Costs and results of two alternatives for malaria control were compared. One constituted by the activities of the National Programme, the other by the integration of an educational strategy denominated "Integrated Alternative" (IA) into the national program in Buenaventura on the Pacific Coast of Colombia. Objective. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two alternatives for malaria control in the urban area of Buenaventura. MATERIALS AND METHODS. A cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out from an institutional and household perspective. Institutional costs were obtained by reviewing records of institutions that implemented each alternative; household costs were obtained from interviews. Effectiveness measurement was the number of averted cases per 10,000 inhabitants.Institutional costs of National Programme and Integrated Alternative were U.S. dollars 3766 and U.S. dollars 24,932.8 respectively. Average household cost in the zone where National Programme was implemented was U.S. dollars 36.2, while in the zone where IA was applied it was U.S. dollars 28.4. The number of averted cases per 10,000 inhabitants was 12.9 (CI 95% -6.0; 31.8) for National Programme and 264.6 (CI 95% 254.1; 275.1) for Integrated Alternative. The institutional cost-effectiveness ratios of National Programme and Integrated Alternative were U.S. dollars 292.4 and U.S. dollars 92.2, respectively.Integration of the educational strategy into the National Programme was the most cost-effective alternative. Our data suggest that the educational strategy should be added to the National Programme activities.