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

This evaluation finds project performance to be highly satisfactory and identifies some critical obstacles relating to the continuity of care. The capacity of the local partners to continue with the implementation of the strategic framework for the fight against HIV/ Aids and TB when MSF departs is severely compromised. The report urges MSF to place more emphasis on identifying a feasible partner for handover before engaging as a leader in such contexts.

Stockholm Evaluation Unit
23/05/2014

This evaluation finds project performance to be highly satisfactory and identifies some critical obstacles relating to the continuity of care. The capacity of the local partners to continue with the implementation of the strategic framework for the fight against HIV/ Aids and TB when MSF departs is severely compromised. The report urges MSF to place more emphasis on identifying a feasible partner for handover before engaging as a leader in such contexts.

Stockholm Evaluation Unit
23/05/2014

L’évaluation des vulnérabilités urbaines dans la ville de Conakry a été commissionnée par MSF-CH pour identifier les populations les plus vulnérables et mieux comprendre les facteurs sanitaires de vulnérabilité afin de proposer des pistes de réflexion pour un futur projet. Cette évaluation qualitative a été réalisée par l’Unité d’évaluation de MSF à Vienne. Elle a été menée dans les cinq (5) communes de la ville de Conakry entre août et septembre 2012. Les recommandations et le rapport final sont présentés en octobre 2012.

Alena KOSCALOVA and Marianne VIOT
01/10/2012

This report summarises the key lessons learned from MSF's cholera interventions in Zambia 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010 (OCBA), Guinea Bissau 2005-2008 (OCBA), Juba 2006 (OCBA), Haiti 2010-2011 (OCBA), Angola 2006 (OCB, OCA, OCBA), Zimbabwe 2009 (OCB, OCA, OCBA)

M Iscla
09/05/2012

This evaluation aimed at gaining perspective on and learning from current partnership practices, informing the debate on MSF’s policy on partnerships and providing guidance for future engagement. Four separate field evaluations in DRC, Kenya, Niger and North Korea as well as a desk review of seven additional partnerships have been conducted. The report provides good practice examples and practical recommendations.

Karima Hammadi and Annie Désilets
01/02/2012

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 evaluation analysed MSF intervention strategies of the TB project in the Penal sector of Kyrgyzstan by reviewing relevance, effectiveness and continuity. It assessed current challenges and shortcomings of the intervention in order to recommend new techniques and approaches for the year 2011 and beyond.

Gill Bradbury, Walli Wernhart, and Dr. A.Jamil Faqirzai
08/10/2010

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

En juin 2009, une évaluation finale des 3 années de projet de MSF-CH (2005 à 2008) à Dabola en Guinée a été menée afin (i) d’en documenter les stratégies et (ii) d’en faire une analyse critique en termes d’accès auxsoins, de perception, de durabilité et d’impact.

SCAVACO
23/12/2009

Pages