excerpted from Reducing Pandemic Risk, Promoting Global Health

For the full report go to http://report.predict.global

CAPACITY BUILDING

PHO

TO B

Y D

R. PA

TTAR

APO

L M

ANEE

ORN

, PRE

DIC

T TH

AILA

ND

TEA

M

REDUCING PANDEMIC RISK, PROMOTING GLOBAL HEALTH 65

A key focus of PREDICT was local capacity building to improve wildlife

surveillance in hotspot regions where emergence of pathogens of wildlife

origin was mostly likely to occur. PREDICT specifically sought to operationalize

One Health by helping to improve local, regional, and global surveillance networks

for detection of viruses in wildlife and for outbreak prevention and response.

Examples of PREDICT capacity building efforts included transfer of technologies and testing protocols to local and regional laboratories; facilitating equipment acquisition to improve cold chain and laboratory infrastructure; participating in local and regional training workshops to enhance personnel knowledge and skills; providing on-the-job training in field sampling, safe collection and handling of specimens, and laboratory techniques; facilitating working groups to bring field and laboratory personnel together for increased collaboration; disseminating detailed protocols for all aspects of surveillance activities; and developing integral partnerships with local organizations for the advancement of the program objectives. Capacity building methodology for PREDICT focused on two main objectives: 1) determining the baseline understanding of issues and local capabilities and its change over time for wildlife zoonotic virus surveillance in each participating country, and 2) utilizing information gathered in order to target training and needs for infrastructure improvement (i.e. human resources, laboratory resources, disease surveillance, and One Health partnerships).

Tracking of changes in wildlife surveillance competencies helped to target capacity building priorities on both national and regional levels. Using a rapid survey tool that was developed internally, PREDICT Country Coordinators tracked in-country capabilities and changes over time for wildlife surveillance, zoonotic virus detection, and assistance with outbreak response. This process served to inform on and focus internal project planning efforts. Specifically, data concerning key measures of current activities, including laboratory protocol tracking, disease surveillance, outbreak response, and One Health actions, as well as challenges in conducting and opportunities for improving wildlife virus detection, were gathered in order to better understand activities in each region where the PREDICT project was active (also see Schwind et al. 2014).

In the first and second years, the focus was on understanding the baseline activities and efforts related to the monitoring of wildlife for zoonotic viruses. Therefore, the PREDICT survey tool was divided into five core areas: 1) general efforts, 2) human resources, 3) laboratory resources, 4) surveillance and outbreak response for zoonotic diseases, and 5) risk assessment and communication. Each Country Coordinator was instructed to complete the survey using individual knowledge, publically available information, and/or information from applicable contacts familiar with the topic areas. Country Coordinators were also encouraged to only provide information for areas on which they were sufficiently knowledgeable or where specific sources of information could be cited, thus the data was not comprehensive for all countries.

66 USAID PREDICT

For years three through five, in addition to completing the rapid survey tool, which continued to track efforts in each of the aforementioned core areas of focus, Country Coordinators were also asked to identify at least one key stakeholder within their country to interview to assess the external perspective on the role the project played in improving capacity for wildlife sampling and zoonotic virus detection. Examples of key stakeholders included officials from government ministries and wildlife management or conservation departments. Questions were asked regarding the challenges, opportunities, and priorities relevant to wildlife surveillance for zoonotic pathogens. Stakeholder input was of interest to determine external perspectives on the PREDICT project and associated capacity building efforts. By not solely relying on the PREDICT Country Coordinators’ perceptions, the team was able to develop a more comprehensive picture of perspectives regarding wildlife surveillance to detect zoonotic viruses and the role PREDICT played in improving capacity to perform this work in each country. The completed surveys were collated, analyzed, and used to identify challenges and opportunities associated with conducting wildlife virus surveillance, potential linkages across sectors that could help operationalize One Health, and changes in capacity over time in each country.

HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE SURVEY TOOL

Key MeasuresCore Capacities. To characterize the impact of PREDICT on core capabilities, Country Coordinators identified, in the final rapid survey tool, the areas specifically improved due to PREDICT activities during the five-year period. Core capacities examined through this survey included wildlife field surveillance protocols, trained field surveillance and laboratory personnel, use of effective cold chain, laboratory diagnostic protocols, data management, intersectoral cooperation, outbreak response, inclusion of wildlife in outbreak response activities, and implementation of government programs and policies. The number of countries by region that indicated improvement specifically due to the PREDICT project in each of these core areas is shown in Figure 1. The greatest increase in core capabilities, which was observed across all countries, was through the training of field surveillance personnel. One-hundred percent (n=19) of reporting PREDICT countries stated that improvement was seen in the number of skilled workers available to conduct surveillance activities in-country. This top improvement was followed by an overall increase in the availability of both laboratory diagnostic protocols (n=18) and wildlife field surveillance protocols (n=18) in PREDICT countries.

Figure 1. Number of countries by region where improvement in core activity areas was documented through PREDICT (n=19).

REDUCING PANDEMIC RISK, PROMOTING GLOBAL HEALTH 67

Laboratory Protocol Tracking. A key area of capacity building in global hotspot regions was the implementation of viral family PCR testing protocols in-country. The percentage of countries that implemented PREDICT testing protocols by viral family is presented in Figure 2. Seventeen (90%) of PREDICT countries reported performing at least one PREDICT viral family testing protocol in-country by the final year. In addition, three (43%) countries in Africa, four (50%) countries in Asia, and two (50%) countries in Latin America had at least one PREDICT viral family testing protocol being utilized by a government laboratory.

Disease Surveillance. Increasing and tracking wildlife sampling efforts at key animal-human interfaces was a specific focus for capacity building throughout all PREDICT countries. In each rapid tool survey, Country Coordinators reported on high-risk disease transmission interfaces where PREDICT was sampling wildlife (see Surveillance Strategy section). Table 1 reports the active animal-human interfaces with PREDICT efforts by region at the end of the fifth year. Areas where animals’ primary locations were in or around human dwellings were active wildlife sampling sites across all regions (n=18). In Africa, all seven countries (100%) also reported sampling at hunting interfaces. In Asia, areas where animals came in contact with tourists were a focus for six (75%) countries in the region. In Latin America, all reporting countries in the region also focused efforts in areas where animals came in contact with park personnel and researchers.

Figure 2. Percentage of countries where viral family testing protocols were performed in the final year of the PREDICT project.

68 USAID PREDICT

Table 1. Most sampled high-risk disease transmission interfaces in PREDICT countries by region. Africa (n=7)

Asia (n=8)

Latin America (n=4)

In and around human dwelling(s) 7 (100%)

In and around human dwelling(s)7 (88%)

In and around human dwelling(s)4 (100%)

Hunted/consumed 7 (100%)

Ecotourism6 (75%)

Contact with wildlife personnel/intensive wildlife management area4 (100%)

Contact in agricultural fields 5 (71%)

Market/trade4 (50%)

Contact with researchers (other than PREDICT staff) 4 (100%)

Ecotourism 5 (71%)

Contact in agricultural fields4 (50%)

Contact with domestic animals* or humans NOT likely4 (100%)

Market/trade4 (57%)

Zoos4 (50%)

Sanctuaries3 (75%)

Zoos and Sanctuaries4 (57%)

Sanctuaries4 (50%)

Contact in extractive industry3 (75%)

Contact with researchers (other than PREDICT staff) 4 (57%)

Contact with locals for religious activities4 (50%)

Contact in agricultural fields 3 (75%)

* livestock, dogs and cats

Outbreak Response. Assistance by PREDICT in disease outbreak response was also tracked through the rapid tool survey. These outbreaks included suspected or confirmed cases of brucellosis, Chikungunya, Ebola, encephalomyocarditis virus, Marburg, Monkeypox, Rift Valley fever, viral hemorrhagic fever, and yellow fever in Africa; avian influenza, grammaherpesvirus, hepatitis, Japanese encephalitis, malaria, Nipah virus, and sarcocystis in Asia; and rabies, viral hemorrhagic fever, and yellow fever in Latin America. The extent of involvement by PREDICT varied with each outbreak, but Country Coordinators provided various forms of assistance, such as technical advice and expertise to help in designing response strategies, animal sampling in the field, processing of samples in local laboratories, epidemiologic risk behavior surveys, and training of personnel employed by partner organizations in PREDICT surveillance protocols during outbreaks.

One Health Actions. One Health concepts were operationalized through PREDICT in numerous ways since the onset of the project. PREDICT teams regularly participated in One Health workshops, conferences, and meetings with strategic partners; fostered coordinated surveillance and outbreak investigations with local government ministries; built new bridges between wildlife and public health authorities through the development of outbreak response protocols; and raised awareness of wildlife health among key central and provincial government officials from several relevant One Health disciplines (e.g. animal health, human health, forestry, environment, and education). Types of efforts that were reported through the rapid tool survey in the last year of the project included coordinated response efforts, improvement of local

REDUCING PANDEMIC RISK, PROMOTING GLOBAL HEALTH 69

surveillance capacity, increased educational opportunities, increased intersectoral communication, and increased awareness regarding the importance of wildlife. Table 2 provides specific examples of applications of the One Health approach in participating countries.

Global Challenges and Opportunities in Wildlife Pathogen SurveillanceBecause research regarding the capacity to conduct zoonotic pathogen surveillance in wildlife on a global scale is nominal compared to its human and domestic animal counterparts, two focused projects were conducted through the PREDICT capacity tracking efforts in order to 1) evaluate baseline trends in wildlife surveillance in PREDICT countries at the onset of the project, and 2) determine similarities and differences in perceptions regarding the current state of wildlife pathogen surveillance between in-country stakeholders and PREDICT Country Coordinators. Major findings from each of these research studies include:

Baseline Capacity Findings. Analysis of expert opinion on baseline capacity showed a lower overall capacity for conducting zoonotic disease surveillance in wildlife compared to livestock/domestic animal and human zoonotic disease surveillance capacities. Additionally, better wildlife surveillance capacity was not associated with higher income countries contrary to reports in other health sectors. Reported overall surveillance capacity in Africa was lower for both wildlife surveillance and livestock surveillance compared to human surveillance capacity, whereas Asia and Latin America surveillance capacity was lowest for wildlife, somewhat better for livestock, and

Table 2. Examples of the operationalization of One Health concepts through PREDICT activities. Topic Example

Coordinated response efforts

“Two outstanding examples of how the One Health approach was operationalized in the country are the response activities to the fox-rabies and the yellow fever outbreaks. Prompt technical advice, investigations, and response activities prevented massive persecution and hunting of foxes along with the consequent ecosystem negative effects associated with fox eradication, and also prevented yellow fever infections in humans.”

– Country Coordinator, Bolivia

Improvement of local capacity

“Local capacity for wildlife disease surveillance was improved through the implementation of training and introduction of PREDICT field protocols. Now, the national reference laboratory implements pathogen screening on wildlife samples to detect zoonotic viruses and is sharing archived and newly collected samples with PREDICT for expanded pathogen testing during outbreak response.”

– Country Coordinator, Peru

Increased educational opportunities

“There have been ongoing One Health trainings and courses at different institutions that link participants from different professional backgrounds. One example would be the master’s degree program on One Health in Molecular Biology at Sokoine University of Agriculture.”

– Country Coordinator, Tanzania

Increased intersectoral communication

“PREDICT Nepal initiated a One Health approach in Nepal by supporting the “One Health Workshop” and One Health Alliance Nepal (OHAN) in Nepal for the first time. This organization is working on lobbying for the establishment of a One Health secretariat in Nepal to solve the problem of authority over research and outbreaks related to zoonotic diseases.”

– Country Coordinator, Nepal

“Quarterly meetings among human health, livestock health, and wildlife health have led to increased sharing of knowledge and collaboration on lab capacity building and surveillance activities.”

– Country Coordinator, Laos

Increased awareness regarding the importance of wildlife

“Veterinary schools in our country are recognizing the importance of a One Health approach, have held One Health workshops, and have invited the forestry, wildlife, domestic animal, and human health sectors to participate in the workshops and in development of their new curricula.”

– Country Coordinator, Cambodia

70 USAID PREDICT

was highest for human surveillance. Across the three regions, the highest surveillance capacities across health sectors were reported for Latin America, then Asia, and lastly Africa.

Furthermore, challenges identified by in-country personnel for conducting wildlife surveillance that were categorized as ‘Very Important’ by at least 50% of countries in each global region were reported in the initial PREDICT capacity assessment. At the beginning of the project, the Country Coordinators’ top ranked challenge in all regions was associated with ‘Financial/funding issues’ (85%); the second highest ranked challenge was ‘Insufficient training to work with wildlife’(80%); and the third ranked challenge was associated with ‘Poverty issues’(70%). Other challenges included ‘Time delay between disease or outbreak events and when official information is publicly available’ (65%); ‘Lack of existing government wildlife surveillance program’ (65%); and ‘Insufficient enforcement’ (65%).

The project opportunities relating to wildlife surveillance identified as ‘Very Important’ by at least 50% of participating in-country experts were also reported. The top ranked opportunities for conducting wildlife surveillance for zoonotic pathogens in all regions at the beginning of the PREDICT project were ‘Increasing funding availability’ (80%); ‘Increasing human capacity from new/existing training programs’ (80%); and ‘Increasing communication/coordination among sectors or agencies’ (80%). The second highest opportunities highlighted as “Very Important” included ‘Showing usefulness to help integrate wildlife surveillance into program/country infrastructure’ (75%) and ‘Collaboration with foreign universities/programs/NGOs’ (75%). These opportunities were followed by ‘Increasing laboratory capacity from existing programs and new facilities’ (70%); ‘Establishing wildlife policies and programs’ (70%); and ‘Growing interest/awareness regarding disease issues’ (70%).

Establishing baseline capacity across all health sectors (e.g. public health, domestic animal health, and wildlife health) in PREDICT participating countries, as well as understanding challenges and opportunities present in wildlife pathogen surveillance, provided a clearer picture of in-country capabilities for addressing emerging health threats at the onset of the PREDICT project. Study

findings from the baseline capacity surveys highlighted the need for strategic capacity building to focus and facilitate long-term wildlife surveillance efforts at interfaces where new pathogens are most likely to emerge.

Stakeholder Capacity Findings. Once baseline capacity was qualitatively described in each participating country, the rapid tool survey added key stakeholders from outside the PREDICT project beginning in the third year. Administering the rapid tool survey to Country Coordinators as well as wildlife officials was useful to gain diverse insights and perspectives into capacity building for wildlife pathogen surveillance. Both stakeholder groups identified some high-risk disease transmission interfaces, such as wildlife hunting and markets, as important for ongoing targeting of wildlife surveillance.

PREDICT teams benefit from a wide range of government and scientific partnerships: a wildlife sampling training was held with Indonesia partners in 2012. .

PHOTO BY MELINDA ROSTAL

REDUCING PANDEMIC RISK, PROMOTING GLOBAL HEALTH 71

Similarly, findings regarding challenges across stakeholder groups showed some agreement in that a lack of sustainable funding across regions was the greatest challenge for conducting wildlife surveillance for zoonotic pathogens (wildlife officials: 96% and Country Coordinators: 81%). However, the opportunity for improving zoonotic pathogen surveillance capacity identified most frequently by wildlife officials as important was increasing communication or coordination among agencies, sectors, or regions (100% of wildlife officials), whereas the opportunities identified most frequently by Country Coordinators as important were increasing human capacity, increasing laboratory capacity, and the growing interest or awareness regarding wildlife disease or surveillance programs (all identified by 69% of Country Coordinators).

PREDICT provided a unique opportunity to explore the capacity building conditions present in wildlife pathogen surveillance in global hotspot regions from the perspectives of people with different experiences and backgrounds. While the differences in stakeholder groups’ perspectives regarding the relative importance of challenges and opportunities could be due to differences seen in each organization’s current focus, priorities, and mandates; limitations in each individual’s area of expertise; or the nature of the survey, the findings provided important insights into stakeholder group views as key informants. The broader surveys illustrated the value of including a variety of in-country people with different backgrounds in order to combat emerging infectious diseases.

Future Directions for Capacity Building and Tracking Information obtained through the rapid tool surveys and the aforementioned focused projects, contributes to the growing knowledge concerning successful capacity building practices aimed at improving zoonotic pathogen surveillance in locations considered to be hotspots for emergence of animal viruses in human populations. Utilizing key subject matter experts and other stakeholders to identify and prioritize future research directions had many benefits for sustainable capacity building efforts in developing regions. Furthermore, a One Health approach to capacity building for virus detection applied at local and global scales will have a powerful impact on improving zoonotic virus surveillance in wildlife. The PREDICT project put this knowledge into action by placing in-country personnel, who were also wildlife stakeholders, in key programmatic positions which allowed them to demonstrate value to local public health, agriculture and environmental authorities, and stakeholders. In addition, PREDICT used One Health concepts as a guiding force to increase communication and collaboration across governmental ministries and private sectors in-country. Moving forward, the iterative evaluation of One Health activities, such as through the use of rapid tool surveys, should be continued for the promotion of successful, evidence-based practices.

REFERENCESSchwind, J.S., T. Goldstein, K. Thomas, J.A.K. Mazet, and W.A. Smith. 2014. Capacity building efforts and perceptions for wildlife surveillance to detect zoonotic pathogens: comparing stakeholder perspectives. BioMed Central Public Health14:684. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-14-684.