Quick Reference:

What is GAVI?

GAVI Fact Sheets

Governance

Board Documents

Guidelines

Press Releases

Immunization Information

Immunization Forum
Latest Issue

GAVI Update

GAVI Executive Committee Teleconference

15 July 2004

Summary Report ( PDF - 72K)

1. Report of the IRC Monitoring team

• At its creation in July 2003 the GAVI Executive Committee was given the responsibility to act on behalf of the full Board regarding recommendations of the GAVI Independent Review Committee. According to the original terms of reference approved by the Board, the GAVI EC Functions include: “Review and act on recommendations of the IRC on country proposals, and request payments from The Vaccine Fund between full Board meetings.”
  
  
• The IRC team member on the teleconference reported that according to more in-depth analysis, the spending rate for the ISS funding in 2003 is substantially higher than the 35% spending rate reported at the Board meeting. The Secretariat will complete a full analysis soon and provide it to the Board as soon as possible.
  
  
• There is clear agreement that the performance of ICCs varies between countries. It may be useful to consider that solutions may vary as well – that a more tailored approach that addresses the specific environments of each country would prove more effective. This analysis should be conducted and brought back to the Board as recommendations.

DECISIONS

The GAVI Executive Committee:

1.1 Approved the financial implications of the IRC monitoring team recommendations concerning continued support: Total commitment: $127 million.

1.1.1 $ 34,868,746 for Immunization Services Support including US$ 26,685,400 for reward payments and US$ 8,685,400 for third investment payments

1.1.2 $ 13,310,800 for Injection Safety Support.

1.1.3 $ 78,668,500 for New Vaccines Support

The Secretariat will forward the request to the Vaccine Fund Executive Committee on behalf of the GAVI Board.

1.2 Endorsed all of the proposed actions, suggested by WHO and supported by the Working Group, to respond to the policy recommendations of the IRC monitoring team, namely:

1.2.1 The ad hoc monitoring and evaluation group should, in light of the 2004 experience, further review the past Board policy decision allowing countries which failed the DQA to request a coverage survey to validate their reported DTP3 coverage. The group will revert to the GAVI Working Group with its conclusions.

1.2.2 On behalf of countries under stress or emergency situations ¹ the main technical partners, WHO and UNICEF, should continue to prepare proposals for country support, monitoring reports and other GAVI/VF requirements such as the financial sustainability plans (FSP). Flexible rules should be used in reviewing such proposals and if WHO/UNICEF are asked to implement such activities the implementation modalities will generally conform to their established rules and procedures.

1.2.3 The GAVI Working Group should further consider special incentive measures for high performing countries and those with declining populations which currently do not qualify for ISS rewards.

1.2.4 The Board should make a strong advocacy statement highlighting the importance of sustaining injection safety efforts for all immunizations -- particularly including those for children under 1 year of age.

1.2 5 Countries should be encouraged to use their ISS funding to support waste management activities, and injection safety activities more broadly including strengthening of the National Regulatory Authority (NRA).

1.2.6 Regional working groups (RWGs) can have a useful role reviewing reports and monitoring activities, however, it is important to remember the recommendation of the 2003 GAVI Board Sub-Group Review of Task Forces which very clearly specified that RWGs cannot become implementing entities.

1.2.7 WHO will consult with its Regional Offices to explore including peer review of GAVI Annual Progress Reports during EPI Manager meetings.

1.3 Welcomed the proposal by UNICEF to communicate with its country representatives to encourage ICC’s to ensure that ISS funding is used optimally.

1.4 Requested UNICEF to develop a proposal to address its concern that the EC (and the Board) maybe spending too much time on relatively “minor decisions” e.g, allocation of small amounts of funds, etc.

1. According to a new World Bank definition, ‘low income countries under stress’ are characterized by weak policies, institutions, and governance; a lack of capacity or inclination to use finance effectively to reduce poverty; and, often, restrictions on freedom of speech and public participation. The Secretariat will provide a list of these countries.