THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH
The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) is a project design process based on participation, critical
analysis, strategic thinking, and logic. The LFA has been around for since the 1970s and is used, or is
required, by many donors for funding applications. The LFA offers one of the best project management
tools around, allowing project teams to communicate amongst each other, and with other stakeholders
and funders. Beyond project design, the LFA can be used for strategic planning, and other tasks where
‘problems’ exist and solutions need to be identified. The usefulness of the LFA is only as good as how it
has been practised. As such, taking the time to go through the process in a participatory manner, using
critical thinking and logic, produces better results than a ‘tick the box’ approach. It is important to
differentiate the LFA from the logframe matrix. The logframe matrix is one of the outputs, or products,
of the LFA. So the LFA is a process, based on a sequential steps, and the matrix is the output of one step.
Many people tend to jump straight to the logframe matrix, as this is often what the funding agency
wants to see. A solid, useful logframe is built on strong foundations offered by the preceding steps.
Jumping straight to the logframe may result in a flimsy design that will not lead to successful projects.
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH
The Logical Framework Matrix is used to present information about project objectives, outputs and
activities in a systematic and logical way. It is known as four by four matrix.
Components of Logical Framework
Goal: refers to higher impact objective which the project contributes to sustainably. The goal helps to
set the macro-level context within which the project fits, and describes the long-term impact that the
project is expected to contribute towards (but not itself achieve or be solely accountable for.
Outcome: refers to what the project is expected to achieve in terms of sustainable development
outcome at the end, or soon after, the project life. It’s a beneficiary behavior change or change in
systems, institutional performance because of the combined output and assumptions
Outputs: The outputs describe the project deliverables, the goods and services for which the project
implementers are accountable. Outputs can be tangible deliverables (reports, technical manuals,
training packages etc) or intangible like knowledge and experience.
Activities: the activities describe the tasks performed to produce the various project deliverables
(Outputs). They reflect the processes and methods the project team will use to attain the planned
outputs. They provide the starting point for the implementation planning process. Activities are stated in
terms of actions being undertaken while outputs are stated as completed actions.
Indicator: Indicator is a unit of performance measurement. A baseline study might be needed to be able
to measure the final results? The process of setting up indicators shows if the objectives are vague.
Indicators should answer the questions: For whom? What? When? Where? How much? What quality?
Means of verification (MOVs):
Means of verification should clearly specify the expected source of the information we need to collect.
We need to consider how the information will be collected (method), which will be responsible, and the
frequency with which the information should be provided.
Assumptions: Assumptions refer to conditions which could affect the progress or success of the project,
but over which project managers have no direct control, e.g. price changes, rainfall, land reform policies,
non-enforcement of supporting legislation. An assumption is a positive statement of a condition that
must be met in order for project objectives to be achieved.
Risk: A risk is a negative statement of what might prevent objectives being achieved.
The logical framework approach steps
The LFA, as noted above, is a made up of sequential steps.
1. Situation analysis: Describing the current state
2. Stakeholder analysis: Identifying stakeholders’ roles and ability to affect the project (positively
or negatively)
3. Problem analysis: Identifying the core problem, and the causes and effects of the problem
4. Solution analysis: Identifying all the potential solutions
5. Strategy analysis: Analyzing potential solutions and deciding on the best approach
The logical framework approach steps
The LFA, as noted above, is a made up of sequential steps.
1. Situation analysis Describing the current state
2. Stakeholder analysis Identifying stakeholders’ roles and ability to affect the project (positively or
negatively)
3. Problem analysis Identifying the core problem, and the causes and effects of the problem
4. Solution analysis Identifying all the potential solutions
5. Strategy analysis Analysing potential solutions and deciding on the best approach
6. Logframe matrix A simple, clear representation of the selected solution that describes the logical
thinking between steps (if you do this, then this will happen), and how you will know whether
you have been successful (what will show success, and how can I measure/demonstrate this.
7. Timeline The finer detail that builds on the logframe matrix, and identifies tasks, the inputs
required, responsibilities, and timeframes
8. Budget Self‐explanatory but never simple! Takes the project plan, and costs it out, so that
projects don’t fall short during implementation.
Each step builds on the previous. As noted in the introduction, jumping straight to the logframe matrix
means that you have skipped a number of previous steps. Imagine trying to build a house from the
second level, without the foundations, and first level! Quite difficult, and the result would not be very
solid.
Difference between LFA and Theory of Change
Log frame is part of theory of change, Theory of change starts right from situational analysis.
The theory of change puts forward an idea/concept and the logical framework describes what needs to
happen and in what order for the idea/concept to become reality. Finally the MEL Plan describes the
activities, how often and how long they should happen for us to observe/see any real change.
They are both shows a logical path to your impact, articulating envisaged results. Your log frame is in a
tabular form, it deepens what you have in your theory of change, it has your indicators, target, risks and
assumptions.
ToC looks more like a write up detailing a path of how critical changes will happen when you carry out
your intervention.
