The ultimate guide for anyone wondering how President Joe Biden will respond to the COVID-19 pandemic—all his plans, goals, and executive orders in response to the coronavirus crisis. Shortly after being inaugurated as the 46th President of the United States, Joe Biden and his administration released this 200 page guide detailing his plans to respond to the coronavirus pandemic. The National Strategy for the COVID-19 Response and Pandemic Preparedness breaks down seven crucial goals of President Joe Biden's administration with regards to the coronavirus pandemic: 1. Restore trust with the American people. 2. Mount a safe, effective, and comprehensive vaccination campaign. 3. Mitigate spread through expanding masking, testing, data, treatments, health care workforce, and clear public health standards. 4. Immediately expand emergency relief and exercise the Defense Production Act. 5. Safely reopen schools, businesses, and travel while protecting workers. 6. Protect those most at risk and advance equity, including across racial, ethnic and rural/urban lines. 7. Restore U.S. leadership globally and build better preparedness for future threats. Each of these goals are explained and detailed in the book, with evidence about the current circumstances and how we got here, as well as plans and concrete steps to achieve each goal. Also included is the full text of the many Executive Orders that will be issued by President Biden to achieve each of these goals. The National Strategy for the COVID-19 Response and Pandemic Preparedness is required reading for anyone interested in or concerned about the COVID-19 pandemic and its effects on American society.

This guidance is an update of WHO global influenza preparedness plan: the role of WHO and recommendations for national measures before and during pandemics, published March 2005 (WHO/CDS/CSR/GIP/2005.5).

The United States and the world were unprepared for the COVID-19 pandemic, despite decades of warnings highlighting the inevitability of global pandemics and the need for international coordination. The failure to prioritize and adequately fund preparedness and effectively implement response plans has exacted a heavy human and economic price, and the crisis is not yet over. Emerging and reemerging infectious diseases are a threat to global and national security that neither the United States nor the world can afford to ignore. This Task Force proposes a comprehensive strategy that includes institutional reforms and policy innovations to help the United States and the multilateral system perform better in this crisis and when the next one emerges. Without increased U.S. leadership on and adequate investment in pandemic preparedness and response, the United States and the world will remain unnecessarily vulnerable to epidemic threats. The Council on Foreign Relations sponsors Independent Task Forces to assess issues of current and critical importance to U.S. foreign policy and provide policymakers with concrete judgments and recommendations. Diverse in backgrounds and perspectives, Task Force members aim to reach a meaningful consensus on policy through private deliberations. Once launched, Task Forces are independent of CFR and are solely responsible for the content of their reports. Task Force members are asked to join a consensus signifying that they endorse the general policy thrust and judgments reached by the group, though not necessarily every finding and recommendation. Each Task Force member also has the option of putting forward an additional or a dissenting view.

When communities face complex public health emergencies, state local, tribal, and territorial public health agencies must make difficult decisions regarding how to effectively respond. The public health emergency preparedness and response (PHEPR) system, with its multifaceted mission to prevent, protect against, quickly respond to, and recover from public health emergencies, is inherently complex and encompasses policies, organizations, and programs. Since the events of September 11, 2001, the United States has invested billions of dollars and immeasurable amounts of human capital to develop and enhance public health emergency preparedness and infrastructure to respond to a wide range of public health threats, including infectious diseases, natural disasters, and chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear events. Despite the investments in research and the growing body of empirical literature on a range of preparedness and response capabilities and functions, there has been no national-level, comprehensive review and grading of evidence for public health emergency preparedness and response practices comparable to those utilized in medicine and other public health fields. Evidence-Based Practice for Public Health Emergency Preparedness and Response reviews the state of the evidence on PHEPR practices and the improvements necessary to move the field forward and to strengthen the PHEPR system. This publication evaluates PHEPR evidence to understand the balance of benefits and harms of PHEPR practices, with a focus on four main areas of PHEPR: engagement with and training of community-based partners to improve the outcomes of at-risk populations after public health emergencies; activation of a public health emergency operations center; communication of public health alerts and guidance to technical audiences during a public health emergency; and implementation of quarantine to reduce the spread of contagious illness.

While much progress has been made on achieving the Millenium Development Goals over the last decade, the number and complexity of global health challenges has persisted. Growing forces for globalization have increased the interconnectedness of the world and our interdependency on other countries, economies, and cultures. Monumental growth in international travel and trade have brought improved access to goods and services for many, but also carry ongoing and ever-present threats of zoonotic spillover and infectious disease outbreaks that threaten all. Global Health and the Future Role of the United States identifies global health priorities in light of current and emerging world threats. This report assesses the current global health landscape and how challenges, actions, and players have evolved over the last decade across a wide range of issues, and provides recommendations on how to increase responsiveness, coordination, and efficiency â€" both within the U.S. government and across the global health field.

The U.S. medical countermeasures (MCMs) enterprise is interconnected, complex, and dynamic. It includes public and private entities that develop and manufacture new and existing MCMs, ensure procurement, storage, and distribution of MCMs, and administer, monitor, and evaluate MCMs. The interagency group known as the Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise (PHEMCE) is the nation's sole coordinating body, responsible for ensuring end-to-end MCM preparedness and response. Ensuring an Effective Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise provides recommendations from an expert committee for a re-envisioned PHEMCE. Four priority areas of improvement emerged from committee deliberations: (1) articulating PHEMCE's mission and role and explicating the principles guiding PHEMCE's operating principles and processes, (2) revising PHEMCE operations and processes, (3) collaborating more effectively with external public and private partners, and (4) navigating legal and policy issues.

As nations race to hone contact-tracing efforts, the world's experts consider strategies for maximum transparency and impact. As public health professionals around the world work tirelessly to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is clear that traditional methods of contact tracing need to be augmented in order to help address a public health crisis of unprecedented scope. Innovators worldwide are racing to develop and implement novel public-facing technology solutions, including digital contact tracing technology. These technological products may aid public health surveillance and containment strategies for this pandemic and become part of the larger toolbox for future infectious outbreak prevention and control. As technology evolves in an effort to meet our current moment, Johns Hopkins Project on Ethics and Governance of Digital Contact Tracing Technologies—a rapid research and expert consensus group effort led by Dr. Jeffrey P. Kahn of the Johns Hopkins Berman Institute of Bioethics in collaboration with the university's Center for Health Security—carried out an in-depth analysis of the technology and the issues it raises. Drawing on this analysis, they produced a report that includes detailed recommendations for technology companies, policymakers, institutions, employers, and the public. The project brings together perspectives from bioethics, health security, public health, technology development, engineering, public policy, and law to wrestle with the complex interactions of the many facets of the technology and its applications. This team of experts from Johns Hopkins University and other world-renowned institutions has crafted clear and detailed guidelines to help manage the creation, implementation, and application of digital contact tracing. Digital Contact Tracing for Pandemic Response is the essential resource for this fast-moving crisis. Contributors: Joseph Ali, JD; Anne Barnhill, PhD; Anita Cicero, JD; Katelyn Esmonde, PhD; Amelia Hood, MA; Brian Hutler, Phd, JD; Jeffrey P. Kahn, PhD, MPH; Alan Regenberg, MBE; Crystal Watson, DrPH, MPH; Matthew Watson; Robert Califf, MD, MACC; Ruth Faden, PhD, MPH; Divya Hosangadi, MSPH; Nancy Kass, ScD; Alain Labrique, PhD, MHS, MS; Deven McGraw, JD, MPH, LLM; Michelle Mello, JD, PhD; Michael Parker, BEd (Hons), MA, PhD; Stephen Ruckman, JD, MSc, MAR; Lainie Rutkow, JD, MPH, PhD; Josh Sharfstein, MD; Jeremy Sugarman, MD, MPH, MA; Eric Toner, MD; Mar Trotochaud, MSPH; Effy Vayena, PhD; Tal Zarsky, JSD, LLM, LLB