BAHIR DAR UNIVERSITY

College of agricultural and environmental science

Department of plant science

Project planning and analysis group assignment

Section ‘A’ group 5

No Name Id
INTRODUCTION

The Logical Framework Approach is an analytical and management tool which is now used (in one form
or another) by most multi-lateral and bi-lateral aid agencies, international NGOs and by many partner
governments for the management of development projects. Developed in the late 1960s to assist the US
Agency of International Development to improve its project planning and evaluation system, the Logical
Framework Approach (LFA) was designed to address three basic concerns, namely that: -

 Planning was too vague, without clearly defined objectives that could be used to monitor and
evaluate the success (or failure) of a project
 Management responsibilities were unclear; and
 Evaluation was often an adversarial process, because there was no common agreement as to
what the project was really trying to achieve.

Originally developed and applied in science (NASA) and the private sector (management by objectives)
for the planning and management of complex projects, the Logical Framework Approach was first
formally adopted as a planning tool for overseas development activities by USAID in the early 1970s.
Since then it has been adopted and adapted by a large number of agencies involved in providing
development assistance. They include the British DFID, Canada’s CIDA, the OECD Expert Group on Aid
Evaluation, the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), Australia’s AusAID and
the German GIZ. With its ‘ZOPP’-version (Ziel-Orientierte Projekt Planung) GIZ has put particular
emphasis on the participation of stakeholders in the application of the approach. EC requires application
of the LFA and preparation of the Log frame as a part of EU funding applications.

The LFA has since been adopted as a project planning and management tool by most donors,
multilateral and bilateral development agencies. Even though different agencies/donors modify the
formats, terminology and tools used in their LFA, the basic analytical principles have remained the same.
Indeed, the EU, the main external donor to Serbia, requires the development of a Log frame Matrix as
part of its IPA project formulation procedures (LFM is an integral part of IPA Project Fiche). Other donors
also use the LFA as a core tool to the project cycle management. The LFA is a very effective analytical
and management tool when understood and intelligently applied. However, it is not a substitute for
experience and professional judgment and must also be complemented by the application of other
specific tools (such as Economic and Financial Analysis and Environmental Impact Assessment) and
through the application of working techniques which promote the effective participation of
stakeholders.

The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) is an analytical process and set of tools used to support
objectives-oriented project planning and management. It provides a set of interlocking concepts which
are used as part of an iterative process to aid structured and systematic analysis of a project or program
idea.

The LFA is a way of describing a project in a logical way so that it is:

• Well designed

• Described objectively

• Can be evaluated

• Clearly structured

The LFA should be thought of as an ‘aid to thinking’. It allows information to be analysed and organised
in a structured way, so that important questions can be asked, weaknesses identified and decision
makers can make informed decisions based on their improved understanding of the project rationale, its
intended objectives and the means by which objectives will be achieved

The LFA helps to: -

 Analyze an existing situation, including the identification of stakeholders’ needs and the
definition of related objectives; -
 Establish a causal link between inputs, activities, results, purpose and overall objective (vertical
logic)
 Define the assumptions on which the project logic builds
 Identify the potential risks for achieving objectives and purpose
 Establish a system for monitoring and evaluating project performance
 Establish a communication and learning process among the stakeholders, i.e. clients
beneficiaries, planners, decision-makers and implementers
 Advantages
 It ensures that fundamental questions are asked and weaknesses are analysed, in order to
provide decision makers with better and more relevant information.
 It guides systematic and logical analysis of the inter-related key elements which constitute a
well-designed project.
 It improves planning by highlighting linkages between project elements and external factors.
 It provides a better basis for systematic monitoring and analysis of the effects of projects.
 It facilitates common understanding and better communication between decision makers,
managers and other parties involved in the project.
  Management and administration benefit from standardized procedures for collecting and
assessing information.
 The use of LFA and systematic monitoring ensures continuity of approach when original project
staff is replaced.
 As more institutions adopt the LFA concept it may facilitate communication between
governments and donor agencies.
 Widespread use of the LFA format makes it easier to undertake both sectoral studies and
comparative studies in general.
 Limitations
 Rigidity in project administration may arise when objectives and external factors specified at
the outset are over emphasised.
 This can be avoided by regular project reviews where the key elements can be re-evaluated and
adjusted.
 LFA is a general analytic tool.
 It is policy-neutral on such questions as income distribution, employment opportunities, access
to resources, local participation, cost and feasibility of strategies and technology, or effects on
the environment.
 LFA is therefore only one of several tools to be used during project preparation,
implementation and evaluation, and it does not replace target-group analysis, cost benefit
analysis, time planning, impact analysis, etc.
 The full benefits of utilising LFA can be achieved only through systematic training of all parties
involved and methodological follow-up

The Logical Framework Matrix (Logframe)

The results of the stakeholder, problem, objectives and strategy analysis are used as the basis for
preparing the Logical Framework Matrix. The Logical Framework Matrix (or more briefly the logframe)
consists of a matrix with four columns and four (or more) rows, which summarise the key elements of a
project plan and should generally be between 1 and 4 pages in length. However, this will depend on the
scale and complexity of the project.
How to Prepare The Logical Framework Matrix?

First Stage ― TOP DOWN:

 Goal: starting at the top and using the information from the Objective Tree write the overall objective of
the project. The overall objective may be beyond the reach of this project on its own, for instances: “To
contribute to improved family health and the general health of the rive ecosystem”.
 Purpose: it describes the desired outcome that the project will achieve. This should be clear and brief.
Example: “Improved river water quality”.
 Outputs: describe the project intervention strategy. There may be several outputs. Example: “1) Reduced
volume of wastewater directly discharged into the river system by households and factories”.
 Activities: these are the tasks that are needed to achieve these outputs. There may be several for each
output. Statements should be brief and with an emphasis on action words. Examples: “1.1) Conduct
baseline survey of households and businesses; 1.2) Complete engineering specifications for expanded
sewerage network, etc.”
 Inputs: when required to do so provide additional information, such as the means and costs, which are
needed to carry out these activities.

Second Stage ― WORK ACROSS

Second stage of the preparation of the log frame Matrix. Source: BARRETO (2010)

 Objectively verifiable indicators of achievement: starting from the top to the bottom of the
hierarchy of the objectives, begin to work across the log frame identifying the Objective
Verifiable Indicators for measuring the progress in terms of quantity, quality and time. There are
two kinds of indicators: 1. Impact indicators: related to the overall goal, helps to monitor the
achievement and the impact of the project. Example: “Incidence of water borne diseases, skin
infections and blood disorders caused by heavy metals, reduced by 50% by 2008, specifically
among low income families living along the river”. 2. Process (our outcome) indicators: related
to the purpose and results. These measure the extent to which the stated objectives have been
achieved. Example: “Concentration of heavy metal compounds (Pb, Cd, Hg) and untreated
sewerage; reduced by 25% (compared to levels in 2003) and meets established national
health/pollution control standards by end of 2007”.
 Sources and means of verification: the source of verification should be considered and specified
at the same time as the formulation of indicators. This will help to test whether or not the
indicators can be realistically measured at the expense of a reasonable amount of time, money
and effort. The SOV should specify how, who and when the information will be gathered.
 Third Stage ― BOTTOM UP

Third stage of the preparation of the log frame matrix. Source: BARRETO (2010)

 Assumptions: reflecting up from the bottom of the log frame, consider how, if each assumption
holds, it will be possible to move to the next stage of the project. Assumptions are external
factors that have the potential to influence (or even determine) the success of a project, but lie
outside the direct control of project managers. Assumptions are usually progressively identified
during the analysis phase. The analysis of stakeholders, problems, objectives and strategies will
have highlighted a number of issues (i.e. policy, institutional, technical, social and/or economic
issues) that will impact on the project ‘environment’, but over which the project may have no
direct control. In the case of the river water pollution example, important assumptions might
include issues related to: 1. Rainfall and river flow (beyond the project’s control, but potentially
critical in terms of changes in levels/concentration of pollutants found in the river); 2.
Householders and businesses willingness to pay for improved sewerage connections.
Applicability

The log frame is applied when planning, implementing and evaluating specific projects and
programmes within an action plan. It is valuable for carrying out logical checks during project
design as well as for monitoring progress and reviewing activities and output during project
implementation (PHILIP et al. 2008).

Using LFA for project or program design imposes rigour in assessing what is to be achieved and
the assumptions behind what interventions and activities will be required. Many international
donors, such as the Asian Development Bank and the European Commission, require projects
they fund to be designed according to an LFA (WUR 2010).

Reference

https://sswm.info/planning-and-programming/decision-making/planning-community/logical-
framework-approach

https://www.intrac.org/wpcms/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/The-Logical-Framework.pdf
https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1865/The-Logical-Framework-A-Managers-
Guide.pdf

http://pdf2.hegoa.efaber.net/entry/content/916/Logical_Framework_Analysis.pdf

http://www.evropa.gov.rs/Evropa/ShowDocument.aspx?Type=Home&Id=525

https://sswm.info/sites/default/files/reference_attachments/AUSAID%202005%20The%20Logical
%20Framework%20Approach.pdf

https://wedc-knowledge.lboro.ac.uk/resources/booklets/G006-The-Logical-Framework-online.pdf