financial intermediary fund for pandemic prevention, preparedness

FINANCIAL INTERMEDIARY FUND FOR PANDEMIC PREVENTION,

PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE (“PPR FIF”)

ANNEX

TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY PANEL

I. BACKGROUND

As set out in the PPR FIF Governance Framework, the Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) is an

advisory panel to the Governing Board (hereinafter “Board”) of the PPR FIF. The TAP provides

independent advice to the Board on critical gaps in pandemic PPR, funding priorities and calls for

proposals, as well review of funding proposals submitted to the FIF, in line with the principles for

evaluating submissions approved by the Board. In this way, the TAP can support the FIF with its

goal of financing projects and activities that help strengthen capacity building and implementation

of Pandemic Prevention, Preparedness, and Response under the International Health Regulations

(IHR) (2005) and other internationally endorsed legal frameworks, consistent with a One Health

approach (see Governance Framework, paragraph 17). The TAP’s roles and responsibilities are

set out in paragraph 21 of the PPR FIF Governance Framework.

II. MEMBERSHIP

1. Overall structure of TAP

The TAP is a pool of up to 20 experts, bringing a diverse range of independent technical and

financial expertise relevant to FIF-supported projects and activities. TAP experts serve in their

personal and technical capacities, and they do not represent their employer, government, or any

other entity. The FIF Secretariat, through the work of its health technical team, is responsible for

convening the TAP, including committees comprising a subset of experts, as needed (see section

V below) and supporting its work (see Governance Framework, paragraphs 18, 23 and 24). The

TAP’s leadership team comprises a Chair and Vice-Chair, as discussed in Section III below.

2. Collective expertise

Collectively, the TAP experts shall possess strong expertise across the full set of technical areas

in which the FIF will operate, including scientific, programmatic, operational, systems and

structural contexts of PPR and of what it takes to build resilient health and community systems

and strengthen IHR (2005) core capacities for PPR, particularly in the following key areas: (i)

disease surveillance; (ii) laboratory systems; (iii) health workforce capacities, including

community health workers; (iv) health emergency management; (v) emergency care; (vi) infection

prevention and control; (vii) risk communication, and community leadership and engagement;

This document builds on paragraphs 6 and 17 to 21 of the Governance Framework setting out the purpose, roles

and responsibilities, and broad structure and composition of the TAP, as well as on paragraphs 23 and 24 of the

Governance Framework that set out the role of the Secretariat in support of the TAP.

(viii) zoonotic diseases and One Health approaches; (ix) medical countermeasures readiness; and

(x) how to build PPR capacities in a manner that contributes to strengthening health systems.

TAP membership will have: i) extensive experience developing, implementing, managing,

evaluating and/or reviewing PPR programs in International Development Association (IDA) and

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) countries and/or regional level;

ii) expertise in economics and financing, including in assessing strategic investments, value for

money and sustainability in the review of funding proposals, as well as in innovative financing

mechanisms, partnerships, health finance, and market-shaping; iii) deep knowledge of the latest

scientific evidence, up-to-date international guidelines and normative guidance, including new

developments, approaches, good practices, and technologies for strengthening PPR; iv) experience

assessing expected results/impacts of funding proposals and in monitoring and evaluating

programs in IDA and IBRD countries, preferably in the context of PPR programming; and v)

experience in gender equality, human rights and equity.

In preparing the short list of experts (as described below and in the Appendix, section B) for

submission to the Board, and in the Board’s final selection to form the TAP, consideration will be

given to the following: i) an adequate distribution of technical and financial expertise across

sectors, such as governments, academia, civil society and communities engaged in pandemic PPR,

including One Health, multidisciplinary research, implementation, and other relevant expertise; ii)

geographical balance; iii) a balance between representatives from low-income, middle-income,

and high-income countries; iv) gender balance; and v) other relevant diversity considerations.

3. Key qualifications of individual TAP experts

Applications will be invited from individual experts who possess a range of professional skills

necessary to conduct the TAP’s mandate, with knowledge in a variety of fields related to PPR,

including the IHR (2005) core capacities most relevant to PPR, as listed above, and in what it

takes to strengthen these core capacities. Additionally, each individual shall possess the skills

and attributes required to carry out the TAP’s roles and responsibilities, including:

a) Proven experience and ability to assess the appropriate mix of interventions and choices

on prioritization for maximum impact, and program quality, effectiveness and efficiency;

b) Proven experience and ability to review programmatic plans and Funding Proposals and

associated documentation presented in English and ability to articulate and communicate

effectively in writing (in English) the outcomes of reviews, complex results, and lessons

learned; knowledge of other World Bank official languages will be an added advantage;

c) The highest standards of professional integrity;

d) An ability to work effectively with colleagues from diverse backgrounds; and

e) Preferably, practical experience in working on PPR in IDA and IBRD countries, including

with governments, civil society, and other partners.

Members of the FIF Secretariat are ineligible to serve as members of the TAP. Board Members

(including those participating in constituency delegations, as alternates or observers) shall stand

down from these roles to be eligible to serve on the TAP.

4. Selection

Members of the TAP will be appointed by the Board. The Secretariat will issue an open call to

invite applications from experts (see the Appendix for more details). The call will clearly spell out

the expertise and qualifications sought from applicants. It will be posted on the Secretariat’s

external PPR FIF website, as well as on the WHO’s external website, and will remain open for a

period of two weeks, following which, the Secretariat will prepare a short list of experts for a

selection panel which, after reviewing candidates, will submit its recommendations to the Board

for final approval (see the Appendix for more details).

5. Term

TAP experts will be appointed to serve for a period of 2 years and will be eligible for reappointment

with a maximum of two consecutive terms. Their appointment may be terminated at any time by

the Board if the FIF's interest so requires or as otherwise specified in these terms of reference or

letters of appointment. Where an expert’s appointment is terminated, the Board may decide to

appoint a replacement.

6. Functions

In line with the overall purpose of the TAP, the key functions of TAP experts will be to:

a) Assess the technical merits of Funding Proposals submitted for FIF-financing, based on a

set of agreed criteria and a proposal scoring system approved by the Board; evaluate and

prioritize Funding Proposals; after each round of a Call for Proposals, provide an analysis

of the lessons learned from the review of the Funding Proposals, including

recommendations for the Secretariat, the Implementing Entities, and the Governing Board.

b) Provide technical inputs on the needs and prioritization for FIF funding, and the priorities

and requirements for Calls for Proposals, including by providing summaries for the Board

on pandemic PPR status, priorities and gaps based on existing landscape analyses and

studies, such as the Joint External Evaluations (JEE), State Parties Annual Reviews

(SPARs), after action reviews, and other reports on the implementation of IHR (2005) and

other internationally endorsed legal frameworks, including reports and evaluations

produced by international organizations and academic scientific organization.

7. Remuneration

TAP experts will receive an honorarium for work related to the TAP, if permitted to receive such

honorarium, and will have their travel costs and per diems covered by the Secretariat. These will

be in accordance with the applicable World Bank rules and policies.

In performing this function, the TAP shall not duplicate the work of other actors in developing landscape analyses

or broader studies on PPR but rather, draw on those; the TAP shall co-ordinate with other technical committees and

experts.

III. TAP LEADERSHIP

1. Qualifications

The Chair of the TAP will be a senior executive of the WHO emergencies program or similar

office at the WHO. The Vice-Chair will complement the experience and expertise of the Chair and

provide co-investor country experience and expertise in strengthening pandemic PPR under the

IHR (2005) and other internationally endorsed legal frameworks, consistent with a One Health

approach in co-investor countries. The Vice-Chair will ideally also have experience facilitating the

review of funding proposals.

2. Selection

The Board will select the Chair and Vice-Chair. For the Chair, the WHO will propose

nomination(s) to the Secretariat. All nominations received will be presented to the Board. For the

Vice-Chair, the Secretariat will invite Board Members

to nominate candidates and the Vice-Chair

will be selected from among these nominated candidates.

3. Term

The TAP Chair and Vice-Chair will be appointed to serve for a period of 2 years and will be

eligible for reappointment with a maximum of two consecutive terms. Their appointment may be

terminated at any time by the Board if the FIF's interest so requires or as otherwise specified in

these terms of reference or letters of appointment. Where an appointment is terminated, the Board

shall appoint a replacement following the selection process outlined in section 2 above.

4. Functions

The TAP Chair will lead and facilitate, with impartiality, the discussions of TAP experts as they

carry out their functions (per Item 6 above) and to present the TAP’s recommendations to the

Board, reflecting both majority and minority views, as appropriate.

The Vice-Chair will support and complement the TAP Chair in this role and join the Chair at Board

meetings. The TAP Vice-Chair will also lead the discussions of TAP experts, if the Chair is

unavailable for any reason, including when actual or potential conflicts of interest arise for the

Chair, for example, when Funding Proposals that relate to the WHO as an Implementing Entity

are assessed (see Governance Framework, paragraph 19).

The TAP Chair and Vice-Chair will also (i) provide other services in relation to the TAP review

process as needed; and (ii) participate in the evaluation of the TAP.

5. Remuneration

In the event the time and expenses of the Chair and/or Vice-Chair are not covered by her/his

employer, and provided this is permissible by their employer, the Chair and Vice-Chair will

receive an honorarium for work related to the TAP and will have their travel costs and per diems

Defined as voting members of the Board.

To be clear, these candidates cannot be the Board Members themselves.

covered by the Secretariat. These will be in accordance with the applicable World Bank rules and

policies.

IV. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND ETHICS

TAP Leadership and TAP experts will be subject to the FIF’s conflict of interest framework and

policies as set forth in paragraph 33 of the Operations Manual. TAP leadership and experts are

bound by an obligation of confidentiality in the conduct of their duties, as set out in the

confidentiality undertakings that are signed as part of the process of joining the TAP.

V. TAP OPERATING PROCEDURES

1. Meetings and Participation

TAP meetings will be scheduled based on business needs. TAP meetings may be held in person or

virtually, via video or teleconference, as determined by the Chair in consultation with the

Secretariat.

Active participation is expected from all TAP experts, including in working groups,

teleconferences, and interaction over email. TAP experts are expected to attend meetings and if an

expert misses two consecutive meetings, the Board may end his/her appointment as a member of

the TAP. TAP experts may, in advance of TAP meetings, be requested to review meeting

documentation and to provide their views for consideration by the TAP.

As necessary, the TAP Chair and Vice-Chair will establish smaller Expert Committees (sub-groups

of the TAP, as described below) to work on the evaluation of specific Calls for Proposals or other

issues.

The Secretariat will determine the modes of communication by the TAP, including between the

Secretariat and the TAP members, and the TAP experts among themselves.

TAP experts will not speak on behalf of, or represent, the TAP or the FIF Secretariat or the Board

to any third party.

2. Evaluation by the TAP of Funding Proposals

For each Call for Proposals, the TAP Chair and Vice-Chair will form an Expert Committee of 8 to

10 experts, selected from among the pool of TAP experts (the Chair and Vice-Chair shall not be

eligible for inclusion in the Expert Committee; rather, they will facilitative the work of such

committees, as noted above). Each proposal will be evaluated by the Expert Committee through a

quantitative scoring system as well as qualitative criteria, specific to the relevant Call for Proposals

and in alignment with the results framework; the quantitative scoring system and qualitative

criteria will be reviewed and approved in advance by the Board.

Quantitative evaluation. The system of scoring and prioritization of proposals will consider, inter

alia, the extent to which a funding proposal:

Details will be spelled out in the Call for Proposals.

a) Fulfills all the requirements as set out in the Governance Framework, Operations Manual,

and the Call for Proposals.

b) Fills critical gaps and reinforces capacity building and implementation of pandemic PPR

under the IHR (2005) and other internationally endorsed legal frameworks, consistent with

a One Health approach.

c) Presents a clear theory of change for how the resources requested will strengthen PPR,

including a set of intended results that are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and

time-bound, aligned with the PPR FIF’s Results Framework, and demonstrating early

impact but including a multi-year vision for subsequent work.

d) Puts forward a plan that is operationally feasible and can be implemented within the

resources requested and otherwise available.

e) Demonstrates good value for money in the selection of activities proposed along with

efficiency (preparation and supervision costs of involved Implementing Entities are kept

low).

f) Explains how the FIF financing will have a catalytic impact (e.g., by aligning support of

different partners based on a government strategy and plan, leveraging innovation, and/or

triggering new government commitments and actions).

g) Incentivizes countries to increase investments in pandemic PPR, including in health and

community systems and, where relevant, based on the principles of additionality,

incentivizes countries to invest more in pandemic PPR, including through blending of

MDB resources to further increase concessionality and the matching of domestic resources

as well as other modalities.

h) Brings together key institutions engaged in pandemic PPR and health system financing and

promote a more coordinated and coherent approach to pandemic PPR.

i) Strengthens country-level planning and prioritization processes, thereby strengthening

alignment and complementarity of PPR and health system strengthening and reducing

transactions costs for co-investor countries.

j) Is complimentary to Implementing Entity existing functions and not funding their core

operations.

k) Provides a strong justification that the proposal relates to a country/region that is

significantly exposed to epidemic risks.

l) Demonstrates strong ownership from beneficiaries.

m) Demonstrates inclusivity and participation in the development of funding proposals

(preparation of proposals is based on proactive involvement of relevant sectors, civil

society, Implementing Entities, and other stakeholders) and integrates gender equality and

broader equity considerations.

The details of what metrics to use for scoring will be included in each Call for Proposals.

Qualitative evaluation. Each proposal evaluation will also include a qualitative review, covering

the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal.

Review and recommendation process. The review process will be as follows. After initial

screening (based on paragraph 12 in the Operations Manual), the Secretariat will send the Funding

Proposals to the Expert Committee members, individually. Each expert who is a part of the

Committee will evaluate the proposal based on an agreed quantitative scoring system

complemented by a qualitative evaluation and submit their evaluations to the Secretariat, within

an agreed timeframe (say, 10 working days).

The Secretariat will then work with the TAP Chair and Vice-Chair to convene a meeting of the

Expert Committee. This meeting will be held within five working days of the submission of

individual evaluations to the Secretariat. At that meeting, all evaluations submitted by individual

experts under the relevant Call will be discussed. The average score for each proposal will be

prepared. Proposals will then be ranked by the Expert Committee, based on the quantitative scores

and qualitative evaluations.

The TAP Chair and Vice-Chair will ensure that the Expert Committee reaches clarity on the

assessment/ratings of each proposal, and on which proposals to recommend to the Board for

funding, which ones to send back for re-review, and which proposals to reject. This assessment

will be based solely on the strengths/merits of each individual proposal.

At the end of each Expert Committee meeting, the Chair and Vice-Chair, will submit to the

Secretariat:

a) One report for each set of proposals submitted under a Call and reviewed by the TAP pool

of experts. The report will specifically make one of three possible recommendations:

• Proposals recommended for Approval – plus scoring/prioritization and comments

on areas the TAP deems deserving of special attention by the submitter, the

Secretariat, or partners.

• Proposals recommended for Re-review – plus the key reasons why the TAP did not

consider the proposal ready to be recommended for approval at this session.

• Proposals rejected.

b) The report will include a qualitative and quantitative analysis of each proposal submitted,

any recommendations to the Board and FIF partners on FIF program and policies, including

in relation to the grant application and review processes.

The TAP Expert Committee’s report, signed off by the Chair and Vice-Chair, will be submitted to

the Board through the Secretariat. All recommendations from the TAP are advisory to the Board,

which retains full control over any subsequent decisions or actions regarding any proposals or

other matters considered by the TAP.

3. Monitoring and Evaluation of TAP Performance

The TAP will normally self-monitor its performance annually, reporting to the Board a summary

of activities and contributing to the impact assessment.

An independent and external evaluation of the TAP performance will take place along with the

overall FIF evaluation (first stocktaking at the end of the first year, second as a mid-term review

and the final independent evaluation), having regard to the principles and requirements of its

mandate as set out in these terms of reference and any additional activities undertaken.

The Board will review these terms of reference as it deems necessary, normally in conjunction

with the independent and external evaluations, to ensure their adequacy and that these remain

relevant to the TAP’s program of work and in accordance with developments in best practice.

4. Information and documentation

Information and documentation to which experts may gain access in performing TAP related

activities will be considered as confidential and proprietary to the World Bank. TAP experts must

undertake to abide by the confidentiality obligations and confirm that any and all rights in the work

performed by them in connection with, or as a result of their TAP-related activities will be

exclusively vested in the World Bank.

TAP experts shall not quote from, circulate, or use TAP documents for any purpose other than in

a manner consistent with their responsibilities under these Terms of Reference.

The Board retains full control over the publication of the reports of the TAP, including deciding

whether to publish them. In the interests of transparency, the outcomes of each Call for Proposals

(including submitted and published proposals), TAP reports, and decisions, will be made public.

APPENDIX: PROCEDURE FOR SELECTION OF TAP EXPERTS AND LEADERSHIP

A. Open call

The procedure of selection of TAP experts starts with an open call for expressions of interest by suitable

experts. Open calls will invite suitable qualified candidates who meet the established eligibility criteria to

express their interest online by submitting a curriculum vitae and a cover letter, indicating candidates’

motivation to apply and how they satisfy the selection criteria.

Calls will clearly set out the proposed functions of the TAP and the criteria that potential candidates will

meet, as well as the main terms and conditions of any appointment. Calls will specify expertise, and may

specify geographical and gender representations, as deemed necessary.

Calls will be published for at least two weeks on the PPR FIF website as well as the WHO’s public website.

An open call serial number will be attributed to each call for experts. Once the open call is advertised, the

Secretariat will actively share it among related technical networks and with collaborators to ensure a broad

outreach.

Applicants will also be requested to complete and sign the standard declaration of interests (DOI) form for

experts.

B. Process to select experts

Applications will first be screened for eligibility by the Secretariat to assess whether a candidate possesses

the key qualifications outlined in Section II.3. The screening by the Secretariat will include the declaration

of interests (DOI) of all eligible candidates. Interviews or other forms of follow-ups may be scheduled

between candidates and the Secretariat to clarify areas of uncertainties about candidates’ experience and

expertise or potential conflicts of interest.

Following a determination that a candidate’s appointment to the TAP would not give rise to actual or

potential conflicts of interest, in accordance with the FIF’s Conflicts of Interest policies (see paragraph 33

of the Operations Manual), the proposed candidate will be presented to a selection panel, convened by the

Secretariat, composed of the Chair and/or the Vice-Chair of the TAP, and three Board members. Board

members to be part of the selection panel will be appointed by the Board.

The selection panel will:

a. Review the submissions against the criteria established by the Governing Board with the Secretariat

including, inter alia, geographical representation and gender balance. The selection panel will establish its

own methodology to carry out this task in an objective and transparent manner;

b. Review the completed declaration of interest forms to ensure that any proposed member has no conflict

of interest;

c. Prepare a recommended short list of experts. In addition, it is a good practice to add a suppletory list with

a number of additional experts should any of the recommended experts in the main not accept the

appointment and/or any expert leaves the TAP and needs to be replaced;

d. Submit the short list of recommended experts to Board for consideration and decision.

The Board will make the final decision regarding the TAP’s membership.

C. Appointment of experts

Upon approval of the membership by the Board, the Secretariat will issue the letters of appointment to the

successful applicants. Once a countersigned copy of the letter and Confidentiality Undertaking attached to

the letter are received by the Secretariat, the procedure of appointment of experts is finalized.

If any proposed expert declines the appointment, the Secretariat may invite any expert from the additional

suppletory list to complete the membership, with due consideration for the criteria for selection and

appointment and the terms of reference of TAP. Likewise, it is possible to replace any departing expert or

to add more experts (up to the maximum of 20), by inviting an individual from the additional suppletory

list to complete the membership, with due consideration for the criteria for selection and appointment and

the terms of reference of the TAP. The appointment of replacement or additional experts is also subject to

receiving a countersigned invitation letter and Confidentiality Undertaking and, if needed, an updated DOI

form.

The appointment will be limited in time as indicated in the letter of appointment.

D. Appointment of the Chair and Vice-Chair

Upon selection by the Board, the Secretariat will issue the Letters of Appointment to the Chair and the

Vice-Chair. Once a countersigned copy of the letters and Confidentiality Undertakings attached to the

letters are received by the Secretariat, the procedure of selection of the Chair and Vice-Chair is finalized.

If the proposed Chair or Vice-Chair declines the appointment, the procedure outlined above in section III.

2 shall apply for nomination of new Chair and Vice-Chair.

E. Other considerations

The Board reserves the right to accept or reject any expression of interest, to annul the open call process

and reject all expressions of interest at any time without incurring any liability to the affected applicant or

applicants and without any obligation to inform the affected applicant or applicants of the grounds for the

Board's action.

The Secretariat will not in any way be obliged to reveal, or discuss with any applicant, how an expression

of interest was assessed, or to provide any other information relating to the evaluation/selection process or

to state the reasons for not choosing a member.

The Secretariat will publish the names and a short biography of the selected individuals on the FIF public

website.