeline

Difficulty(1-3 scale)

Impact(1-3 scale)

Responsibility

Indicators

COORDINATION
Objective 1: Develop legal basis for intersectoral and central/local government coordination for the management of zoonosis
1.1. Formalize legal regulation for guidelines to coordinate themanagement of zoonosis outbreaks with disaster status

3-6 months

1.2. Conduct a training of trainers and deliver trainings to apply
guidelines to coordinate management of zoonosis outbreaks

12 months

1.3. Apply guidelines, monitor and evaluate implementation ofregulation and guidelines to identify gaps and corrective actions

12 months
and cont.

+++

HDC, BNPB, Kemendagri,
Kemenkes, Kementan, K LHK,
etc.

-Regulation formalized-Guidelines developed

+++

+++

MoA, MoH, KLHK, Home Affair,
BNPB.
Focal point: Coordinating
MHDCA-Number of provinces thatparticipate in training of trainers-Number of districts/cities thatcarry out trainings

+++

+++

MoA, MoH, KLHK, MHA
Focal point: Coordinating
MHDCA-Guidelines are implemented-Management of outbreaks iscoordinated and effective++

HUMAN RESOURCES & EDUCATION
Objective 2: Develop and conduct joint training on laboratory and epidemiology for human and animal health2.1. Organize a cross sectoral decision-maker meeting to discuss
joint training on laboratory and epidemiology for human and animal
health

3-6 months

2.2. Conduct a workshop to develop joint training modules onlaboratory and epidemiology for human and animal health

12 months

2.3. Deliver joint trainings on laboratory and epidemiology forhuman and animal health

12 months
and cont.

Coordinating MHDCA-Number of participants-Meeting outputs(recommendations, timeline)+++

Coordinating MHDCA, MoH,
MoA, MoEF-Training modules developed+++

Coordinating MHDCA, MoH,
MoA, MoEF-Number of trainings conducted

Coordinating MHDCA-Meeting outputs(recommendations, timeline)

Coordinating MHDCA, MoH,
MoA, MoEF, MoRTHE-Developed work plan

+

+++

+
+

-Number of participants trained

Objective 3: One Health curriculum in faculty of Medicine and Veterinary Medicine
3.1. Organize a decision maker meeting to discuss implementation of
One Health curriculum in medical and veterinary school

3-6 months

3.2. Conduct a workshop to prepare workplan to develop One Healthcurriculum

12-24months

++

+++

+++

+++

16

RISK ASSESSMENT & SURVEILLANCE
Objective 4: Coordination and collaboration to identify priority zoonotic disease in Indonesia
4.1. Conduct a coordination meeting between MoH, MoA and PMK

12 months

4.2. Organize a focal group discussion (FGD) with 100 participantsfrom relevant institutions (KLHK, Menko PMK, BNPB)

12 months

++

+++

+++

+++

MoH (organizer)-Number of participants-Meeting outputs

MoA (organizer)-Number of participants-FGD outputs & recommendations

Objective 5: Develop information system for zoonosis and implement systematic sharing of surveillance data
5.1. Harmonize information systems among MoA, MoH and KLKH

12 months

5.2. Develop joint SOPs for data sharing

12 months

5.3. Deliver trainings for the use of System Information (SIZE), data
management and data analysis

12 months

+++

+++

++

+++

++

+++

++

+++

Coordinating MHDCA-Integrated information system isestablished and running

Coordinating MHDCA-SOPs for data sharing aredeveloped

Organizer: Coordinating MHDCA
Participants : MoA, MoH, KLHK

-Number of training conducted-Number of staff trained

MoH, MoA-Number of participants trained

DG-LAH, DG-PDC-Guidelines developed

DG-LAH, DG-PDC-Report of pilot testing-Corrective measures identified

DG-LAH, DG-PDC-Number of participants trained

Objective 6: Improve laboratory capacity for diagnosis of zoonotic diseases
6.1. Conduct a joint training to improve (i) skills of human resources,(ii) laboratory facilities, (iii) standardized laboratory methods, for 80
persons

12 months

RESPONSE
Objective 7: Improve coordination for zoonotic disease emergency response
7.1. Develop guidelines for response to zoonosis emergencies

3-6 months

7.2. Test and evaluate implementation of guidelines for zoonosis
control in 3 pilot locations

12 months

7.3. Conduct a leadership training on response to zoonosis outbreaks
for 1 veterinarian and 1 medical doctor for each province (68 total)

12 months

+

+++

++

+++

+

+++

Objective 8: Ensure availability of emergency funds and infrastructure for zoonotic disease prevention and control
8.1. Develop regulations that bind central and local government tohave emergency funds for zoonosis outbreaks

12 months

++

+++

+

+++

DG-LAH, DG-PDC

Regulation for emergency fundingfor zoonosis outbreaks is in place

DG-LAH, DG-PDC-Number of participants trained

Objective 9: Improve capacity for outbreak containment at the source
9.1. Deliver a training for joint field investigation and response to
zoonosis outbreaks (biosecurity, depopulation, investigation, casemanagement…)

12 months

17

COMMUNICATION
Objective 10: Develop integrated national communication system and mechanism
10.1. Conduct a workshop to develop integrated national
communication system and mechanism and develop a memorandumof understanding among related Ministries (3 days)

3-6 months

10.2. Develop guidelines for integrated national communication
system and mechanism

3-6 months

10.3. Test and evaluate implementation in 3 pilot locations(Bengkalis, Boyolali and Ketapang)

12 months++++

Coordinating MHDCA, Kemenkes
P2P, Kementan, KLHK, BNPB,
Kemdagri, Kemkominfo-Workshop report-Memorandum of Understanding

++

+++

Coordinating MHDCA, Kemenkes
P2P, Kementan, KLHK, BNPB,
Kemdagri, Kemkominfo-Draft of guidelines produced-Finalized guidelines

+++

+++

Coordinating MHDCA, Kemenkes
P2P, Kementan, KLHK, BNPB,
Kemdagri, Kemkominfo-Activity report+++

Coordinating MHDCA, Kemenkes
P2P, Kementan, KLHK, BNPB,
Kemdagri, Kemkominfo,
Bangkalis, Ketapang-Workshop report-Number of participants

++

+++

Coordinating MHDCA, Kemenkes
P2P, Kementan, KLHK, BNPB,
Kemdagri, Kemkominfo,
Bangkalis, Ketapang-Meeting reports-Number of participants in eachmeeting-Press/media releases

++

+++

Coordinating MHDCA, Kemenkes
P2P, Kementan, KLHK, BNPB,
Kemdagri, Kemkominfo-Final report-Number of trained participants

+++

+++

Coordinating MHDCA, Kemenkes
P2P, Kementan, KLHK, BNPB,
Kemdagri, Kemkominfo-Number of trainings conducted-Number of participants trained

Objective 11: Build commitment and participation of stakeholders
11.1. Conduct an advocacy workshop to build commitment andparticipation of stakeholders (2 days)

3-6 months

11.2. Conduct routine meetings every 3 months for national
communication between stakeholders

12 months
andcontinued++

Objective 12: Build human resource capacity in national communication
12.1. Conduct a national training (training of trainers) on integrated
national communication system and mechanism (4 days)

12 months

12.2. Deliver trainings for local governments on communication
system and mechanism (3 days) for four sectors (health, animal
health, wild life and information)

12 months

Difficulty of implementation: Low +, Moderate ++, Very difficult +++Impact: Low impact +, Moderate impact ++, High impact +++Abbreviations: KLHK: Ministry of Environment and Forestry / Kemenkes P2P: DG Diseases Control and Prevention MoH / Kemdagri: Ministry of internal affair / Kementan:
Ministry of Agriculture / BNPB: National Disaster Agency / HDC or MHDCA: Human Development and Culture / Kemkominfo: Ministry of Communication and information / MoEF:
Ministry of Finance / Bengkalis and Ketapang: District for one health pilot implementation / DG-LAH: Director General Livestock and Animal Health.

18

OUTPUT 2: PRIORITIZATION RESULTS
All participants were asked to vote individually via a mobile application and to select which five of the 12 objectives they considered as of highest priority.
51 participants participated in the vote. 84% of them considered Objective 1 (Coordination) as a top priority. Other high priority objectives were Objective 10(Communication - 59%), Objective 7 (Response - 53%) and Objective 5 (RA & Surveillance - 49%).

19

OUTPUT 3: ONE HEALTH ROAD-MAP

Coordination

6 months

12 months….and continued >>> Priority rank

Formalize legal regulation for guidelines to coordinate themanagement of zoonosis outbreaks with disaster status

1

Training of trainers and trainings to apply guidelines
for the management of zoonosis outbreaks

1

Apply guidelines, monitor and evaluate implementation of regulation and guidelines to identify
gaps and corrective actions

1

Human Resources& Education

Cross sectoral decision-maker meeting to discuss joint training
on laboratory and epidemiology for human and animal health6

Workshop to develop training modules on laboratory
and epidemiology for human and animal health

6

Deliver joint trainings on laboratory and epidemiology for human and animal health
Decision maker meeting to discuss implementation of One Healthcurriculum in medical and veterinary school

11

Workshop to prepare workplan to develop One Health curriculum

Risk Assessment& Surveillance

6

11

Coordination meeting between MoH, MoA and PMK

5

Focal group discussion with 100 participants from relevant institutions (KLHK, Menko PMK, BNPB)

5

Harmonize information systems among MoA, MoH and KLKH

4Develop joint SOPs for data sharing

4

Deliver trainings for the use of System Information (SIZE), data management and data analysis

4

Conduct a joint training to improve (i) skills of human resources, (ii) laboratory facilities, (iii) standardized laboratory
methods, for 80 persons

620

6 months

12 months….and continued >>>Communication

Response

Develop guidelines for response to zoonosis emergencies

Priority rank
3

Test and evaluate implementation of guidelines for zoonosis

3

Conduct a leadership training on response to zoonosis outbreaks

3

Develop regulations that bind central and local government to have emergency funds for zoonosis outbreaks

9

Deliver a training for joint field investigation and response to zoonosis outbreaks (biosecurity, depopulation, investigation,case management…)

10

Conduct a workshop to develop integrated national
communication system and mechanism and a MoU among
related Ministries

2

Develop guidelines for integrated national communication
system and mechanism

2

Test and evaluate implementation in 3 pilot locations(Bengkalis, Boyolali and Ketapang)

2

Conduct an advocacy workshop to build commitment andparticipation of stakeholders

8

Conduct routine meetings every 3 months for national communication between stakeholders

8

Conduct a national training (training of trainers) on integrated national communication system and mechanism

12

Deliver trainings for local governments on communication system and mechanism for four sectors (health, animal health,wild life and information)

12

21

WORKSHOP EVALUATION
An evaluation questionnaire was completed by 54 participants (Figure 9) in order to collect feedback on therelevance and utility of the workshop. The vast majority of nationals rated the workshop highly, being for themost part “fully satisfied”, or otherwise “satisfied” with both the content (94%) and the format of theworkshop (96%). In addition, when asked about the level of impact of the workshop, 93% and 94% ofparticipants answered ‘high impact’ or ‘very high impact’ in regards to their technical knowledge and inregards to improving the collaboration between animal health and human health in Indonesia (Table 3).

Figure 9: Answers to the question “which sector are you from?” (54 respondents)
Table 3: Results of the evaluation of the event by participants (54 respondents)

Overall assessment'Satisfied' or 'Fully satisfied'Content

94%

Structure / Format

96%

Organization (venue, logistics, …)

78%

Impact of the event on…

‘High’ or ‘Very High impact’… your technical knowledge

93%… the work of your unit94%

… the collaboration of animaland public health in Indonesia

94%

When asked what were the main strengths of the workshop (open question), the most frequent answers
were the material and method (61% of evaluations) and the skills of the experts and facilitators (29%).
When asked to name the main weaknesses of the workshop (open question), common answers were theinsufficient amount of time allocated for the workshop (68%) and the lack of translation devices or the qualityof the translation (32%).
Extracts from the comments of participants:"Well thought-out format with a strong emphasis on interactions among stakeholders. One of the bestinter-disciplinary workshop I have ever attended""A great method for self-assessment and for road-mapping the way forward""Material and method were excellent. The sessions are very well articulated […] and the process is very wellthought out"

22

APPENDIXANNEX 1: WORKSHOP AGENDA
DAY 1 – 21 August 201712.00 – 14.00
14.00 – 16.00

Registration
MC : Ibu Rohani

Opening Session- Indonesia Raya anthem- Organizer Report- Welcoming remark- Remark from WHO- Remark from OIE- Remark and Opening of National IHR-PVS bridging workshop- Group Photo

16.00 – 16.15
16.15 – 17.50- Direktur P2PTVZ- Head of Bali
Province
- WHO
- OIE
- DG Live Stock andAnimal Health MoA

Coffee break

Session 1: Workshop Objectives and National
Perspectives

Moderator : drh
Azhar• Movie 1: Tripartite One Health collaboration and vision (10’)• Workshop approach and methodology (10’)• IHR JEE Self-assessment for Zoonosis Action Package and
PHEIC potential zoonosis diseases (50’)• Movie 2: Driving successful interactions - (20’)- WHO/OIE- WHO/OIE- Dir. P2PTVZ MoH- WHO/OIEDAY 2 – 22 August 201708.00 – 08.10

Review of Day 1

08.10 – 10.10

Continuation of Session 1 : Workshop Objectives andNational Perspectives- IHR Implementation (2005) in Indonesia (45’)- PVS implementation and evaluation report in Indonesia (45’)-

10.10 – 10.25
10.25 – 12.10

12.10 – 13.00
13.00 – 13.45

Lesson learned from Bali on rabies control programme (30’)

Moderator : dr
Sinurtina- Dir. Surveilanceand Health
Quarantine MoH- Dir. Animal Health
MoA- Bali Provincial
animal health
OfficeCoffee BreakSession 2: Navigating the road to One Health• Presentation and organization of the working group exercise(15’)• Case study - Working groups by disease (90’)

Moderator : drh Pebi
PurwoSuseno
WHO/OIE

Lunch
Presentation of Group Discussion (45’)

Moderator : drh Pebi
PurwoSuseno
WHO/OIE

23

13.45 – 16.10

Session 3: Bridges along the road to One Health
•
•
•
•
•

16.10 – 16.25
16.25 – 17.55

Movie 3: Tools for human health (20’)
Movie 4: Tools for animal health (20’)
Movie 5: Bridging the tools (10’)
Mapping gaps on the IHR/PVS matrix (60’)
Discussion – Plenary (35’)
Coffee BreakSession 4: Crossroads - IHR MEF and PVS Pathwayreports- Presentation and organization of the working group exercise(10’)- Extract main results from the PVS Pathway (PVS Evaluation
and PVS Gap Analysis) and IHR reports (annual selfevaluation), in relation to gaps identified on the matrix andreview what has been proposed in the NAPHS (80’)

Moderator : drh
Pujiatmoko
WHO/OIE

Moderator : drSyamsu Alam
WHO/OIE

DAY 3 – 23 August 201708.00 – 08.10

Review of day 2

Session 5: Vision and strategic actions
08.10 – 10.10

10.10 – 10.25• Presentation and organization of the working group exercise(15’)• Objectives and Activities (Working groups by technical topic)(105’)
Coffee BreakSession 6: Roadmap - Reaching consensus
10.25 – 13.00

13.00 – 14.00• World Café and finalization (80’)• Plenary discussion on the Roadmap (60’)• Presentation of the prioritization tool (15’)
Lunch(collective assessment of priority levels)

Session 7: Way forward

15.45 – 16.00• Results of prioritization vote (10’)• Movie 6 : Joint External Evaluation (10’)• Next steps (integrating the action points into the IHR-MEF
process) (30’)• Possible contributions of international partners –DAWR /FAO (30’)• Evaluation of the workshop (15’)
Coffee Break

16.00 – 17.00

Closing Ceremony

14.00 – 15.45

Moderator : dr Lily
Banonah
WHO/OIE

Moderator : drh
Azhar
WHO/OIE

Moderator : drh
Endang Burni
WHO/OIE

DG DC & EH MoH

24

ANNEX 2: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS

INDONESIA
Henny Kambey
Dinas Pertanian dan Peternakan Propinsi
Sulut
Sri Yusnowati
Pusat Kegiatan Hewan dan
Keanekaragaman Hayati
Endang Burni P
Subdit Zoonosis
Novie Ariari
Subdit Zoonosis
Khoirul Syahri
Dinas Pertanian Peternakan dan
Perkebunan Ketapang
choiruls@gmail.com
Tatik Murhayati
Dinas Kesehatan Propinsi Jawa Tengah
murha823@gmail.com
Ayu Pradipta P
B2P2VRP Litbangkes
ayupredipta.p@gmail.com
Johanes Eko K
Subdit Zoonosis Dit. P2PTVZ
Rohani Simanjuntak
Subdit Zoonosis

Muhammad Azhar
Ditkeswan Kementan
Pudjiatmoko, Ph.D
Ditkeswan Kementan
Zainal Khoirudin
Subdit Zoonosis
Agustiningsih
Balitbangkes
SudjadiSubdit Zoonosis
Siti Yulianti
Subdit P2H Ditkeswan
Sayekti Udi Utama
BBTKLPP Yogyakarta
naufal_utama@yahoo.co.id
Gede Wira S
Dinas Kesehatan Bali
Yenvetris
Dinkes Propinsi Riau
Budi Santoso
BBTKLPP Surabaya
budidiv@gmail.com

Leny Marlina
Subdit Zoonosis

I Gede Agung J
KKP Kelas I Denpasar
kkp_dps@yahoo.co.id

SarmanBTKLPP Manado
sarman065@gmail.com

Ruswanto
BKSDA Kalimantan Barat
ruswanto24@yahoo.co.id

Tantri Proboraras
Balai Veteriner Semarang - Dinas
Peternakan dan Keswan Propinsi Jawa
TengahRafis Wijaya
KKP Kelas II P. Baru

Ngurah Gede
Dinas Kehutanan Propinsi Bali

Syamsu Alam
Subdit Karkes Dit SKK
syamsumala@gmail.com

25

Naalih Kelsum
Kemenko PMK

Ketut Suarjaya
Dinkes Propinsi Bali

Pebi Purwa Suseno
Kementan

Sri Mulyati
Dinas Peternakan dan Keswan Riau
srimulyati2309@gmail.com

Herwinarni
Dit. Kesmavet Ditjen PKH
herwinarniwiwin@yahoo.com
Susan M. Noor
Balai Besar Penelitian Veteriner (BBLitvet)
susan_yurismono@yahoo.com
Yuli Miswati
Balai Veteriner Bukittinggi
yulimiswatibkt@yahoo.co.id
Widiawati
BBTKLPP Jakarta
se.bbkklppjakarta@gmail.com
Syafrinal
Dinas Lingkungan Hidup dan Kehutanan
Propinsi Riau
Retno Wulan Handayani
Balai Veteriner Banjar Baru Kalimantan
SelatanNi Putu Somaasih
Dinas Kesehatan Propinsi Bali
Sutrisno
KKP Pontianak
M.E. Budiastuti
Subdit Karantina Kesehatan, Dit SKK
meba_lamintang@yahoo.co.id
Heryanti
Dinas LHK Jawa Tengah
nattasya@yahoo.co.id

Hani M. Mardani
Dinas Pertanian Kabupaten Bengkulu
mardanidvm@gmail.com
A. Muchtar Nasir, M.Epid
Subdit PIE Ditjen P2P
dr.nasseer@gmail.com
A. Djauhari
Dinas Pangan, Peternakan dan Keswan,
Kalimantan Barat
Ni Made Ari Juliadewi
Dinas Kesehatan Propinsi Bali
Sherly J.K
Dinkes Boyolali
Ir. Juwaris
Dinas Peternakan Kab. Boyolali
juaris2009@gmail.com
I Ketut Diarmita MP
Dirjen PKH
David Wong
US CDC in Republic of Korea
Nata Kesuma
Dinas PKH Bali
Raja Philip. S
Dit MPBK Kemendagri
Nurhanifah
BKSDA Jateng
hanifahh1@gmail.com

Pravita Sari P. Ardini
Subdit Kelembagaan / Sumberdaya
Keswanpravitasaripurnamaardini@gmail.com

I Wayan Pujana
Dikes Propinsi Bali
na_puja@yahoo.com

Badar KKKP Semarang
badarsoc@yahoo.co.id

Nasirrudin
Balai Besar Veteriner Wates Yogyakarta
nudin27@gmail.com

26

Nurlina
Subdit Surveilans
nurlinaaulia123@gmail.com
Priagung
KKC Semarang
agung39@hotmail.com
Eva Kaat
Dinkes Propinsi Sulut
evakaat86@gmail.com
I Made Arthawan
Dinas Peternakan dna Kesehatan Hewan
Propinsi Bali
imade.arthawan@gmail.com
Rencana Tarigan
BTKL Batam
rentar.tarigan@yahoo.com
Heather Menzier
US CDC Indonesia
fev7@cdc.gov
Lily Banonah
Subdit Karkes
banonah_lily@yahoo.co.id
HusainDinkes Ketapang Kalimantan Barat
ahusaini31768@gmail.com
Sinurtina. S
Kemenko PMK
Ichwan M.
KLHK
im_mihardja@yahoo.com
Asep Supriatna
BNPB
Dilasdita Kartika P
BBVet Denpasar

Ratna Budi H
Subdit PIE, SKK
Yosi Mersilinda
ULP
Marsalena, SKM. M.AP
Dinas Kesehatan Propinsi Kalimantan
Baratkalbarp2p@yahoo.com
H. Mohamad Subuh, MPPM
Dirjen P2P
Mila Mayangsari
TU Dirjen P2P
Rosliany
KKP Denpasar
I Ketut Sudiana
KKP Denpasar
I Nyoman Sudiyova
Dinas Kesehatan Propinsi Bali
Sri Umiyati
Subdit Zoonosis
Lucky Tjahjono
KKP Denpasar
I Gusti Putu Yogi Semedi
KKP Denpasar
Alia Adyana
KKP Denpasar
Ria Rostiana
P2PTVZ
Ria Sartika Dewi
Direktorat P2PTVZ
Chita Septiawati
Zoonosis

Rita Marieta Dewi
Puslitbang BTDKKarnely Herlena
Subdit ISPA

27

OIE
Pennapa Metayompong
OIE SRR SEA
p.matayompong@oie.int
Pasang Tshering
OIE RRAP
p.tshering@oie.int
John Weaver
OIEjohnweavervet@gmail.com
FAO
James Mc Grane
FAO Indonesia
James.McGrane@fao.org
Luuk Schoonman
FAO Indonesia
Luuk.schoonman@fao.org
Elly Sawitri
FAO Indonesia
ellysawitri@yahoo.com
WHO
Kwang Rim
WHO Indonesia
rimk@who.int
Maria Erly
WHO Indonesia
erlym@who.int
Endang W. Wulandari
WHO Indonesia
wulandarie@who.int
Gyanendra Gongal
WHO SEARO
gongalg@who.int
Stephane de la Rocque
WHO HQ
delarocques@who.int
Guillaume Belot
WHO HQ
belotg@who.int

28