Pvs self evaluation of the belgian veterinary services
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 21

PVS self-evaluation of the Belgian Veterinary Services PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

REGIONAL INFORMATION SEMINAR FOR RECENTLY APPOINTED OIE DELEGATES BRUSSELS / BELGIUM 18-20 FEBRUARY 2014. PVS self-evaluation of the Belgian Veterinary Services. Pierre Naassens, CVO Belgium 20/02/2014. Presentation. Context of self-evaluation Preparations Course of evaluation Methodology

Download Presentation

PVS self-evaluation of the Belgian Veterinary Services

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript



PVS self-evaluationof theBelgian Veterinary Services

Pierre Naassens, CVO Belgium 20/02/2014


  • Context of self-evaluation

  • Preparations

  • Course of evaluation

  • Methodology

  • Results

  • Conclusions

Context of self-evaluation

  • EU context (Com non-paper 04-05-2012)

    • Advocated by the Commission

    • To eventually have a global EU PVS evaluation as a capital argument in EU trade discussions with Third Countries, there was a need for around ten self evaluations done between 2012 and 2013.

    • MS self evaluation missions are completely voluntary; they can be performed by the trained experts of the MS concerned.

    • If and only if needed and requested by the MS concerned, help could be sought from the Commission and even the OIE through trained EU experts.

    • Reports are strictly under the concerned MS responsibility and are to be used, as far as the EU strategy is concerned, only to prepare for a wider evaluation and comparison with the current EU auditing tools to help in the EU trade with Third Countries.

Context of the self-evaluation

  • According to OIE

    • To assess a country’s own Veterinary Service performance

      • Governmental and non-governmental organisations that implement animal health and welfare measures and other standards and recommendations in the Terrestrial Code (and the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code) in the territory.

      • The Veterinary Services are under the overall control and direction of the Veterinary Authority

      • Private sector organisations, veterinarians, (veterinary paraprofessionals or aquatic animal health professionals) are normally accredited or approved by the Veterinary Authority to deliver the delegated functions

    • Performed by internal experts with possible input by OIE experts

Context of the self-evaluation

  • In Belgium

    All authorities / organisations of the VS cooperated on voluntary basis

Veterinary Service in Belgium

Public Service (Veterinary Authority)


Veterinary Statutory Body


Animal Health Associations


Approved Veterinarians

Private Service

Regions (Wildlife)


  • PVS course December 2011

    • 3 day training course by OIE on the “OIE PVS Tool”

  • Composition of evaluation team

    • 2 experts from the FASFC

      • certified to perform OIE PVS Evaluation missions

      • Veterinarians

        • 1 veterinary policy officer

        • 1 internal auditor

Course of evaluation

  • Invitation to be part of the evaluation to all parties concerned

  • Opening meeting

  • Request for information to all parties concerned

  • Visits and interviews

  • Closing meeting

  • Draft report and remarks

  • Final report

From January to September 2012


Course of evaluation – Site sampling

  • 14 sites were visited in 15 days

  • 73 persons were interviewed


  • Use of the PVS tool

    • Four fundamental components

    • Divided into 46 critical competencies

    • For each critical competency a list of suggested indicators was used to help determine the level of advancement


  • Five qualitative levels of advancement for each critical competency

  • A higher level assumes compliance with all preceding levels

    • Underrate – emphasize the strengths

    • Overrate – emphasize theweaknesses


Level 5

Full compliance with OIE standards (incl. audits)


Level 1

no compliance


  • Information taken into account

    • Gathered over the internet

    • Documentation given during interview or sent by the different organisations / authorities

    • Interviews

    • Visits

    • Results of internal audits and FVO missions


  • For each critical competency of each fundamental component

    • Level of advancement

    • List of main weaknesses

I: Human, physical and financial resources

  • I-2B. Education in animal health is not required for ‘controllers (paraprofessionals)’

  • I-3. Procedures are not foreseen for the follow up of the ‘quality’ of the work of the approved veterinarian (notification of disease, sampling, etc.) and of their continuing education

  • I-6. Evaluation of internal and external coordination is not always foreseen

  • I-11. Audits are not performed in all sections of the VS concerning management of resources and operations

II: Technical authority and capability – part 1

  • II-2. Outsourcing of analyses by NRL not always to accredited labs

  • II-3. Obligations to OIE are not included in the risk assessment by the Scientific Committee

  • II-4. Risk through illegal import of pets from countries at risk for rabies

  • II-5. No supervision on knowledge and on implementation of notification of recognized vets

  • II-5. No obligations to notify outbreaks/cases between authorities

  • II-6. Wildlife is not included in the national disease contingency plans

  • II-7. Obligations to OIE are not included in the risk assessment

II: Technical authority and capability – part 2

  • II-8B. Administration of veterinary drugs only registered in ‘risk period’

  • II-9. No controls on the ‘quality’ of the prescriptions of veterinary drugs

  • II-9. Inspections are not based on an ‘inspection plan’

  • II-11. Not al concerned parties are included in the simulation exercises

  • II-12. Procedures sometimes take too long to rapidly implement technical innovations

  • II-13. Registration of poultry at flock level is not implemented

III: Interaction with stakeholders

  • III-4. Private vets are approved to perform certain tasks but there is no follow up of the quality of tasks performed

  • III-5A. There is no control on the implementation of the deontology by the VSB. Inquiries starts and disciplinary measures are taken after complaints

  • III-5B. The financial and institutional management of the VSB has not been audited by an external organisation

IV: Access to markets

  • IV-1. Evaluation of legislation not on periodic basis

  • IV-1. Legislation on wildlife disease management does not exist

  • IV-6 . There is no central registration of legislation of other EU member states or trading countries

  • IV-6. Exchange of information between authorities is on voluntary basis

  • IV-6. The information in WAHID is not really correct (endemic disease instead of not reported)


  • Recommendations were given for all weaknesses


    • Elaboration of procedures for the control of approved vets

    • Involvement of all concerned parties in simulation exercises

    • Internal and external audits of all authorities involved

    • Elaboration of conditions for laboratories that perform analyses for accredited labs or NRL’s

    • Federal and regional contingency plans must be in line with each other

    • Registration of each administration of veterinary medicines

    • Facilitation to implement technical innovations in existing programmes

    • ...

General conclusions

  • Evaluation

    • High level of advancement of PVS in Belgium

    • Not all authorities perform internal/external audits

    • Internal Audit Department of the FASFC plans a follow-up of the recommendations.

    • General satisfaction of all parties involved – first time (during closing meeting) that all parties were together in one room

General conclusions

  • PVS-tool

    • The tool itself is well documented, practical and easy to use

    • Seen the high level of advancement, details and in-depth evaluation are important

    • Seen the variety of aspects considered (cfr. OIE Terrestrial Code) it is not feasible to have an in-depth evaluation of every aspect in a reasonable time frame

    • PVS is a severe tool. A low score of one part of the VS determines the score for the whole critical competence. There is no average.

  • Login