|
Public health criteria (PHC)
|
PHC1 Reduction in incidence of human cases
|
0: Nil; 1: Low; 2: Moderate; 3: High
| |
X
|
|
PHC2 Reduction in entomological risk
|
0: Nil; 1: Low; 2: Moderate; 3: High
| |
X
|
|
PHC3 Impacts of adverse health effects
|
0: Nil; 1: Indirect effects on mental or social health; 2: Direct effects on physical health
| |
X
|
|
Animal and environmental health criteria (AEC)
|
AEC 1 Impact on habitat
|
Surface*Sensitivity*Intensity1
| |
X
|
|
Surface : 1: Nil; 2: Small scale;
| | |
|
3: Large scale; Sensitivity: 1: Nil; 2: Land;
| | |
|
3: Water ; 4: Land and water; Intensity: 1: Nil; 2: Fences;
| | |
|
3: Mowing; 4: Acaricides; 5: Removal of vegetation or burning
| | |
|
AEC 2 Impact on wildlife
|
Number*Species*Intensity2
| |
X
|
|
Number: 1: Nil; 2: Effect on specific species;
| | |
|
3: Effect on several species; Species: 1: Nil,
| | |
|
2: low valued species; 3: Highly valued species; Intensity: 1: No effect; 2: Morbidity; 3: Mortality
| | |
|
Social impact criteria (SIC)
|
SIC 1 Level of public acceptance
|
1: Nil; 2: Low; 3: Moderate; 4: High
| |
X
|
|
SIC 2 Proportion of population benefitting from intervention
|
1:<25%; 2:25-50%; 3:50-75%; 4:>75%
| |
X
|
|
Strategic, economic and operational impact criteria (SEC)
|
SEC1 Cost to the public sector
|
0: Nil; 1: Low; 2: Moderate; 3: High
|
X
|
X
|
|
SEC2 Cost to the private sector
|
0: Nil; 1: Low; 2: Moderate; 3: High
|
X
|
X
|
|
SEC3 Delay before results
|
1: Days; 2: Weeks; 3: Months; 4: Years
|
X
|
X
|
|
SEC4 Complexity
|
1: Simple (minor institutional changes);
|
X
|
X
|
|
2:Intermediate (necessitates new hires); 3: Moderate (necessitate new work teams in one sector of intervention); 4: Complex (requires inter-sectoral/inter-institutional changes);
| | |
|
5: Very complex (necessitates creation of new structures or organisations)
| | |
|
SEC5 Impact on organisation’s credibility
|
0: Nil; 1: Low; 2: Moderate; 3: High
| |
X
|
|
Surveillance criteria (SUC)
|
SUC1 Detection of zones where tick populations are present
|
1: Less than 10%; 2: Low (11-50%); 3: Moderate (51-70%); 4: High (>71%)
|
X
| |
|
SUC2 Identification of zones where tick populations are established
|
1: Less than 10%; 2: Low (11-50%); 3: Moderate (51-70%); 4: High (>71%)
|
X
| |
|
SUC3 Identification of Lyme endemic zones
|
1: Less than10%; 2: Low (11-50%);3: Moderate (51-70%); 4: High (>71%)
|
X
| |
|
SUC4 Quality of data
|
1: Poor; 2: Medium; 3: High
|
X
| |
