Improving immunization coverage and equity - technical resources
Comparing Resources
Tip: You can share the address of this page to allow others to view your comparison
| Resource | CHOLTOOL |
|---|---|
| Purpose | Costing of oral cholera vaccine (OCV) introduction in LMICs. |
| Content | The costing tool enables the user to estimate the value of incremental (additional) resources required to add oral cholera vaccination campaigns to an existing immunization programme. The CholTool is designed for costing from a payer/provider perspective, and can make the perspective narrower or broader within the viewpoint. For example, the payer/provider may be defined narrowly as the EPI department within a ministry, or it could be broadened to a government perspective. it can also include the perspective of an external partner such as the WHO. The perspective is applied to determine which costs are included in the analysis and how included costs are considered as financial and economic. The CholTool calculates both financial and economic costs. The CholTool provides estimates of two cost measures: 1) total costs of adding the OCV to specific areas; and 2) cost per fully immunized person. It differentiates recurrent (operational) and capital costs as well as financial and economic costs. It also presents expenditures required for initial investments required for the OCV vaccine introduction. |
| Use | Requires user input. The user can customize the tool with country specific characteristics, as well as some country specific information. |
| Contraints/Limitations | •It only estimates the value of new resources needed and does not include the cost of other goods and services (e.g. transport) already being used for other vaccines. • The tool is availble upon request. |
| Example criteria this resource could address | Can be used to estimate the economic delivery cost per dose including service delivery and programmatic costs. |
| If available, notes on the development process | Four examples of applications of CholTool were presented in three countries- one in Ethiopia, two in Malawi and one in Nepal. The cost projections conducted before the campaign using the tool and a retrospective costing using the tool in Nepal resulted in no significant difference between the cost calculated. |
| Additional Links | |
| Link to access the resource | /en/resources/journal-article/choltool |