Executive Summary
This report presents the Priority areas for multisectoral
intervention (PAMI) analysis for cholera surveillance and response in
Ethiopia. The analysis covers districts affected with cholera outbreak
over the defined study period, utilizing epidemiological indicators
including case incidence, persistence, testing coverage,
positivity rates, and case fatality rates. The findings inform
targeted public health interventions, resource allocation, and outbreak
response prioritization.
Key Performance Indicators
|
Metric
|
Value
|
|
Analysis Period
|
August 27, 2022 – January 12, 2026
|
|
Duration
|
3.4 years
|
|
Total Reported Cases
|
66,913
|
|
Total Deaths
|
829
|
|
Overall Case Fatality Rate (CFR)
|
1.24 %
|
|
Districts with Reported Cases
|
421
|
|
Critical Priority Districts
|
3
|
|
High Priority Districts
|
42
|
|
Average PAMI Priority Score
|
8.8
|
1. Introduction
Cholera remains a significant public health threat in Ethiopia, with
recurrent outbreaks affecting multiple regions annually. The Global Task
Force on Cholera Control (GTFCC) surveillance framework emphasizes the
use of standardized indicators to identify high-priority areas for
intervention. This report applies the PAMI methodology to rank districts
based on a composite priority score derived from:
- Incidence rate
- Outbreak persistence
- Testing coverage gap
- Laboratory positivity rate
- Case fatality rate
The results are intended to guide the Ethiopian Public Health
Institute (EPHI), regional health bureaus, and international partners in
strategic decision-making for cholera prevention and control.
2. Geographic Distribution of Priority Districts
A total of 421 districts reported at least one laboratory-confirmed
or clinically suspected cholera case during the analysis period. These
districts have been categorized into four priority levels:
- Critical Priority (score ≥75): 3 districts –
Require immediate, intensive intervention
- High Priority (score 50–74): 42 districts – Require
enhanced surveillance and response
- Medium Priority (score 25–49): 52 districts –
Routine monitoring with targeted support
- Routine Surveillance (score <25): 332 districts
– Maintain standard surveillance
3. Epidemiological Trends
3.1 Daily Case Trend (National Level)

3.2 Weekly Case Distribution by Year

4. PAMI Priority Score Analysis
4.1 Distribution of Priority Scores

4.2 Top 20 Priority Districts

4.3 Component Score Averages

5. District-Level Priority Table
The table below lists the top 50 priority districts with their
associated PAMI rank, score, epidemiological indicators, and priority
category.
6. Summary of Findings
6.1 Epidemiological Summary
Epidemiological Summary
|
Metric
|
Value
|
|
Total Analysis Period
|
3.4 years
|
|
Districts with Cases
|
421
|
|
Critical Priority Districts
|
3
|
|
High Priority Districts
|
42
|
|
Overall CFR
|
1.24 %
|
6.2 Top 5 Priority Districts
Top 5 Priority Districts
|
|
- wantawo (High Priority) - Score: 71.2/100
|
- quara (Critical Priority) - Score: 40.2/100
|
- lagahida (High Priority) - Score: 33.9/100
|
- meyumuluka (Medium Priority) - Score: 27.9/100
|
- wajale town (High Priority) - Score: 26.5/100
|
7. Key Recommendations
7.2 Surveillance Strengthening (All Districts)
- Reduce case notification time from current baseline to less than 48
hours
- Increase specimen collection and laboratory confirmation rates to
≥80% of suspected cases
- Implement weekly cross-border alert sharing mechanisms for districts
sharing boundaries with neighboring countries
7.3 Cross-Border Coordination (Border Districts)
- Establish bilateral coordination mechanisms with Kenya, South Sudan,
Sudan, Eritrea, and Somalia
- Harmonize case definitions and alert thresholds across borders
- Conduct joint outbreak investigations for cross-border clusters
7.4 Capacity Building
- Train frontline healthcare workers in standardized cholera case
management and infection prevention and control (IPC)
- Strengthen IPC practices at all cholera treatment facilities and
oral rehydration points
- Enhance community engagement and risk communication, focusing on
water treatment, hand hygiene, and early care-seeking
7.5 Resource Mobilization
- Prioritize funding allocations for critical and high priority
districts
- Ensure adequate supplies of rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs),
intravenous fluids, oral rehydration salts, and personal protective
equipment
- Support WASH interventions in hotspot communities, including
chlorination of water sources and household water treatment
8. Limitations
- The analysis depends on completeness and timeliness of case reports
from all districts; underreporting may underestimate true burden
- Testing coverage varies significantly, and districts with low
testing may have misclassified cases
- Population estimates used for incidence calculations are based on
projected census data and may not reflect current displacements
- Cross-border cases may be double-counted or missed depending on
reporting systems
9. Conclusion
The PAMI priority analysis successfully identified 45 districts (3
critical, 42 high) that account for the majority of Ethiopia’s cholera
burden. These findings provide an evidence-based framework for phased,
targeted interventions. EPHI recommends immediate activation of response
plans for critical priority districts, enhanced surveillance for high
priority districts, and regular quarterly review of priority scores as
new data become available.
10. Next Steps
- Validation workshop with regional health bureaus to
review district-level findings (May 2026)
- Development of district-specific action plans for
all critical and high priority districts (June 2026)
- Resource mapping and gap analysis to align donor
funding with priority districts (July 2026)
- Quarterly PAMI score updates using real-time
surveillance data (ongoing)
Prepared by:
Ethiopian Public Health Institute (EPHI)
Public Health Emergency Management Center
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia