Table 2.

Performance of state (out of 10) in surveillance and EBS as scored by the visited teams, Sudan, 2021

No	Statement	N. Darfur	N. Kordofan	Northern	Khartoum	Sinnar	Gedarif	Average
1	State has a list of signals and events	10	10	10	10	10	10	10.0
2	State capacity to detect signals and events	5	4	4	10	8	6	6.2
3	State register signals and events regularly	5	5	5	8	8	8	6.5
4	State triages/verifies signals within 24 h	10	10	10	10	10	8	9.7
5	State reports signals and events to FMOH	4	3	3	10	10	10	6.7
6	There is structured collaboration with partners	1	1	1	8	1	1	2.2
7	There is an EBS at state level	8	1	1	8	0	0	3.0
8	There is CEBS at state level	8	6	6	4	7	7	6.3
9	EBS is part of HEEC structure	7	0	0	8	6	7	4.7
10	State assesses risk within 48 h	10	10	10	10	10	8	9.7
11	State responds within 48 h	7	10	10	10	10	8	9.2
12	HEEC at state level has a functional structure	7	2	0	8	10	10	6.2
13	HEEC has written roles and responsibilities	7	0	0	0	0	0	1.2
14	State has all national guidelines and SOPs	5	3	7	8	7	10	6.7
15	Staff at state and localities are trained	1	7	5	7	3	3	4.3
16	State has a budgeted plan	10	10	10	0	10	10	8.3
17	There is a known budget for surveillance	7	10	2	0	10	10	6.5
18	State has free access to internet	3	0	10	6	0	0	3.2
19	State is part of the national HEEC network	8	10	10	9	8	8	8.8
20	State has a plan and checklist for supervision	2	10	10	10	10	5	7.5
21	State conducts supervision regularly	1	1	1	8	2	2	2.5