Malawi declared a state of national disaster due to the COVID-19 pandemic on 20th March 2020 and registered its first confirmed coronavirus case on the 2 April 2020. The aim of this paper was to document policy decisions made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic from January to August 2020. We reviewed policy documents from the Public Health Institute of Malawi, the Malawi Gazette, the Malawi Ministry of Health and Population and the University of Oxford Coronavirus Government Response Tracker. We found that the Malawi response to the COVID-19 pandemic was multisectoral and implemented through 15 focused working groups termed clusters. Each cluster was charged with providing policy direction in their own area of focus. All clusters then fed into one central committee for major decisions and reporting to head of state. Key policies identified during the review include international travel ban, school closures at all levels, cancellation of public events, decongesting workplaces and public transport, and mandatory face coverings and a testing policy covering symptomatic people. Supportive interventions included risk communication and community engagement in multiple languages and over a variety of mediums, efforts to improve access to water, sanitation, nutrition and unconditional social-cash transfers for poor urban and rural households.

Background: Malawi's National Malaria Control Programme (NMCP) is developing a new strategic plan for 2023-2030 to combat malaria and recognizes that a blanket approach to malaria interventions is no longer feasible. To inform this new strategy, the NMCP set up a task force comprising 18 members from various sectors, which convened a meeting to stratify the malaria burden in Malawi and recommend interventions for each stratum. Methods: The burden stratification workshop took place from November 29 to December 2, 2022, in Blantyre, Malawi, and collated essential data on malaria burden indicators, such as incidence, prevalence, and mortality. Workshop participants reviewed the malaria burden and intervention coverage data to describe the current status and identified the districts as a appropriate administrative level for stratification and action. Two scenarios were developed for the stratification, based on composites of three variables. Scenario 1 included incidence, prevalence, and under-five all-cause mortality, while Scenario 2 included total malaria cases, prevalence, and under-five all-cause mortality counts. The task force developed four burden strata (highest, high, moderate, and low) for each scenario, resulting in a final list of districts assigned to each stratum. Results: The task force concluded with 10 districts in the highest-burden stratum (Nkhotakota, Salima, Mchinji, Dowa, Ntchisi, Mwanza, Likoma, Lilongwe, Kasungu and Mangochi) 11 districts in the high burden stratum (Chitipa, Rumphi, Nkhata Bay, Dedza, Ntcheu, Neno, Thyolo, Nsanje, Zomba, Mzimba and Mulanje) and seven districts in the moderate burden stratum (Karonga, Chikwawa, Balaka, Machinga, Phalombe, Blantyre, and Chiradzulu). There were no districts in the low-burden stratum. Conclusion: The next steps for the NMCP are to review context-specific issues driving malaria transmission and recommend interventions for each stratum. Overall, this burden stratification workshop provides a critical foundation for developing a successful malaria strategic plan for Malawi.

Background The roles and functionality of technical working groups (TWGs) in the health sectors vary across countries, still they aim to support government and ministries in formulating evidence-informed recommendations for policies and facilitate dialogue and alignment of activities among stakeholders within the health sector. Thus, TWGs have a role in enhancing the functionality and effectiveness of the health system structure. However, in Malawi, the functionality of TWGs and how they utilize research evidence to contribute to decision-making is not monitored. This study sought to understand the TWGs' performance and functionality in enabling evidence-informed decision-making (EIDM) in Malawi's health sector. Methods A cross-sectional descriptive qualitative study. Data were collected through interviews, documents review and observation of three TWG meetings. Qualitative data were analysed using a thematic approach. The WHO-UNICEF Joint Reporting Form (JRF) was used to guide the assessment of TWG functionality. Results TWG functionality varied in the Ministry of Health (MoH) in Malawi. The reasons for those perceived to be functioning well included meeting frequently, diverse representation of members, and that their recommendations to MoH were usually considered when decisions were made. For the TWGs that were perceived as not functioning well, the main reasons included lack of funding, periodic meetings and discussions that needed to provide clear decisions on the actions to be taken. In addition, evidence was recognized as important in decision-making, and research was valued by decision-makers within the MoH. However, some of the TWGs lacked reliable mechanisms for generating, accessing and synthesizing research. They also needed more capacity to review and use the research to inform their decisions. Conclusions TWGs are highly valued and play a critical role in strengthening EIDM within the MoH. Our paper highlights the complexity and barriers of TWG functionality in supporting pathways for health policy-making in Malawi. These results have implications for EIDM in the health sector. This suggests that the MoH should actively develop reliable interventions and evidence tools, strengthen capacity-building and increase funding for EIDM.

BackgroundThe roles and functionality of Technical Working Groups (TWGs) in the health sectors varies across countries, but they generally aim to support government and ministries in formulating evidence informed recommendations for policies and facilitate dialogue and alignment of activities among stakeholders within the health sector. Thus, TWG’s have a core role to enhance functionality and effectiveness of the health system structure. However, in Malawi the functionality of TWGs and how they utilise research evidence to contribute to decision making is not monitored. This study sought to understand the TWGs performance and functionality in enabling Evidence Informed Decision Making (EIDM) in Malawi's health sector.MethodsA cross-sectional descriptive qualitative study employing qualitative methods. Data was collected through interviews; documents review and observation of three TWG meetings. Qualitative data was analysed using a framework analysis approach. ResultsTWG functionality varied in the Ministry of Health in Malawi. The reasons for those perceived to be functioning well included meeting frequently; diverse representation of members; and the membership consisted of highly technical people; and their recommendations to MoH were usually taken into consideration when decisions were made. For the TWGs that were perceived as not functioning well, the main reasons included lack of funding, irregular meetings and discussions that did not provide clear decisions on the actions to be taken. In addition, evidence was recognized as important in decision-making and research was valued by decision makers within the MoH. However, some of the TWGs lacked reliable mechanisms for generating, accessing, and synthesizing research. They also had limited capacity to review and use the research to inform the decisions they made. ConclusionsTWGs are a key decision-making structure within the MoH in Malawi. However, TWGs functionality will need reliable interventions for evidence informed decision making and sustainable funding to facilitate performance of TWGs.