Introducing greater flexibility will enable Gavi to better respond to long and short term challenges faced by countries.
A new policy, “Gavi and fragile states: a country by country approach” for Gavi in countries that face immunisation challenges was approved by the Gavi Board in Tanzania in December 2012. The policy allows Gavi to work with our partners to strengthen our focus on countries that require more intensive support and attention.
What is the purpose of the policy?
Public, country and expert consultations show that there are a number of Gavi-eligible countries that face exceptional challenges over long periods of time, limiting their ability to access and implement Gavi support. Working closely with partners and in-country stakeholders, the new policy allows Gavi to develop a tailored approach for each of these countries and to adjust our support to better relate to the specific country context.
The policy also recognises that there are countries that may experience time-limited man-made or natural emergencies. For these situations, Gavi will provide one-off flexibilities in order to help protect immunisation systems and existing Gavi support.
When is the policy applied and how does it work?
The policy includes a framework that serves as a transparent tool for identifying the countries to receive long-term intensified support from the Vaccine Alliance. The framework will be applied on an annual basis to ensure that Gavi responds to those countries most in need.
The countries identified in December 2012 through the framework are: Afghanistan, CAR, Chad, Cote d’Ivoire, DRC, Guinea, Haiti, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia and South Sudan.
The new policy also offers guidance for countries that experience emergency situations, in which case a request can be submitted to Gavi by the country, WHO or UNICEF.
For countries that are not identified for a tailored approach, Gavi will continue to work closely with countries to improve the effectiveness of the routine immunisation system and to address specific challenges, e.g. DTP3 coverage under 70%, equity disparities in immunisation and administrative data quality.