Map | A Partnership for Children's Health Search:  Advanced Search
Home General Information Country Support Board Task Forces Resources Media Center
About the Board Last Board Meeting Members Board Reports EC reports Private Access
Printer-friendly format

Quick Reference:

What is GAVI?

GAVI Fact Sheets


Board Documents

Guidelines & Forms

Press Releases

Immunization Information

Immunization Focus
Latest Issue

GAVI Update

Fourth GAVI Board Meeting, Noordwijk, The Netherlands, 19 November 2000

Task Force on Research and Development: terms of reference and composition

Dr Peter Wilson, consultant to the Task Force on Research and Development (R&D), presented a summary (Word – 438k) of the composition, objectives, strategies and goals of the task force.

The Board:

3.1 Approved the composition of the R&D Task Force which assures a range of expertise in vaccinology and immunology, provided that the recommendation in para. 3.4 below is addressed. The task force comprises:

  • three co-chairs – from WHO, industry and academia, and
  • five members from different geographical regions.

3.2 Endorsed the advisory role that the task force will play in the process of identifying and supporting the GAVI research and development agenda. The task force will:

  • identify highest priority research gaps and make recommendations to the GAVI Board;
  • provide technical support to implementing partners in:
    • identifying key barriers and strategies to address research and development gaps;
    • evaluating alternative project structures; and
    • setting up a research and development agenda and timetable;
  • monitor adherence to an agreed-upon agenda and timetable.

3.3 Approved the recommendation of the task force that GAVI should focus initially on three vaccine products: pneumococcal, rotavirus and meningococcal A (or A/C). These products, described in the presentation (Powerpoint – 113k), were picked from a larger list because they satisfied all or most of the following criteria:

  • either there is no currently-registered vaccine, or the existing vaccine has drawbacks which severely limit its utility;
  • the vaccine has a high potential impact; and could significantly reduce morbidity and mortality in children and/or adults;
  • a high probability of success in short/medium term use of the vaccine;
  • the vaccine has a potential for improving immunization systems;
  • the vaccine fills a strategic gap, i.e., no other effort is currently focusing on it;
  • there is a lack of other, non-vaccine solutions (preventative or curative).

3.4 Endorsed the proposal outlined in the presentation that the task force, in consultation with the GAVI Working Group and others in the research community, would seek to identify up to three promising fields of research on new technologies and systems for improving immunization services.

Similar criteria as those used for vaccine product selection would be used to identify the under-addressed research fields, which may include:

  • proven strategies for reaching the hard-to-reach, including the application of lessons learned from polio eradication;
  • improved information technology (IT) infrastructures for better management of immunization services;
  • development of new technologies – including ‘low-tech’ devices – for increasing immunization and injection safety, reducing the need for a cold chain, and/or other tools that could improve efficiency.

3.5 Recognized that the current composition of the task force does not include experts in the area of applied and operational research, and encouraged the task force to add two to four appropriately qualified individuals to support this research area.

3.6 Requested the task force to provide the Board with its recommendations on candidate projects to support immunization services, at the latest by the Board’s next meeting in June 2001.


  Contact us | Guestbook | Copyrights | Text site