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

The objective of this lessons learnt exercise was to assess the advantages and disadvantages of the UNITAID grant governance and management model for project achievements in terms of medical (and related) outcomes, strategic decisions, the potential for collaboration between multiple MSF entities and to leverage the learnings for replication in future projects. The exercise showed that the project directly delivered a new, more effective, simpler and much cheaper treatment to patients across seven countries.

This publication was produced at the request of MSF OCG, under the management of the Vienna Evaluation Unit. It was prepared independently by Hugues Juillerat, Sharon McClenaghan and Glenn O’Neil of TRAASS International.
15/01/2019

An external evaluation of the support programs has been conducted between April and June 2015. This 360° snapshot was aiming at evaluating the appropriateness, the effectiveness and the impact of the support activities operated from Turkey and Lebanon.

Stockholm Evaluation Unit. Ofelia Garcia (lead evaluator)
30/07/2015

MSF OCBA , Review of Partnership 2011-2013 Helsinki Citizen Assembly - MSF OCBA Istanbul - Kilis Migrants Syria Refugees Gaias Consulting C. Boulanger Soma

FDESTENABES
28/08/2014

The hand over of MSF-F Phnom Penh HIV project is a complex process. This HIV cohort is the biggest of MSF OCP to be handed over so far and the hand over is almost directly done to the national health authorities, NGO partners having been identified only for minor parts of the project. In the first part of the report, a narrative description and an evaluation of the main technical aspects of the handover process are presented.

Cristina Orlandini
01/04/2010

This evaluation was requested by MSF CH Geneva and focuses on the pertinence, efficacy and impact of the sexual violence project in Guatemala. The motivation to evaluate this program stemmed from difficulties at the initial stages of the project in realizing the goals through the original strategies chosen. The results answer key questions about the added value of the intervention regarding the problem of the sexual violence (SV).

María Luisa Cabrera Pérez-Armiñan and Marilyn McHarg
10/03/2009

Médecins Sans Frontières has been running HIV/AIDS treatment programmes since 2001. As national systems scaled up capacity, MSF began to hand over HIV projects in 2005. Variable experience with handover and internal debates about MSF responsibility to patients led OCG to propose an evaluation of the handover process, to learn from experience and inform policy and practice. A qualitative review was carried out through interviews, case studies in Cameroon and Laos, and review of other vertical and integrated HIV projects.

Dr. Rosamund Lewis and Dr. PehrOlov Pehrson
01/01/2009

Following the handover of AIDS treatment programs to the authorities of Guatemala, MSF conducted a study to assess various aspects of the continuity of HIV/AIDS care. This review was conducted 18 months after MSF left the Roosevelt hospital, and examined both the clinical data and opinions of staff and patients. Despite some shortfalls in the frequency of laboratory testing and community follow up, the level of care and outcomes for the patients was well maintained by the hospital staff.

01/08/2007

MSF had been working in Honduras and Guatemala in HIV prevention and care of people living with HIV and AIDS for several years before ART projects were started in 2001. In 2005 the projects were handed over to the National AIDS Programme, though MSF-CH kept some staff in both countries to monitor progress. This evaluation was planned a year and a half after handing over the project, to document the perception of people regarding lessons learnt; whether the project was handed over properly; and the quality of care for people living HIV.

SCAVACO
01/02/2007