|
GAVI Executive Committee Meeting
29 October 2003
FINAL Summary Report
GAVI Executive Committee Terms of Reference
2004-05 Work Plan
Long-term strategic issues
Partners' Meeting
Next EC meeting & teleconference
GAVI Executive Committee Terms of Reference
The GAVI EC:
1 Endorsed the current terms of reference for the GAVI Executive Committee, re-confirming the importance of principals’ participation in meetings. Only under very special circumstances would members be able to send alternates in their stead.
2 Agreed that in the future it would be good to review and perhaps refine the terms of reference of the Working Group in the future, especially in consideration of the evolution of the task forces and the EC.
Back to top
2004-05 Work Plan
The GAVI EC:
3 Agreed that the work plan represents a great deal of hard work and constructive thinking and congratulated the entities for their efforts to focus on achieving the targets set out in the Strategic Framework. The EC was comfortable with all of the proposed changes to the targets.
4 Requested the Secretariat to consult with the Working Group to revise the work plan documentation to provide more information that would help the EC to prioritize the work plan activities. The EC noted that prioritization is needed between the different targets as well as for the activities outlined within each target. Decisions about which activities to implement should be based on available funding, so that it would be clear that if we have raised ‘$X’ in funding, Y activities could be conducted, and if we raise more than ‘$X’, Y+Z activities could be conducted. Specifically, the Secretariat should request work plan entities to include more information on the following, as necessary:
4.1 The process undertaken by the work plan entities to identify those activities that truly capitalize on the alliance and GAVI added value from the multitude of potential activities that could contribute to the shared targets.
4.2 Justification that the selected activities are the optimal ones to reach the given target.
4.3 The ‘unit costs’ and ‘number of units’ for the larger multi-country activities, especially the new activities and those in which the budget has increased substantially.
5 Requested the Secretariat to provide analysis of the relative urgency of the given targets in regards to the GAVI milestones, especially the access milestone.
6 Noted that the provision of technical assistance is critical to the achievement of each of GAVI’s milestones and stated objectives and needs to be recognized as such.
7 Urged that those responsible for designing and ultimately implementing the work plan activities draw upon the strengths of all GAVI partners in relevant work. This was particularly mentioned regarding industry involvement in local training and information dissemination activities.
8 Requested the Secretariat to consult with the Working Group in order to develop a system for ongoing review and monitoring of work plan activities as they are implemented.
9 Requested that the revised work plan contain further definition of joint activities, especially those that could increase involvement from new donors, and address new approaches to the issue of the 7 largest countries in more detail.
10 Noted that the annual budgets managed by the Secretariat in the proposed 2004-2005 biennium are almost twice the approved 2003 budget, and that new items account for most of the budget increase. The EC therefore requested more information on the justification of the new items within the Secretariat-managed budgets.
11 Recommended that the total budget be tightened, and better framed against the GAVI goals, before it is presented to the Board. The EC did not have a specific recommendation regarding how much the budget should be reduced but recognized that the current funding climate would make it difficult to fill the entire budget gap ($23.3m).
12 Agreed that the EC needs to think further on options to raise resource to fund the work plan so that it can provide some recommendations to the GAVI Board.
13 Agreed that elements of future work plans should be tied to existing GAVI targets, priority areas, objectives and milestones so as to ensure that each activity is directly related to GAVI’s stated objectives;
Back to top
Long-term strategic issues
The GAVI EC:
14 Agreed that it may make sense to initiate a process that would analyze the pros and cons of a merger of the GAVI Secretariat with the Vaccine Fund management. The EC also noted the importance of a transparent process to design a common management system that built on the strengths (and avoided the weaknesses) of the current structures. Ideally, all analysis and decisions on the proposed common management structure would be made to coincide with the hiring of a new GAVI Executive Secretary for January 2005. This issue would be on the December Board agenda for information and discussion.
15 Acknowledged the continuing importance of maintaining adequate vaccine supply and affordable pricing.
16 Agreed that it has become time to resolve the tension between whether GAVI should constrict it mission to focus on Vaccine Fund related work or expand the role of the Vaccine Fund to encompass more immunization efforts. The following impressions were expressed:
16.1 The Vaccine Fund should be viewed as a ‘change agent’- a short-term financing tool to catalyze new ways of working that lead to longer-term sustainability for specific areas of immunization, as it has done, for example, with hepatitis B, health information systems and safety of immunization injections.
16.2 The historic strength of GAVI has been the substantial resources of the Vaccine Fund, but also the tight focus and the lean Secretariat, aspects which should be maintained.
16.3 The measles situation presents a moral issue: if GAVI is concerned about reducing vaccine preventable deaths it must consider how it might catalytically support efforts to reduce deaths from the biggest vaccine-preventable killer of children.
16.4 Projects supported, or under consideration for support, by GAVI must support routine immunization while focusing on GAVI’s role as a catalyst. The efficiencies of being a catalyst for each program option (eg. measles versus dengue versus IPV) would need to be explored, discussed and reviewed before any specific decision of support could be made.
17 Agreed to bring the above issues to the GAVI Board and suggest ways to move the discussion forward to decisions. T Godal would co-present with an EC member.
Back to top
Partners’ Meeting
The GAVI EC:
18 Agreed to recommend to the Board that the next GAVI Partners’ Meeting should be held in 2005. In 2004, other networking opportunities (e.g., events around the child survival task force, MDGs, GFATM partners’ forum, AU heads of state summit, NGO meetings, WHO and UNICEF regional meetings) should be capitalized upon to share information on GAVI and build commitment for immunization.
Back to top
Next EC meeting & teleconference
The GAVI EC:
19 Agreed that the EC would need to have a teleconference before the December Board meeting in order to finalize the recommendations on the work plan and prepare for the Board discussion on long-term strategic issues.
20 Agreed to hold a working dinner meeting for the EC after the December Board meeting on 10 December in order to decide upon next steps.
Back to top
|