Infokiri

/















ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies



MEETING REPORT

Annual Meeting for National Coordinators
of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies (CCBs)
ECDC, Stockholm, Sweden, 10 April 2024





Contents

Executive summary 3
Main discussions 4
Welcome from ECDC Director 4
Welcome and introductory notes from the Chair 4
Adoption of the Draft Programme 4
Adoption of the meeting report of the Annual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (26 April 2023) and the meeting report Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (6 November 2023) 4
Adoption of the updated document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions” 4
ECDC’s strengthened mandate: working with EU/EEA MS. Updates: 5
 Update on EU Health Task Force 5
 Update on Preparedness and Response 5
 Vaccine monitoring platform 6
 Framework for prevention of communicable diseases 6
 Current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance 7
 ECDC One Health Task Force 7
 ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and HSC 7
 Enhanced collaboration with the CCBs – next steps 8
 Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods 9
 Update on Targeted Country Support: Country Overviews Dashboard access for Member State users 10
 Update on SRM: nomination model for access to applications 10
 A new platform for information exchange: Collaboration Centre 11
Adjournment 11
Annex 1: Meeting Programme 12
Annex 2. List of Participants 14


Executive summary
The Annual Meeting for National Coordinators of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies (CCB) convened on 10 April 2024 at ECDC, Stockholm, as a face-to-face meeting.
During the meeting, the National Coordinators adopted the updated Terms of Reference of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies. The participants were updated about ECDC’s work in respect to strengthened mandate and its impact on ECDC’s way of working. They discussed on the general aspects of the change and some more specific topics: updates on EU Health Task Force, preparedness and response, Vaccine monitoring platform, Framework for prevention of communicable diseases, current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance, ECDC One Health Task Force.
The participants were updated on the ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and the HSC. The views and reflections on enhanced collaboration with the CCBs and next steps were collected during the discussions.
During the meeting, the National Coordinators were updated on the latest developments of the targeted country support, informed on the developments of the Stakeholders Relationship Management (SRM) system and a new platform for information exchange.
CCB representatives from 19 EU/EEA Member States participated in the meeting. The meeting programme and the participant list are annexed to this report. PowerPoint presentations and related meeting documentation are available on the ECDC CCB extranet.



Main discussions
Welcome from ECDC Director
1. Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC, warmly welcomed National Coordinators (NCs) of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies (CCBs) to the annual meeting, which was arranged as a face-to-face meeting. She thereby emphasised the importance of this meeting that was particularly focused to present the updates of developments in respect to ECDC’s strengthened mandate, and the way of working with the stakeholders to ensure that the level of ambition is set together and that ECDC activities are based on well-defined needs and priorities. The participants were welcomed to the meeting to provide their input and have an open dialogue about the challenges on the implementation of the strengthened mandate.
Welcome and introductory notes from the Chair
2. Maarit Kokki, Head of the Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC, welcomed the National Coordinators to the annual meeting and expressed her gratitude to all participating in this meeting in person, with an extended welcome to new National Coordinators. As noted, the meeting was mainly focused on the discussions on ECDC’s strengthened mandate and its impact on ECDC’s way of working. As the CCBs play a central role in ECDC’s work, it is important to have a continuous dialogue with main stakeholders of ECDC and receive their feedback. Thereby, the session dedicated to the enhanced collaboration with the CCBs and next steps was highlighted. Following that, the participants were briefed about other topics of the meeting, i.e., updates on the Targeted Country Support and presentation of country overview dashboard, the developments of the Stakeholder Relationship Management (SRM) system and a presentation of a new Collaboration Centre platform for information exchange. Maarit Kokki then informed the participants that the meeting was recorded for the purpose of notes. The recording will not be stored after the report of the meeting has been finalised. Lastly, it was noted that all the meeting documents and presentations from the meeting are available on the ECDC CCB extranet.
Adoption of the Draft Programme
3. The Chair asked if anyone wished to add or modify the Draft Programme which has been shared together with related documentation. There were no comments, thus, the Draft Programme was adopted.
Adoption of meeting report of the Annual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (26 April 2023) and meeting report of Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (6 November 2023)
4. The draft report of the Annual meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (26 April 2023) and the draft report of Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (6 November 2023) were circulated to the CCB representatives for comments as well as shared on the CCB extranet. There were no further comments thus the meetings reports were adopted without changes.
Adoption of the updated document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions”
5. Maarit Kokki informed that the document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions” was updated with the following:
• Terms of Reference for Director of ECDC Coordinating Competent Body (Annex 1) were updated.
• Terms of Reference for National Coordinator of ECDC Coordinating Competent Body (Annex 2) were updated.
• Terms of Reference for National Coordinators Coordination Committee (NCCC) were removed. Following the on-line survey for CCB Directors and National Coordinators of the need of the NCCC, it was agreed to close the NCCC structure.
• Terms of Reference for OCPs for Epidemic Intelligence (Annex 7) were inserted.
For the reference, the CCB document of 2023 has been shared on the dedicated meeting place of the CCB extranet. The participants agreed with the updates and the document was adopted.
ECDC’s strengthened mandate: working with EU/EEA MS. Updates:
• Update on EU Health Task Force
6. Vicky Lefevre, Head of Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC, presented an update on the European Union Health Task Force (EUHTF). She noted that ECDC’s new mandate established the EU Health Task Force to provide effective operational response and crisis preparedness support to EU/EEA Member States (MS) and wider global health security. The creation and coordination of the EUHTF is carried out with support and collaboration of the European Commission, EU/EEA MS and EU partners as flexible body, mobilised in different situations and under different mechanisms, with remote support as well as rapid in-country field deployment. The scope of activities supported by the EUHTF in preparedness and response, as well as its a composition were introduced. Vicky Lefevre then informed regarding request of EUHTF support, noting the national health authorities, EC, WHO/GOARN, the geographical scope (EU/EEA countries, EU candidate countries, potential candidate countries, European Neighbourhood Policy countries and other partner countries) and criteria for EUHTF mobilisation. Subsequently, the participants were informed about the process to mobilise EUHTF support and expertise, the EUHTF expert’s profiles required for the EUTHF Expert Pools, EUHTF funding mechanism and EUHTF governance. The participants thereby were updated on ongoing and completed EUHTF assignments.

7. Following the presentation, the participants were interested about the composition of the EUHTF Expert Pool, whether the suggested experts could be outside of CCBs, and how to deal in cases when experts might not be available, whether the NFPs for Preparedness and Response should be involved and whether it would be possible to nominate experts from academia, whether people outside ECDC networks could apply to the Expert Pool and should the NC be aware and approve the experts, thereby checking with the institution they are employed. The NCs inquired about specific emergency situations and scenarios when local event or crisis occur, for instance related to chemicals. Furthermore, the participants commented that it would be important to be aware of benefits when there will be more requests, considering clarification of EUTHF governance in major outbreaks. It would be good to have a document to the suggested experts and some advice online.
8. Vicky Lefevre responded regarding being part of EUHTF External Expert Pool. At this stage, there will not be any open call. The initial call will proceed via the EPIET Alumni Network and in a second step also via the ECDC Expert Directory. ECDC would like to start with a smaller number of experts and keep the group engaged through a community of practice. If more requests are received, the EUHTF Expert Pool will be expanded e.g. through open calls. Thus, now it is a learning process for all of us. Another mechanism when urgent support is needed or when no expert is identified through the Expert Pools, is to launch a call thorough the NCs and relevant NFPs to respond to a specific request. The MS could propose people outside the CCB. To register as external experts, applicants will be required to complete a profile following a standard form. Experts will be asked to provide their contact details, areas of expertise, language skills and their curriculum vitae. The types of activities will be country and event focused depending on country needs. Regarding prioritising requests for support, currently all requests have been accepted. In case we would receive many requests, we will need to prioritise, thus ECDC will see how it evolves. Furthermore, regarding specific emergency situations of local event or crisis it was noted that ECDC has no expertise, for example, in chemicals. This is not part of the type of support offered by the EUHTF. However, cooperates with ECHA and DG ECHO, such request could be channelled to other entities. ECDC will publish an administrative decision on the establishment and the functioning of the EUHTF on its website.
• Update on Preparedness and Response
9. Vicky Lefevre provided an update on preparedness and response, noting EU/EEA countries self-reporting on prevention, preparedness and response planning for the implementation of IHR Core Capacities based on SCBTH - Article 7, every 3 years. She informed that data collection was performed during 27 Sept to 27 Dec 2023 in the REDCap platform. All countries completed the survey. The results are regarded as a baseline, enabling observation of trends and improvements in subsequent reporting cycles. The report aimed at initiating discussion in the HSC on further actions to enhance prevention, preparedness and response planning. The international Health Regulation (IHR) 2005 capacities and additional capacities for EU/EEA MS reported as per article 7 of the regulation were presented. Vicky Lefevre continued the update on the ECDC Emergency preparedness assessments (under Article 8), noting the proposed two-step approach for the assessment methodology: step 1 - validation process and step 2 - in-depth assessment. The team composition, consideration of other outputs and alignment with different assessments conducted by the country, the detailed mission process and timelines were presented.
10. Following the presentation, the floor was opened for the discussion. The questions were raised regarding nominations from countries, composition of the ECDC assessment team, whether the assessment visit it is organised together with Ministries of Health or via CCB NCs. Regarding country assessments, it would be good to know the process, timing, responsibilities and required technical expertise, lessons learnt and any insights. In respect to country visit, the participants inquired who will compose the programme and plan, and would experts involved in completing the questionnaire also be involved during the phase of identifying the experts. Regarding validation process and legislation, the inquiry was whether all the legislation and other documents submitted should be translated into English.
11. Vicky Lefevre noted that the composition of the ECDC assessment team would be mainly ECDC experts supported by EC experts for specific areas. Following agreement of the assessed country, also an expert from WHO EURO and from another MS would join the team. The programme for the assessment visit includes all 16 capacities covered in the Art 7 survey and is composed in agreement between the ECDC assessment team and the national contact point designated by the country for the assessment visit. The composition of the team at country level should have the required expertise related to the 16 capacities to be covered under the assessment but is the country who decides on the individual organisations and experts to be included. ECDC would provide translation of legislation or other documents not submitted in English. ECDC will provide regular feedback to MS on how the first assessment missions are going to share best practices and learn lessons.
• Vaccine monitoring platform
12. Piotr Kramarz, Deputy Head of Unit/Deputy Chief Scientist, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, and Catherine Cohet, European Medicines Agency (EMA) jointly presented the update on the EU Vaccine Monitoring Platform (VMP), noting that EMA and ECDC extended mandates require to jointly study vaccine use, effectiveness and safety that cover prioritisation of evidence gaps, registration and supervision of studies and facilitation/coordination of post-authorisation safety/effectiveness studies to monitor vaccine performance and impact over time. The participants were informed about the Immunisation and Vaccine Monitoring Advisory Board (IVMAB) and its composition. The VMP research agenda with prioritisation of research questions and the Vaccine Effectiveness Burden, Impact Studies (VEBIS) project were presented. The Emergency Task Force (ETF) established by Reg. EU 123/2022 as an expert advisory body of EMA for emergencies and preparedness, and EMA-funded vaccine studies were noted. Following the presentation, the participants were interested in more details about the ETF, regarding the work and involvement of countries in EMA-funded vaccine studies, timelines and plans, data protection and collaboration with NITAGs (National Immunisation Technical Advisory Groups).
13. Piotr Kramarz clarified that the IVMAB includes regulatory experts from the EMA’s scientific committees and that the studies included in the VMP are funded by either ECDC or EMA and are independent. Regarding the involvement of MS public health experts, the NFPs for Vaccine Preventable Diseases are in the IVMAB. No issue was noted in respect to data protection, the GDPR regulation is ensured, and studies are conducted in the MS respecting the national legislation. Furthermore, Piotr Kramarz noted about ECDC’s consideration of VEBIS studies to become more agile. There is already a possibility of generation of monthly updates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. The project also covers influenza vaccine effectiveness estimation and expansion to potentially other vaccines is considered. Carrying out the studies from the ECDC side is done via a contactor. The VEBIS project covers various healthcare settings and data sources, including hospitals, networks of general practices and electronic databases. Regarding the NITAG Collaboration, ECDC hosts a platform for collaboration and exchange of information, practices, and experiences with ECDC being involved in providing the secretariat and organising the meetings of the NITAG Collaboration. Catherine Cohet further noted that EMA will be soon in better position to communicate to public, and that EMA has access to large data sources with the consortia of representatives from countries.

• Framework for prevention of communicable diseases

14. John Kinsman, Expert Social and Behaviour Change, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, updated on the ECDC prevention framework and the prevention community of practice following the extended ECDC mandate. The five categories of prevention were presented, and the first steps towards an ECDC Prevention Community of Practice (including an external pilot mapping of actors) were presented. The aim of the Framework is to enhance the prevention of communicable diseases by emphasising the role of social and behavioural sciences. The participants were informed about the ECDC Prevention Community of Practice and its objectives and timeframe. John Kinsman has also updated the audience on the capacity building activities in the area of behavioural and social science support to prevention. As an example, he used the training provided to support the EU Neighbourhood Policy partner countries with current focus primarily on Ukraine.

15. Following the presentation, the participants were interested in the interlinking of the work with the Community of Practice for prevention and disease networks, also a possibility of specific trainings for daily work and lessons learned. John Kinsman responded that a mapping exercise of prevention actors was conducted through a pilot that was done in two phases, the first one was exploratory and mainly focused into interviews of interests and the second was done via social media outreach. The Prevention Framework is a generic document outlining the overall approach of the Centre to prevention and its principles will be discussed with the disease networks. Trainings on the use of social and behavioural science for prevention are in preparation with options such as e-learning and webinars in future.
• Current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance

16. Bruno Ciancio, Head of Section Surveillance, Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC, presented an update on current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance. The ECDC eHealth programme, SUREHD project, focused to design and implement multinational surveillance systems using routinely collected electronic health records in EU/EEA, and its main achievements were introduced. The European Health Data Space - Secondary use (EHDS2) with the ECDC objectives and the ECDC Use Case on AMR surveillance were presented. Bruno Ciancio then noted the questions in respect to Art 8 country assessments in the surveillance area and informed about possible developments supported by EU4Health grants. Further on, he updated on the laboratory support, the EURLs for public health, activities, and access to high-capacity WGS services through outsourced WGS support, informed about the national infrastructure support programmes 2021 and 2022 and GenEpi-BioTrain, the cross-border capacity-building support programme in genomic epidemiology.
17. Following the presentation, the participants acknowledged the large potential of the presented areas and actions to increase surveillance effectiveness. They commented that training trainers of possible developments supported by EU4Health grants could be cascaded down to hospitals, etc. Regarding the process of developing case definitions, it should go faster, as some MS have challenges.
18. Bruno Ciancio supported the views noting that it is important that actions have started in a systematic way with priority areas. Regarding case definitions he noted that until the new adopted the existing ones are valid, and the adoption could be done before summer. Regarding laboratory support and the role of surveillance, it is a critical point and needs to be discussed further. The network consists of the national reference laboratories, that is essential for surveillance, noting the importance to engage the European level.
• ECDC One Health Task Force
19. Ole Heuer, Head of Section Epidemic-Prone Diseases, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, presented an update on ECDC One Health Task Force, noting that One Health has been identified as a high priority topic in the SCBTH regulation: One Health means a multi-sectoral approach which recognises that human health is connected to animal health and to the environment, and that actions to tackle threats to health must take into account those three dimensions. The participants were informed about the long-standing collaboration between EU agencies on zoonotic pathogens and AMR & AMC in animals and humans, the integrated analysis of consumption of antimicrobial agents and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from humans and food-producing animals in the EU/EEA. The ECDC One Health Framework, its content and challenges to One Health collaboration, as well as proposed strategic objectives for ECDC were presented. Subsequently, during the discussion the establishment for a cross-agency One Health Task Force was mentioned, thus, at the moment there is no direct involvement of other institutions or HERA. The most important thing and aim would be to establish a collaboration at the national level, and at EU level among the agencies and across the sectors and promoting that.
• ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and HSC
20. Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC, presented an update on ECDC’s collaboration within the EU Health Union and key partners and interactions, highlighting that DG SANTE’s role was regarding the regulatory framework, coordination of risk management in the Health Security Committee (HSC) and the EU Global Health Strategy. The long time collaboration noted with EMA as joint ECDC/EMA and Vaccine Monitoring Platform, mentioning that EMA works on vaccine safety and ECDC on effectiveness. The following activities of cooperation with DG HERA were explained: intelligence gathering and assessment of health threats relevant to medical countermeasures; modelling, forecasts and foresight activities relevant to medical countermeasures; promoting advanced research and development of medical countermeasures and related technologies; strengthening knowledge in preparedness and response related to medical countermeasures; contribution to reinforcing the global health emergency preparedness and response architecture. The coordination of the work with the partners was done through working arrangements and MoUs. In respect to MoU with EMA, it was noted a specific annex for vaccine monitoring platform. Following that, it was said that a high-level working arrangement between ECDC and HERA was signed last year and published on the ECDC website. This agreement is being reviewed now after one year with a focus on whether certain areas need to be mentioned in more details. HERA has also a laboratory network and a database for medical counter measures that was not yet well developed and under creation.
21. Vicky Lefevre continued and explained that ECDC has provided the necessary information to DG HERA in regard to the applications, i.e. EpiPulse, TESSy, EWRS. Regarding the lab-network called DURABLE was more research oriented. As the last point Vicky Lefevre mentioned an involvement of ECDC in the wastewater monitoring, advising mainly on the usage in respect of Covid-19, and now ECDC is a part of the ‘EU-Wish’, a HERA funded project, where MS get grants to implement wastewater surveillance.
22. The participants were interested in the profiles of people involved in DG HERA, and suggested to invite HERA to share their activities and views, and potential surveillance on hazards with other international organisations. The DURABLE lab-network was noted as a good example of collaboration. Also, the question was raised regarding the involvement of ECDC in European stockpiles. Participants were interested about HERA’s stakeholder management system, if they have their own network of National Coordinators, a role similar to the ECDC National Coordinator in respect to HERA.
23. ECDC replied that colleagues from DG HERA will be invited to the next AF meeting, and informed that a representative from DG HERA representatives is already in the MB. Regarding the stockpiling, ECDC was not involved into operations and governance of this, only sometimes was asked to provide information. Regarding the network and stakeholder management, ECDC clarified that HERA has a board and an advisory forum, and in both ECDC is observer. It would be important if for example CCB Directors would find out who is representing their country in the HERA board and advisory forum.
• Enhanced collaboration with the CCBs – next steps
◦ The CCB nomination structure: current and future
◦ Collaboration with the IANPHI
24. Maarit Kokki made a presentation focusing on the collaboration with the CCBs, noting an overall picture of the ECDC nominations structure with focus on ECDC’s cooperation with the EU/EEA Member States and next steps. The structure of the Coordinating Competent Body was recalled as well as nomination process of National Focal Points (NFPs) and Operational Contact Points (OCPs). Due to the implementation of the ECDC strengthened mandate, ECDC has been reviewing the modalities of its collaboration with main partners and stakeholders, the ECDC CCBs, focusing on:
• Strengthening the collaboration with the CCBs at a strategic level.
• Perception of the CCB Directors around their role, and what roles and responsibilities they would be ready and willing to take in the future. Thereby the ToR for CCB Director were updated accordingly.
• Reinforce the role of the National Coordinator. The ToR for NC were updated accordingly.
• Set up a Strategic Advisory Group of CCB Directors and prepare ToR for it. The ToR were drafted and consulted with the CCB Directors, consequently considered as approved.
• Exploring possibilities for collaboration with the International Association of National Public Health Institutes (ECDC/CCB/IANPHI).
• Setting up the meetings: a Strategic Advisory Group of CCB Directors meet face-to-face with the ECDC Director (during spring); an annual face-to-face meeting with the NCs (during spring) and a virtual meeting for CCB Directors and NCs focusing on specific topics (during autumn).
As next steps for near future, Maarit Kokki suggested to consider reviewing the overall CCB structure and the network system by investigating the value it brings to countries and thus the best approach for improvement and sustainability. Furthermore, exploring possibilities for collaboration with the International Association of National Public Health Institutes (ECDC/CCB/IANPHI), considering back-to-back meetings and a dialogue between IANPHI, ECDC and CCBs to achieve the useful and structured collaboration was emphasised.
25. Following the presentation, the floor was opened for discussion. The NCs noted that the current CCB structure worked very well, however, it was becoming challenging due to the growing number of NFPs and especially OCPs. It should be considered carefully not creating too many networks and OCPs because it is not easy to manage them in the country, thus better to keep it as simple as possible, and the nominations must be very targeted. It was noted that the NC has a good relationship with NFPs and an efficient exchange of information and feedback, however, there is more difficult interaction with the OCPs due to large number of these contact points. Due to limited resources, it is ineffective to have too many OCPs, however, in case the NCs have good connection with NFPs, for some countries there were no significant issues observed. Regarding the role of the CCB Directors, their involvement is at strategic level, thus it could be considered the possibility of delegation, i.e., the person could decide who can be delegated instead of keeping the rigid structure. Concerns were raised in regard to nominations of some NFPs that are not close to the CCB, for example NFPs for Communication, an unclarity of NITAG network and its relation with the NFPs for Vaccine Preventable Diseases, also the NFPs for Scientific Advise vs Advisory Forum. The NCs experience difficulties when they need to nominate contact points from other institutions outside CCB. The communication between ECDC and CCBs was noted as not always correct, when sometimes receivers were hidden, the purpose of an email was not clear or not required recipients were addressed. The participants congratulated ECDC for creating a huge networking system and an impressive SRM system that successfully facilitates the cooperation between ECDC and the MS. An induction material for newly appointed CCB Director and NC was acknowledged as being informative and useful, and targeted very well to the respective roles.
26. The following elements have been pointed out for the future:
• Review the CCB structure and networks:
◦ consider simplification and reduction of roles.
◦ check redundant roles and networks that are not relevant/active, or do not have meetings and could be merged or eliminated;
• Find a way to collect NCs feedback;
• Address internally the email communication with the CCBs, considering the clearance and correct list of recipients. The AI support could be helpful in drafting emails in near future.
• Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods
27. Helena de Carvalho Gomes, Head of Section Scientific Process and Methods, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC, presented the proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods, noting that the ECDC’s new mandate puts a stronger emphasis on advanced analytics including epidemiological modelling and related research methods according to the Regulation (EU) 2022/2370. The aim was to create a formal exchange platform for quantitative experts with the new OCPs under the NFPs for Scientific Advice Coordination that intended to cover various infectious diseases and public health functions. The expected benefit and proposed terms of reference were introduced.
28. Following the presentation, the participants discussed the reasoning and need of the new OCPs. It was noted that from a technical point of view such a network could be beneficial, provided it exchanges with the other functional and disease networks regarding analytical and modelling activities. Concerning its placement in the current CCB structure, some CCB members noted that it may we worthwhile reviewing the role and function of the NFPs for Scientific Advice Coordination since the quantitative methods network would not fit under any of the other existing structures. The question was raised if a more informal, community of practice type, network could be an alternative to formally nominate additional contact points.
29. ECDC responded that currently the forecast and scenario hubs established during the pandemic are partly fulfilling the need for a more informal network. However, what is currently missing is a strong link to the public health community, which could be achieved by setting up a more formal network under the CCB structure. Members should ideally not come from academia but instead be colleagues working at the national public health institutes and designated competent bodies, involved in the analysis and interpretation of public health relevant data, irrespective of their formal job title, considering that not all public health agencies have dedicated advanced analysis and statistical and mathematical modelling capacity. Such a network would facilitate the exchange across the different public health agencies, complement the currently more academic hubs, and contribute to preparedness by fostering networking, mutual learning and continuous professional development. The NFPs for Scientific Advice Coordination have not been active but are set up and could be activated in a short time frame. ECDC will review the current networking structure and get back with a more elaborated proposal.
• Update on Targeted Country Support: Country Overviews Dashboard access for Member State users
30. Svens Henkuzens, Country Support Officer, European and International Cooperation Section, Director’s Office, ECDC, updated the participants on the further development of the County overviews Dashboard. In the previous NC meetings ECDC was asked to have a more pro-active approach towards identifying vulnerabilities in countries and to seek possible ways to address them. Svens Henkuzens then introduced the steps for ECDC getting closer to and deepening its knowledge on Member States, that are identifying the minimum country information needed to support capacity building, making informed decision on countries to receive  prioritized country support, planning actions through the annual Single Planning Document and providing targeted country support that is in line with the ongoing work on integration with other processes at ECDC e.g., Art 8 follow-up, EUHTF. The participants were informed that access to the dashboard is set up by default for CCB Directors and NCs. The live demo of the platform was presented.
31. The participants acknowledged the Country Overview Dashboard as a very good and informative tool for countries in one place. They inquired about sources of information and the possibility to open the access to NFPs and OCPs, as well as public availability. Svens Henkuzens then clarified that access can be granted by roles and by default that would be processed following a broad agreement, and at this stage publicly access will not be available. It was suggested to grant default access to all National Focal Points, except for SoHO NFPs and Scientific Advice NFPs. ECDC will request from NCs the approval on this matter. The data sources were noted as ECDC, EC, WHO, OECD, Eurostat, EMCDDA, EFSA.
• Update on SRM: nomination model for access to applications
32. Skaidra Kurapkiene, Corporate Governance Officer, Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC, and Anca Dragnea, Project Manager/Business Analyst, Digital Solutions, Digital Transformation Services, ECDC, presented an update of the latest developments of Stakeholders Relationship Management (SRM) system. A new nomination model for access to ECDC applications was introduced noting that access to applications will be based on the nominated CCB roles, thereby the CCB nomination process will not change, however, it will not be possible for NCs/nomination managers to grant only access via SRM without the assigned role. An improved SRM online help functionality was introduced that accommodates comprehensive explanatory material and videos to better support the user for operations in the system.
33. SRM developments were warmly welcomed by the participants. It was highly appreciated all the thorough and effective support in SRM guidance, nominations management, and any other related help delivered in timely manner to the NCs and nomination managers by respective ECDC colleagues.
• A new platform for information exchange: Collaboration Centre
34. Anca Moruzov, Principal Expert Information Management, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC informed the participants about the ECDC Information and Knowledge Management (IKM) Section and its activities. The Enterprise Content Management Platform (ECMP) and ECMP Collaboration Centre as the new platform for information exchange replacing Extranets, and the External Document Management System (DMS) was presented. Following that, a dedicated workspace for NFPs for Public Health Training and TSF (ECON NFPTs and TSF) was demonstrated.
35. An inquiry was raised regarding the link to ECDC Virtual Academy (EVA) demonstrated in the ECON NFPTs and TSF, noting that it would be good to have it in the presented platform. ECDC replied that this page is under development, and, generally, the platform (ECON) can be created according to the NCs and overall MS needs. It was informed that the new ECON application will gradually replace all ECDC extranets.
Adjournment
36. Andrea Ammon thanked the participants for the engagement, highlighting the common way forward. Subsequently, the Chair of the meeting, Maarit Kokki, thanked the participants for their valuable contributions throughout the meeting and for sharing their ideas and suggestions. Furthermore, she looked forward to continuous fruitful collaboration and dialogue on the implementation of ECDC amended mandate.







Annex 1: Meeting Programme

Wednesday, 10 April 2024

09:00-09:30
Arrival of participants to ECDC, Board Room

09:30-09:40
Welcome from ECDC Director
Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC


09:40-09:50
Welcome and introductory notes from the Chair
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC


09:50-09:55
Adoption of the Draft Programme (Document)
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Draft Programme

09:55-10:00
Adoption of the meeting report of the Annual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators of the ECDC CCBs (26 April 2023) (Document)
Adoption of the meeting report of Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators of ECDC CCBs (6 November 2023) (Document)
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Meeting Report


Meeting Report


10:00-10:10
Adoption of the updated document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions” (Document)
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions

10:10-10:40

ECDC’s strengthened mandate: working with EU/EEA MS. Updates:
• EU Health Task Force
Vicky Lefevre, Head of Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

10:40-11:10
Coffee break (Social corner area outside Board Room)

11:10-11:30

• Preparedness and response
Thomas Hofmann, Head of Section Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

11:30-11:50
• Vaccine monitoring platform
Piotr Kramarz, Deputy Head of Unit/Deputy Chief Scientist, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, Catherine Cohet, Expert EMA
PowerPoint presentation

11:50-12:10
• Framework for prevention of communicable diseases
John Kinsman, Expert Social and Behaviour Change, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

12:10-12:30
• Current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance
Bruno Ciancio, Head of Section Surveillance, Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

12:30-13:30
Lunch break (Social corner area outside Board Room)

13:30-13:50

• ECDC One Health Task Force
Ole Heuer, Head of Section Epidemic-Prone Diseases, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

13:50-14:10

ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and the HSC
Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


14:10-15:00

Enhanced collaboration with the CCBs – next steps (Discussion)
• The CCB nomination structure: current and future
• Collaboration with the IANPHI
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


15:00-15:30
Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods
Helena de Carvalho Gomes, Head of Section Scientific Process and Methods, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC
Barbara Albiger, Principal Expert Scientific Quality, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation
Document ''Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods“

15:30-16:00
Coffee break (Social corner area outside Board Room)

16:00-16:40
Update on Targeted Country Support: Country Overview Dashboard access for Member State users
Svens Henkuzens, Country Support Officer, European and International Cooperation Section, Director’s Office, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation
Live demo

16:40-16:55
Update on SRM: nomination model for access to applications
Skaidra Kurapkiene, Corporate Governance Officer, Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Anca Dragnea, Project Manager/Business Analyst, Digital Solutions, Digital Transformation Services, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


16:55-17:10
A new platform for information exchange: Collaboration Centre
Anca Moruzov, Principal Expert Information Management, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


17:10-17:20

AOB, Closing remarks
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC

18:00-20:00
Dinner (The Winery Hotel, Rosenborgsgatan 20, Solna)
Adjournment




Annex 2. List of Participants
#
Country
Representative
Role
1.
Austria
Sigrid KIERMAYR
National Coordinator
2.
Belgium
Koen BLOT
National Coordinator
3.
Bulgaria
Zhivka GETSOVA
National Coordinator Alternate
4.
Croatia
Bernard KAIC
National Coordinator
5.
Czech Republic
Hana ORLIKOVÁ
National Coordinator
6.
Denmark
Stine Ulendorf JACOBSEN
National Coordinator
7.
Estonia
Natalia KERBO
National Coordinator
8.
France
Paula GARCIA LOBATO
National Coordinator Alternate
9.
Germany
Ute REXROTH
National Coordinator
10.
Greece
Maria PIROUNAKI
Delegated by National Coordinator
11.
Hungary
Ágnes DÁNIELISZ
National Coordinator
12.
Italy
Francesco MARAGLINO
National Coordinator
13.
Lithuania
Jurgita PAKALNIŠKIENĖ
National Coordinator
14.
Poland
Katarzyna ZACHARCZUK
National Coordinator Alternate
15.
Portugal
Mariana FERREIRA
National Coordinator
16.
Sweden
Agneta FALK FILIPSSON
National Coordinator
EEA
17.
Iceland

Gudrun ASPELUND
National Coordinator
18.
Liechtenstein

Silvia DEHLER
National Coordinator
19.
Norway

Heidi LANGE
National Coordinator Alternate

/















ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies



MEETING REPORT

Annual Meeting for National Coordinators
of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies (CCBs)
ECDC, Stockholm, Sweden, 10 April 2024





Contents

Executive summary 3
Main discussions 4
Welcome from ECDC Director 4
Welcome and introductory notes from the Chair 4
Adoption of the Draft Programme 4
Adoption of the meeting report of the Annual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (26 April 2023) and the meeting report Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (6 November 2023) 4
Adoption of the updated document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions” 4
ECDC’s strengthened mandate: working with EU/EEA MS. Updates: 5
 Update on EU Health Task Force 5
 Update on Preparedness and Response 5
 Vaccine monitoring platform 6
 Framework for prevention of communicable diseases 6
 Current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance 7
 ECDC One Health Task Force 7
 ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and HSC 7
 Enhanced collaboration with the CCBs – next steps 8
 Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods 9
 Update on Targeted Country Support: Country Overviews Dashboard access for Member State users 10
 Update on SRM: nomination model for access to applications 10
 A new platform for information exchange: Collaboration Centre 11
Adjournment 11
Annex 1: Meeting Programme 12
Annex 2. List of Participants 14


Executive summary
The Annual Meeting for National Coordinators of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies (CCB) convened on 10 April 2024 at ECDC, Stockholm, as a face-to-face meeting.
During the meeting, the National Coordinators adopted the updated Terms of Reference of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies. The participants were updated about ECDC’s work in respect to strengthened mandate and its impact on ECDC’s way of working. They discussed on the general aspects of the change and some more specific topics: updates on EU Health Task Force, preparedness and response, Vaccine monitoring platform, Framework for prevention of communicable diseases, current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance, ECDC One Health Task Force.
The participants were updated on the ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and the HSC. The views and reflections on enhanced collaboration with the CCBs and next steps were collected during the discussions.
During the meeting, the National Coordinators were updated on the latest developments of the targeted country support, informed on the developments of the Stakeholders Relationship Management (SRM) system and a new platform for information exchange.
CCB representatives from 19 EU/EEA Member States participated in the meeting. The meeting programme and the participant list are annexed to this report. PowerPoint presentations and related meeting documentation are available on the ECDC CCB extranet.



Main discussions
Welcome from ECDC Director
1. Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC, warmly welcomed National Coordinators (NCs) of the ECDC Coordinating Competent Bodies (CCBs) to the annual meeting, which was arranged as a face-to-face meeting. She thereby emphasised the importance of this meeting that was particularly focused to present the updates of developments in respect to ECDC’s strengthened mandate, and the way of working with the stakeholders to ensure that the level of ambition is set together and that ECDC activities are based on well-defined needs and priorities. The participants were welcomed to the meeting to provide their input and have an open dialogue about the challenges on the implementation of the strengthened mandate.
Welcome and introductory notes from the Chair
2. Maarit Kokki, Head of the Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC, welcomed the National Coordinators to the annual meeting and expressed her gratitude to all participating in this meeting in person, with an extended welcome to new National Coordinators. As noted, the meeting was mainly focused on the discussions on ECDC’s strengthened mandate and its impact on ECDC’s way of working. As the CCBs play a central role in ECDC’s work, it is important to have a continuous dialogue with main stakeholders of ECDC and receive their feedback. Thereby, the session dedicated to the enhanced collaboration with the CCBs and next steps was highlighted. Following that, the participants were briefed about other topics of the meeting, i.e., updates on the Targeted Country Support and presentation of country overview dashboard, the developments of the Stakeholder Relationship Management (SRM) system and a presentation of a new Collaboration Centre platform for information exchange. Maarit Kokki then informed the participants that the meeting was recorded for the purpose of notes. The recording will not be stored after the report of the meeting has been finalised. Lastly, it was noted that all the meeting documents and presentations from the meeting are available on the ECDC CCB extranet.
Adoption of the Draft Programme
3. The Chair asked if anyone wished to add or modify the Draft Programme which has been shared together with related documentation. There were no comments, thus, the Draft Programme was adopted.
Adoption of meeting report of the Annual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (26 April 2023) and meeting report of Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (6 November 2023)
4. The draft report of the Annual meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (26 April 2023) and the draft report of Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators (6 November 2023) were circulated to the CCB representatives for comments as well as shared on the CCB extranet. There were no further comments thus the meetings reports were adopted without changes.
Adoption of the updated document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions”
5. Maarit Kokki informed that the document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions” was updated with the following:
• Terms of Reference for Director of ECDC Coordinating Competent Body (Annex 1) were updated.
• Terms of Reference for National Coordinator of ECDC Coordinating Competent Body (Annex 2) were updated.
• Terms of Reference for National Coordinators Coordination Committee (NCCC) were removed. Following the on-line survey for CCB Directors and National Coordinators of the need of the NCCC, it was agreed to close the NCCC structure.
• Terms of Reference for OCPs for Epidemic Intelligence (Annex 7) were inserted.
For the reference, the CCB document of 2023 has been shared on the dedicated meeting place of the CCB extranet. The participants agreed with the updates and the document was adopted.
ECDC’s strengthened mandate: working with EU/EEA MS. Updates:
• Update on EU Health Task Force
6. Vicky Lefevre, Head of Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC, presented an update on the European Union Health Task Force (EUHTF). She noted that ECDC’s new mandate established the EU Health Task Force to provide effective operational response and crisis preparedness support to EU/EEA Member States (MS) and wider global health security. The creation and coordination of the EUHTF is carried out with support and collaboration of the European Commission, EU/EEA MS and EU partners as flexible body, mobilised in different situations and under different mechanisms, with remote support as well as rapid in-country field deployment. The scope of activities supported by the EUHTF in preparedness and response, as well as its a composition were introduced. Vicky Lefevre then informed regarding request of EUHTF support, noting the national health authorities, EC, WHO/GOARN, the geographical scope (EU/EEA countries, EU candidate countries, potential candidate countries, European Neighbourhood Policy countries and other partner countries) and criteria for EUHTF mobilisation. Subsequently, the participants were informed about the process to mobilise EUHTF support and expertise, the EUHTF expert’s profiles required for the EUTHF Expert Pools, EUHTF funding mechanism and EUHTF governance. The participants thereby were updated on ongoing and completed EUHTF assignments.

7. Following the presentation, the participants were interested about the composition of the EUHTF Expert Pool, whether the suggested experts could be outside of CCBs, and how to deal in cases when experts might not be available, whether the NFPs for Preparedness and Response should be involved and whether it would be possible to nominate experts from academia, whether people outside ECDC networks could apply to the Expert Pool and should the NC be aware and approve the experts, thereby checking with the institution they are employed. The NCs inquired about specific emergency situations and scenarios when local event or crisis occur, for instance related to chemicals. Furthermore, the participants commented that it would be important to be aware of benefits when there will be more requests, considering clarification of EUTHF governance in major outbreaks. It would be good to have a document to the suggested experts and some advice online.
8. Vicky Lefevre responded regarding being part of EUHTF External Expert Pool. At this stage, there will not be any open call. The initial call will proceed via the EPIET Alumni Network and in a second step also via the ECDC Expert Directory. ECDC would like to start with a smaller number of experts and keep the group engaged through a community of practice. If more requests are received, the EUHTF Expert Pool will be expanded e.g. through open calls. Thus, now it is a learning process for all of us. Another mechanism when urgent support is needed or when no expert is identified through the Expert Pools, is to launch a call thorough the NCs and relevant NFPs to respond to a specific request. The MS could propose people outside the CCB. To register as external experts, applicants will be required to complete a profile following a standard form. Experts will be asked to provide their contact details, areas of expertise, language skills and their curriculum vitae. The types of activities will be country and event focused depending on country needs. Regarding prioritising requests for support, currently all requests have been accepted. In case we would receive many requests, we will need to prioritise, thus ECDC will see how it evolves. Furthermore, regarding specific emergency situations of local event or crisis it was noted that ECDC has no expertise, for example, in chemicals. This is not part of the type of support offered by the EUHTF. However, cooperates with ECHA and DG ECHO, such request could be channelled to other entities. ECDC will publish an administrative decision on the establishment and the functioning of the EUHTF on its website.
• Update on Preparedness and Response
9. Vicky Lefevre provided an update on preparedness and response, noting EU/EEA countries self-reporting on prevention, preparedness and response planning for the implementation of IHR Core Capacities based on SCBTH - Article 7, every 3 years. She informed that data collection was performed during 27 Sept to 27 Dec 2023 in the REDCap platform. All countries completed the survey. The results are regarded as a baseline, enabling observation of trends and improvements in subsequent reporting cycles. The report aimed at initiating discussion in the HSC on further actions to enhance prevention, preparedness and response planning. The international Health Regulation (IHR) 2005 capacities and additional capacities for EU/EEA MS reported as per article 7 of the regulation were presented. Vicky Lefevre continued the update on the ECDC Emergency preparedness assessments (under Article 8), noting the proposed two-step approach for the assessment methodology: step 1 - validation process and step 2 - in-depth assessment. The team composition, consideration of other outputs and alignment with different assessments conducted by the country, the detailed mission process and timelines were presented.
10. Following the presentation, the floor was opened for the discussion. The questions were raised regarding nominations from countries, composition of the ECDC assessment team, whether the assessment visit it is organised together with Ministries of Health or via CCB NCs. Regarding country assessments, it would be good to know the process, timing, responsibilities and required technical expertise, lessons learnt and any insights. In respect to country visit, the participants inquired who will compose the programme and plan, and would experts involved in completing the questionnaire also be involved during the phase of identifying the experts. Regarding validation process and legislation, the inquiry was whether all the legislation and other documents submitted should be translated into English.
11. Vicky Lefevre noted that the composition of the ECDC assessment team would be mainly ECDC experts supported by EC experts for specific areas. Following agreement of the assessed country, also an expert from WHO EURO and from another MS would join the team. The programme for the assessment visit includes all 16 capacities covered in the Art 7 survey and is composed in agreement between the ECDC assessment team and the national contact point designated by the country for the assessment visit. The composition of the team at country level should have the required expertise related to the 16 capacities to be covered under the assessment but is the country who decides on the individual organisations and experts to be included. ECDC would provide translation of legislation or other documents not submitted in English. ECDC will provide regular feedback to MS on how the first assessment missions are going to share best practices and learn lessons.
• Vaccine monitoring platform
12. Piotr Kramarz, Deputy Head of Unit/Deputy Chief Scientist, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, and Catherine Cohet, European Medicines Agency (EMA) jointly presented the update on the EU Vaccine Monitoring Platform (VMP), noting that EMA and ECDC extended mandates require to jointly study vaccine use, effectiveness and safety that cover prioritisation of evidence gaps, registration and supervision of studies and facilitation/coordination of post-authorisation safety/effectiveness studies to monitor vaccine performance and impact over time. The participants were informed about the Immunisation and Vaccine Monitoring Advisory Board (IVMAB) and its composition. The VMP research agenda with prioritisation of research questions and the Vaccine Effectiveness Burden, Impact Studies (VEBIS) project were presented. The Emergency Task Force (ETF) established by Reg. EU 123/2022 as an expert advisory body of EMA for emergencies and preparedness, and EMA-funded vaccine studies were noted. Following the presentation, the participants were interested in more details about the ETF, regarding the work and involvement of countries in EMA-funded vaccine studies, timelines and plans, data protection and collaboration with NITAGs (National Immunisation Technical Advisory Groups).
13. Piotr Kramarz clarified that the IVMAB includes regulatory experts from the EMA’s scientific committees and that the studies included in the VMP are funded by either ECDC or EMA and are independent. Regarding the involvement of MS public health experts, the NFPs for Vaccine Preventable Diseases are in the IVMAB. No issue was noted in respect to data protection, the GDPR regulation is ensured, and studies are conducted in the MS respecting the national legislation. Furthermore, Piotr Kramarz noted about ECDC’s consideration of VEBIS studies to become more agile. There is already a possibility of generation of monthly updates of COVID-19 vaccine effectiveness. The project also covers influenza vaccine effectiveness estimation and expansion to potentially other vaccines is considered. Carrying out the studies from the ECDC side is done via a contactor. The VEBIS project covers various healthcare settings and data sources, including hospitals, networks of general practices and electronic databases. Regarding the NITAG Collaboration, ECDC hosts a platform for collaboration and exchange of information, practices, and experiences with ECDC being involved in providing the secretariat and organising the meetings of the NITAG Collaboration. Catherine Cohet further noted that EMA will be soon in better position to communicate to public, and that EMA has access to large data sources with the consortia of representatives from countries.

• Framework for prevention of communicable diseases

14. John Kinsman, Expert Social and Behaviour Change, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, updated on the ECDC prevention framework and the prevention community of practice following the extended ECDC mandate. The five categories of prevention were presented, and the first steps towards an ECDC Prevention Community of Practice (including an external pilot mapping of actors) were presented. The aim of the Framework is to enhance the prevention of communicable diseases by emphasising the role of social and behavioural sciences. The participants were informed about the ECDC Prevention Community of Practice and its objectives and timeframe. John Kinsman has also updated the audience on the capacity building activities in the area of behavioural and social science support to prevention. As an example, he used the training provided to support the EU Neighbourhood Policy partner countries with current focus primarily on Ukraine.

15. Following the presentation, the participants were interested in the interlinking of the work with the Community of Practice for prevention and disease networks, also a possibility of specific trainings for daily work and lessons learned. John Kinsman responded that a mapping exercise of prevention actors was conducted through a pilot that was done in two phases, the first one was exploratory and mainly focused into interviews of interests and the second was done via social media outreach. The Prevention Framework is a generic document outlining the overall approach of the Centre to prevention and its principles will be discussed with the disease networks. Trainings on the use of social and behavioural science for prevention are in preparation with options such as e-learning and webinars in future.
• Current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance

16. Bruno Ciancio, Head of Section Surveillance, Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC, presented an update on current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance. The ECDC eHealth programme, SUREHD project, focused to design and implement multinational surveillance systems using routinely collected electronic health records in EU/EEA, and its main achievements were introduced. The European Health Data Space - Secondary use (EHDS2) with the ECDC objectives and the ECDC Use Case on AMR surveillance were presented. Bruno Ciancio then noted the questions in respect to Art 8 country assessments in the surveillance area and informed about possible developments supported by EU4Health grants. Further on, he updated on the laboratory support, the EURLs for public health, activities, and access to high-capacity WGS services through outsourced WGS support, informed about the national infrastructure support programmes 2021 and 2022 and GenEpi-BioTrain, the cross-border capacity-building support programme in genomic epidemiology.
17. Following the presentation, the participants acknowledged the large potential of the presented areas and actions to increase surveillance effectiveness. They commented that training trainers of possible developments supported by EU4Health grants could be cascaded down to hospitals, etc. Regarding the process of developing case definitions, it should go faster, as some MS have challenges.
18. Bruno Ciancio supported the views noting that it is important that actions have started in a systematic way with priority areas. Regarding case definitions he noted that until the new adopted the existing ones are valid, and the adoption could be done before summer. Regarding laboratory support and the role of surveillance, it is a critical point and needs to be discussed further. The network consists of the national reference laboratories, that is essential for surveillance, noting the importance to engage the European level.
• ECDC One Health Task Force
19. Ole Heuer, Head of Section Epidemic-Prone Diseases, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, presented an update on ECDC One Health Task Force, noting that One Health has been identified as a high priority topic in the SCBTH regulation: One Health means a multi-sectoral approach which recognises that human health is connected to animal health and to the environment, and that actions to tackle threats to health must take into account those three dimensions. The participants were informed about the long-standing collaboration between EU agencies on zoonotic pathogens and AMR & AMC in animals and humans, the integrated analysis of consumption of antimicrobial agents and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from humans and food-producing animals in the EU/EEA. The ECDC One Health Framework, its content and challenges to One Health collaboration, as well as proposed strategic objectives for ECDC were presented. Subsequently, during the discussion the establishment for a cross-agency One Health Task Force was mentioned, thus, at the moment there is no direct involvement of other institutions or HERA. The most important thing and aim would be to establish a collaboration at the national level, and at EU level among the agencies and across the sectors and promoting that.
• ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and HSC
20. Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC, presented an update on ECDC’s collaboration within the EU Health Union and key partners and interactions, highlighting that DG SANTE’s role was regarding the regulatory framework, coordination of risk management in the Health Security Committee (HSC) and the EU Global Health Strategy. The long time collaboration noted with EMA as joint ECDC/EMA and Vaccine Monitoring Platform, mentioning that EMA works on vaccine safety and ECDC on effectiveness. The following activities of cooperation with DG HERA were explained: intelligence gathering and assessment of health threats relevant to medical countermeasures; modelling, forecasts and foresight activities relevant to medical countermeasures; promoting advanced research and development of medical countermeasures and related technologies; strengthening knowledge in preparedness and response related to medical countermeasures; contribution to reinforcing the global health emergency preparedness and response architecture. The coordination of the work with the partners was done through working arrangements and MoUs. In respect to MoU with EMA, it was noted a specific annex for vaccine monitoring platform. Following that, it was said that a high-level working arrangement between ECDC and HERA was signed last year and published on the ECDC website. This agreement is being reviewed now after one year with a focus on whether certain areas need to be mentioned in more details. HERA has also a laboratory network and a database for medical counter measures that was not yet well developed and under creation.
21. Vicky Lefevre continued and explained that ECDC has provided the necessary information to DG HERA in regard to the applications, i.e. EpiPulse, TESSy, EWRS. Regarding the lab-network called DURABLE was more research oriented. As the last point Vicky Lefevre mentioned an involvement of ECDC in the wastewater monitoring, advising mainly on the usage in respect of Covid-19, and now ECDC is a part of the ‘EU-Wish’, a HERA funded project, where MS get grants to implement wastewater surveillance.
22. The participants were interested in the profiles of people involved in DG HERA, and suggested to invite HERA to share their activities and views, and potential surveillance on hazards with other international organisations. The DURABLE lab-network was noted as a good example of collaboration. Also, the question was raised regarding the involvement of ECDC in European stockpiles. Participants were interested about HERA’s stakeholder management system, if they have their own network of National Coordinators, a role similar to the ECDC National Coordinator in respect to HERA.
23. ECDC replied that colleagues from DG HERA will be invited to the next AF meeting, and informed that a representative from DG HERA representatives is already in the MB. Regarding the stockpiling, ECDC was not involved into operations and governance of this, only sometimes was asked to provide information. Regarding the network and stakeholder management, ECDC clarified that HERA has a board and an advisory forum, and in both ECDC is observer. It would be important if for example CCB Directors would find out who is representing their country in the HERA board and advisory forum.
• Enhanced collaboration with the CCBs – next steps
◦ The CCB nomination structure: current and future
◦ Collaboration with the IANPHI
24. Maarit Kokki made a presentation focusing on the collaboration with the CCBs, noting an overall picture of the ECDC nominations structure with focus on ECDC’s cooperation with the EU/EEA Member States and next steps. The structure of the Coordinating Competent Body was recalled as well as nomination process of National Focal Points (NFPs) and Operational Contact Points (OCPs). Due to the implementation of the ECDC strengthened mandate, ECDC has been reviewing the modalities of its collaboration with main partners and stakeholders, the ECDC CCBs, focusing on:
• Strengthening the collaboration with the CCBs at a strategic level.
• Perception of the CCB Directors around their role, and what roles and responsibilities they would be ready and willing to take in the future. Thereby the ToR for CCB Director were updated accordingly.
• Reinforce the role of the National Coordinator. The ToR for NC were updated accordingly.
• Set up a Strategic Advisory Group of CCB Directors and prepare ToR for it. The ToR were drafted and consulted with the CCB Directors, consequently considered as approved.
• Exploring possibilities for collaboration with the International Association of National Public Health Institutes (ECDC/CCB/IANPHI).
• Setting up the meetings: a Strategic Advisory Group of CCB Directors meet face-to-face with the ECDC Director (during spring); an annual face-to-face meeting with the NCs (during spring) and a virtual meeting for CCB Directors and NCs focusing on specific topics (during autumn).
As next steps for near future, Maarit Kokki suggested to consider reviewing the overall CCB structure and the network system by investigating the value it brings to countries and thus the best approach for improvement and sustainability. Furthermore, exploring possibilities for collaboration with the International Association of National Public Health Institutes (ECDC/CCB/IANPHI), considering back-to-back meetings and a dialogue between IANPHI, ECDC and CCBs to achieve the useful and structured collaboration was emphasised.
25. Following the presentation, the floor was opened for discussion. The NCs noted that the current CCB structure worked very well, however, it was becoming challenging due to the growing number of NFPs and especially OCPs. It should be considered carefully not creating too many networks and OCPs because it is not easy to manage them in the country, thus better to keep it as simple as possible, and the nominations must be very targeted. It was noted that the NC has a good relationship with NFPs and an efficient exchange of information and feedback, however, there is more difficult interaction with the OCPs due to large number of these contact points. Due to limited resources, it is ineffective to have too many OCPs, however, in case the NCs have good connection with NFPs, for some countries there were no significant issues observed. Regarding the role of the CCB Directors, their involvement is at strategic level, thus it could be considered the possibility of delegation, i.e., the person could decide who can be delegated instead of keeping the rigid structure. Concerns were raised in regard to nominations of some NFPs that are not close to the CCB, for example NFPs for Communication, an unclarity of NITAG network and its relation with the NFPs for Vaccine Preventable Diseases, also the NFPs for Scientific Advise vs Advisory Forum. The NCs experience difficulties when they need to nominate contact points from other institutions outside CCB. The communication between ECDC and CCBs was noted as not always correct, when sometimes receivers were hidden, the purpose of an email was not clear or not required recipients were addressed. The participants congratulated ECDC for creating a huge networking system and an impressive SRM system that successfully facilitates the cooperation between ECDC and the MS. An induction material for newly appointed CCB Director and NC was acknowledged as being informative and useful, and targeted very well to the respective roles.
26. The following elements have been pointed out for the future:
• Review the CCB structure and networks:
◦ consider simplification and reduction of roles.
◦ check redundant roles and networks that are not relevant/active, or do not have meetings and could be merged or eliminated;
• Find a way to collect NCs feedback;
• Address internally the email communication with the CCBs, considering the clearance and correct list of recipients. The AI support could be helpful in drafting emails in near future.
• Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods
27. Helena de Carvalho Gomes, Head of Section Scientific Process and Methods, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC, presented the proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods, noting that the ECDC’s new mandate puts a stronger emphasis on advanced analytics including epidemiological modelling and related research methods according to the Regulation (EU) 2022/2370. The aim was to create a formal exchange platform for quantitative experts with the new OCPs under the NFPs for Scientific Advice Coordination that intended to cover various infectious diseases and public health functions. The expected benefit and proposed terms of reference were introduced.
28. Following the presentation, the participants discussed the reasoning and need of the new OCPs. It was noted that from a technical point of view such a network could be beneficial, provided it exchanges with the other functional and disease networks regarding analytical and modelling activities. Concerning its placement in the current CCB structure, some CCB members noted that it may we worthwhile reviewing the role and function of the NFPs for Scientific Advice Coordination since the quantitative methods network would not fit under any of the other existing structures. The question was raised if a more informal, community of practice type, network could be an alternative to formally nominate additional contact points.
29. ECDC responded that currently the forecast and scenario hubs established during the pandemic are partly fulfilling the need for a more informal network. However, what is currently missing is a strong link to the public health community, which could be achieved by setting up a more formal network under the CCB structure. Members should ideally not come from academia but instead be colleagues working at the national public health institutes and designated competent bodies, involved in the analysis and interpretation of public health relevant data, irrespective of their formal job title, considering that not all public health agencies have dedicated advanced analysis and statistical and mathematical modelling capacity. Such a network would facilitate the exchange across the different public health agencies, complement the currently more academic hubs, and contribute to preparedness by fostering networking, mutual learning and continuous professional development. The NFPs for Scientific Advice Coordination have not been active but are set up and could be activated in a short time frame. ECDC will review the current networking structure and get back with a more elaborated proposal.
• Update on Targeted Country Support: Country Overviews Dashboard access for Member State users
30. Svens Henkuzens, Country Support Officer, European and International Cooperation Section, Director’s Office, ECDC, updated the participants on the further development of the County overviews Dashboard. In the previous NC meetings ECDC was asked to have a more pro-active approach towards identifying vulnerabilities in countries and to seek possible ways to address them. Svens Henkuzens then introduced the steps for ECDC getting closer to and deepening its knowledge on Member States, that are identifying the minimum country information needed to support capacity building, making informed decision on countries to receive  prioritized country support, planning actions through the annual Single Planning Document and providing targeted country support that is in line with the ongoing work on integration with other processes at ECDC e.g., Art 8 follow-up, EUHTF. The participants were informed that access to the dashboard is set up by default for CCB Directors and NCs. The live demo of the platform was presented.
31. The participants acknowledged the Country Overview Dashboard as a very good and informative tool for countries in one place. They inquired about sources of information and the possibility to open the access to NFPs and OCPs, as well as public availability. Svens Henkuzens then clarified that access can be granted by roles and by default that would be processed following a broad agreement, and at this stage publicly access will not be available. It was suggested to grant default access to all National Focal Points, except for SoHO NFPs and Scientific Advice NFPs. ECDC will request from NCs the approval on this matter. The data sources were noted as ECDC, EC, WHO, OECD, Eurostat, EMCDDA, EFSA.
• Update on SRM: nomination model for access to applications
32. Skaidra Kurapkiene, Corporate Governance Officer, Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC, and Anca Dragnea, Project Manager/Business Analyst, Digital Solutions, Digital Transformation Services, ECDC, presented an update of the latest developments of Stakeholders Relationship Management (SRM) system. A new nomination model for access to ECDC applications was introduced noting that access to applications will be based on the nominated CCB roles, thereby the CCB nomination process will not change, however, it will not be possible for NCs/nomination managers to grant only access via SRM without the assigned role. An improved SRM online help functionality was introduced that accommodates comprehensive explanatory material and videos to better support the user for operations in the system.
33. SRM developments were warmly welcomed by the participants. It was highly appreciated all the thorough and effective support in SRM guidance, nominations management, and any other related help delivered in timely manner to the NCs and nomination managers by respective ECDC colleagues.
• A new platform for information exchange: Collaboration Centre
34. Anca Moruzov, Principal Expert Information Management, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC informed the participants about the ECDC Information and Knowledge Management (IKM) Section and its activities. The Enterprise Content Management Platform (ECMP) and ECMP Collaboration Centre as the new platform for information exchange replacing Extranets, and the External Document Management System (DMS) was presented. Following that, a dedicated workspace for NFPs for Public Health Training and TSF (ECON NFPTs and TSF) was demonstrated.
35. An inquiry was raised regarding the link to ECDC Virtual Academy (EVA) demonstrated in the ECON NFPTs and TSF, noting that it would be good to have it in the presented platform. ECDC replied that this page is under development, and, generally, the platform (ECON) can be created according to the NCs and overall MS needs. It was informed that the new ECON application will gradually replace all ECDC extranets.
Adjournment
36. Andrea Ammon thanked the participants for the engagement, highlighting the common way forward. Subsequently, the Chair of the meeting, Maarit Kokki, thanked the participants for their valuable contributions throughout the meeting and for sharing their ideas and suggestions. Furthermore, she looked forward to continuous fruitful collaboration and dialogue on the implementation of ECDC amended mandate.







Annex 1: Meeting Programme

Wednesday, 10 April 2024

09:00-09:30
Arrival of participants to ECDC, Board Room

09:30-09:40
Welcome from ECDC Director
Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC


09:40-09:50
Welcome and introductory notes from the Chair
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC


09:50-09:55
Adoption of the Draft Programme (Document)
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Draft Programme

09:55-10:00
Adoption of the meeting report of the Annual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators of the ECDC CCBs (26 April 2023) (Document)
Adoption of the meeting report of Virtual Meeting for Directors and National Coordinators of ECDC CCBs (6 November 2023) (Document)
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Meeting Report


Meeting Report


10:00-10:10
Adoption of the updated document “Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions” (Document)
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Coordinating Competent Bodies – Structures, Terms of Reference and Interactions

10:10-10:40

ECDC’s strengthened mandate: working with EU/EEA MS. Updates:
• EU Health Task Force
Vicky Lefevre, Head of Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

10:40-11:10
Coffee break (Social corner area outside Board Room)

11:10-11:30

• Preparedness and response
Thomas Hofmann, Head of Section Emergency Preparedness and Response, Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

11:30-11:50
• Vaccine monitoring platform
Piotr Kramarz, Deputy Head of Unit/Deputy Chief Scientist, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC, Catherine Cohet, Expert EMA
PowerPoint presentation

11:50-12:10
• Framework for prevention of communicable diseases
John Kinsman, Expert Social and Behaviour Change, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

12:10-12:30
• Current activities for strengthening epidemiological surveillance
Bruno Ciancio, Head of Section Surveillance, Public Health Functions Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

12:30-13:30
Lunch break (Social corner area outside Board Room)

13:30-13:50

• ECDC One Health Task Force
Ole Heuer, Head of Section Epidemic-Prone Diseases, Disease Programmes Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation

13:50-14:10

ECDC’s collaboration with HERA and the HSC
Andrea Ammon, Director, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


14:10-15:00

Enhanced collaboration with the CCBs – next steps (Discussion)
• The CCB nomination structure: current and future
• Collaboration with the IANPHI
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


15:00-15:30
Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods
Helena de Carvalho Gomes, Head of Section Scientific Process and Methods, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC
Barbara Albiger, Principal Expert Scientific Quality, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation
Document ''Proposal to establish OCPs for quantitative methods“

15:30-16:00
Coffee break (Social corner area outside Board Room)

16:00-16:40
Update on Targeted Country Support: Country Overview Dashboard access for Member State users
Svens Henkuzens, Country Support Officer, European and International Cooperation Section, Director’s Office, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation
Live demo

16:40-16:55
Update on SRM: nomination model for access to applications
Skaidra Kurapkiene, Corporate Governance Officer, Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC
Anca Dragnea, Project Manager/Business Analyst, Digital Solutions, Digital Transformation Services, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


16:55-17:10
A new platform for information exchange: Collaboration Centre
Anca Moruzov, Principal Expert Information Management, Scientific Methods and Standards Unit, ECDC
PowerPoint presentation


17:10-17:20

AOB, Closing remarks
Maarit Kokki, Head of Executive Office, Director’s Office, ECDC

18:00-20:00
Dinner (The Winery Hotel, Rosenborgsgatan 20, Solna)
Adjournment




Annex 2. List of Participants
#
Country
Representative
Role
1.
Austria
Sigrid KIERMAYR
National Coordinator
2.
Belgium
Koen BLOT
National Coordinator
3.
Bulgaria
Zhivka GETSOVA
National Coordinator Alternate
4.
Croatia
Bernard KAIC
National Coordinator
5.
Czech Republic
Hana ORLIKOVÁ
National Coordinator
6.
Denmark
Stine Ulendorf JACOBSEN
National Coordinator
7.
Estonia
Natalia KERBO
National Coordinator
8.
France
Paula GARCIA LOBATO
National Coordinator Alternate
9.
Germany
Ute REXROTH
National Coordinator
10.
Greece
Maria PIROUNAKI
Delegated by National Coordinator
11.
Hungary
Ágnes DÁNIELISZ
National Coordinator
12.
Italy
Francesco MARAGLINO
National Coordinator
13.
Lithuania
Jurgita PAKALNIŠKIENĖ
National Coordinator
14.
Poland
Katarzyna ZACHARCZUK
National Coordinator Alternate
15.
Portugal
Mariana FERREIRA
National Coordinator
16.
Sweden
Agneta FALK FILIPSSON
National Coordinator
EEA
17.
Iceland

Gudrun ASPELUND
National Coordinator
18.
Liechtenstein

Silvia DEHLER
National Coordinator
19.
Norway

Heidi LANGE
National Coordinator Alternate