ADVANCING ADT

ROAD MAP FOR

MISSOURI

A Three-Year Plan

Submitted by:

STEVE STRUBBERG, DVM

STATE VETERINARIAN

MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

1616 MISSOURI BLVD

573-751-3377

Submitted to:

TERRY GOSCH, DVM

AREA VETERINARIAN FOR MISSOURI

VETERINARY SERVICES

ANIMAL AND PLANT HEALTH INSPECTION SERVICE

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

1715 SOUTHRIDGE DRIVE

JEFFERSON CITY, MO 65101

573-658-9850

Date: August 4, 2022
Table of Contents

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................... 3

II. CURRENT TRACEABILITY SITUATION............................................................................ 4

2.1 Who are we? ....................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Where are we now?............................................................................................................. 5

2.3 Strengths and Weaknesses.................................................................................................. 7

2.4 Opportunities and Threats................................................................................................... 7

2.5 Inventory of existing infrastructure and suitability assessment.......................................... 8

III. VISION AND MISSION CONTEXT FOR ADVANCING TRACEABILITY....................... 9

3.1 Vision statement ................................................................................................................. 9

3.2 Mission statement ............................................................................................................... 9

IV. TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS ...................................................................................... 9

4.1 Strategic goal(s) ................................................................................................................. 9

4.2 Programmatic goal(s) (Objectives) .................................................................................... 9

4.3 Animal Disease Traceability performance measures.......................................................... 9

4.4 Data requirements............................................................................................................... 9

4.5 Information technology plan............................................................................................. 10

4.6 Resource requirements...................................................................................................... 10

4.7 Organizational needs......................................................................................................... 10

4.7.1 Executive support.......................................................................................... 10

4.7.2 Coordination and oversight procedures......................................................... 10

4.7.3 Policy............................................................................................................. 11

4.7.4 Staffing.......................................................................................................... 11

4.7.5 Budget requirements ..................................................................................... 12

4.7.6 Outreach ........................................................................................................ 12

4.7.6.1 Accredited veterinarians................................................................... 13

4.7.6.2 Slaughter Plants................................................................................ 13

4.7.6.3 Industry as a whole........................................................................... 14

4.8 Monitoring and reporting interstate movement activity ................................................... 14

V. ADVANCING TRACEABILITY........................................................................................... 15

5.1 Ranking of priorities for advancement ............................................................................. 15

5.2 Implementation of objectives............................................................................................ 15
3 

I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Missouri is ranked in the top ten nationally in swine, poultry, and cattle inventories. 

Most of these animals move interstate to be fed or processed due to the lack of feeding and 

processing facilities within Missouri. This presents a challenge to ensure the cattle over 18 

months of age are identified prior to movement out of state for processing. Since Missouri 

has been Brucellosis and Tuberculosis free for over ten years, we rely on slaughter 

surveillance to monitor for disease incidents. The ability to trace the slaughter suspects is 

crucial to maintain our disease-free status and contain any possible disease incidents. The 

swine and poultry movement are predominately vertically integrated systems, utilizing 

herd health plans and the GIN identification system, moving in large lots. The mandated 

identification system by the swine industry ensures traceability for independent producers 

who move their livestock with individual identification. The Scrapie Program has 

ultimately provided the same structure for the goat and sheep industry. 

Missouri utilizes a data management program (USAHerds) to house its traceability 

information. This software allows for quick and reliable searches for information as the 

need arises. The data and information from official calf hood vaccination forms, 

Certificates of Veterinary Inspections, disease test charts and other is entered into this 

program. 

The ability to query official identification in a data base greatly enhances the 

efficiency, thus decreasing the time required to trace animals in a disease incident. Time 

is crucial in the event of a disease outbreak, especially if the disease is a highly contagious 

and infectious. The time required to identify and trace an infected animal is directly related 

to the magnitude and ability to contain and control the outbreak. 

The ability to transfer the identification information electronically from paper forms 

to the data base reduces the labor required and increases the accuracy of the data. The work 

force to provide the required data entry is expensive compared to the utilization of 

electronic identification methods. The equipment to read and record the official 

identification enhances the accuracy of the data and provides traceability in real time. We 

continue to work with a less than an adequate work force to provide data entry essential for 

complete compliance to the Animal Disease Traceability Plan. 

Missouri will continue to assess the current identification systems utilized by the 

disease programs to determine their compliancy with the traceability goals. Missouri has 

promoted the use of electronic certificate of veterinary inspections, vaccination, and test 

charts to increase the efficiency and accuracy of data entry. Missouri will also monitor any 

necessary changes to movement requirements to ensure animals are officially identified 

when they enter interstate commerce.

• What is the fundamental problem(s) this plan addresses? Missouri will 

continue to address the large volume of data entry required and accuracy issues 

incurred with manual entry. 
4

• What are the key elements in summary form? The market streamlining 

program that was developed and implemented to capture the official 

identification of test-eligible cattle moving through the livestock markets 

throughout the state has provided Missouri with a large query able database to 

initiate our disease investigations. The traceability plan will continue to build 

on this basic plan and expand the type of official identification in the database.

• What are the primary benefits? The traceability plan utilizing the Market 

Streamlining and USAHerds to collect and manage the data will fit well within 

USDA’s framework for animal disease traceability. 

• The implementation of USAHerds has tied the entire disease programs 

together. This provides a common database for all forms of official 

identification among the species.

• Missouri will utilize the AIMS system to allocate official identification ear 

tags. In addition, we will work with other states with USAHerds to enhance 

the traceability components of the software.

• Missouri has promoted heavily the utilization of electronic certificates of 

veterinary inspections and various test/vaccination charts to enable the 

identification to be queried in the same manner as the market streamlining data. 

This will continue to be a priority of the program.

• How does this plan build upon previous efforts to advance ADT? The plan 

builds on all the previous advancements that have been made, including but 

not limited to more electronic records and data capture, installation of readers 

in markets, new electronic CVI options etc.

• How does this plan fit within USDA’s new framework for ADT? The plan 

should align with the new framework.

• How does this plan support animal health information systems within the State, 

Tribe, or Territory? Advances in the plan and goals will interact with current 

information systems.

• How does this plan support animal health information need with other States,

Tribes, Territories and USDA nationally? Missouri will utilize the AIMS 

system to allocate official identification ear tags. In addition, we will work 

with other states with USAHerds to enhance the traceability components of the 

software.

• What alternatives were explored? None

• What are the projected costs and benefits for the first, second and third years 

of the plan?

FY P/S Fringe E & E Total

2022 400,000 240,000 225,000 640,000

2023 425,000 255,000 230,000 680,000

2024 450,000 270,000 250,000 720,000

II. CURRENT TRACEABILITY SITUATION

2.1 Who are we?
5

Although various State/Tribe/Territory governmental agencies are tasked 

with ADT efforts, identifying the specific agencies/units involved in 

implementing this road map is essential to planning success. This also 

includes identifying constituents that will be impacted by and/or require 

collaboration with, to advance the proposed plan.

• Who are the primary constituents? The primary constituents are the 

livestock and poultry producers, livestock market owners, 

accredited veterinarians and Missouri Department of Agriculture 

Animal Health Division employees.

• Who are the external constituents? States of origin and destination.

• What does statewide, tribal-wide, territory-wide mean? Statewide 

means the information must be collected from a variety of sources 

and locations throughout Missouri.

• How are traceability data used internally, externally? The 

traceability data will primarily be utilized internally to enable 

Missouri to verify the absence or presence of disease within our 

state. The data will enable Missouri to effectively identify, contain 

and control the affected animals in the event of a disease incident.

• What values guide the ADT system? Accuracy and efficiency in 

data entry.

• What is the make-up of the ADT advisory group? How and how 

often are they engaged? The animal disease traceability advisory 

group was formed under the previous program guidelines. The 

group was comprised of individuals representing livestock 

commodities, producers, veterinarians, and agribusiness. The group 

initially met on a regular basis, however, will meet on an as needed 

basis or as written into the cooperative agreement.

2.2 Where are we now?

In assessing the existing situation, this section is intended to link inventory 

of existing infrastructure with a broader range of considerations.

• How is ADT currently defined? Is it viewed as a cross-cutting 

component to animal health information systems? Is it viewed as a 

stand-alone initiative? The current animal disease traceability is 

viewed as a vital component of our disease control program. We 

utilize the market streamlining program to provide necessary 

information to enable us to trace animals related to a disease 

outbreaks or incidents. The program is identified as a separate 

animal health program but is integrated into the disease 

investigations involving cattle. The USAHerds data allows us to 

trace efficiently and in a fast manner. There are well over 7 million 

individual movement records available for traces as needed. In 

addition, those records are now being shared through AHER and 

available to assist other states with their traceability needs. 

• What measures of traceability capability are currently being used? 

What are the specific values and associated interpretation? The 
6

percentage of successful traces is also utilized as a measurement of 

the capability of our current system. The specific values vary with 

the species; however, in regard to the cattle industry (test-eligible 

over 18 months) we can currently trace 95% of the traces within 1 

day.

• How is coordination being currently achieved within the unit? The 

market streamlining system concentrates on the beef industry and 

lacks coordination with all species identified. However, the 

USAHerds software provides coordination between all species and 

allows access to all staff.

• How is coordination currently being achieved statewide, tribalwide, territory-wide? The market streamlining data is obtained from 

all livestock markets located throughout Missouri. The market 

streamlining data is managed by USAHerds, which is accessible to 

staff located throughout the state.

• How does the present unit coordinate activities with other existing 

agencies/units? MDA has a very strong relationship with the Area 

Veterinarian in Charge, therefore, we coordinate the necessary 

information to ensure the investigation is accomplished in a timely 

manner.

• What standards for traceability are currently being used? Are they 

appropriate? Missouri currently strives to provide traceability to the 

farm of origin within 2 working days for all species. This is 

appropriate for most of the traces, however, if the livestock or 

poultry is marketed through a dealer this standard is not appropriate.

• What is the state of technology infrastructure? Missouri Office of 

Administration maintains computer/servers and backups data on a 

daily basis. Capability in terms of size? Compatibility within and 

outside the agency/unit/dept. etc. for sharing data when needed.

Missouri has implemented a computer software program to 

electronically collect and submit the same information as was 

collected on the VS 4-54 Form to a central database to enable 

traceability in a short period of time. We have also acquired data 

management software to provide additional traceability capabilities. 

The data management software is accessible 24/7 to our staff. The 

sharing of information must be approved by the department director; 

the capability to share is adequate.

• Are requests for information available 24/7, or only available M-F, 

40 hours per week, if authorized personnel are present? The 

accessibility to the data would be 24/7 through authorized personnel. 

Additionally, identification information is submitted to AHER on a 

daily basis or as changes occur and is accessible to other states and 

USDA personnel.

• What is the impact of state, tribe, or territory funding on capability? 

How does Federal funding fit into the plan? It is necessary to 

complete the overall mission while the market streamlining program 
7

was paid for with state funds, federal funding will be utilized to 

provide data entry, outreach programs, USAHerds software 

maintenance, personnel funding, some travel, and upgrade 

computers.

2.3 Strengths and Weaknesses

[Strengths are intended to describe circumstances or positions that allow an 

organization to take advantage of opportunities. Weaknesses, in contrast, 

are issues or threats that make an organization less able to exploit 

opportunities.]

• What are the strengths of the organization in terms of technology, 

human resources, personnel capabilities, etc.? The data management 

software (USAHerds) has greatly enhanced the accuracy of the 

identification entered in the Missouri database system. The software 

enables the department to query “official identification” to trace 

animals in the event of a disease incident. The ability to merge the 

market streamlining data with USAHerds greatly enhances the 

amount of data and allows MDA to manage the data more 

efficiently. Missouri will analyze the current identification 

requirements for movement into the state and determine the changes 

necessary to comply with the Animal Disease Traceability program.

• What are the weaknesses in terms of “lack of” technology, human 

resources, personnel capabilities, etc.? The biggest challenge is 

maintaining adequate staff to provide data entry into the system. The 

continued development and implementation of electronic 

certificates of veterinary inspections is essential to accurately 

capture the data necessary for traceability.

2.4 Opportunities and Threats

[The basis for this component is the assumption that improving ADT

capability will create opportunities for those involved that would not be 

available should traceability not be optimized. At the administrative level, 

implementation of standards for improving efficiencies of information 

collection, storage, sharing, and security would be an opportunity. Every 

State/Tribe/Territory is subject to catastrophic events, such as tornados, 

wildfires, drought, winter storms, animal/zoonotic disease, flooding, 

possibly hurricanes.] 

• Does this plan create an opportunity in ability to respond? Yes

• Does this plan enable or avoid consequences of potential threats?

The plan enables Missouri to respond more efficiently in the event 

of a potential threat, however, the consequences would be dependent 

upon the threat.

• Does this plan provide for better use of available resources than 

current approaches? The plan enhances the utilization of the 

resources.
8

• Does this plan enhance networking opportunities? The ability to 

access the information 24/7 by authorized individuals will greatly 

enhance the networking opportunities. District Veterinarians will be 

able to locate and identify animals of interest in a timely manner.

• If this plan is not implemented, what are the threats? Missouri will 

not be able to fully utilize the capabilities of the database to protect 

the livestock and poultry industries from disease or catastrophic 

events.

• If this plan is not implemented, will others be tasked with doing so?

Missouri would continue to strive to provide traceability to enable 

us to respond to a disease outbreak or natural disaster.

• Have previous efforts to coordinate with other entities within the 

applicant’s boundaries, and outside the applicant’s boundaries, been 

complicated or unavailable for not having this plan in place? The 

market streamlining software allows Missouri to query a database 

of test eligible cattle in an efficient manner. However, the system 

was not capable of communicating with the field staff and 

coordinating with other sources of official identification.

2.5 Inventory of existing infrastructure and suitability assessment

[This section is intended to provide a more detailed and technical 

assessment of existing infrastructure than the “Who we are” section. An 

outcome of this section is to support the requirements analysis for funding 

prioritization and justification.]

• Human resources MDA currently utilizes several employees for data 

entry in USAHerds for a variety of animal health programs which 

affects traceability. These employees enter data from health 

certificates, test records, tag allocations, livestock market 

information, premises and other forms of data relating to disease 

traceability.

• Space availability Missouri will purchase from Missouri Office of 

Administration as needed.

• Connectivity resources, both in office and in the field. The office 

and field staff has access to the information through smart phones 

and “hotspot” devices.

• Access to USDA ADT and animal health information resources

Missouri is uploading information into USAHerds.

• Organization of all existing paper record systems used to access 

ADT or animal health information Missouri is uploading 

information into USAHerds.

• Computerized data management capability, including present 

storage size, speed, security, etc. Missouri will utilize Office of 

Administration to purchase storage space as needed and 

standards/requirements.

• Automated data capture capability. The market streamlining system 

is semi-automatic. Missouri will continue to promote the use of 
9

electronic certificates of veterinary inspection, which will automate 

data capture. MDA is promoting and recommending the use of 

electronic forms that allow more automated data capture.

III. VISION AND MISSION CONTEXT FOR ADVANCING TRACEABILITY

3.1 Vision Statement: Missouri is committed to the continued implementation 

of a traceability program to ensure the ability to identify and contain in the 

event of a disease incident or natural disaster.

3.2 Mission Statement: Missouri will strive to continue to advance the accuracy 

and efficiency of the traceability program through implementation and 

utilization of technology.

IV. TRACEABILITY REQUIREMENTS

The following categories must be described in the Road Map:

4.1 Strategic goal(s): To develop and implement a State-wide infrastructure for 

advancing animal disease traceability compatible with State, Tribe, 

Territory and USDA standards.

1. Enhance electronic sharing of data among Federal and State animal 

health officials, veterinarians, and industry; including sharing basic 

ADT data with the Federal Animal Health Events Repository (AHER);

2. Increase use of electronic ID tags for animals requiring individual 

identification in order to make the transmission of data more efficient.

3. Enhance the ability to track animals from birth to slaughter through a 

system that allows tracking data points to be connected; and

4. Elevate the discussion with States and industry to work toward a system 

where animal health certificates are electronically transmitted from 

private veterinarians to State animal health officials.

4.2 Programmatic goals (objectives)

• Continued Input data into appropriate systems

• Improve retrieval of available traceability information

• Continually monitor ICVI data quality

• Continued development and implement the utilization of electronic 

interstate certificates of veterinary inspections

• Continue outreach programs to accredited veterinarians to increase 

the quality and processing of electronic forms and health 

certificates.

• Working with veterinarians to adapt more electronic means and the 

use of electronic data capture software and apps, such as mobile 

apps.

4.3 ADT Trace Performance Measures (TPMs)

Missouri completes TPMs as required.

4.4 Data requirements
10

• Fully describe standards to be used for official animal identification, 

including arrangements with other States, Tribes, Territories, as well 

as official identification methods/devices used within the 

cooperator’s jurisdiction. Missouri references CFR for use and 

requirements of official identification devices. 

• What tag distribution record keeping systems are being used? AIMS 

and USAHerds.

• What data requirements exist for commuter herd agreements? N/A

• What forms are approved for interstate movement in addition to 

ICVIs? Swine Health Plans

• How and when will data be shared with other States, Tribes, 

Territories, and USDA? Currently on an as needed basis, however 

data is messaged to AHER.

• How will group/lot official numbers be handled within the system?

Same as with other official identification numbers.

4.5 Information technology plan 

Missouri will utilize the current IT system but will need computer upgrades 

and replacement computers in the future. The State of Missouri contracts 

with an outside vendor to provide cloud services to host current computer 

software.

4.6 Resource requirements

• Is specific expertise needed that is not currently available? No

• Will consultants be needed? No

• Is a continuity of operation plan (COOP) in place and how 

frequently is it tested? Yes, annually. 

• Are automated data capture resources needed? Nothing more than 

already provided through cooperative agreements. 

4.7 Organizational needs

• Does a need for organizational change exist? No

• Can additional resources be leveraged within the current 

administrative structure? No

4.7.1 Executive support 

[This section is intended to describe how current administrative 

authorities view the importance of a sound ADT system to the wellbeing of the livestock and poultry industries affected. 

• Is additional support from executive management needed?

No

• Is accountability provided? Yes

• How are officials briefed on progress and baseline measures 

of performance? Through results and briefings. 

4.7.2 Coordination and oversight procedures 
11

• What is the make-up of the applicant’s ADT advisory group? 

How frequently are they engaged? Industry, state, and 

federal partners. They meet on an as needed basis with other 

meetings as outlined in the cooperative agreement.

• How are emergency preparedness resources engaged or 

responded to when necessary? Missouri has an AgriSecurity position who coordinates the emergency 

management response.

• How is compatibility with other States, Tribes, Territories, 

and USDA monitored? Through collaboration with the 

various entities. MDA participates in many conference calls, 

national meetings, and other venues. USAHerds user group 

meetings and conference calls are very useful when keeping 

those states compatible with others.

• How are responsibilities assigned for implementing the 

plan? Through the directive of the state veterinarian. 

• How are disputes arbitrated? Through discussions and 

consensus. 

• How is feedback obtained relative to perception of 

successful implementation above and below the 

administrative authority? Through communication with field 

staff via conference calls, conferences, etc.

• How is transition achieved when administrators are 

replaced? Through documentation of the plan and directives 

to implement the stages in the future.

4.7.3 Policy

• How does the applicants’ policies align with the ADT 

general standards document and achievement of traceability 

goals? 

It matches very well.

• Is there a need to address or change a state policy to align 

with 9CFR part 86 or the ADT General Standards 

document? No 

4.7.4 Staffing

• How is full-time, paid support staff justified? Missouri and 

other states have made tremendous strides in becoming less 

paper dependent, however there is still a lot of work and 

programming to be done to alleviate paper. Staff is needed 

to enter data from paper and to verify electronic data is 

accurate and complete. USAHerds requires a tremendous 

amount of data entry to adequately utilize the traceability 

capabilities of the software program. 

• What qualifications are needed? Accuracy, attention to detail 

and ability to focus on data entry. 

• What personnel are needed to implement the plan? Program 

manager, administrative assistants, and data entry staff. 
12

• Can other human resources be leveraged to assist in 

implementing the plan? Yes, we currently have individuals 

providing data entry for other animal health programs which 

utilize official identification.

• Are professional credentials and certification an issue? No

• Are job descriptions for the roles needed provided? The job 

descriptions are available through the human resource 

division.

• Is ADT information a distinct function within the unit or an 

add-on “coordinated by committee” versus an individually 

coordinated, stand-alone sub-unit? The animal disease 

traceability information is coordinated with several animal 

health programs and systems.

4.7.5 Budget requirements

• How are you funded for ADT? State, Tribe, Territory versus 

Federal? Through a combination of state and federal 

resources.

• What are the funding requirements projected by year for 

first, second and third year for implementing this plan?

FY2022--$640,000

FY2023--$680,000

FY2024--$720,000

• How is cost sharing achieved? The state funding will provide 

some personnel cost, travel, IT support, equipment 

maintenance, supplies, communications and other as needed. 

The federal funds will be utilized to provide help provide 

outreach to accredited veterinarians, some personnel costs, 

some software maintenance costs, travel and mileage, 

communication costs and other as outlined in the cooperative 

agreements.

• How can the applicant insulate against budget cuts and 

shortfalls? In the event of significant budget cuts, Missouri 

will continue the current system and utilize funds to 

maintain. The completion of the established goals of the road 

plan will be delayed due to the inability to acquire the 

necessary staff.

• Can other funding sources be leveraged to support this plan? 

Missouri has utilized Homeland Security Funds in the past 

to acquire data management software; however, the 

availability of funding from Homeland Security has 

diminished and would not be available. The availability of 

state funding to fully support this plan is not a viable option.

4.7.6 Outreach
13

4.7.6.1. Accredited veterinarians

Accredited veterinarians are instrumental to the 

advancement of ADT in livestock and poultry.

• What is the plan for informing accredited 

veterinarians of the new guidelines for 

official ID and the specific three-year plan for 

implementation? Missouri will continue to 

utilize the district veterinarians and Animal 

Health Officers to inform accredited 

veterinarians. MDA will participate in 

professional and commodity conferences to 

distribute and inform the profession and 

producers.

• What continuing education is being planned 

for improving data quality relative to animal 

health information systems being used? We 

will continue to promote the use of an 

electronic CVI to our accredited 

veterinarians, this will serve as a method to 

provide additional training and 

implementation of electronic animal health 

forms. Submitting official forms in a timely 

manner?

• What is the plan for enhancing the use of 

eICVIs, if any? MDA promotes the use of 

eICVIs and will continue to monitor the 

adaption of such and will look for ways to 

enhance the ICVI as needed.

• What role, if any, does the accredited 

veterinarian have in providing low-cost, 

official identification tags/devices to 

producers? The accredited veterinarians will 

be able to distribute official identification 

tags to producers or utilize them as a means 

of identification outside the parameter of an 

animal disease program.

4.7.6.2. Slaughter plants

Because of frequent commingling of livestock, and 

sometimes poultry, at livestock markets, increased 

biosecurity risks are incurred and, as a result, the 

importance of access to traceability information 

when needed is important.

• What continuing education efforts are being 

planned for addressing the concerns of the 

slaughter plants in the jurisdiction? Missouri 
14

will utilize the district veterinarians and field 

staff to provide information to the livestock 

markets. MDA will also provide information 

via the participation at livestock and poultry 

seminars and meetings.

• What is the plan for accessing or requesting 

traceability information from slaughter 

plants? Missouri will utilize the market 

streamlining system currently implemented 

and maintained in livestock markets.

4.7.6.3. Industry as a whole

Implementation of any plan to advance ADT impacts 

a variety of constituents, likely none more so than 

industry itself.

• How is industry being informed of the 

implementation plan? Missouri informs the 

livestock and poultry industries of the 

program through meetings with producers 

and staff. MDA also participates in 

commodity association meetings and trade 

shows.

• How is the advisory committee being 

leveraged for this continuing education 

purpose? Through meetings and conference 

calls as needed.

• What other resources are available for 

industry outreach? MDA’s website and 

attendance at industry meetings, conferences 

and conventions.

• What constitutes industry? What species are 

involved? Livestock Markets, livestock and 

poultry commodity groups. Cattle, swine, 

horses, sheep, goats and poultry.

• How are under-represented and underserved communities being included in the 

outreach plan? The district veterinarians and 

field staff are distributed throughout the 

state, including under-represented areas. In 

addition, the under-served areas may be 

served by attending a livestock or poultry 

meeting or tradeshow.

4.8. Monitoring and reporting interstate movement activity 

[The traceability framework is focused on interstate movement and the 

accompanying ICVI or similar documentation for that movement.
15

• How will the number of animals and the number of shipments be 

monitored that move interstate? Interstate movement is captured in 

USAHerds and reviewed by staff for compliance and accuracy.

• How will the data be verified or validated? ICVIs are monitored and 

reviewed daily for compliance.

• The following data should be tracked and available upon request:

o Number of ICVIs and other interstate movement documents 

created within the State/Tribe/Territory on a year-to-date 

basis for move-out animals

o Number of ICVIs and other interstate movement documents 

received for move-in animals

o Number of animals by species and class for move-in events 

associated with ICVIs and other interstate movement 

documents, indicating the number of animals officially 

identified and the number not officially identified

o Number of animals by species and class for move-out events 

associated with ICVIs and other interstate movement 

documents, indicating the number of animals officially 

identified and the number not officially identified

o Volume of distribution for each official numbering 

system/device issued by the State/Tribe/Territory and/or 

AVIC office, including backtags by market or slaughter 

facility

V. ADVANCING TRACEABILITY 

5.1 Ranking of priorities for advancement

This section is intended to show the breadth of elements encompassed in 

advancing ADT. This ranking should identify sufficient projects prioritized 

for funding over the next three years. It will be the basis of comparison for 

the annualized cooperative agreement work plans. What specific steps are 

needed to advance from where the initiative currently resides?

• Is a phased-in approach appropriate over the three-year period? Yes, 

the implementation of the plan will be completed over the next three 

years.

• Are various components dependent upon measurable successes 

rather than defined time periods? Yes

5.2 Implementation of objectives

Accepting that each year’s cooperative agreement work plan will likely be 

a collection of objectives, this section is intended to identify each of the 

objectives prioritized in V.5.1. and correspondingly listed in IV.4.7.5. and 

describe how each project will be conducted or approached. Objectives 

should be listed and ranked as priorities for each of the planned three years, 

aligning with the three-year budget plan.

FY2022
16

Continued Input data into appropriate systems. Improve retrieval of 

available traceability information.

Continually monitor ICVI data quality. Continued development and 

implement the utilization of electronic interstate certificates of veterinary 

inspections. Continued develop and implement the utilization of electronic 

interstate certificates of veterinary inspections. Establish compatible 

standards for sharing data with States/Tribes/ Territories and USDA when 

needed.

FY2023

Continued develop and implement the utilization of electronic interstate 

certificates of veterinary inspections. Continue outreach programs to 

accredited veterinarians to increase the quality and processing of electronic 

forms and health certificates. Continued Input data into appropriate systems. 

Continually monitor ICVI data quality. Establish compatible standards for 

sharing data with States/Tribes/ Territories and USDA when needed.

FY2024

Establish compatible standards for sharing data with States/Tribes/ 

Territories and USDA when needed. Integrate surveillance and traceability 

data. Continued develop and implement the utilization of electronic 

interstate certificates of veterinary inspections. Continue outreach programs 

to accredited veterinarians to increase the quality and processing of 

electronic forms and health certificates. Continued Input data into 

appropriate systems. Continually monitor ICVI data quality.