thread: 100%. Also important to look at existing metrics that assess evidence of functionality for existing capacity + metrics of leadership & political will. See this piece by my @NTI_WMD colleague @_JessicaABell : https://www.nti.org/analysis/atomic-pulse/us-and-covid-19-leading-world-ghs-index-score-not-response/ https://twitter.com/JenniferNuzzo/status/1278323216499474432

It's true that the U.S. does have some strong preparedness capabilities in place...yet our federal leadership still failed to mount the effective response that was in our grasp.

But, also the U.S. does poorly on http://ghsindex.org  metrics of public confidence in government; political+security risks & socioeconomic resilience; access to healthcare.

It's also important to consider that the JEE and http://ghsindex.org  metrics are national assessments and not geared to assess regional or global capabilities, which are also lacking - particularly for supply chain management.

Should situate JEE & http://ghsindex.org  in an architecture for preparedness that: 1)externally evaluates preparedness; 2) provides technical+financial to fill gaps; 3) builds local/regional/global surge + data capacity for pandemics; 4) holds countries accountable

Bottom line: Lots of work to do. There are good points here, but want to be clear that throwing out existing metrics would be a mistake. Instead we can & should add+further weight measures of rxn time, function, political will+leadership, community health, surge capacity.

Welcome views as we plan the next iteration of http://ghsindex.org  and consider these important issues.