RIDER - About us

Réseau Interdisciplinaire Dédié à l’Evaluation et au Retour d’expérience -
Interdisciplinary Network for Evaluation and Lessons-learned Exercises 

As RIDER is temporarily suspended, evaluation requests are being redirected respectively to the Crash and Epicentre and priorities are established twice a year through an Evaluation steering Committee made of the Executive direction, the Medical direction, the Operations direction, Epicentre and Crash. However, the evaluation methods presented below remain valid.  

About the CRASH  

The CRASH supports feedback, evaluation, and critical review of Médecins Sans Frontières operations. This activity contributes to critical reflection on our work and aims to improve it. It draws on methodologies from social sciences. This cross-cutting approach feeds into all of the team's activities (particularly research, training, and advising). 

Moreover, the CRASH advises MSF leaders as they shape their positions on operational and public matters. To that end, it acts at the request of the association’s president, directors and operational managers on project-related issues, current events and organisational concerns. Supporting evaluations, critical reviews and lessons learning exercises methodologically is part of its remit.  

Following the RIDER’s spirit, the current positioning of OCP on evaluation is still the production of rigorous and useful knowledge for action, using social sciences and epidemiology. In particular to:  

  • Improve the relevance, quality and impact of evaluations (initial, real-time or retrospective) that use methods from epidemiology and the social sciences (i.e., anthropology, management, history, economics, geography or sociology). 
  • Improve evaluation and learning practices within each department. 
  • Share results of evaluations and lessons-learned exercises more widely, both internally and with the general public.  

How do we proceed? 

Anyone who would like to launch an evaluation, a study, a lessons-learned exercise, or any other reflection on MSF’s action that requires specialized know-how can escalate their request to their hierarchy (Cell, Ops direction or other direction), so that a first level of triage is exercised. The requests that are then prioritized by the direction of operations or medical direction (or other), are then discussed during “evaluation steering committee” meetings twice a year and more if necessary. Once priorities are clearly established, the Crash team and Epicentre can then provide methodological support to finalise the methodology of the request, and support with finding adequate human resources if necessary.   

How do we do? 

In practice, the first step is to formulate an initial question that explains the context, the primary question the proposed study would address, who the target audience would be, how the results would be used, as well as suggested restitution formats and dissemination strategies. 

The objectives are clarified with the project initiator. Is it a question about the overall context (What is happening? What is the situation?), or about MSF practices (Did we do well? How we might do better…)? Or is it to document an experience (a specific project, innovation, practice, or incident ...) in order to transform it into shareable knowledge? To justify or promote a decision, a practice, a policy? To evaluate an innovation in real time?  

The goal of this preliminary phase is to test the relevance of the question and to discuss with the initiator the best way to answer it: a more in-depth multi-disciplinary project, or perhaps a “lighter” process (organized debriefing, brainstorming, workshop, literature review, synthesis of archival documents, etc.). 

If, after reflection, the project initiator wishes to undertake a full study, (s)he will, with the support of Crash and Epicentre members, write a work plan that includes: 

  • The objectives and the questions being asked. 
  • Recommended methods and required resources: methodological know-how, level of involvement of Crash and/or Epicentre, human resources need, involvement of the project initiator in project management and implementation… 
  • Strategies for dissemination and use of results: reporting formats (written reports, workshops, slide decks, other audiovisual…), dissemination policy (internal, donors, partners…), change management strategies (support system for recommendations…). 

Internal link and contact