BackgroundEffective integration, one of the seven strategic priorities of the Immunization Agenda 2030, can contribute to increasing vaccination coverage and efficiency. The objective of the study is to measure and compare input costs of “non-selective” measles vaccination campaign as a stand-alone strategy and when integrated with another vaccination campaign.MethodsWe conducted a cost-minimization study using a matched design and data from five states of Nigeria. We carried-out our analysis in 3 states that integrated measles vaccination with Meningitis A and the 2 states that implemented a stand-alone measles campaign. The operational costs (e.g., costs of personnel, training, supervision etc.) were extracted from the budgeted costs, the financial and technical reports. We further used the results of the coverage surveys to demonstrate that the strategies have similar health outputs.ResultsThe analysis of the impact on campaign budget (currency year: 2019) estimated that savings were up to 420,000 United States Dollar (USD) with the integrated strategies; Over 200 USD per 1,000 children in the target population for measles vaccination (0.2 USD per children) was saved in the studied states. The savings on the coverage survey components were accrued by lower costs in the integration of trainings, and through reduced field work and quality assurance measures costs.ConclusionsIntegration translated to greater value in improving access and efficiency, as through sharing of costs, more life-saving interventions are made accessible to the communities. Important considerations for integration are resource needs, micro-planning adjustments, and health systems delivery platforms.