Undertaking Problem Analysis, constructing a Problem

Tree, and Developing a Results Framework

1. Introduction to Problem Analysis
 Problem analysis is a critical step in project design, aimed at
identifying and understanding the key issues that need to be
addressed.
 It provides a structured approach to uncover the root causes of a
problem, its effects, and the interrelationships among various
factors.
 A well-executed problem analysis ensures the formulation of
targeted and effective interventions.
2. Identifying the Focal/Core Problem
The focal or core problem is the central issue that the project intends to
address. It is the entry point for understanding the broader context and
dynamics of a situation.
Steps to Identify the Core Problem:
1. Data Collection:
o Conduct stakeholder consultations, interviews, and focus
group discussions.
o Review existing reports, studies, and data relevant to the
context.
o Use participatory tools such as surveys or participatory rural
appraisals (PRAs).
2. Problem Brainstorming:
o List all identified issues and challenges from data collection.
o Prioritize issues based on frequency, severity, and stakeholder
input.
3. Defining the Problem Statement:
o Articulate the problem as a clear, concise statement that
reflects an undesirable situation affecting the target group.
o Avoid overly broad or vague descriptions to ensure clarity and
focus.

1 | Page
3. Establishing Causal Relationships
Understanding the cause-and-effect dynamics around the core problem is
essential to identifying actionable solutions.
Steps to Establish Causal Relationships:
1. Differentiate Causes from Effects:
o Identify underlying causes (why the problem exists).
o Distinguish immediate effects (what happens as a result of the
problem).
2. Categorize Causes and Effects:
o Root Causes: Deep-seated issues, often systemic or
structural, driving the problem.
o Intermediate Causes: Contributing factors linking root
causes to the core problem.
o Direct Effects: Immediate consequences of the problem.
o Secondary Effects: Broader impacts stemming from direct
effects.
3. Map Relationships:
o Use participatory methods such as facilitated workshops with
stakeholders to explore and agree on causal linkages.
o Validate the causal relationships with empirical evidence
where possible.

4. Constructing a Problem Tree

A problem tree is a visual representation that illustrates the hierarchy of
causes and effects linked to the core problem. It serves as a tool to
organize and present the findings of the problem analysis.

Steps to Construct a Problem Tree:

1. Place the Core Problem at the Center:
o Write the core problem in a box and position it at the center of
the diagram.
2. Identify and Map Causes:
o Below the core problem, map out the direct causes.

2 | Page
 o Continue breaking down each direct cause into its underlying
causes (root causes).
o Use arrows to indicate causal relationships.
3. Identify and Map Effects:
o Above the core problem, map out the direct effects.
o Continue identifying secondary effects stemming from the
direct effects.
o Use arrows to show how effects propagate.
4. Validate the Problem Tree:
o Review the problem tree with stakeholders to ensure accuracy
and completeness.
o Adjust based on feedback to reflect consensus.

Example of a Problem Tree

Outmigratio Increased poverty, and

Effects
n social tensions

Food Increased
Reduced
insecurity vulnerability to
household
climate change
income
Core Low agricultural productivity among smallholder farmers
Problem

Limited access Poor Irrigation Inadequate

to credit infrastructure agricultural
Causes

Limited Market
Low inputs use (e.g.
Access
seeds, fertilizers)

Constructing an Objective Tree

An objective tree is a mirror image of the problem tree, transforming
identified problems into solutions.
It provides a structured approach to visualizing how project objectives can
address the core problem and its causes, leading to desired outcomes.

3 | Page
Steps to Construct an Objective Tree:
1. Transform the Core Problem into a Core Objective:
o Reframe the problem statement into a positive goal.
o For example, “Low agricultural productivity” becomes
“Enhanced agricultural productivity.”
2. Convert Causes into Means (Strategies):
o Reframe each cause into an actionable objective that
addresses it.
o Example: “Limited access to credit” becomes “Improved
access to credit for smallholder farmers.”
3. Convert Effects into Ends (Goals):
o Reframe each effect into a desired outcome of solving the
problem.
o Example: “Reduced household income” becomes “Increased
household income.”
4. Establish Logical Relationships:
o Use arrows to show how means (strategies) lead to the core
objective and how the core objective contributes to achieving
the ends (goals).
5. Validate the Objective Tree:
o Review with stakeholders to ensure alignment with their
expectations and priorities.
o Adjust as needed to reflect a consensus-based approach.

4 | Page
Translating Objective Analysis into project objectives and Results
A results framework outlines the logical flow from project inputs to the
intended impact. It is used to organize objectives and strategies into
measurable outcomes.
Project Overall Goal: “To achieve enhanced agricultural productivity and
resilience among smallholder farmers.”
Specific Objectives:
1. Improve access to agricultural inputs and credit.
2. Strengthen agricultural extension services and adoption of climate-
smart practices.
3. Enhance irrigation infrastructure and market access for smallholder
farmers.

Designing Project Activities Corresponding to Outputs

Each output must be supported by specific project activities that directly
contribute to achieving it.
Output 1: Improved credit facilities
 Activity 1.1: Establish partnerships with financial institutions to
develop tailored credit products for smallholder farmers.

5 | Page
  Activity 1.2: Conduct awareness campaigns on credit access and
usage.
 Activity 1.3: Train farmers on financial literacy and credit
management.
Output 2: Trained extension workers
 Activity 2.1: Develop and deliver training modules on climate-smart
agriculture for extension workers.
 Activity 2.2: Facilitate knowledge-sharing platforms for extension
workers and farmers.
 Activity 2.3: Monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of training
programs.
Output 3: Upgraded irrigation infrastructure
 Activity 3.1: Conduct feasibility studies to identify irrigation needs
and gaps.
 Activity 3.2: Design and construct efficient irrigation systems.
 Activity 3.3: Provide training to farmers on the operation and
maintenance of irrigation systems.

6 | Page
Theory of Change (TOC)
A Theory of Change (TOC) provides a comprehensive framework that links
project interventions to the desired outcomes and impacts. It identifies the
pathways of change by detailing the causal relationships between
activities, outputs, outcomes, and impacts. A TOC helps stakeholders
understand how and why change is expected to happen.

Key Components of a Comprehensive Theory of Change

1. Impact
 Definition: The long-term, overarching change or transformation
that the project seeks to achieve in society, the environment, or a
specific sector. It represents the ultimate goal and vision driving the
intervention.
 Key Features:
o Broad and ambitious in scope.
o May align with global goals like the Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs).
o Takes years to achieve and often depends on multiple
stakeholders.
 Example: For forestry, the impact could be "Enhanced ecological
integrity and community resilience in Ethiopia."
 Key Questions:
o What is the ultimate change we aim to achieve?
o How will this benefit the target population or system?
2. Outcomes
 Definition: Medium-term changes or results that stem from
achieving project outputs. Outcomes indicate the specific benefits or
shifts experienced by the target group.
 Key Features:
o Outcomes bridge the gap between outputs and impact.
o They are measurable and can often be tracked over a few
years.
o They focus on behavioral, institutional, or systemic changes.

7 | Page
  Example: "Strengthened forest governance and enhanced
community engagement."
 Key Questions:
o What behavioral or systemic changes are expected as a result
of our outputs?
o Who will benefit, and how will these benefits manifest?

3. Outputs
 Definition: Tangible, immediate results or products of project
activities. Outputs are directly within the project’s control.
 Key Features:
o They contribute to outcomes but do not ensure them
independently.
o Outputs are the deliverables of the project’s activities.
o They should be specific and quantifiable.
 Example: "Established forest cooperatives and increased
awareness through community programs."
 Key Questions:
o What deliverables must be produced to achieve outcomes?
o Are these outputs realistic and achievable with the available
resources?

4. Activities
 Definition: The specific actions or interventions undertaken to
generate outputs. These are the operational steps a project team
carries out.
 Key Features:
o Activities are the most granular level of the TOC.
o They need to be clearly defined and directly tied to the
outputs.
o They often involve a timeline and resource allocation.
 Example: "Conduct workshops on cooperative management;
distribute seedlings and provide agroforestry training."

8 | Page
  Key Questions:
o What actions need to be implemented to achieve the intended
outputs?
o Are these activities efficient and cost-effective?

5. Barriers
 Definition: Challenges, constraints, or obstacles that could hinder
the successful implementation of the TOC. These barriers may exist
at social, institutional, financial, or environmental levels.
 Key Features:
o Identifying barriers ensures proactive risk management.
o Barriers may include resistance to change, lack of funding, or
technical capacity issues.
 Example: "Limited funding for governance mechanisms;
community mistrust in cooperatives."
 Key Questions:
o What constraints might impede progress?
o How can we address or mitigate these challenges?

6. Assumptions
 Definition: Key conditions or external factors that are expected to
hold true for the TOC to succeed. Assumptions reflect the enabling
environment necessary for change.
 Key Features:
o Assumptions often highlight risks that are outside the project’s
control.
o They must be realistic and evidence-based.
o If assumptions are incorrect, they could compromise the
project’s success.
 Example: "Communities are willing to participate in cooperatives;
resources for governance are consistently allocated."
 Key Questions:
o What external factors need to hold true for success?

9 | Page
 o What evidence supports these assumptions?

TOC Diagram: Deforestation and Land Degradation

TOC Diagram: Forest Fire Management

10 | P a g e
Difference and Similarities Between Overall Objective and Impact
in the Logframe
Overall Objective
 Definition: The overall objective articulates the broad, long-term
purpose of the project. It describes what the project aims to
contribute to but may not achieve on its own.
 Scope: Broad in focus and typically aligns with national or global
goals (e.g., Sustainable Development Goals).
 Measurement: Difficult to measure directly within the project's
timeframe. Progress towards the overall objective often requires
input from other projects or external factors.
 Example: "To enhance the livelihoods and resilience of smallholder
farmers."
Impact

11 | P a g e
  Definition: The impact refers to the ultimate change or benefit the
project aspires to achieve. It represents the higher-level effects
resulting from the project's outcomes.
 Scope: Closely related to the overall objective but more specific to
the project's contribution to the broader purpose.
 Measurement: Measurable over a longer period, often beyond the
project's implementation timeline.
 Example: "Increased average household income by 20% and
reduced food insecurity by 15%."
Similarities:
 Both reflect the long-term aspirations of the project.
 Both are influenced by external factors beyond the project’s direct
control.
 Both guide the design of project outcomes and outputs.
Differences:
 The overall objective is broader and may encapsulate multiple
impacts.
 The impact is a measurable expression of change within the scope
of the project's contribution.
Relationship Between Overall Objective and Outcome
Outcome
 Definition: Outcomes represent the specific, medium-term changes
or results that the project aims to achieve through its outputs. They
are the direct results of the project activities and outputs.
 Scope: Narrower and more focused than the overall objective,
outcomes indicate progress towards achieving the overall objective.
 Measurement: Outcomes are measurable within the project
timeframe and reflect behavioral, institutional, or systemic changes.
 Example: "50% of farmers adopting climate-smart practices."
Relationship:
 Contribution: Outcomes are the building blocks for achieving the
overall objective. For example, "increased adoption of climate-smart
practices" contributes to "enhanced livelihoods and resilience."

12 | P a g e
  Causality: The outcomes directly influence the likelihood of
achieving the overall objective, but the overall objective depends on
other external factors as well.
 Alignment: Outcomes must align with the overall objective,
ensuring that every intermediate result contributes to the broader
purpose.

Difference and Relationship Between Impact and Outcomes

Impact
 Definition: Impact is the highest-level change or benefit that the
project seeks to achieve, usually in the long term. It reflects the
broader, systemic effects of the project.
 Scope: Impacts are broad, often aligning with global or national
priorities like the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). They are
influenced by multiple external factors beyond the project's direct
control.
 Measurement: Impacts are assessed over a longer timeframe and
are often harder to measure precisely.
 Example: "Improved resilience and ecological integrity in Ethiopia."
Outcome
 Definition: Outcomes are the medium-term results or changes
directly attributable to the project’s outputs. They reflect the
immediate benefits to the target population or system.
 Scope: Outcomes are narrower in scope than impacts and are more
directly linked to the project’s interventions.
 Measurement: Outcomes are measurable within the project
lifecycle and indicate progress toward achieving the impact.
 Example: "50% of farmers adopting climate-smart practices."
Differences:
1. Level of Change:
o Impact: Long-term systemic change.
o Outcome: Medium-term behavioral or institutional change.
2. Control:

13 | P a g e
 o Impact: Indirectly influenced by the project.
o Outcome: Directly influenced by project activities and
outputs.
3. Timeframe:
o Impact: Often takes years or decades to materialize.
o Outcome: Achieved during or shortly after the project
implementation period.
Relationship:
 Outcomes are the immediate stepping stones to achieving impact.
 Outcomes provide measurable milestones that indicate whether
progress is being made toward the broader impact.
 For example:
o Outcome: "Enhanced adoption of sustainable land
management practices."
o Impact: "Reduced deforestation and improved biodiversity."

How Many Outcomes and Impacts Should a Project Have?

Outcomes:
 Number: A project typically has 2–5 outcomes, depending on its
complexity and scope.
 Reasoning: Too many outcomes dilute focus and make monitoring
and evaluation cumbersome, while too few may oversimplify the
project’s objectives.
 Guiding Principle: Each outcome should represent a distinct and
measurable change directly attributable to project activities.
Impacts:
 Number: Projects usually aim for 1 or 2 impacts.
 Reasoning: Impacts represent the overarching goal, and having too
many can create confusion about the project’s ultimate purpose.
 Guiding Principle: Each impact should encapsulate the broader,
long-term changes the project aims to contribute to.

Examples of Indicators

14 | P a g e
Impact Level
 "Reduction in overgrazed rangelands by 30% by 2030."
 "Increase in average livestock productivity by 15%."
Outcome Level
 "20% reduction in livestock mortality rates during droughts."
 "50% of pastoralists adopting rotational grazing systems."
Output Level
 "10 grazing cooperatives established by project year 2."
 "500 hectares planted with drought-resistant fodder crops."
Activity Level
 "Number of workshops conducted on rotational grazing practices."
 "Number of drought-resistant seeds distributed."

15 | P a g e
List of Indicators for the Five OECD Evaluation Criteria
1. Relevance
Relevance evaluates whether the intervention is doing the right things by
addressing priorities, needs, and context.
Indicators:
 Alignment with global frameworks: Consistency with the SDGs,
Paris Agreement, or other international commitments.
 Alignment with national/sectoral priorities: Extent to which the
program aligns with national development plans, strategies, and
policies.
 Beneficiary needs: Evidence that the program responds to clearly
identified and validated needs of target groups.
 Stakeholder consultation and engagement: Involvement of
beneficiaries, government, and partners in the design and planning
process.
 Contextual relevance: Sensitivity to the cultural, social, political,
and economic environment.
 Relevance of objectives: Logical and evidence-based justification
for program goals and objectives.
 Coherence with existing interventions: Avoidance of duplication
and reinforcement of related initiatives.
 Adaptability to emerging needs: Flexibility to adjust to changing
needs, priorities, or contexts (e.g., shocks, crises).
 Targeting: Appropriateness of targeting criteria, especially for
vulnerable groups (e.g., women, youth, disabled, marginalized).
 Innovation: Introduction of innovative approaches or solutions that
address unmet needs.

2. Effectiveness
Effectiveness assesses the extent to which the intervention achieves its
objectives and expected outcomes.
Indicators:

16 | P a g e
  Achievement of outputs: Quantitative and qualitative
achievement of planned outputs.
 Achievement of outcomes: Measurable changes attributable to
the intervention (e.g., increased income, reduced vulnerability).
 Outcome quality: Relevance and usefulness of outcomes to
beneficiaries.
 Beneficiary satisfaction: Feedback on how well the intervention
meets expectations.
 Capacity building: Improvements in the technical, managerial, and
institutional capacities of stakeholders.
 Behavioral change: Evidence of sustained behavioral changes
among beneficiaries or stakeholders.
 Unintended results: Identification and evaluation of both positive
and negative unintended effects.
 Gender and social inclusion outcomes: Tangible benefits for
women, youth, marginalized, and vulnerable groups.
 Coverage: Proportion of the intended target population reached.
 Timely implementation: Adherence to planned timelines for
delivering results.
 Theory of Change validation: Confirmation that the intervention
logic (inputs to outcomes) is valid.

3. Efficiency
Efficiency evaluates how well resources are used to achieve results.
Indicators:
 Cost-efficiency: Costs per unit of output compared to benchmarks
or similar programs.
 Cost-benefit ratio: Economic return on investment for the
intervention.
 Timeliness of delivery: Punctuality of resource deployment and
activity completion.
 Budget utilization rate: Percentage of allocated budget spent as
planned.

17 | P a g e
  Administrative costs: Proportion of funds spent on overhead
versus direct program implementation.
 Procurement efficiency: Effectiveness and competitiveness of
procurement processes.
 Human resource utilization: Adequacy and productivity of human
resources deployed.
 Comparative performance: Benchmarking against similar
interventions in the region or sector.
 Use of technology: Application of innovative tools or methods to
optimize processes.
 Transaction costs: Assessment of financial and time costs
associated with coordination, reporting, and compliance.
 Fund disbursement rates: Speed and efficiency of financial
disbursements to implementers and beneficiaries.

4. Impact
Impact measures the broader, long-term effects of the intervention.
Indicators:
 Poverty reduction: Evidence of decreased poverty levels among
target populations.
 Economic growth: Contribution to increased productivity, income
generation, or economic diversification.
 Health improvements: Reductions in morbidity, mortality, or other
health indicators.
 Educational gains: Increases in literacy, enrollment, or skill
acquisition.
 Gender equity impacts: Structural changes that improve gender
equality and women’s empowerment.
 Environmental impacts: Positive or negative effects on
ecosystems, biodiversity, and natural resources.
 Social cohesion: Strengthening of trust, community participation,
or reduction in conflicts.

18 | P a g e
  Policy influence: Extent to which the intervention informs, shapes,
or influences public policies.
 Systemic change: Shifts in institutional, social, or market systems
due to the program.
 Sustainability of impacts: Likelihood that observed impacts will
persist beyond the intervention period.
 Ripple effects: Evidence of scale-up, replication, or spillover
benefits.
 Equity of impact distribution: Assessment of who benefits and
whether benefits reach the most marginalized.
 Resilience building: Enhanced capacity of individuals or
communities to withstand future shocks.

5. Sustainability
Sustainability examines the likelihood of continued benefits after the
intervention ends.
Indicators:
 Financial sustainability: Availability of resources to maintain
benefits after external support ends.
 Institutional ownership: Strength and capacity of local
institutions to assume leadership and management.
 Policy integration: Inclusion of the program’s objectives into
national or local policies.
 Community ownership: Level of commitment and engagement
from local communities to sustain outcomes.
 Partnerships: Continuation of collaborations with key stakeholders.
 Economic viability: Long-term cost-effectiveness and market
readiness of interventions.
 Environmental sustainability: Long-term positive or neutral
effects on the environment.
 Risk mitigation strategies: Existence of plans to address risks
threatening sustainability (e.g., political, environmental, financial
risks).

19 | P a g e
  Exit strategies: Clarity and implementation of strategies for
transitioning responsibilities.
 Maintenance mechanisms: Evidence of plans or systems in place
for maintaining infrastructure or services.
 Behavioral adoption: Degree to which target populations have
internalized and continue to practice desired behaviors.
 Replication and scalability: Potential for replication in other
regions or sectors.

Cross-cutting Considerations
The following indicators should be integrated across all five criteria:
 Gender and inclusion: Specific consideration of women, youth,
and marginalized groups in relevance, effectiveness, and impact.
 Climate resilience: Integration of adaptive strategies to address
climate change impacts.
 Human rights: Compliance with and promotion of fundamental
rights throughout the intervention.
 Innovation: Use of new approaches, technologies, or
methodologies to enhance outcomes.
 Monitoring and learning: Effectiveness of systems to track
progress and integrate lessons learned.

20 | P a g e