Evaluations 2013

Evaluations Report - Maban South Sudan (by David Curtis and Boris Stringer, 1/30/2013)

The OCB intervention in Maban started in 2011 and quickly grew to become the single largest intervention for 2012. Within this extremely challenging and rapidly developing context OCB deployed significant resources to meet the needs of the refugee population. The evaluation looks at the first months of the intervention between the time of the initial assessment and the handover to the emergency desk at the height of the emergency. The report finds that the intervention was seen positively and the outputs highly appreciated by everybody involved. The evaluation does however highlight some areas for improvement in the future as well as identify some structural issues in the organisation of operations in emergencies. The report includes a management response.


 
MSF-­‐OCP project in Yida camp, South Sudan (by Pauline Busson Vincent Brown)
 
On August 2nd, 2012, a press release by MSF declares a health catastrophe in Yida refugee camp, South Sudan where MSF-OCP is working since ovember 2011. Three months later, in October, MSF-OCP's Operations Department requests an evaluation of the intervention in Yida refugee camp to draw lessons learned. This review analyses the operations developed by MSF-OCP in Yida camp within the global scope of the entire humanitarian response, with a special focus on the emergency phase. 
 

Evaluation of the Pool D’Urgence Congo (by Juan-Luis Dominguez August 28 2013) (en Français ci-dessous)

The evaluation of the PUC (Congo Emergency Pool/ Pool D’urgence Congo) finds that the project, as a full epidemiological surveillance, assessment and response system is extraordinarily well structured, having developed both a technically sound complex methodology and working tools, with a capacity for reacting to epidemiological outbursts very swiftly and effectively. It also finds that there is no other international or national organisation with such impressive medical expertise and response capacity within the context. The report concludes that is a firmly settled information network and reliable alert detection system, and is the defacto medical NGO of reference in emergencies in DRC. It concludes further that PUC has a very high quality to its medical approach, and that it offers an outstanding return in terms of impact and lives saved. The report also highlights some areas for improvements, such as: staff shortages, follow-up from MSFOCB national coordination and headquarters; an understaffed pharmacy with shortages; and an unreliable emergency supply delivery system.

Executive Summary Booklet in English


Evaluation du projet “pool d´urgence au Congo (by Juan-Luis Dominguez August 28 2013)

L'évaluation de la PUC (Pool d'Urgence Congo) estime que le projet, en tant que système de surveillance, d'évaluation et de réponse en ce qui concerne l'activité épidémiologique, est extrêmement bien structuré, ayant développé à la fois une méthodologie complexe et technique et des outils de travail, avec une capacité de réaction rapide et efficace en cas de crise épidémiologique. Elle constate également qu'il n'y a aucun autre organisation nationale ou internationale jouissant d'une telle expertise médicale et capacité d'intervention dans un contexte pareil. Le rapport conclut que du fait de son réseau d'information solidement installé et de la fiabilité de son système de détection d'alerte, le PUC apparaît comme l'ONG médicale de référence en cas d'urgence en RDC. De plus, il assigne à a PUC une approche médicale de très haute qualité, qui offre un rendement exceptionnel en termes d'impact et de vies sauvées. Le rapport souligne également un besoin d'amélioration dans certains domaines, tels que : la pénurie de personnel, le suivi avec la coordination nationale MSFOCB et ses sièges sociaux, une pharmacie en sous-effectif avec des pénuries, et la faiblesse d'un système de secours en ce qui concerne la distribution de matériel.

Executive Summary Booklet en Français


Evaluation of the MSF-OCB intervention in Martissant, Port-au-Prince, Haití from 2006-2013 (MSF OCB) (by Xavier Bartroli & Ofelia Garcia)

This evaluation contributes to the debate around the OCB Martissant intervention following the proposed closure and resulting decision to scale down in 2013. The report concludes that the context remains similar to that of the beginning therefore the intervention is still as relevant as it was in 2006 however the evaluation questions the suitability of OCB's country wide strategy in Haiti, urging a focus towards the most vulnerable and marginalised urban populations, rather than towards the general needs of the population. The evaluation suggests that the initial approach was perhaps not exclusively needs driven, and "reflects a top-down prioritisation of tertiary and secondary facilities at the expense of primary and front-line strategies". The evaluation alludes to a way forward for the project, highlighting that the key challenge for OCB now is“right-sizing” and focusing on populations in danger of being left behind. Many other interesting and relevant findings are brought up by this evaluation, which can be assimilated into the work of MSF in future interventions.

Executive Summary Booklet in English


Évaluation de l'intervention MSF-OCB à Martissant, Port-au-Prince, Haïti 2006-2013 (MSF OCB) (by Xavier Bartroli & Ofelia Garcia)

Cette évaluation contribue au débat autour de l’intervention de OCB Martissant à la suite de sa fermeture envisagée et de la décision de réduction en 2013. Le rapport conclut que le contexte n’a pas changé et que par conséquent, l’intervention est toujours aussi appropriée qu’elle l’était en 2006. Cependant, l’évaluation remet en question la pertinence de la stratégie nationale d’OCB en Haïti, et recommande une concentration des efforts sur les populations urbaines les plus vulnérables et marginalisées, plutôt que sur les besoins généraux de la population. L’évaluation suggère que l’approche initiale n’était peut-être pas uniquement centrée sur les besoins, et aurait pu « refléter une priorité venant du haut de la hiérarchie qui viendrait privilégier les installations secondaires et tertiaires au détriment de stratégies primaires de première ligne ». L’évaluation propose une voie à suivre pour le projet, soulignant que le principal défi pour OCB sera de déterminer une « taille optimale » et de mettre l’accent sur les populations qui risquent d’être laissées pour compte. L’évaluation présente d'autres résultats intéressants qui pourraient être assimilés par MSF dans la conduite de ses futures interventions.

Executive Summary Booklet en Français

 


Evaluation of OCB Evaluation of MSF-OCB's Humanitarian Response in Mali (2012 – 2013) (by Christine Bousquet, December 5, 2013)

This report find that the overall legacy of MSF-OCB's engagement in the dynamic and unpredictable context of the Mopti region of Mali as positive, highlighting a strong reputation based on an uninterrupted presence throughout the conflict.  MSF-OCB has been widely recongnised as an organization that responded flexibliy where there were demonstrated needs, as conflict flared and receded, access expanded or contracted.  In particular, the great level of organizational and individual commitment to providing support to populations affected by the conflict was praised.  A main area for improvement relates to impact and effectiveness, where MSF is encouraged to make better use of quality standards, tools and protocols. Additional recommendatinos point towards a need for improved monitoring of performance through systematic use of log frame and indicator tracking tables.  Several other key issues are lifted by the findings of this evaluation, which can be assimilated into the work of MSF in future interventions.

Executive Summary in English


 
 
This report find that the overall legacy of MSF-OCB's engagement in the dynamic and unpredictable context of the Mopti region of Mali as positive, highlighting a strong reputation based on an uninterrupted presence throughout the conflict.  MSF-OCB has been widely recongnised as an organization that responded flexibliy where there were demonstrated needs, as conflict flared and receded, access expanded or contracted.  In particular, the great level of organizational and individual commitment to providing support to populations affected by the conflict was praised.  A main area for improvement relates to impact and effectiveness, where MSF is encouraged to make better use of quality standards, tools and protocols. Additional recommendatinos point towards a need for improved monitoring of performance through systematic use of log frame and indicator tracking tables.  Several other key issues are lifted by the findings of this evaluation, which can be assimilated into the work of MSF in future interventions.
 
 

 

By: Rebecca Cederholm