Photos: 

Some evaluation reports are public and can be downloaded from this website, while others are restricted to MSF users and can only be accessed via Tukul. This limitation is mainly due to the sensitive nature of the operational contexts and the resulting content. However, there are internal discussions about making all evaluation reports publicly searchable. If you are an MSF association member, reports are made available on various associate platforms such as www.insideOCB.com.

Country/Region

Since MSF’s return to Afghanistan in 2009, its operations on the ground have been monitored with a spyglass, unlike any other mission in this kind of environment. Consequently, OCs have been pushed to innovate but also remain critical vis-a-vis their respective strategies and the overall modus operandi of the Afghan mission. This evaluation of the single representation set up aims to analyse and learn from the current state of affairs of the Afghan mission in view of possible ways forward.

This publication was produced at the request of MSF, under the management of the Stockholm Evaluation Unit. It was prepared independently by Dan Sermand and Cedric Martin.
17/02/2017

This report is a review of advocacy within the MSF movement from 2010-2015. Commissioned by the core ExCom, the aim of this review was to explore the effectiveness of MSF advocacy and produce recommendations to improve its approach, coordination and organization in support to operations within the movement. Two external evaluation consultants, Glenn O’Neil and Liesbeth Schockaert, conducted the review with the support of Nirupama Sarma who carried out a complementary review of the Access Campaign (AC).

This publication was produced at the request of MSF International, under the management of the Vienna Evaluation Unit. It was prepared independently by Glenn O'Neil and Liesbeth Schockaert, with contributions from Nirupama Sarma.
14/09/2016

In 2010 the operational prospects for OCB (strategic operational plan) outlined the broad objectives for the coming three years and placed renewed attention on key medical areas including surgery and emergency and acute medicine, bringing about increased investment in two hospital programs where OCB focussed on providing emergency surgical care in third level facilities in Tabarre and Kunduz.

This publication was produced at the request of MSF OCB, under the management of the SEU. It was prepared independently by Juan Luis Dominguez and Jon Gunnarsson.
29/10/2015

This survey investigates patients’ coping mechanisms and their dependence on medical institutions both from the patients’ standpoint and from that of MSF’s project teams.

Marc Le Pape and Suzanne Bradol
08/07/2015

Through an analysis of the events that have marked MSF’s history since 2003, this series of case studies and historical accounts describes the evolution of MSF's humanitarian ambitions, the resistance to these ambitions and the political arrangements that overcame this resistance (or that failed to do so).

edited by Claire Magone, Michaël Neuman, Fabrice Weissman
22/11/2011

Reviewed Interventions This chapter provides an overview of the contexts and MSF interventions of all the reviewed interventions (DRC, Cameroun, Djibouti, Iraq, South Africa and Pakistan).

Alena Koscalova, Elena Lucchi
16/12/2010

The purpose of this evaluation was to review the experience in needs assessment and response to displacement in open settings. For the evaluation process, six interventions were reviewed: MSF Operational Centre Geneva (OCG) interventions in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) (Haut-Uélé), Djibouti, Cameroon and Iraq; Operational Centre Brussels (OCB) interventions in South Africa and Pakistan; and partial review of Operational Centre Paris (OCP) experience in Pakistan.

Alena Koscalova and Elena Lucchi
01/06/2010

In January 2006 the MSF-CH Meditrina was launched in Zürich with the objective to provide first-line medical assistance to people excluded from the Swiss health care system, primarily on the grounds of their illegal presence on Swiss territory. A team of the two evaluators reviewed documents, interviewed Meditrina team, beneficiaries, stakeholders and authorities, visited project sites.

admin
19/02/2008

Pages