Download PP Slide 8 LOGICAL FRAMEWORK

THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
APPROACH (LFA)
Pramod B. Shrestha
27 June 2016
Akansha’s Feeback
LFA HISTORY

LFA was developed in the 1960s
The method is in use world wide, by all international
development organizations when assessing, monitoring and
evaluating projects and programs.

The UN-system, EU, multilateral and bilateral development
agencies all act to have their counterparts to use result oriented
planning, the LFA method, when planning, implementing
and evaluating projects and programs.
Why LFA?
By using the LFA-method correctly the
project/program reaches;




RELEVANCE
FEASIBILITY
SUSTAINABILITY
COST EFFECIENCY
LFA: A way of structuring the main elements in
a project, highlighting logical linkages between
intended inputs, planned activities and
expanded results.
MAIN ELEMENTS OF A PROJECT(LFA)
1. Inputs
2. Activities
3. Outputs
4. Immediate Objectives (Purpose)
5. Development Objectives (Goal)
Cause-effect relationship among objectives at
several levels
Goal
Purpose
Outputs
Activities
Inputs
under full control of
project management
beyond control of
project management
CORE CONCEPT OF LOGFRAME
MATRIX: MEANS AND END
LOGIC
The main concept underlying the Logical
Framework is means and end. The better the
means and end linkages between each level of
aims, the better the programme design.
By definition, each programme has a “if-then” or
“means-and-end” logic embedded in it. If we
produce certain results under certain conditions,
then we can expect to achieve certain other
outcomes.
THE LFA AND ASSUMPTIONS
ASSUMPTIONS REFLECT OUR RECOGNITION THAT THERE ARE FACTORS
BEYOUND OUR CONTROL THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR SUCCESSFUL
ACHIEVEMENT OF OBJECTIVES AT ALL LEVELS OF THE PROJECT. SO BY
IDENTIFYING OUR ASSUMPTIONS, WE HAVE EXPANDED OUR ORIGINAL
HYPOTHESIS STATEMENT TO INCLUDE THE SPECIFIC NATURE OF THE
MORE IMPORTANT UNCERTAINTIES THAT COULD AFFECT THAT
HYPOTHESIS.
GOAL
ASSUMPTIONS
PURPOSE
ASSUMPTIONS
OUTPUTS
ASSUMPTIONS
ACTIVITIES
INPUTS
ASSUMPTIONS
WE MUST TRY TO DEFINE, AT ANY ONE LEVEL, ALL THE NECESSARY AND
SUFFICIENT CONDITIONS (BOTH WITHIN OUR CONTROL – THE CENTRAL
HYPOTHESIS – AND OUTSIDE OF OUR CONTROL – ASSUMPTION) THAT MUST
BE IN PLACE FOR US TO ACHIEVE THE NEXT LEVEL OBJECTIVE.
PLAN DOWNWARDS
PLAN DOWNWARDS
Goal
Assumptions
Purpose
Assumptions
Outputs
Assumptions
Activities
Assumptions
Inputs
AND THEN
THINK UPWARDS
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH (LFA): AN
EXAMPLE – SEVEN CRITICAL ELEMENTS
1.PARTICIPATION ANALYSIS
2. PROBLEM ANALYSIS
3. OBJECTIVES ANALYSIS
4.ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
5. DEFINING PROJECT
ELEMENTS
6. DETERMINING THE
ASSUMPTIONS
7. ESTABLISHING THE
INDICATORS
Context Analysis
Background information
• Projects are part of a larger context - prior to start, collect
relevant background information on the sector and on the
relevant organizations to work with.
• Which environment will the project be situated in,
the country, the region and the sector?
• Analysis of Context is made through studies
(sector-, country- and /or regional studies etc.)
Step 1
PARTICIPATION/Stakeholder Analysis
People with different knowledge, different
background, different sex, different region
Listen and involve
© Project Design AB
Kari Örtengren / 2012
[email protected]
Mobil: 0733-795 568
Step 1 . PARTICIPATION Analysis
• Stakeholders, those who are influenced by and exert an
influence on the project entity. Who will be influenced,
positively or negatively, by the project.
• Stakeholder analysis - mapping of stakeholders and their
respective roles, include gender, age, ethnic, regional and
aspects of experience!
• Which stakeholders should be involved in planning and /
or implementing the project – important to include a broad
group – people with different knowledge on the sector!
© Project Design AB Sweden
K. Örtengren 2011
Step 1
Participation Analysis
Generally, five main groups of stakeholders to involve:





Beneficiaries/Target group
Implementers
Financing agents
Decision makers
Experts
One stakeholder may belong to several groups. The stakeholders all have
important information to give to the future project group/ implementers.
They provide a relevant picture of the situation in order to find relevant, feasible
and sustainable solutions.
© Project Design AB Sweden
K. Örtengren 2011
Step 2
Problem Analysis/Situation Analysis
Effects
Focal Problems
Causes
How to involve stakeholders
and get an understanding of the situation
© Project Design AB
Kari Örtengren / 2012
[email protected]
Mobil: 0733-795 568
Step 2. Problem Analysis
Situation Analysis
• Problem analysis is helping us finding “the roots of the
evil”
• Three parts in a problem analysis;
 The main problem to be solved, Our focus
 The causes, reasons to the focal problem
 The effects of the focal problem
• Discuss who owns the problem?
• A problem analysis should always be made by the local
stakeholders, the owners of the problem.
PROBLEM TREE
Effekr
Effects
Focal Problem
Causes
EXAMPLE on a
PROBLEM TREE
Bus company gets a
Effekr
bad reputation
Disabled
people
High cost for
hospital care
Buses
are delayed
People die and
get injured
High number of
bus accidents
Careless
busdrivers
Stress
Bad traffic
situation
Buses in
poor condition
Alcohol
abuse
Tight
schedule
Poor
maintenance
Old buses
No maintenance
routines
Too few drivers
and buses
Weak management capacity
at the bus company
Roads in
poor condition
Poor maintenace
Weak
knowledge
on manintenace
Corruption
Why a Problem Tree?
Problem Tree
Effects
Objective Tree
Overall objectives
Focal problem
Project Objective
Causes
Expected results
Activities
“SMART” project objective
& results (short-term objectives)
• Specific
• Measurable
• Approved
• Realistic
• Time bound
LFA & Result Based Management (RBM) TERMINOLOGY
TERMIOLOGY FOR PLANNING & MONITORING
RBM terminology , use when
LFA terminology use when
measuring performance, during
implementation and evaluation
planning
IMPACT
OVERALL OBJECTIVES
(long-term)
PROJECT OBJECTIVE
(medium-term)
EXPECTED RESULTS
(short-term)
MEDIUM-TERM OUTCOME
•
SHORT-TERM OUTCOMES
OUTPUTS
EXPECTED OUTPUTS
(direct result from activities)
RESOURCES
INPUTS
LEVELS and TERMIOLOGY IN MONITORING in LFA
1. IMPACT
(Overall objectives)
2. MEDIUM-TERM
OUTCOME
(project objective)
3. SHORT-TERM
OUTCOMES
(expected results)
1. Long term effects on life changes
and living standards (e.g. Increased trade and/or
improved GDP)
2. Medium term effects- access usage and
satisfaction of users
(E.g. Improved Efficiency in Customs Service in
region X )
3. Short term effects, services produced (e.g. a.
Improved technical administrative solutions in
custom service in region X,
b. Strengthened knowledge among administrative
staff in Customs Service in Region X )
4. OUTPUTS
4. Very short-term results, direct effect of the
activities, such as 150 staff trained, 20.000 manuals
printed etc.
5. INPUTS
5. Financial, staff, time input needed to implement
project (e.g. 20000 USD, 45 man months and 3
years)
Evaluation Criteria

Relevance: The appropriateness of the project objectives to the problems
it addresses and to the physical and policy environment.

Efficiency: Results acheived at reasonable cost i.e how well inputs/means
have been converted into results in terms of quality, quantity and time?

Effectiveness: An assessment of the contribution made by the results to
achievement of the project purpose and how assumptions have affected
project achievements.

Impact: The effect of the project on its wider environment. Its contribution
to the objectives for the sector (overall objectives)

Sustainability: Likelihood of the benefits produced by the project to
continue to flow after end of project with particular reference to ownership,
environment, policy support, institutional capacity and financial support.
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
Promote
Traditional Life
Style
Increase Life
Expectancy
High Land
Value
Better Environment
Recreational
Opportunity
Re-establish of
Cultural Value
Support Aquatic
Life
Sustainable Cultural
Practices
Minimizing River Pollution
E
N
D
S
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
Option:1
Efficient Policy
Option:2
Motivated
People
Option:3
(Option1+Option2
Combined)
COST
Low
High
High
CHANCE OF
SUCCESS
Low
High
High
COST/ BENEFIT
Long
Short
High
TIME HORIZON
Long
Short
Long
SOCIAL RISK
Low
High
High
HUMAN
RESOURCE
Low
High
High
ALTERNATIVE ANALYSIS
• Option 1
• Limited to formulate policies/ guidelines for managing local & different
stakeholders towards addressing pollution in Bishnumati River while on the
other hand chances of success is low if implementation is not properly
managed
• Option 2
• involves the different stakeholders & locals occupying the adjoining area,
getting into the grass root level & their motivation are comparatively
higher than option 1. However, chance of success is high since it
involves the participatory approach
• Option 3
• Option 3 is the combination of option 1 & option 2, though the cost of
implementation is high, the probability of success is also high.
DEFINING THE MAIN PROJECT ELEMENTS
1. GOAL
Better Living
Environment
2. PURPOSE
Minimizing River
Pollution
3.OUTPUT
Clean River
Revival of Aquatic
Life
High land value in
the surrounding Area
Reestablishing of the
cultural values
Monitoring by
Municipality
DEFINING THE MAIN PROJECT ELEMENTS
4.ACTIVITIES
Policy making with
the grass route level
Undertake awareness
program for proper
waste disposal
Proper drainage
network
Proper treatment of
sewerage before
disposal
Co- ordination among
individual CBO,
INGO, NGO etc
5.INPUTS
,
Funds for training
construction and
awareness programs.
Co- operation of local
community and
general public.
Formulating
implement able
policies
DETERMINING THE ASSUMPTION
1.GOAL
Better Living
Environment
2. PURPOSE
ASSUMPTION
River will continue to
serve as life
supporting elements
ASSUMPTION
Minimizing River
Pollution
Proper sewerage and
solid waste disposal.
Monitoring
by Municipality
Implementation of
planning and building
bye-laws by
Municipality.
3.OUTPU T
ASSUMPTION
Clean River
Disposalof treated
sewerage
Revival of Aquatic
Life
Co-ordination among
local bodies
High land value in
the surrounding Area
Municipal staffs are
motivated due to
better remuneration
Reestablishing of the
cultural values
Interest of indigenous
people in continuing
their cultural practice
DETERMINING THE ASSUMPTION
4.ACTIVITIES
ASSUMPTION
Policy making with
the grass route level
Undertake awareness
program for proper
waste disposal
Interest of local
people for better
environment
Strict implementation
& monitoring of
Building Bye Law
environment
Proper drainage
network
Proper treatmen
sewerage before
disposal
t of
5.INPUTS
ASSUMPTION
Funds for training
and awareness
programs.
Stable political
environment
Co - operation of local
community and
general public.
Human as well as
financial resources
available
Formulat ing
implement able
policies
Local community co
ordination
-
-
ESTABLISHING THE INDICATORS
1. GOAL
Better Living
Environment
INDICATORS
ASSUMPTION
Reduction in air and
water pollution
River will continue to
s erve as life
supporting elements
Decrease in health
hazard.
2. PURPOSE
Minimizing River
Pollution
INDICATORS
ASSUMPTION
Proper sewerage and
solid waste disposal.
Emergence of aquatic
life
Implementation of
planning and building
bye - laws by
Municipality.
Monitoring
by Municipality
3.OUTPUT
INDICATORS
Clean River
Increase in economic
activities
Revival of Aquatic
Life
Increase in numb
pilgrims
High land value in
the surrounding Area
Better surrounding
environment
Reestablishing of the
cultural values
ASSUMPTION
Disposal of treated
sewerage
er of
Co - ordination among
local bodies
Municipal staffs are
motivated due to
better remuneration
Interest of indigenous
people in continuing
their cultural practice
ESTABLISHING THE INDICATORS
4.ACTIVITIES
Policy making with
the grass route level
Undertake awareness
program for proper
waste disposal
INDICATORS
Updating of policies
annually
Reduction in the
encroachment
River management in
local level
ASSUMPTION
Interest of local
people for better
environment
Strict implementation
& monitoring of
Building Bye Law
environment
Proper drainage
network
Proper treatment of
sewerage before
disposal
5.INPUTS
Funds for training
and awareness
programs.
Co-operation of local
community and
general public.
Formulating
implement able
policies
INDICATORS
Allocation of budget
Community
Participation
ASSUMPTION
Stable political
environment
Human as well as
financial resources
available
Local community coordination
-
Summary
o
Good planning with an efficient tool such as the LFA
o Planning is a process , a participatory approach
o Define SMART objectives including monitoring tools
such as indicators & source of verifications
o Specify activities
o Make a risk analysis & risk management plan
o Set aside time, resources and skills for
planning & monitoring
o Responsible monitoring persons
o Analysing data & learning from results
o Dissemination of results to relevant stakeholders
o Good project management skills helps
How strategic planning and
monitoring works
depends on its users, on us!