Logical Framework

Project Proposal Writing
ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com
63
3: The Logical Framework Approach: Planning

In this second stage of the LFA we take our analysis and develop it into a project plan. We will set our Goal and Outcome, and define the Outputs, Activities and Inputs needed. We will identify Preconditions and Risks, and outline our Monitoring and Evaluation systems. At the end, we will have a completed LogFrame.
Introduction
If we have fully completed our analysis, developing the plan and Logframe will be relatively straightforward. Certainly, there will be times we may need to pause, consider and consult, and possibly reformulate ideas so that our plan continues to reflect reality, but its still a systematic process that you will have no problem in achieving. The Planning stage will usually go as follows: Describe the Project Effects (Narrative Summary Outcome and Goal) Describe the Project Operations (Narrative Summary Outputs. Activities and Inputs) Describe the Project Context (Assumptions and Preconditions) Establish Indicators and define Means of Verification (Project Monitoring and Evaluation) Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions
Goal
PROJECT EFFECTS The direct (Outcome) and indirect (Goal) effects of what the project produces or provides PROJECT MONITORING AND EVALUATION How you will measure progress and achievement
PROJECT CONTEXT The environment which may influence project operations or effects
Outcomes
Outputs
PROJECT OPERATIONS
What the project does (Activities) or provides (Outputs)
Inputs
Preconditions
Activities
64
The Project Goal

What is a Project Goal?
The Goal (in some Logframes you may see this expressed as Impact) refers to the higher level objectives. The Goal is the ultimate objective the project will contribute to a general, long-term change often or at national level or related to a specific sector. For example, types of change at goal level may include change in health behaviour, improved nutritional status or improved livelihoods, changes in public policy or reduced crime. The Goal, then, sets the greater context your project will contribute to. A single project cannot usually achieve the Goal by itself. Projects are limited by target population covered and resources available, and subject to influence by external factors. Dont think about being able to measure your Goal during the lifespan of the project -your Outcome is a measurable, timebound deliverable, but your Goal is not. The Problem Tree often gives us a range of negative consequences of the core problem that may fall into various sectors. When these are transformed through the Objectives Tree into positive changes, we can see that we often have a choice of Goal. Try to select a Goal that is most consistent with: Government policy it should reflect national aims and priorities or, at least, not contradict them Donor policy Your own organisations mission and purpose
For example: Increased access to safe water in community X may improve health leading to: Reduced child mortality (Health Goal) Improved incomes as the population has more productive days (Poverty Reduction Goal)
Increased access to safe water may also reduce womens labour leading to: A more supportive environment for female participation in decision making (Inclusiveness Goal)
65
Describing the Goal

Express the Goal as an end result, not a process. Keep your language simple and try to avoid any terminology that may not be well-understood by people outside your organisation. If you must use terminology, explain the first time you use it. The Goal should refer to the target group and be as specific / verifiable as possible. In the Logframe, this is entered into the Narrative Summary column and the exact details (quantity, quality, time, location and target group) may be expanded later as an OVI. For example, the following is NOT a good example of a clear goal: To advise the Provincial Tourism Office and the local community on how to realise the tourism potential of the Buddha Cave to maximise pro-poor income opportunities while protecting the province and its surrounding environment Whats wrong with this? This Goal doesnt really work because it describes a process (to advise), uses unnecessary complex terminology (pro-poor income opportunities) and does not give us any information about the target group. A better version could be: Improved livelihoods of Nakhang Xang villagers, Khammouane Province, Lao PDR
66
Task Draft a Goal statement for the Indonesia Case Study and insert into the Logframe below. Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions
Goal
Outcomes
Outputs
Inputs Activities
Preconditions
67
Possible Solution Narrative Summary Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions
Goal
Outcomes
Outputs
Inputs Activities
Preconditions
68
The Project Outcome

What is the Project Outcome?
The Outcome (sometimes referred to as Purpose or Objective) represents what your project will achieve by its end. Often the Outcome represents a behaviour change in the target group or a measurable change in circumstances affecting end-users. The Outcome is different to the Goal in that it should be complete by the end of the project. The Outcome is more specific than a Goal it refers to a definite location, target group and time period and should be achievable and measurable within the lifespan of the project. Remember, the entire project only contributes to the Goal. However, the Outcome should contribute directly and significantly to achieving the Goal you stated earlier. Even so, the Outcome still lies outside of the immediate control of the project management. (If it were within project control, it would be an Output.) The Outcome, then, is what the sum of your activities expects to achieve if the Assumptions are correct and the project were completely successful. We said earlier that types of change at Goal level may include change in health behaviour, improved nutritional status, improved livelihoods, and changes in public policy or reduced crime. At Outcomes level these might translate to: OUTCOME Increased use of family planning Increased agricultural production Increased production of maize GOAL Change in health behaviour Improved nutritional status Improved livelihoods
Increased employment Greater public involvement in local government decisionmaking
Reduced crime
Changes in public policy
69
There should be only one main Outcome in a Logframe. It is the single, intermediate step between your Outputs and your Goal. Often but not always it corresponds to the Objective based on the original Core Problem. If you are lucky remember, the Logframe process is sometimes intuitive and requires trial-and-error but if your project is straightforward, you may see a relationship between your Objectives Tree and Logframe like this:
70
However, you might find yourself with what you think is more than one Outcome. What can you do here? Some people try to squeeze two ideas into the same Outcome a miniature cause-and-effect such as Increased agricultural production through application of improved farming methods. But that only occasionally works. Or they might be clear about their overall project purpose but feel they have to break it down into a list of sub-objectives at this level. Again, we are stretching the Logframe (and its principles) a bit here there should be just one Outcome the major step towards the Goal achievable by the project if all Assumptions are correct. We didnt say this was going to be so easy, and at this point it is quite OK to be stretching mentally and pencilling in one idea only to erase it five minutes later. I frequently tell training participants that, during practical sessions, in my role as coach, I will often suggest one idea and contradict it a little later as the Logframe starts to take shape. The LFA is part science and part trial-and-error, and as we develop the Logframe through this process we will often find ourselves making changes, as further parts become clear or as we gain new perspectives. If you are stuck at this point, dont worry too much. Perhaps all the extra information you want to squeeze into your Outcome may play a better role as Indicators detailing the specifics of what, exactly, the measurable change will be. Some organisations have modified their Logframes, adding a level between Outcomes and Outputs. This level of sub-objectives sometimes called Component Objectives or Intermediate Results is used when the project is large enough to have several, diverse major components, each needing its own Objective Statement. However, they still have to provide a logical link between the Outputs overall Outcome. Alternatively, you may want to look again at your Goal is it so distant from your Outcome that it needs to be made less lofty? Or is it your Outcome itself that, in reality, cannot be delivered by the project within its lifespan? Perhaps adjusting your perspective is the key here? Or perhaps, as you descend to the Outputs and Activities (Project Operations), you should just offer less detail of the actual steps of implementation. Remember the Logframe is a summary, a snapshot of the project its in many ways restrictive, as we are limited to what is in the frame. Perhaps we are trying to include too much detail.
71
Describing the Outcome

When writing the Project Outcome, identify: Who and where is the target group? What change will be realised, and by when?
Remember your Outcome must be must be SMART (SpecificMeasurable-Appropriate-Realistic-Timebound) although usually we will see the specific and measurable parts in our M&E columns. Dont forget, also, we are describing the end result, the change brought about as a consequence of all our efforts throughout the entire project. So, avoid using verbs of action like train, advise, establish, develop, etc. these are all Activities. In many Logframes we see writers use verbs of change such as decrease, increase, improve, strengthen and enhance. These are OK, but you will express your ideas more confidently (and, as a result, your proposal will be stronger and more persuasive) if you talk about the end results so prefer to say decreased, increased, improved, strengthened and enhanced instead, e.g.: Increased involvement of the poorest members of Nakhang Xang villagers in sustainable tourism activities Task State the Outcome in the Narrative Summary column. (Other specifics will be developed in the OVIs column later.)
72
Possible Solution Narrative Summary Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions
Goal
Outcomes
Outputs
Inputs Activities
Preconditions
73
Project Operations Outputs, Activities & Inputs

Outputs
Outputs are intermediate, intended changes measurable, specific results of the Activities conducted. Together, they must lead to the project Outcome. Outputs are within the organisations control. If the Preconditions are met and the Inputs (resources: time, equipment, finance) available, Activities will be conducted and Outputs achieved. Often, they correspond to the immediate causes of the Core Problem in our Problem Tree. Outputs would be things such as products (goods created, and infrastructure or services provided), acquired knowledge / learning, or systems established. State your Outputs as end results, not processes, e.g.: Task Develop the Logframe for the Indonesia Case Study further by adding Outputs based on the strategy we developed earlier. IEC materials created Legal Advice Centre established 60 journalists trained in Human Rights reporting Local villagers understand the value of and have the skills to grow organic produce Guidelines for citizenship process developed for ethnic minorities
74
Possible Solution Narrative Summary Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A 1. Increased availability and accessibility of safe water for IDPs 2. Increased availability and accessibility of safe latrines 3. Occupancy of temporary shelters does not exceed 10 people per tent 4. IDPs aware of how to reduce risk of disease Inputs Activities Preconditions Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions
Goal
Outcomes
Outputs
75
Activities
Activities can be defined as actions / work done mobilising resources available (such as time, money, people) to produce specific Outputs. Each Output has a group of related Activities, a series of timebound steps to be conducted by the project. Note that actions taken by others are NOT project Activities and if reaching the Outputs depends on others actions, those actions are project Assumptions i.e. we are not in control of these and dependent on their being successful. The exact level of detail of your Activities to some extent depends on your entry point how ambitious your Outcome is as well as on the scope of the project (geographical size, target group, etc.). In some cases, especially larger projects, your Activities may be quite broad, while in other, more manageable projects they may be very detailed. In both cases, keep the level of detail in your Activities section sufficient that you have outlined the tasks enough that it is clear they will lead to the desired Outputs. If you feel the need to go into further detail, you can explore this in the Project Description of your proposal. Remember, the Logframe is a summary of the project (covering 1-2 pages at most), so you do not need to include everything here. Dont list Activities which are not related to any Output. For example, there may be some actions necessary before commencing your Activities, such as capacity building / orientation for your team, or acquiring resources, etc. If they do not lead directly to any Outputs, do not include these in the Logframe describe them in the relevant part of the project document. Describe the Activities as actions. Task Develop the Logframe for the Indonesia Case Study further by adding Activities designed to achieve the Outputs we developed. (At the operational level, this may be unfamiliar for many of you, so just use your creativity.)
76
Possible Solution Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions
Goal
Outcomes
Outputs
Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A 1. Increased availability and accessibility of safe water for IDPs 2. Increased availability and accessibility of safe latrines 3. Occupancy of temporary shelters does not exceed 10 people per tent 4. IDPs aware of how to reduce risk of disease 1.1 Distributing 500m3 water (water truck) 1.2 Borehole water in one point 1.3 Set up communal water tanks 1.4 Distribute buckets (capacity 20 lt.) 2.1 Constructing temporary latrines 3.1 Distributing tents 3.2 Advocacy and coordination with local government 4.1 Conducting hygiene programme for IDPs
Inputs
Preconditions
Activities
77
Inputs
It is common practice to include a budget summary alongside the Activities. Theres no need for OVI or MOV at the Activities level, as all Activities are completely with the projects direct control. Any Activity and Input monitoring system can usually be best defined and established by project management during implementation. The Inputs section, then, is a summary of the project budget what personnel, materials, money and equipment are needed to carry out project Activities. Just as with the section of the Logframe on Activities, the level of detail will vary depending on the size of the project: a smaller project may have quite a detailed and complete list, while a more ambitious, broader project may just have the major components mentioned. A small project may list items such as training hall, accommodation, training materials, running costs, facilitator, etc., possibly with the costs related to each specified or an overall budget. A larger project may only have a very general summary such as Media campaign budget, Project office, equipment Again, the total project budget would be given, along with a breakdown by source (donors, host country, other agencies). Heres the Inputs section of the Logframe based on the Indonesia Case Study. 1.1 Distributing 500m3 water (water truck) 1.2 Borehole water in one point 1.3 Set up communal water tanks 1.4 Distribute buckets (capacity 20 lt.) 2.1 Constructing temporary latrines 3.1 Distributing tents 3.2 Advocacy and coordination with local government 4.1 Conducting hygiene programme for IDPs Inputs Total Cost: GBP 18,650 Direct Cost: 14,650 Water Trucking 3600 Borehole Water 550 Purchase / installing 5 water tanks 200 Purchase / distribution 1000 water buckets capacity 20L 2,500 Constructing 20 temporary latrines 2,500 Conducting hygiene promotion 300 Providing and distributing 100 tents 5000 Indirect Cost: GBP 4000 (Transport, staffing, indirect operational costs) Preconditions
Activities
78
The Project Context: Preconditions and Assumptions

Projects which do not take the external environment into consideration run the risk of failure to meet their objectives. External factors are the Preconditions and Assumptions in our Logframe. We start from the bottom of the Logframe, in the fourth column, and work upwards. Staring from the bottom right, Preconditions are the things that must be true before we can use Inputs to carry out Activities. What conditions do we need before the project can actually begin? These may be legal or political; they may be related to another event that must take place before we can begin; they may be related to something as simple as seasonal road conditions allowing us access to the project site. The question to answer here is, what do we need for a green light to start activities? Working upwards, Assumptions are those things which must be true for the project to succeed for Outputs to lead to Outcomes, and for Outcomes to lead to Impact. Some parts of the Objectives Tree things that we could not affect may be included here. Task Returning to the Indonesia Case Study: At the Preconditions level, what is needed before Activities can begin? At the Outputs level, what must be true for Outputs to lead to the Outcome (improvement of living conditions)? At the Outcome level, what must be true for the Outcome to contribute towards the Goal (improved health status)?
79
Possible Solution Assumptions
No unanticipated outbreaks / epidemics Local government continues to provide sufficient nutrition / medical care Number of IDPs does not significantly increase IDPs maintain hygienic standards of latrines Preconditions Local government gives full access to the camp
80
Now we have completed the Preconditions and Assumptions we can test the diagonal logic.
Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification
Assumptions
Goal
Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A
No unanticipated outbreaks / epidemics Local government continues to provide sufficient nutrition / medical care Number of IDPs does not significantly increase IDPs maintain hygienic standards of latrines
Outcomes
Outputs
1. Increased availability and accessibility of safe water for IDPs 2. Increased availability and accessibility of safe latrines 3. Occupancy of temporary shelters does not exceed 10 people per tent 4. IDPs aware of how to reduce risk of disease 1.1 Distributing 500m3 water (water truck) 1.2 Borehole water in one point 1.3 Set up communal water tanks 1.4 Distribute buckets (capacity 20 lt.) 2.1 Constructing temporary latrines
Inputs Total Cost: GBP 18,650 Direct Cost: 14,650 Water Trucking 3600 Borehole Water 550 Purchase / installing 5 water tanks 200 Purchase / distribution 1000 water buckets capacity 20L 2,500 Constructing 20 temporary latrines 2,500 Conducting hygiene promotion 300 Providing and distributing 100 tents 5000 Indirect Cost: GBP 4000 (Transport, staffing, indirect operational costs)
Preconditions Local government gives full access to the camp
Activities
3.1 Distributing tents 3.2 Advocacy and coordination with local government 4.1 Conducting hygiene programme for IDPs
81
The logic tells us that: If the local government does not object and gives us access to the camps, and we have the budget, then we can conduct the Activities. The Activities will lead directly to the Outputs more safe water / toilets, more tents and increased awareness. As long as there is no big increase in the number of camp occupants, and if IDPs keep the sanitation facilities clean, living conditions will improve. If there are no epidemics, and the local government continues to meet its obligations to provide food and medical care, we will see an improvement in the health status of the IDPs.
In some Logframes you may see this column described as Risks. Basically, Risks and Assumptions are the same thing. However, Risks look at anticipated problems (what could go wrong) while Assumptions looks at conditions that need to be met (what should go right). So, the difference is just one of perspective. Either way, identifying these helps us allows us to anticipate potential risks and modify our plans so we address / mitigate these in project design. Some Assumptions may lead us to significantly redesigning the Outcome. Once we have identified our Assumptions, we can use a Decision Tree to analyse them and decide how to address them. There are three things that can happen as a result of the analysis: The Assumption may not be included The Assumption may be included The project is redesigned to address the risk
82
Th ere is also the extreme case where we have a high-risk project where external factors are almost certain to cause problems in achieving results sometimes called a killer assumption. This does not mean, as some think, that the project has to be abandoned. When there is a killer assumption, it implies that we must either redesign the project to mitigate the risk, or manage it closely.
83
Risk Analysis and Risk Management

Risk Analysis is an analysis of the Logframes Assumptions likely to affect the successful achievement of the projects objectives. A good understanding of project Risks can increase the projects likelihood of success. The Logframe can provide a starting point for more in-depth risk assessment which can lead to better planning and delivery of services. Assumptions identify events and issues outside of the projects control: but a Risk Analysis can allow us to bring more things under project influence. External factors vary in significance. The risk of an assumption not being true can be assessed according to its level of probability and impact. Low probability and low impact risks can often be accepted and monitored; while high probability and high impact risks may kill the project or require close management attention. We need to identify significant risks that must be managed, and screen the minor risks that can be accepted. The table below is a simple way to prioritise risks. Plot each risk in the table as follows: Severity of Impact Likelihood Almost certain (8-100%) Likely (60-80%) Possible (4060%) Unlikely (2040%) Extremely unlikely (0-20%) Negligible Minor Moderate Major Extreme
High Risk Medium Risk High Risk Medium Risk Low Risk High Risk Medium Risk Medium Risk High Risk High Risk Extreme Risk
Each risk will be Low, Medium, High or Extreme but be careful when classifying a risk which is borderline.
84
Lower level risks can usually be noted and accepted ordinary monitoring is enough. Higher-level risks should be addressed in a risk management plan. Risk Level Definition Extreme risks are those most likely to happen AND will prevent the project from achieving its objective. Extreme risks will need close attention and a risk management plan if the project is to go ahead. High risks are those which would cause severe delay, or significantly affect performance or costs. High risks need a high level of management attention and a risk management plan. Medium risks are those which are both likely and will need to be controlled / monitored. These risks will need to be reassessed at key stages of implementation. Low risks are acceptable but still require regular control and monitoring.
Extreme
High
Medium
Low
85
Risk Management Options

Choosing the best way to deal with any risk is a trade-off between the cost of addressing it and the potential benefits. When selecting your response, consider carefully when to accept the risk and, where the risk is not acceptable, which approach to use. Choices available to us are: Accept it You cant make any project 100% risk-free. If risks are low and not likely to have much negative impact, sometimes the most cost-effective thing to do is leave it. Maybe there are some stakeholders who might have the potential to hinder activities, but they dont have a lot of influence and its uncertain whether they will oppose or not. In a case like this, its best to monitor the risk. Avoid it If the risk is too large and you cant do anything about it, think about dropping the related Activity or Output. For example, one component may have strong opposition from influential stakeholders and addressing this is too much for you to handle. When transforming the Problem Tree into an Objectives Tree, some of the objectives may not have been stated as they were considered high risk; or when selecting the project strategy risk may have been one reason why one approach was given less priority than others. Be careful, though, when dropping any part of your project strategy as it can reduce the achievement of project Outcomes. Reduce the Likelihood of the Risk Controlling the risk can require a lot of time and effort. You may have to redevelop your strategy, change your methodology and monitor Activities and stakeholder reactions more frequently. Look at what you can do to reduce the risk without diverting too many project resources. Reduce the Effects Reducing the effects is also usually not cost-free. However, if the risk is unacceptable and cannot be avoided, then addressing its source is often necessary. Powerful stakeholders resisting the project are one case where, although we may not be able to remove the risk, we may reduce its effects through a good communication plan. High impact / low likelihood risks (such as political instability) may also need to be addressed for through emergency / contingency plans. Transfer it You may not have this opportunity, but in some cases its best to pass the responsibility for addressing the risk to those who can manage it best. However, outsourcing risk management can be expensive, and raises issues of accountability. Even if another party or agency is hired to deal with the risk, close monitoring will be needed.
86
Project Monitoring and Evaluation

The 2nd and 3rd columns of our Logframe summarise our Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) system. Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators Means of Verification Assumptions
Goal
PROJECT EFFECTS The direct (Outcome) and indirect (Goal) effects of what the project produces or provides PROJECT MONITORING AND EVALUATION How you will measure progress and achievement
PROJECT CONTEXT The environment which may influence project operations or effects
Outcomes
Outputs
PROJECT OPERATIONS
What the project does (Activities) or provides (Outputs)
Inputs
Preconditions
Activities
Project Monitoring is the regular, systematic collection and analysis of data on specific indicators to: Demonstrate to management and key stakeholders the extent of progress Assist in timely decision-making Ensure accountability Provide the basis for evaluation and learning
Project Evaluation is the periodic, systematic assessment of an on-going or completed project, its design, implementation and results. It aims to: Compare actual results with those planned / expected Determine the relevance and fulfilment of objectives Measure efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability
Monitoring will usual be managed internally by the project itself, and begins from project initiation, continuing throughout the project lifespan. As major milestones are achieved and Activities become Outputs, we also start to evaluate. Evaluation may be internal or external.
87
Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs)

Indicators tell us how the achievement of activity objectives will be measured and verified. They are the basis for monitoring delivery of outputs and measuring progress towards outcomes. Indicators answer the question: How do I know whether the activities are leading to the desired change? Taking an example where of a pro-poor tourism project training villagers to produce handicrafts for sale, at each level, we establish answers to questions such as: How do we know that more community members are involved in handicraft production? What will tell us if this has had an impact on household incomes? How do we measure benefits of improved incomes at village level? How can we know if these benefits are going to be sustainable?
Indicators should be specific in terms of the quantity, quality, time, location and target group. Remember, though, that the Logframe is just a summary and should not contain more detail than is necessary. OVI should be simple and reliable, and easy to verify at a reasonable cost. Features of Good Indicators: The Five Dimensions There are no absolute rules about what makes a good indicator, but where possible your Indicators should be include the following dimensions: Time Target Group Location Quality of Change Quantity of Change
88
Features of Good Indicators: SMART Indicators should also aim to be SMART. Specific Indicators need to be specific and to relate to change the project aims to bring about. Training delivered, for example, is not a specific indicator of learning. Measurable Wherever possible, indicators should be quantitative. However, process indicators can be hard to quantify, and qualitative indicators can also be used. Even so, you should try to make these as objective and systematic as possible. Realistic It must be possible to gather the information accurately, reliably and at reasonable cost to the project. Appropriate You should specify indicators which are appropriate to what is being measured. For example, a health Indicator might be percentage of children immunised (indicator of services provided). Your indicators must also be appropriate to management needs. Timebound The information for the indicator must be collected and reported at the right time to influence management thinking. Avoid choosing indicators that can only tell you at the end of an activity whether you succeeded or not. The lessons learned may be too late.
89
Making the Indicator Specific: Examples
Basic Indicator
Number of graduates increased
+ quantity
Number of graduates increased from 5,000 to 14,000 Number of graduates with pass grade School Leaving Certificate increased from 5,000 to 14,000 Number of graduates with pass grade School Leaving Certificate increased from 5,000 to 14,000 by end of three-year period Number of graduates from lower income families with pass grade School Leaving Certificate increased from 5,000 to 14,000 by end of three-year period Number of graduates from lower income families in Serengi District with pass grade School Leaving Certificate increased from 5,000 to 14,000 by end of three-year period
+ quality
+ time frame
+ target group
+ location
Basic Indicator + quantity + quality + time frame
Rattan shoot production increased Rattan shoot production increased from 30 to 60 ha. Production of saleable rattan shoots increased from 30 to 60 ha. Production of saleable rattan shoots increased from 30 to 60 ha. by end of two years Production of saleable rattan shoots of smallholder farmers increased from 30 to 60 ha. by end of two years Production of saleable rattan shoots of smallholder farmers in Ban Ko Lem village increased from 30 to 60 ha. by end of two years
+ target group
+ location
90
Types of Indicator
The two main types of indicators are Process and Outcome Indicators. Process Indicators Process Indicators tell us whether the project is delivering as intended. They tell us whether the project is moving in the right direction to achieve its objectives. Process indicators tell us the extent to which we have achieved our objectives. Information on activities what and how many and should be collected throughout the project lifespan. Process Indicators can also include a quality aspect looking at how well activities were carried out. Outcome Indicators Outcome Indicators look at the results the extent to which the project is meeting its goals or objectives. These Indicators tell us whether the expected change occurred. This type of Indicator is often stated as a percentage, ratio or proportion so we can see what was achieved in relation to the total population. These can be short-term, mid-term and long-term. For example, in a health project: A short-term result (Output) could be a change in knowledge about hygiene. For example, as a result of Activities, the target group has more information / knowledge about the relationship between hygiene and disease, and practices to improve hygiene in food preparation. , e.g. By (DATE), 150 mothers of (LOCATION) have learned (WHAT?). A mid-term result (Outcome) could be a change in behaviour: hand-washing, sterilisation of surfaces, etc., e.g. By (DATE), XYZ% of households of (LOCATION) practicing (WHAT?). A long-term result could be the Goal of the resulting improvement in childrens health
91
Indicators can also be Direct Indicators or Proxy Indicators. Direct Indicators Direct Indicators tell us firmly whether the results are being achieved. They are a direct result of an intervention e.g. the levels of savings in a savings and credit program. Typically, Direct Indicators are easier to measure and verify. Proxy Indicators Proxy Indicators (sometimes called soft or indirect Indicators) are changes which we assume to be related to direct impacts. So, levels of women's savings would be a Proxy Indicator of poverty reduction. Proxy Indicators are often quantitative ways to measure qualitative results, for example: The number of people trained can be a proxy for a change in knowledge The number of hectares of paddy cultivated can be a proxy for increased income
Task Define indicators for the Indonesia Case Study. Ask yourself: How the Outputs, Outcome and Goal can be measured What indicators can be used to measure achievement?
92
Possible Solution Narrative Summary Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A 1. Increased availability and accessibility of safe water for IDPs 2. Increased availability and accessibility of safe latrines 3. Occupancy of temporary shelters does not exceed 10 people per tent 4. IDPs aware of how to reduce risk of disease Objectively Verifiable Indicators Number of cases of waterborne diseases reduced by 50% Within 2 weeks, all IDPs have access to: sufficient safe water hygienic latrines safe accommodation 1.1 Each IDP has access to 3L of safe water per day within 7 days 1.2 5 x communal water tanks with capacity 2000L are functional within 1st week 2.1 20 x functioning temporary latrines operational within 10 days 3.1 100 x tents distributed to 100 hh within first week 3.2 maximum occupancy of 90% of tents is 10 persons 4.1 1000 IDPs aware of how to reduce health risks from waterborne diseases, sanitary practices and overcrowding
Goal
Outcomes
Outputs
Dont worry if you are still confused about Indicators it does take some practice. If you do get stuck, just move onto Means of Verification. Sometimes looking at what information is available to us can help define what the indicator should be. It is best to have several indicators for each level, as our objectives will have different dimensions. However, the Logframe should be simple and useful, and too many Indicators may create an unnecessary distraction as too many resources are diverted to data collection and analysis. Select a manageable number of indicators. If you come up with a long list of possible indicators, try to reduce your list to the essential ones. Final considerations should be that: Your indicators are relevant The information is easily available A baseline exists (if not, you may have to establish one) The indicators are easy to measure They can be easily understood You have the resources and skills to verify them They are valid from your donors perspective
93
Means of Verification (MOV)

What information you will need and how you can gather it? MOV are the cost-effective methods and sources to quantify or assess your indicators. Once it is clear what information you need (the key Indicators), next you need to decide how you will get it. When establishing MOV, things to consider are: What information do we need to verify the indicators? How much can we get quickly, cheaply and simply (for example, using a questionnaire)? How reliable will the information be? What extra methods should we use if we need more information? Will donors or management and other decisions-makers approve the methods? Are the methods appropriate for the target group? (Can they complete a questionnaire? Will we be allowed access to documents?) Can we expect the audience to conform to the methods? (Will they be able to fill out questionnaires correctly, engage in interviews or focus groups? Are they literate? Will they just give face-saving answers?) Who should gather the information? Do we have the skills to conduct these methods? When and how often should we collect the information? How shall we store the data? Can we easily analyse the results?
Typically, a combination of methods works best. For example, a questionnaire can quickly collect a great deal of information from a lot of people, and then interviews can get more in-depth information from certain respondents about their answers to the questionnaires. When choosing your methods, bear in mind that you are trying to get the most useful and relevant information in the most economical way. Strike a balance between what is desirable (how complete and reliable the results will be) with what is feasible in practice. You dont have to collect all data first-hand. While MOV requires collecting primary data specific to the projects, also aim to use existing sources where available. Dont build parallel data gathering systems to what already exists (i.e. other organisations reports).
94
Selecting Methods There are six broad ways for gathering information for your Indicators. Whatever approach you use, the actual methods will fall into one of these categories. Survey questionnaires, checklists Interview structured or unstructured, getting first-hand responses from end-users Desk Study reviewing existing documentation: reports, publications, web sites Observation visiting the project site and personally observing what is happening Focus Group Discussion facilitated meetings with groups of endusers around a particular issue Case Study an in-depth investigation over time into one particular end-users experience and outcomes of the programme
Some methods are more quantitative and others more qualitative. Each has both advantages and limitations. Survey The survey method is appropriate when we need to get a lot of information quickly. Relatively easy to design and administer, questionnaires / surveys have benefits of being: Non-threatening: there is no-one to judge responses, so endusers do not have to please the questioner Anonymous: end-users can freely respond knowing that their identity will be kept private Relatively cost-free Easy to compare: makes analysis easier (if the questionnaire is designed with the analysis in mind!)
Things to consider are: Respondents might not complete carefully Questions have to be designed carefully in order not to bias the response from the end-user This method does not develop any kind of relationship with the end-user Surveys never get the full story
95
Interview Interviews help us gain some more depth and insight to really understand how the project is affecting end-users or how they feel about it. Here we get both range of information we can cover a lot of issues as well as depth. We can respond immediately and investigate deeper any responses, while developing a relationship with the respondent. However, interviews take time. While the interview may be structured (i.e. the same questions are asked to all respondents), their flexible nature means that analysis and cross-comparison may be difficult: after all, everyone has a different story. There is also the danger that the questioner may bias the responses, or that the respondent may give facesaving answers. Desk Study Reviewing secondary documentation is a good way to find out how a project is doing without actually interrupting the process. This is from a review of reports and other project documents. In the best scenario, we have access to a huge amount of information without having to interrupt the programmes operations. However, it can be time consuming; we need to know what we are looking for or can get lost. Sometimes the information is incomplete or cannot be verified. Its also inflexible: you can only use what already exists. Observation Observation for example, through visits to project sites lets us get verifiable, first-hand information about how things are actually done. It is very useful for observing processes as they happen for example, observing a User Group Meeting. Despite being time consuming, a big advantage is that we can respond immediately. We can ask questions to gain further understanding of what we see, and instead of asking what if? can actually take action and see what happens. However, understanding what we see isnt always easy to interpret, and categorising the information collected can be tricky. Another drawback of observation is that our presence can influence others behaviour, and what we see may not be typical of what happens when we are not present.
96
Focus Group Discussion Originally developed as a quality tool in marketing, the Focus Group Discussion (FGD) is useful for exploring group perceptions on a topic in depth. These could be reactions and feelings of end-users or exploring group concerns. FGDs an also help us to resolve emerging conflicts and reach participatory decisions. The FGD is efficient in that we can get both range and depth of information in a short time. It also serves to communicate key information about our programmes to end-users. The limitations of this method include: Scheduling the discussion can be can be difficult Analysing the discussion afterwards may be complex We need to ensure that the FGD is conducted by a skilled facilitator Participants may not give honest responses, and try to please the facilitator or fit in with the group Relationships between the group members may mean that some members do not express their ideas openly The culture of the group may not lend itself easily to the divergence of opinion necessary to reach true consensus
Case Study The Case Study focuses on depth, and aims to fully understand a particular end-users experience of a programme. It gives a full picture of the end-users experience of the project inputs, processes and results, providing a powerful way to demonstrate the benefits of the programme to outsiders look at how many INGOs use case studies in their fundraising with the general public. The limitations are that: It is very time consuming to collect It has to be planned and conducted from the start of the programme not just added later. (Thats a Success Story) The Case Study gives depth of information, not breadth Analysis and, particularly, cross-comparison, can be difficult
97
Task Select the MOV for the Indonesia Case Study. Possible Solution Narrative Summary Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A 1. Increased availability and accessibility of safe water for IDPs 2. Increased availability and accessibility of safe latrines 3. Occupancy of temporary shelters does not exceed 10 people per tent 4. IDPs aware of how to reduce risk of disease Objectively Verifiable Indicators Number of cases of waterborne diseases reduced by 50% Means of Verification Camp health post reports
Goal
Within 2 weeks, all IDPs have access to: sufficient safe water hygienic latrines safe accommodation
Observation report Community meeting report
Outcomes
1.1 Each IDP has access to 3L of safe water per day within 7 days 1.2 5 x communal water tanks with capacity 2000L are functional within 1st week 2.1 20 x functioning temporary latrines operational within 10 days 3.1 100 x tents distributed to 100 hh within first week 3.2 maximum occupancy of 90% of tents is 10 persons 4.1 1000 IDPs aware of how to reduce health risks from waterborne diseases, sanitary practices and overcrowding
1. Distribution reports 2. Observation 3. Observation / progress reports 4. FGD / community meeting
Outputs
98
Comparison of Quantitative and Qualitative Methodologies You will probably use both quantitative and qualitative methodologies in collecting data to verify Indicators. While both types are important, donors will expect some quantitative evidence that you achieved the project Outcome. Using both qualitative and quantitative methodologies will strengthen the evaluation. The following table shows characteristics of quantitative and qualitative methods, the purpose of each, and examples of data sources. Quantitative Methodologies Needs relatively large sample sizes Can be used to make generalisations about the larger population Requires some knowledge of statistics Measures actions, performance and levels of knowledge. Can be used to answer questions such as How many? How much? How often? Typically closed-ended; we know what we are looking for before data collection begins Project records Surveys of stakeholders Surveys at population level (local, regional or national) Qualitative Methodologies Does not need large sample sizes Cannot easily be used to generalise findings Does not require expertise in statistics (but should be systematic) May require other skills, especially facilitation Gives us information about attitudes, perceptions and motivations. Can be used to answer the questions Why? Usually structured in an open-ended way so that information arises spontaneously. Interviews Observation Focus Group Discussion Case study
Features
Purpose
Sources of Data
99
Final Logframe: Indonesia Case Study

Narrative Summary Goal
Improved health status of Internally Displaced People at Camp A Immediate improvement of living conditions of 5000 Internally Displaced People in Camp A 1. Increased availability and accessibility of safe water for IDPs 2. Increased availability and accessibility of safe latrines 3. Occupancy of temporary shelters does not exceed 10 people per tent 4. IDPs aware of how to reduce risk of disease
Objectively Verifiable Indicators

Number of cases of waterborne diseases reduced by 50%
Means of Verification
Camp health post reports
Assumptions
Observation report Within 2 weeks, all IDPs have access to: sufficient safe water hygienic latrines safe accommodation 1.1 Each IDP has access to 3L of safe water per day within 7 days 1.2 5 x communal water tanks with capacity 2000L are st functional within 1 week 2.1 20 x functioning temporary latrines operational within 10 days 3.1 100 x tents distributed to 100 hh within first week 3.2 maximum occupancy of 90% of tents is 10 persons 4.1 1000 IDPs aware of how to reduce health risks from waterborne diseases, sanitary practices and overcrowding 1. Distribution reports 2. Observation 3. Observation / progress reports 4. FGD / community meeting Community meeting report
No unanticipated outbreaks / epidemics Local government continues to provide sufficient nutrition / medical care Number of IDPs does not significantly increase IDPs maintain hygienic standards of latrines
Outcomes
Outputs
1.1 Distributing 500m3 water (water truck) 1.2 Borehole water in one point 1.3 Set up communal water tanks 1.4 Distribute buckets (capacity 20 lt.) 2.1 Constructing temporary latrines 3.1 Distributing tents 3.2 Advocacy and coordination with local government 4.1 Conducting hygiene programme for IDPs
Inputs
Total Cost: GBP 18,650 Direct Cost: 14,650 Water Trucking 3600 Borehole Water 550 Purchase / installing 5 water tanks 200 Purchase / distribution 1000 water buckets capacity 20L 2,500 Constructing 20 temporary latrines 2,500 Conducting hygiene promotion 300 Providing and distributing 100 tents 5000 Indirect Cost: GBP 4000 (Transport, staffing, indirect operational costs)
Preconditions
Local government gives full access to the camp
Activities
100

Logical Framework

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Logical Framework

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Logical Framework

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

3: The Logical Framework Approach: Planning

What the project does (Activities) or provides (Outputs)

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

The Project Goal

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

Describing the Goal

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

The Project Outcome

Increased employment Greater public involvement in local government decisionmaking

Changes in public policy

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

Describing the Outcome

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

Project Operations Outputs, Activities & Inputs

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

The Project Context: Preconditions and Assumptions

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

Possible Solution Assumptions

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

Preconditions Local government gives full access to the camp

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

Risk Analysis and Risk Management

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing

ELD Training 2010 www.eldtraining.com

Project Proposal Writing