Logical Framework

Approach
Tilahun Haregu
Dec 2016

1
2 Terminologies

– Logical Framework Analysis

– Logical Framework Approach
– Log frame
– Project Framework
– Log frame matrix
Definition
Logical Framework:
A tool to help strengthen project design, implementation and evaluation.

Logical Framework Approach (LFA):

An analytical process and set of tools used to support objectives-oriented
project design, implementation and evaluation.

3
4 Why LFA?

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

• Well designed
• Described objectively
• Can be evaluated
• Clearly structured
5 The Logical Framework

A simple tool which helps you:

– Organize your thinking;
– Relate activities and investment to expected results;
– Set performance indicators;
– Allocate responsibilities;
– Communicate information on the project concisely and
unambiguously.
6 The two Main Stages of LFA

– The Analysis stage (iterative)

– Preparatory analysis
– Stakeholder analysis
– Problem analysis
– Analysis of objectives
– Analysis of strategies

– The Planning stage (iterative)

– Logical Framework Matrix Preparation
Preparatory analysis
Analysis of policy, sector and institutional context within
which your project is going to be implemented.

Key documents to refer to would include donor’s country

strategy papers and relevant Government development policy
documents.

Not a new analysis but to ensure that the development of the

project idea takes account of these elements of the operating
environment.

7
8 Stakeholder analysis

– The key questions:

– Whose problems or opportunities are we analyzing?
– Who will benefit or loose-out, and how, from a proposed project
intervention’?
– Stakeholder analysis matrix :
– The basic characteristics of the stakeholders
– How they are affected by the problem(s)
– Their interests (and possible actions to address it )
– Potential (Capacity and motivation to bring about change)
– SWOT Analysis
 9 Problem Analysis – Creating
Problem tree
– Analysis of the negative aspects of an existing situation and establishing
the cause and effect relationships between the identified problems.
– Identify major existing problems,
Identify problems
Connect them – Select an individual starter, a focal problem for analysis
– Look for related problems to the starter problem
– Begin to construct the problem tree by establishing a hierarchy
– All other problems are then sorted in the same way: what causes that?
– Connect the problems with cause-effect arrows – clearly showing key links
– Review the diagram, verify its validity and completeness and make necessary
adjustment
 10 Analysis of Objectives – establishing
objective tree
– Reformulate all negative situations of the problems analysis into
positive situations that are desirable, realistically achievable.
Convert: – Check the means-ends relationships to ensure validity and
1. Problem to objectives completeness of the hierarchy (cause-effect relationships are turned
2. Cause-effect to means-end into means-ends linkages).
– Work from the bottom upwards to ensure that cause-effect
relationships have become means-ends relationships.
– Draw connecting lines to indicate the means-ends relationships.
11 Analysis of Strategies

Strategy selection:
– Strategic: Expected contribution to key policy objectives
– Social/distributional: Distribution of costs and benefits to target groups
– Financial: Capital and operating cost implications, financial sustainability
– Economic: Economic return, cost-benefit, cost effectiveness, etc.
– Technical: feasibility Appropriateness, use of local resources, market
suitability
– Environmental: Environmental impact, environmental costs vs. benefits
 Logical Framework Matrix
• 4 columns and 4 (or more) rows
Logic of intervention/Narrative Objectively Verifiable Sources of Assumptions
summary Indicators Verification

Overall objective/Goal/Impact

Purpose/outcomes

Results/outputs

Activities/Processes Inputs/Resources/Means Costs

12
 13
Colum 1: Intervention logic (Top-down logic)

 Identifies what the project intends to do (strategy of

intervention) and shows the causal relationship between the
different levels of the objectives.
 Define the overall objective to which your project
contributes
 Define the Purpose to be achieved by the project
 Define the Results for achieving the Purpose.
 Define the Activities for achieving each result.
 Verify intervention Logic with IF/THEN test
COLUM 4: ASSUMPTIONS (BOTTOM-UP LOGIC)

 What external factors may impact on project implementation

and the long-term sustainability of benefits, but are outside
project management’s control?
 Once the Activities have been carried out, and if the
Assumptions at this level hold true, results will be achieved;
 Once these Results and the Assumptions at this level are
fulfilled, the Project Purpose will be achieved; and
 Once the Purpose has been achieved and the Assumptions
at this level are fulfilled, contribution to the achievement of
the Overall Objectives will have been made by the project. 14
 COLUMN 2&3: OVI AND MOV (HORIZONTAL LOGIC)

 Specification of OVI (QQTTP)

 Quality - The kind (or nature) of the change, (how well)
 Quantity - The scope/extent of the change, (how much, how many)
 Timing - When the change should have taken place (by when)
 Target group -(for whom)
 Place - Location (where)

15
 Column 2&3: OVI and MOV (Horizontal
Logic)
• Check usefulness of OVI
• Is the information available from existing sources (statistics, records, etc.)?
• Is the information reliable and up-to-date?
• Is special data-gathering required?
• If so, do the benefits justify the costs?
• Avoid costly and/or unreliable indicators.

16
17 Column 2&3: OVI and MOV (Horizontal
Logic)

The MOV should specify:

 What information to be made available,
 Where, in what form the information/documented source
should be collected
 Who should collect/provide the information
 When/how regularly it should be provided
18 Three stages to success

– Stage One - Top down (Objectives)

– Stage Two - Bottom up (Assumptions)

– Stage Three - Work across (OVI and MOV)

19 Double Check

– Will the inputs and activities clearly lead to the outputs required to
achieve the purpose and contribute to the goal?
– Will the indicators and means of verification effectively measure the
progress of the project?
– Are the assumptions reasonable or do they indicate a level of risk, which
suggests that the project is unlikely to get off the ground or be
completed? (The killer assumption)
– Is the project staff committed to the objectives and indicators identified
and see them as realistic and achievable?
– Are there any changes, which could be made which will make the project
more practical and workable?
20 Final steps

– Write it up and share to relevant stakeholders to contribute and/or

agree.
– Link it to the project cycle management (Planning, implementation,
evaluation)
– As the project progresses and situations change, return to the log
frame and revise it accordingly.
Source: http://www.tools4dev.org/resources/logical-framework-logframe-template/ 21
 LFA 4 Research (Logic)
Narrative summary

Goal/Impact (ultimate Long term wide spread change which the outcome contributes towards
benefit) • How this research program will contribute to improving the lives of people and their
environment (ultimate benefit to people/environment).
Purpose/Outcomes Effects or behavior changes resulting from uptake of research outputs
(results of uptake) • Changes to policy or practice;
• Changes to conceptual understanding of a topic;
• Changes in behavior or attitudes of influential individuals/organizations
Results/Outputs (body Research results, up-take service, capacity building:
of knowledge) • High quality, relevant research is completed
• Research is made accessible and evidence-informed discussions are facilitated
• Capacity is built to carry out, communicate and to use research evidence

Activities/Processes Major groups of activities which are of a different nature:

(The project) • Conducting experiments
• Setting up an infrastructure
• Executing case studies
• Disseminating knowledge 22
 LFA 4 Research (OVI)
Indicators
Goal/Impact Reduction in Mortality rates, improvements in life expectancy, improvement in quality of
life etc
Purpose/Outcomes Policy changed as a result of the evidence generated by the research
% of people with correct understanding of the issue addressed by the research
% of individuals/organizations practicing the recommended behavior
Results/Outputs Number of peer-reviewed primary research papers made available in open access format.
Number of seminars involving a panel of research experts discussing the latest research
findings have been facilitated within relevant southern policy-making institutions.
Relevant decision makers as identified by stakeholder analysis rate policy briefs as ‘useful’
or ‘very useful’ on a five point scale.
Increase in score awarded to draft papers carried out by experts blinded to whether the
paper was written pre or post training.
Activities/Processes Number of case studies/experiments completed.
Number of research subjects included.
Number of research staffs received trainings/mentorships.

23
 LFA 4 Research (MOV)
MOV

Goal/Impact Population surveys (e.g. DHS, Census, etc.)

Purpose/Outcomes Policy documents revised or newly developed.

Surveys of individuals/organizations.

Results/Outputs Publications
Seminar reports
Opinion reports
Scoring reports

Activities/Processes Research progress reports

Training reports etc.

24
25 LFA 4 Research (Assumptions)

Guiding questions:
– Q1: Is the particular condition external to the project, i.e., not part of
the project strategy and not included in the first column?
– Q2: Is the respective external condition really crucial for the success of
the project?
– Q3: How likely is it that the respective assumption holds true?
 Example: Integrated Pest Management (Fruit Fly)
Narrative summary Objectively Verifiable indicators Means of Assumptions
verification
Goal Increased income of farmers; 20% increase in net income of Economic, Mangos production
reduced insecticide pollution mango farmers in Kenya by 2020 environment continues as main
reports source of economy
Purpose Increased production of good 50% reduction in the amount of Socio-economic Use of IPM is not
quality Mangos increased; mango produce being rejected by studies counteracted by
Decreased expenditure in buyers in Kenya by 2020. subsidized
insecticides 30% decrease on insecticide insecticide
expenditure of farmers in Kenya by
2020
Outputs Proven IPM package of IPM package proven to be Research reports Legal status given to
baiting & male annihilation, effective by 2017 IPM
biological control and
cultural control
Activities Identify the elements; Inputs/Resources: Costs/Budget: Effective and
Developing Package of IPM; Human resources Personnel: $$$ inexpensive extracts
Conducting experiments. Lab infrastructure Equipment:$$$ available
26
Source: http://www.icipe.org/impacts/demonstration-research-impacts-communities/fruit-fly-integrated-pest-management.
 Useful references
1. The Logical Framework. Technical note. USAID, 2012
2. The Logframe Handbook, World Bank, 2005.
3. Sivia Qoro. The Logical Framework (Sources: EU, EPTISA, CIDT)
4. Guide to the Logical Framework Approach. Second edition, 2011
5. Logframe guidance for research programs, DFID,
6. A guide for developing a logical framework, CIDT, Wolverhampton.
7. Logical Framework Analysis, BOND, 2003
8. Tools for development: A handbook for those engaged in development activity. DFID, 2003
9. Guidance on using the revised Logical Framework. DFID, 2011
10. Elements of the CYCLE OF OPERATIONS and Introduction to the Logical Framework approach.
European Commission. 2013

27