Strengthening GAVI's Governance Processes and Structures in the Context of Convergence
PDF - 275K
Presentation - Rudi Daems, for John Lambert
PPT - 456K
9 Recommendation of the governance sub-group
The Board decided the following:
9.1 On the Board role and mandate:
9.1.1 The Board should focus on a limited number of issues, while delegating others. It would retain its oversight responsibility, with its work facilitated by the Executive Committee. Specifically, the Board should delegate to the Executive Secretary (see decision 8.10.3):
- Secretariat staffing structure, within approved budgets,
- Day-to-day management of the alliance, including operational decisions.
9.1.2 The Board should adopt a performance evaluation system, with the help of periodical internal / external reviews.
9.2 On the Board’s composition:
9.2.1 One seat for IFFIm donors on a rotational basis will be added if and when the IFFIm materializes. As the IFFIm develops, additional mechanisms to ensure participation of IFFIm donors could be considered.
9.2.2 One developing country Board seat will be added, ensuring that Africa is adequately represented.
9.2.3 The seat for the Vaccine Fund would be maintained, represented by a Vaccine Fund Board member.
9.2.4 The Research Institute and Technical Agency seats will be combined so that when the term of Jan Holmgren of Gotheberg University ends in June 2006 his seat will not be re-filled. The term of Arlene King of Health Canada ends in June 2007 and an appropriate candidate that represents research and technical agencies will be sought.
9.2.5 UNICEF, WHO and the World Bank should only have one seat each on the GAVI Board. The Chair of the Board is additional to the agency representation on the Board, i.e., when WHO is chair there will also be a seat for a WHO representative.
9.3 On the Board’s operations:
9.3.1 The use of teleconferences should be limited.
9.3.2 Decisions should be reached in most cases through consensus.
9.3.3 The Board will meet three times in 2005, considering the important strategic issues that will need Board deliberation and decision. The meetings would be held in March/April, June/July and November/December.
9.3.4 An e-mail-based, “no objection” voting system will be adopted for simple topics which require Board decisions but do not require extensive discussion or deliberation.
9.3.5 The Secretariat should provide more support to developing country representatives to ensure adequate understanding of the issues and improve communication with the constituency members.
9.3.6 An introductory “Board book” should be provided to new Board members, for quick reference and understanding of GAVI issues.
9.3.7 The use of ad-hoc and temporary groups, when required, to handle specific topics will be continued.
9.4 On the management of Board meetings:
9.4.1 Agendas should be focused on the main roles of the Board, namely:
- strategic vision and direction,
- objectives and milestones,
- country program approval and fund requests,
- workplan and secretariat budget approval and control,
- Executive Secretary nomination and evaluation,
- monitoring commitment, stimulating alignment and resolving issues among partners, and
- contributions to advocacy and fundraising
9.4.2 Materials should be distributed with sufficient time in advance. If documents are not distributed 10 working days prior to a meeting the agenda item should be removed, and the decisions points should not be changed after the document is distributed.
9.4.3 A formal process of recapitulation of decisions taken at the end of each Board and EC meetings should be adopted.
9.4.4 Meeting reporting should continue to focus on board decisions, but provide more detail on the discussions especially when there are differing opinions.
9.5 On the Executive Committee role and mandate:
9.5.1 The EC should be retained, with broadly the same mandate and authority (see attached the terms of reference for the EC agreed at the July 2003 Board meeting). The EC is not a decision-making body but primarily an advisory body to the GAVI Board in order to facilitate its work. The only authority the EC currently has is to “review and act on recommendations of the IRC on country proposals, and request payments from The Vaccine Fund between full Board meetings.”
9.6 On the Executive Committee composition:
9.6.1 While some Board members expressed concern about increasing the size of the EC, it was decided that two seats for industry representatives from developed and developing countries will be added.
9.6.2 In light of convergence the Vaccine Fund seat will be dropped.
9.6.3 The EC will continue to be chaired by the Chair of the GAVI Board.
9.6.4 Members attending the EC would solely be the direct deputy of the permanent board member, without any further delegation allowed. This pragmatic solution would ensure that the EC can meet more often. The EC should however, proactively invite the principal when important topics/conflicts are addressed.
9.7 On the Executive Committee operations:
9.7.1 The EC should meet more often than it does today, as needed, through face-to-face or video / conferences.
9.8 On the Working Group role and mandate:
9.8.1 The Working Group should continue its current function, reporting to the GAVI Secretariat. The name of the group should be changed to distinguish it from other working groups. However the proposed name, Secretariat Support Group, was not accepted by the Board as it does not adequately reflect its advisory role.
9.9 On the Working Group composition:
9.9.1 The current composition of the Working Group should be retained, namely that it broadly reflects the composition of the Board, with individuals selected based on skill. Individuals should be selected by the Executive Secretary, in consultation with the Board Chair.
9.9.2 In light of convergence the Vaccine Fund seat will be dropped.
9.9.3 A seat for technical agency representative will be added.
9.10 Other recommendations:
9.10.1 The IRC mechanism should be retained as currently defined with a more structured process for selection of new IRC members.
9.10.2 ICCs will need to be strengthened to play an appropriate and strong role in coordination and oversight of GAVI/Vaccine Fund support in countries. WHO and UNICEF should reach out to their national representatives to strengthen their commitment to and ownership of GAVI/Vaccine Fund.
9.10.3 More managerial authority should be delegated to the Executive Secretary; this will be especially important as the convergence process ensues and decisions will need to be made about staffing and other implementation issues.
9.10.4 Providing support to the board members from developing countries, including communicating key policies, is a key function of the Secretariat and should be formalized and supported in the Secretariat budget.