logical framework approach - introduction · logical framework approach – the path to the...
TRANSCRIPT
Logical Framework Approach - introduction
25.1.2013
Johanna Rasimus EU project advisor, Kehys ry.
What is it?
• LFA is an analytical process (involving background
analyses)
• LFM (the Logical Framework Matrix) is the documented
product of the analytical process
• ’’aid’’ to thinking
• tool for planning and managing development projects
• convenient, logical summary of the key factors of the
project
Two main phases of LFA
1) Analysis phase
• problem analysis – identifying key problems, constraints &
opportunities; determining cause & effect relationships
• objective analysis – developing solutions from the identified
problems; identifying means to end relationships
• stakeholder analysis – identifying & characterizing potential
major stakeholders; assessing their capacity
• strategy analysis – identifying different strategies to achieve
solutions; selecting most appropriate strategy.
2) Planning phase
• developing Logical Framework matrix - defining project
structure, testing its internal logic & risks, formulating
measurable indicators of success
• activity scheduling – determining the sequence and
dependency of activities; estimating their duration, and assigning
responsibility
• resource scheduling - from the activity schedule, developing
input schedules and a budget
Problem analysis
• A problem analysis identifies the negative
aspects of an existing situation – not
imagined, future or possible problems.
• It establishes ”cause-effect” relationships
between problems.
Problem tree By analysing the core problem through the
questions
• What causes the core problem
• What effects has the core problem
We are able to
• Draw a detailed picture of the cause effect relationship between the problems.
Problem tree - example
River water quality is
deteriorating
Riverine ecosystem under serious
threat, including declining
fishstock.
High incidence of
water born
diseases and
illness among
poor families
Catch and income
of fishing
families in
decline
Most housholds
discharges waste
water directly into the
river
´Wastewater treated in
plants does not meet
international standards
High level of solid waste
dumped into river
Polluters are
not
controlled
Population not
aware of
danger of
waste
dumping
No public
informatio
Households
not
connected
to
sewering
network
Core problem
Direct
Effect
Direct
Cause
Indirect
Effect
Indirect
Cause
Objectives Analysis (1)
• In an objectives analysis the problem tree will be
transformed into a tree of objectives and
analysed.
• A tree of objectives describes the future solutions
(positive statements) of the problems.
Objectives Analysis (2)
Working from top downwards, all problems
are reworded, making them into objectives.
Difficulties in rewording may be solved by
clarifying the original problem statement.
Objectives Analysis (3)
Working from bottom upwards, ensure that
cause-effect relationships have become
means-ends relationships.
The objective tree should provide a simplified
but robust summary of reality, a tool to aid
analysis.
Objective tree - example
River water quality is
improved
Threat to th riverine ecosystem is
reduced and fish stocks are
increased
Incidence of water
born diseases
and illness
among poor
families is
reduced
Catch and income
of fishing
families in
stabilised or
increased
No. of housholds
discharging waste
water directly into the
river is reduced
Wastewater treatment
meets environmental
standards
The quantity of solid
waste dumped into
river is reduced
Polluters are
effectively
controlled
Population
more
aware of
danger of
waste
dumping
Public information
established
Increased % of households not
connected to sewering
network
Stakeholder analysis (1)
• A stakeholder analysis defines the interests and
needs of different people and groups vis-à-vis the
project.
• In the analysis it is possible to define gender
aspects between and within different stakeholder
groups.
Stakeholder analysis (2)
A stakeholder is any
individual, group,
organisation or
institution:
- who is involved in the project
- who has positive/negative
effects on the project
- which the project may affect
in a positive/negative way
A stakeholder can be e.g.
• beneficiaries
• local authorities
• regional authorities
• NGOs
• donors
• local (religious) groups
• other projects in the same
area
• private sector
• media
Brainstorm all stakeholders
Aim for a long and comprehensive list
• Be creative
• Don’t judge or censor as you brainstorm
• Sub-divide groups as appropriate so that
each named group can be seen to have a
broadly common position and interest
Target Group and Stakeholder Matrix
Very Pro Pro Neutral Anti Very Anti
Low
Medium
High
Attitude of the stakeholder to your idea
Influence of the
stakeholder over
the issue
addressed
Importance of
the issue to the
stakeholder
High
Medium
Low
The three dimensions can be represented on one matrix, with the axes representing
the influence and attitude of the stakeholder, and coding the importance of the
issue to the stakeholder by using symbols or colour.
Strategy Analysis (1)
The purpose of the strategy analysis is to
- define possible alternative strategies
- assess the feasibility of the strategies
- agree upon one project strategy.
Strategy Analysis (2)
After identifying alternative strategies, assess the
merits of those options.
Key criteria for strategy selection could include:
- expected contribution to key policy objectives
- benefits to target groups (gender, age, vulnerability)
- complementarity with other projects
- cost-benefit
- contribution to institutional capacity building
- technical feasibility
- environmental impact
Strategy Analysis (4)
• The selected strategy will help to formulate the
first column of the Logical Framework Matrix,
especially overall objective, purpose (specific
objective) and potential results.
Strategy selection – example (Use the objective tree)
River water quality is
improved
Threat to th riverine ecosystem is
reduced and fish stocks are
increased
Incidence of water
born diseases
and illness
among poor
families is
reduced
Catch and income of
fishing families
in stabilised or
increased
No. of housholds
discharging waste
water directly into the
river is reduced
Wastewater treatment
meets
environmental
standards
The quantity of solid
waste dumped into
river is reduced
Polluters are
effectively
controlled
Population
more
aware of
danger of
waste
dumping Public information
established
Increased % of households not
connected to sewering
network
PURPOSE –
specific
objective
Overall
Objective
RESULTS
OUT-Waste
strategy
IN Waste water
strategy
LFA: the Matrix
– The results of the stakeholder, problem,
objectives and strategy analysis are used as a
the basis for preparing the LFA matrix.
Overall objective (1)
• An overall objective describes the anticipated
long term objective towards which the project
will contribute (not necessarily achieve).
• It refers to a broad policy-level target at a
national or sectorial level.
Overall objective (2)
Ensure that the overall objective
• is consistent with the development policy of the country
• is consistent with the donor's policy guidelines
• represents a sufficient justification for the project
• is not too ambitious
• target groups are explicitly defined
• is expressed as a desired end, not as a process
• is expressed in verifiable terms
TO BE EXPRESSED AS “TO CONTRIBUTE TO…”
Purpose / Specific Objective (1)
• The purpose describes the intended effects of
the project for the direct beneficiaries as a
precisely stated future condition.
• A common problem is that the purpose is too
ambitious, unclear or complex.
Purpose / Specific Objective (2)
–Once the purpose has been defined, assure that • it consists of one single objective
• the target groups of the project are specified
• it can be expected to contribute significantly to the fulfilment of the
goal
• it is realistic = likely to occur at the end of the project
• it is formulated as a desired state, not a process
• it is precisely and verifiably defined
Results (1)
• Results refers to the direct results/outputs (goods and services) that the project delivers.
• Results are largely under project management's
control.
• Usually difficult to distinguish objectives and results
from each other.
Results (2)
Once the results have been identified, ensure that:
• all essential outputs necessary for achieving the purpose are
included
• only the results which can be guaranteed by the project can be
included
• each result can be seen as a means to achieve the purpose
• all results are feasible within the resources available
• the results are precisely and verifiably defined.
TO BE EXPRESSED IN TERMS OF TANGIBLE RESULT
“DELIVERED/CONDUCTED/PRODUCED…”
Activities (1)
• Activities are the tasks that need to be carried out to deliver the planned results.
• For each result there will be one or more
activities.
Activities (2)
Once activities are described, ensure that:
• all essential activities necessary to produce the anticipated
results are included
• all activities contribute directly to the output level above
• only activities performed by the project are included
• activities are stated as actions being undertaken rather than
completed outputs
• the time available for each activity is realistic
• the activities are appropriate to the situation in the country
(culture, technology, ecology, gender)
Assumptions (1)
– Assumptions describe situations, events,
conditions or decisions which are necessary for
project success, but which are largely or
completely beyond the control of the project
management.
Assumptions (2)
Important assumptions:
• can be derived from the objectives tree
• are formulated as positive conditions
• are linked to the different levels in the matrix
• are weighted according to the importance and
probability
Indicators
An indicator defines the performance standard to
be reached in order to achieve the objective.
Indicators provide a basis for monitoring and
evaluation during project execution.
Indicators
The meaning of an Objectively Verifiable Indicator (OVI) means that the information collected should be the same
if collected by different people.
Sources of Verification (SOV) refers to the means which
are used to collect and verify the information.
Indicators
Indicators should specify:
- target group (for whom)
- quantity (how much)
- quality (how well)
- time (by when)
- location (where)
Indicators
Example:
Literacy rate among 15 to 25-year-old women
has increased in four villages of the Chipata
region from 40% to 85% by 2008.
Indicators
A good indicator is SMART:
Specific to the objective it is supposed to measure
Measurable
Available at an accepted cost
Relevant to the information needs of managers
Time-bound – to know when we can expect the target
to be achieved
Setting the Indicators
The starting level of the indicator must be defined for
the beginning of the project. Otherwise the change
cannot be measured.
If the starting level is not available, redefine the
indicator.
The starting level can be analysed with a baseline
study (remember to budget!).
Indicators
Indicators can be quantitative or qualitative.
Use both kinds, as they are complementary.
Quantitative: e.g. Number of, frequency of, % of etc.
Qualitative: e.g. Presence of, quality of, extent of, level of
etc.
Examples of Indicators
Example 1.
Objective: The participation of women has increased in communities
What is needed: information about the changes which take place in
community decision-making and relationships
• Quantitative indicator: the growth of the number of women
participating in decision-making
• Qualitative indicator: the women’s own view about their level of
participation in the community
• Qualitative indicator: The change in the quality of the discussions
within the decision-making of the community
Sources of Verification
• Is the information available? • Does the info need to be collected separately? • Who collects it? • Is the information reliable? • How will it be collected? • How often? • How will it be analysed?
Sources of Verification
A source of verification can be e.g.:
1) Official statistics
2) Interviews
3) Research results
4) Reports (also project reports)
5) Monthly/bi-annual etc. surveys