Evaluation of MSF-USA’s COVID-19 Response in Seven Projects

  • Médecins Sans Frontières
  • Consultancy
Career Category
  • Monitoring and Evaluation
Years of experience
  • 5-9 years
  • Disaster Management
  • Health

Background and context

Following the global outbreak of Covid-19 in March 2020, Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) (a.k.a. Doctors Without Borders) took the decision to start operations in the US. This was informed by the epidemiological trends at the time and significant concerns over the burden on health systems, critical supply shortages and the subsequent impact on at-risk populations. Due to the travel risks, assessments first started remotely and then on the ground in New York City (NYC) on 23rd March 2020, by which time Governor Andrew Cuomo had ordered a statewide lockdown and some 27,000 cases had been recorded in NY, including more than 5700 hospitalizations and almost 300 deaths. At the same time, the number of cases was increasing throughout the US and needs becoming increasingly apparent in other parts of the country.

By mid-October 2020, MSF had completed projects in seven locations across the US. Five of the projects were launched under the operational umbrella of Operational Centre Paris (OCP) primarily focusing on several different underserved and high-risk groups while the sixth and seventh projects were launched under the support of Operational Centre Brussels (OCB) focusing on long term care facilities.

Purpose and intended use

The purpose of this evaluation is to support the organisation’s learning on carrying out medical humanitarian action in a context where it has limited previous experience and where there is a developed health infrastructure.

The evaluation should demonstrate the achievements (or not) of the projects, looking at project strategies, objectives, and outcomes. Provide some level of justification (or not) for both the resource investment and the decision to intervene.

The evaluation should ensure diverse perspectives and make explicit the experiences and values of the different stakeholders, not least those affected by the intervention and the partners.

Evaluation criteria and questions

Criteria: Relevance
Evaluation Question 1: In what ways could the projects have had more relevance when considering both the medical humanitarian needs and the capacity and principles (based on the MSF Charter) of the organisation?

  • What needs did the different projects aim to address and how were they identified and selected?
  • Did the projects respond to the expressed needs or demands of the different stakeholders?
  • Were there other needs that could have been addressed by the projects?

Criteria: Appropriateness
Evaluation Question 2: In what ways could the project activities have been better adapted to the context and target population?

  • What were the different activities carried out in the different projects?
  • Were activities tailored to the national and local contexts and in what ways?
  • What would have made the activities more appropriate to the context?

    Criteria: Effectiveness
    *Evaluation Question 3: In what ways could the effectiveness of the projects have been improved?*

  • What were the outputs achieved in each of the project locations?

  • What were the main opportunities and constraints during implementation?

  • Are there things that would have made the projects more effective?

    Criteria: Impact
    *Evaluation Question 5: How much of a difference did the projects make and for whom, under what circumstances?*

  • What are the likely outcomes of the different projects?

  • Were there any unintended positive or negative effects?

  • What would have made a bigger difference at the level of outcomes?

Profile: Requirements for evaluator/s


  • Demonstrable evaluation competencies
  • Experience working in the humanitarian sector
  • Formal education or experience in an area relevant to this evaluation
  • Familiarity with the US health care context
  • Language requirements: English (Fluent)


  • Previous experience with evaluation of humanitarian projects
  • Experience with or good familiarity with MSF and its work

Terms of Reference

The above information can be found in the complete Terms of Reference, which can be found here.

How to apply

The application should consist of a technical proposal, a budget proposal, CV, and a previous work sample. The proposal should include a reflection on how adherence to ethical standards for evaluations will be considered throughout the evaluation. In addition, the evaluator/s should consider and address the sensitivity of the topic at hand in the methodology as well as be reflected in the team set-up. Offers should include a separate quotation for the complete services, stated in dollars (USD). The budget should present consultancy fee according to the number of expected working days over the entire period, both in totality and as a daily fee. Travel costs, if any, do not need to be included as the SEU will arrange and cover these. Do note that MSF does not pay any per diem.

Applications will be evaluated on the basis of whether the submitted proposal captures an understanding of the main deliverables as per this ToR, a methodology relevant to achieving the results foreseen, and the overall capacity of the evaluator(s) to carry out the work (i.e. inclusion of proposed evaluators’ CVs, reference to previous work, certification et cetera).

Interested teams or individuals should apply to [email protected] referencing USCOV no later than 11th November 2020, 23:59 CET. We would appreciate the necessary documents being submitted as separate attachments (proposal, budget, CV, work sample and such). Please include your contact details in your CV.

To help us with our recruitment effort, please indicate in your email/cover letter where (ngotenders.net) you saw this job posting.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *