Pandemic treaty as an instrument to strengthen global health security: Global health diplomacy at its crux.

Background: The World Health Assembly (WHA), on 1st December 2021, unanimously agreed to launch a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement, or other international instrument under the World Health Organization's (WHO's) constitution to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. We aimed to explore the role of global health diplomacy (GHD) in pandemic treaty negotiations by providing deep insight into the ongoing drafting process under the WHO leadership. Methods: We conducted a narrative review by searching Scopus, Web of Sciences, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar search engine using the keywords "Pandemic Treaty," OR "International Health Regulations," OR "International conventions," OR "International treaties" in the context of recent COVID-19 pandemic. Besides, we included articles recommending the need for GHD, leadership and governance mechanisms for this international treaty drafting approved by the WHA. Results: Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of GHD bolstered the international system and remained high on the agendas of many national, regional and global platforms. As per Article 19 of the WHO constitution, the Assembly established an intergovernmental negotiating body (INB) to draft and negotiate this convention/ agreement to protect the world from disease outbreaks of pandemic potential. Since GHD has helped to strengthen international cooperation in health systems and address inequities in achieving health-related global targets, there is a great scope for the successful drafting of this pandemic treaty. Conclusion: The pandemic treaty is a defining moment in global health governance, particularly the pandemic governance reforms. However, the treaty's purpose will only be served if the equity considerations are optimized, accountability mechanisms are established, and a sense of shared responsibility is embraced. While fulfilling treaty commitments might be complex and challenging, it provides an opportunity to rethink and build resilient systems for pandemic preparedness and response in the future.

Does the healthcare decentralization provide better public health security capacity and health services satisfaction? An analysis of OECD countries.

PURPOSE: Decentralization has profound implications for many health systems. This study investigates the effect of health system decentralization in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries on public health security capacity and health service satisfaction. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: Multiple linear regression analyses were employed for variables related to the level of health security capacity and satisfaction with the healthcare system while controlling for all socio-demographic variables from the European Social Survey, including over 44,000 respondents from 25 OECD countries. The Health Systems in Transition series of countries were used for assessing the decentralization level. FINDINGS: The result of multiple linear regression analyses showed that the level of decentralization in health systems was significantly associated with higher health security capacity (ß-coefficient 3.722, 95% confidence interval (CI) [3.536 3.908]; p=<0.001) and health service satisfaction (ß-coefficient 1.463, 95% CI [1.389 1.536]; p=<0.001) in the study. Countries with a higher level of decentralization in health policy tasks and areas were significantly likely to have higher health services satisfaction, whereas this satisfaction had a significant negative relation with the lower level of decentralization status of secondary/tertiary care services in OECD countries (ß-coefficient -5.250, 95% CI [-5.757-4.743]; p = 0.001). ORIGINALITY/VALUE: This study contributes to a better understanding of the extent to which decentralization of health services affects public health safety capacity and satisfaction with health services, whereas the level of decentralization in OECD countries varies considerably. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of public health security and satisfaction with health care delivery in assessing the effects of decentralization in health services.

How can countries respond to the health and care workforce crisis? Insights from international evidence.

Future global health security requires a health and care workforce (HCWF) that can respond effectively to health crises as well as to changing health needs with ageing populations, a rise in chronic conditions and growing inequality. COVID-19 has drawn attention to an impending HCWF crisis with a large projected shortfall in numbers against need. Addressing this requires countries to move beyond a focus on numbers of doctors, nurses and midwives to consider what kinds of healthcare workers can deliver the services needed; are more likely to stay in country, in rural and remote areas, and in health sector jobs; and what support they need to deliver high-quality services. In this paper, which draws on a Policy Brief prepared for the World Health Organization (WHO) Fifth Global Forum on Human Resources for Health, we review the global evidence on best practices in organising, training, deploying, and managing the HCWF to highlight areas for strategic investments. These include (1). Increasing HCWF diversity to improve the skill-mix and provide culturally competent care; (2). Introducing multidisciplinary teams in primary care; (3). Transforming health professional education with greater interprofessional education; (4). Re-thinking employment and deployment systems to address HCWF shortages; (5). Improving HCWF retention by supporting healthcare workers and addressing migration through destination country policies that limit draining resources from countries with greatest need. These approaches are departures from current norms and hold substantial potential for building a sustainable and responsive HCWF.

Building a resilient health system for universal health coverage and health security: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Resilient health system (RHS) is crucial to achieving universal health coverage (UHC) and health security. However, little is known about strategies towards RHS to improve UHC and health security. This systematic review aims to synthesise the literature to understand approaches to build RHS toward UHC and health security. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted including studies published from 01 January 2000 to 31 December 2021. Studies were searched in three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus) using search terms under four domains: resilience, health system, universal health coverage, and health security. We critically appraised articles using Rees and colleagues' quality appraisal checklist to assess the quality of papers. A systematic narrative synthesis was conducted to analyse and synthesise the data using the World Health Organization's health systems building block framework. RESULTS: A total of 57 articles were included in the final review. Context-based redistribution of health workers, task-shifting policy, and results-based health financing policy helped to build RHS. High political commitment, community-based response planning, and multi-sectorial collaboration were critical to realising UHC and health security. On the contrary, lack of access, non-responsive, inequitable healthcare services, poor surveillance, weak leadership, and income inequalities were the constraints to achieving UHC and health security. In addition, the lack of basic healthcare infrastructures, inadequately skilled health workforces, absence of clear government policy, lack of clarity of stakeholder roles, and uneven distribution of health facilities and health workers were the challenges to achieving UHC and health security. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced healthcare infrastructures and adequate number of healthcare workers are essential to achieving UHC and health security. However, they are not alone adequate to protect the health system from potential failure. Context-specific redistribution of health workers, task-shifting, result-based health financing policies, and integrated and multi-sectoral approaches, based on the principles of primary health care, are necessary for building RHS toward UHC and health security.

Preparedness, impacts, and responses of public health emergencies towards health security: qualitative synthesis of evidence.

BACKGROUND: Natural and human-made public health emergencies (PHEs), such as armed conflicts, floods, and disease outbreaks, influence health systems including interruption of delivery and utilization of health services, and increased health service needs. However, the intensity and types of impacts of these PHEs vary across countries due to several associated factors. This scoping review aimed to synthesise available evidence on PHEs, their preparedness, impacts, and responses. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of published evidence. Studies were identified using search terms related to two concepts: health security and primary health care. We used Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines to select studies. We adapted the review framework of Arksey and O'Malley. Data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach and explained under three stages of PHEs: preparedness, impacts, and responses. RESULTS: A total of 64 studies were included in this review. Health systems of many low- and middle-income countries had inadequate preparedness to absorb the shocks of PHEs, limited surveillance, and monitoring of risks. Health systems have been overburdened with interrupted health services, increased need for health services, poor health resilience, and health inequities. Strategies of response to the impact of PHEs included integrated services such as public health and primary care, communication and partnership across sectors, use of digital tools, multisectoral coordination and actions, system approach to responses, multidisciplinary providers, and planning for resilient health systems. CONCLUSIONS: Public health emergencies have high impacts in countries with weak health systems, inadequate preparedness, and inadequate surveillance mechanisms. Better health system preparedness is required to absorb the impact, respond to the consequences, and adapt for future PHEs. Some potential response strategies could be ensuring need-based health services, monitoring and surveillance of post-emergency outbreaks, and multisectoral actions to engage sectors to address the collateral impacts of PHEs. Mitigation strategies for future PHEs could include risk assessment, disaster preparedness, and setting digital alarm systems for monitoring and surveillance.

The Chronic Cholera Situation in Africa: Why Are African Countries Unable to Tame the Well-Known Lion?

Seven years to the Global Taskforce on Cholera Control's target of reducing cholera cases and deaths by 90% by 2030, Africa continues to experience a high incidence of the disease. In the last 20 years, more than 2.6 million cases and 60 000 deaths of the disease have been recorded, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa. Case Fatality Ratio remains consistently above the WHO-recommended 1% with a yearly average of 2.2%. Between 1 January 2022 and 16 July 2023, fourteen African countries reported 213 443 cases and 3951 deaths (CFR, 1.9%) of the disease. In this perspective article, based on available literature and the authors' field experiences in Africa, we discuss the underlying reasons for the sustained transmission of the disease. We posit that in addition to the well-known risk factors for the disease, the chronic cholera situation in Africa is due to the poor socioeconomic development status, weak household and community resilience, low literacy levels, weak capacity of African countries to implement the 2005 International Health Regulation and the pervasively weak health system on the continent. Stemming this tide requires good leadership, partnership, political commitment, and equity in access to health services, water, and sanitation. Therefore, we recommend that African governments and stakeholders recognize and approach cholera prevention and control from the long-term development lens and leverage the current cholera emergency preparedness and response efforts on the continent to strengthen the affected countries' health, water, and sanitation systems. We call on international organizations such as WHO and the Africa Centres for Diseases Control to support African governments in scaling up research and innovations aimed at better characterizing the epidemiology of cholera and developing evidence-based, context-specific, and innovative strategies for its prevention and control. These recommendations require long-term multisectoral and multidisciplinary approaches.

Demographic and economic correlates of health security in West Sumatra province - Indonesia.

OBJECTIVES: Access to health insurances could indicate the degree of health security among communities. Indonesia made a commitment to attain universal health insurance coverage by the end of 2019. However, until today it has not reached the goal of 100% coverage. Therefore, there is a need to portray the demographic and economic correlates of health insurance coverage in an area to improve health security achievement. METHODS: This secondary analysis was based on the 2017 Indonesian national socio-economic survey conducted in the West Sumatra province. Multivariable models using logistic regression were used to estimate the odds ratios (OR) for being uninsured. RESULTS: The results showed that health security, in terms of insurance coverage, was influenced by demographic and economic factors. Young and middle-aged individuals were more likely to be uninsured than older ones (OR = 1.49 and OR = 1.21, respectively). People from a lower educated family, or with lower consumption per capita have higher risk of being uninsured (OR = 3.00 and OR = 1.26, respectively). CONCLUSION: Insurance coverage was influenced by demographic and economic factors. Policymakers should consider demographic and economic factors related to the implementation of universal health coverage. Campaign about the importance of universal health coverage should reach all citizens.

Global equity and timely access: COVID-19 & beyond 23rd DCVMN Annual General Meeting 2022 report.

The 23rd Annual General Meeting of the Developing Countries Vaccine Manufacturers' Network (DCVMN), co-hosted by Serum Institute of India (SII), gathered over 365 delegates and more than 90 high-level speakers for three days of presentations, discussions, and networking, in Pune, India. The meeting provided a platform for vaccine manufacturers from developing countries to voice their experience, challenges and successes, as they play a critical role in the global research, development and supply of vaccines for achieving vaccine equity through increased collaborations and partnerships. The key topics of the 23rd Annual General Meeting revolved around: the key learnings from COVID-19, pandemic preparedness, vaccine sustainability and scalability, strengthening Africa's local manufacturing, partnerships & collaborations, financing, innovations, and vaccine hesitancy. The overarching theme focused on equity, timely access and sustainability, which was carried through in each session, with each panelist providing their contribution to answering - how can we create a sustainable vaccine ecosystem?

Multisectoral action towards sustainable development goal 3.d and building health systems resilience during and beyond COVID-19: Findings from an INTOSAI development initiative and World Health Organization collaboration.

This article is part of the Research Topic 'Health Systems Recovery in the Context of COVID-19 and Protracted Conflict'. As the world faces global health crises such as pandemics, epidemics, climate change and evolving disease burdens and population demographics, building strong and resilient public health systems is of critical importance. The need for an integrated approach to building health system resilience; the widening of inequalities; and fears of vulnerable populations being left behind are critical issues that require Supreme Audit Institutions (SAIs) enquiry as independent public oversight bodies. Each country has a Supreme Audit Institution with a remit to audit public funds as an effective, accountable, and inclusive institution. Government audits are key components of effective public financial management and Good Governance. SAIs contribute to the quality of government engagement and better state-society relations through their work. As SAIs provide independent external oversight and contribute to follow up and review of national targets linked to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in their respective countries, they can play an important role in national recovery efforts. WHO and INTOSAI Development Initiative (IDI) have been collaborating in facilitating SAIs' audits of strong and resilient national public health systems linked to the national target of SDG 3.d in 40 countries across Africa, Americas, Asia and Oceania between 2021 and 2022. This paper aims to convey key lessons learned from the joint multisectoral collaboration for facilitating the 3.d audits that can contribute to building health systems resilience in ongoing recovery efforts. The collaboration included facilitation of the audits through professional education and audit support using a health systems resilience framework. The 3.d audits are performance audits and follow IDI's SDG Audit Model (ISAM). Following the ISAM implies that the SAI should focus on a whole-of-government approach, policy coherence and integration, and assess both government efforts at 'leaving no one behind' and multi-stakeholder engagement in implementing the chosen national SDG target linked to 3.d. WHO's Health Systems Resilience team has supported IDI and SAIs by delivering training sessions and reviewing working papers and draft reports of the SAIs from a health systems resilience perspective. IDI has provided the technical expertise on performance audits through its technical team and through in-kind contributions from mentors from many SAIs in the regions participating in the audit. In the 3.d audit, SAIs can ask how governments are acting to enhance capacity in some or all of the following, depending on their own national context and risk: forecasting, preventing and preparing for public health emergencies (PHEs) and threatsadapting, absorbing and responding to PHEs and threatsmaintaining essential health services in all contexts (including during emergencies/crises). The audits are expected to highlight current capacities of health systems resilience; the extent to which a whole-of-government approach and policy coherence have been utilised; and government efforts related to multistakeholder engagement and leaving no one behind in building health systems resilience related to progressing towards achieving the national target linked to 3.d by 2030. An overall positive achievement noted was that undertaking a complex health audit in the middle of a pandemic is possible and can contribute to building health systems resilience and recovery efforts. In their review of audit plans, draft summaries, and other work by the SAIs, both WHO and IDI have observed that SAIs have used the training and supplementary materials and applied various parts of it in their audits. This collaboration also demonstrates key considerations needed for successful partnership across multisectoral partners at global, regional and national levels. Such considerations can be applied in different contexts, including socioeconomic and health system recovery, to ensure whole-of-society and whole-of-government action in building health systems resilience and monitoring and evaluation to maintain and accelerate progress towards the national target linked to SDG3.d, health security and universal health coverage (UHC), as well as broader socioeconomic development.

Building National Health Security Through a Rapid Self-Assessment and Annual Operational Plan in Uganda, May to September 2021.

Uganda established a National Action Plan for Health Security in 2019, following a Joint External Evaluation (JEE) of International Health Regulations (2005) capacities in 2017. The action plan enhanced national health security awareness, but implementation efforts were affected by limited funding, excess of activities, and challenges related to monitoring and evaluation. To improve implementation, Uganda conducted a multisectoral health security self-assessment in 2021 using the second edition of the JEE tool and developed a 1-year operational plan. From 2017 to 2021, Uganda's composite ReadyScore improved by 20%, with improvement in 13 of the 19 technical areas. Indicator scores showing limited capacity declined from 30% to 20%, and indicators with no capacity declined from 10% to 2%. More indicators had developed (47% vs 40%), demonstrated (29% vs 20%), and sustained (2% vs 0%) capacities in 2021 compared with 2017. Using the self-assessment JEE scores, 72 specific activities from the International Health Regulations (2005) benchmarks tool were selected for inclusion in a 1-year operational plan (2021-2022). In contrast to the 264 broad activities in the 5-year national action plan, the operational plan prioritized a small number of activities to enable sectors to focus limited resources on implementation. While certain capacities improved before and during implementation of the action plan, countries may benefit from using short-term operational planning to develop realistic and actionable health security plans to improve health security capacities.

The level of countries' preparedness to health risks during Covid-19 and pre-pandemic: the differential response to health systems building blocks and socioeconomic indicators.

The global health security (GHS) Index assesses countries' level of preparedness to health risks. However, there is no evidence on how and whether the effects of health systems building blocks and socioeconomic indicators on the level of preparedness differ for low and high prepared countries. The aim of this study was to examine the contributions of health systems building blocks and socioeconomic indicators to show differences in the level of preparedness to health risks. The study also aimed to examine trends in the level of preparedness and the World Health Organization (WHO) regional differences before and during the Covid-19 pandemic. We used the 2021 GHS index report data and employed quantile regression, log-linear, double-logarithmic, and time-fixed effects models. As robustness checks, these functional form specifications corroborated with one another, and interval validity tests confirmed. The results show that increases in effective governance, supply chain capacity in terms of medicines and technologies, and health financing had positive effects on countries' level of preparedness to health risks. These effects were considerably larger for countries with higher levels of preparedness to health risks. The positive gradient trends signaled a sense of capacity on the part of countries with higher global health security. However, the health workforce including doctors, and health services including hospital beds, were not statistically significant in explaining variations in countries' level of preparedness. While economic factors had positive effects on the level of preparedness to health risks, their impacts across the distribution of countries' level of preparedness to health risks were mixed. The effects of Social Development Goals (SDGs) were greater for countries with higher levels of preparedness to health risks. The effect of the Human Development Index (HDI) was greatest for countries whose overall GHS index lies at the midpoint of the distribution of countries' level of preparedness. High-income levels were associated with a negative effect on the level of preparedness, especially if countries were in the lower quantiles across the distributions of preparedness. Relative to poor countries, middle- and high-income groups had lower levels of preparedness to health risks, an indication of a sense of complacency. We find the pandemic period (year 2021) was associated with a decrease in the level of preparedness to health risks in comparison to the pre-pandemic period. There were significant WHO regional differences. Apart from the Eastern Mediterranean, the rest of the regions were more prepared to health risks compared to Africa. There was a negative trend in the level of preparedness to health risks from 2019 to 2021 although regional differences in changes over time were not statistically significant. In conclusion, attempts to strengthen countries' level of preparedness to health shocks should be more focused on enhancing essentials such as supply chain capacity in terms of medicines and technologies; health financing, and communication infrastructure. Countries should also strengthen their already existing health workforce and health services. Together, strengthening these health systems essentials will be beneficial to less prepared countries where their impact we find to be weaker. Similarly, boosting SDGs, particularly health-related sub-scales, will be helpful to less prepared countries. Moreover, there is a need to curb complacency in preparedness to health risks during pandemics by high-income countries. The negative trend in the level of preparedness to health risks would suggest that there is a need for better preparedness during pandemics by conflating national health with global health risks. This will ensure the imperative of having a synergistic response to global health risks, which is understood by and communicated to all countries and regions.

A Socio-Health Approach to Improve Local Disaster Resilience and Contain Secondary Crises: A Case Study in an Agricultural Community Exposed to Bushfires in Australia.

Recent large-scale disasters have exposed the interconnected nature of modern societies, exacerbating the risk of cascading impacts. Examining elements of community health status, such as social determinants of health, their perceived health status, and how they relate to disaster resilience, can illuminate alternative actions for cost-effective disaster prevention and management. Moreover, agricultural communities are essential to food security and provide a working example of the importance of mitigation in escalation of crises. To that aim, this research examines perceptions of the relationship between disaster resilience and determinants of health, including health status. Participants also reported their views on perceived vulnerable groups in their community and proposed design characteristics of more effective community disaster plans.Here investigated are these elements in a small agricultural community of Western Australia previously exposed to bushfires. A questionnaire was used based on health elements from the Social Determinants of Health described by the World Health Organization (WHO) and compared this with quantitative data describing the community health status. A mixed methods approach combining qualitative (semi-structured interview) and quantitative (closed questions using a Likert scale) tools was undertaken with a small group of community members.It was found that community connection and social capital were perceived to provide knowledge and support that enhanced individual disaster risk awareness and preparedness and improved an individual's disaster resilience. Stress and social exclusion within a community were perceived to decrease an individual's resilience to disaster. Disaster resilience was reported to be a function of good physical and mental health. To achieve effective disaster planning, community partnership in the development, education, and testing of plans and robust communication were described as essential traits in community emergency plans.

The intersectionality of health (in)security: Healthcare, disposable workers, and exposure within Brazil's pandemic politics.

Brazil has suffered severe consequences from the Covid-19 pandemic, currently ranking second globally in terms of total fatalities, with more than 682,000 lives lost. This article critically outlines how a 'health security' framework overlooks processes of intersectionality and the varying impacts of the virus on different segments of society, or what we term health insecurity. We organize our analysis around three aspects of the pandemic that have become salient in Brazilian society, namely access to healthcare, disposable workers, and exposure to the virus, and delineate the intersectional impact of gendered inequality, neoliberal ideologies, and racial hierarchies within these three themes. Our methodology employs media and scholarly interpretations of Covid-19, and other secondary empirical and statistical data, to outline the virus's impacts on differently positioned bodies throughout Brazilian society. Our main findings reveal that during the pandemic, women's labor and health concerns have been undervalued, exploitative working conditions have been exacerbated, and Afro-Brazilians have been put in situations of higher exposure to the virus in both public and private spaces. This article underscores the need to better examine how public health, systems of oppression and exclusion, and (in)security overlap with each other.

The role of pharmaceutical industry in building resilient health system.

Objectives: This study explores the interrelationship among the current sustainability agenda of the pharmaceutical industry, based on the United Nation sustainable development goals (SDGs), the elements of the Joint External Evaluation (JEE) tool, and the triad components of the One Health approach. Methods: A cross-walk exercise was conducted to identify commonalities among SDGs, JEE assessment tool, and One Health approach. An in-depth study of 10 global pharmaceutical firms' corporate sustainability reports and COVID-19 response plan for 2019-2020 was also conducted. Results: The result of the exercise showed the existence of a direct and indirect relationship among the SDGs, elements of JEE assessment tool, and One Health approach. For example, both no poverty (SDG 1) and zero hunger (SDG 2) are linked with food safety targets under the JEE and with human and animal health under the One Health approach. Conclusion: This study adds a new dimension emphasizing the possibility of tailoring the pharmaceutical industry's activities under the sustainability agenda to strengthen global health security while remaining consistent with the One Health approach.

COVID-19 Response Roles among CDC International Public Health Emergency Management Fellowship Graduates.

Since 2013, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has offered the Public Health Emergency Management Fellowship to health professionals from around the world. The goal of this program is to build an international workforce to establish public health emergency management programs and operations centers in participating countries. In March 2021, all 141 graduates of the fellowship program were invited to complete a web survey designed to examine their job roles and functions, assess their contributions to their country's COVID-19 response, and identify needs for technical assistance to strengthen national preparedness and response systems. Of 141 fellows, 89 successfully completed the survey. Findings showed that fellowship graduates served key roles in COVID-19 response in many countries, used skills they gained from the fellowship, and desired continuing engagement between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and fellowship alumni to strengthen the community of practice for international public health emergency management.

Co-creation and priority setting for applied and implementation research in One Health: Improving capacities in public and animal health systems in Kenya.

Background: The Kenyan government has successfully been implementing sector specific and multisectoral projects aligned to the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA). For operational readiness and to enhance the effective planning and implementation of Global Health Security Programs (GHSP) at national and subnational level, there is an urgent need for stakeholders' engagement process to seek input in identifying challenges, prioritise activities for field implementation, and identify applied research and development questions, that should be addressed in the next five years. Methods: The modified Child Health and Nutrition Research Initiative (CHNRI) method was used to identify global health security related priorities for multisectoral implementation in Kenya. Subject matter experts from human, animal and environmental health sectors at national and subnational level contributed to predefined research questions from a number of sources and activities for consideration for implementation using a One Health approach. Sixty-two experts scored the 193 questions based on five pre-defined criteria: 1) feasibility and answerability; 2) potential for burden reduction; 3) potential for a paradigm shift; 4) potential for translation and implementation; and 5) impact on equity. Data resulting from this process was then analysed in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to determine the research priorities and experts' agreements. Results: Among the priority activities identified for implementation research were; strengthening One Health governance and legal frameworks; integration of ecosystem health into One Health programming; strengthening disease reporting, integrated data collection, information sharing and joint outbreak response; socio-anthropological and gender-based approaches in improving risk and behavioural change communication and community engagement; and one health workforce development. In addition, the potentials to invest in collaborative predictive risk modelling to enhance epidemic intelligence systems, while strengthening the One Health approach in the food safety incident and emergency response plans are feasible. Interpretation: Successful multisectoral implementation of global health security program in Kenya calls for a whole of society approach that will harness community and private sector knowledge to build preparedness and response capacities while targeting neglected and marginalised populations. This research provides a framework that is worth emulating for cost-effective planning and implementation of overarching One Health programs.