Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
The guide to the logical framework approach (lfa) is a comprehensive resource developed by the european integration office (seio) in close cooperation with various projects. It provides a detailed overview of the lfa, which is an analytical process and a tool for planning, managing, and evaluating development projects. The guide covers the history, principles, and applications of the lfa, including the logical framework matrix (lfm) as a documented product of the analytical process. It highlights the importance of the lfa for civil servants, non-governmental organizations, local self-governments, and consultant companies involved in project preparation, implementation, and management.
Typology: Cheat Sheet
1 / 41
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA EU INTEGRATION OFFICE
The PPF3 project is funded by the EU andimplemented by a consortium led by PM Group
Inte
rnationalMa na meg uorGtne Republic of Serbia Government p European Integration Office
THE LOGICAL
FRAMEWORK
APPROACH:
GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA EU INTEGRATION OFFICE
GUIDE TO
Key Responsibilities and Decision Making Process ......................................................... 55 Coordinating the Project Cycle Management in an Integrated Planning .............. 56 Using the LFA at Various Phases of PCM ............................................................................. 58 Programming Phase ............................................................................................................... 58 Identification Phase ................................................................................................................ 60 Formulation Phase .................................................................................................................. 62 Implementation Phase, Including Monitoring and Reporting ............................ 64 Evaluation Phase ...................................................................................................................... 67
PART 4 - ANNEXES .............................................................................................................. 69
Annex 1 - LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX TEMPLATE ..................................................... 70 Annex 2 - SAMPLE LOGFRAME ................................................................................................ 71 Annex 3 - GLOSSARY ................................................................................................................... 73 Annex 4 - SOURCES OF INFORMATION ................................................................................ 78
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
CSO Civil Society Organisations DFID Department for International Development
EC European Commission
EU European Union
EUD European Union Delegation
GIZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit
ISNAR International Service for National Agricultural Research IPA Instrument for Pre-Accession
LFA Logical Framework Approach
LFM Logical Framework Matrix (Logframe Matrix)
NAD Needs Assessment Document
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OVI Objectively Verifiable Indicators
PCM Project Cycle Management
PF Project Fiche
PPF Project Preparation Facility
PRSP Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
ROM Result Oriented Monitoring SEIO European Integration Office
SIDA Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency
SOV Sources of Verification
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Treats
ToR Terms of Reference
USAID United States Agency for International Development
QSG Quality Support Group ZOPP (GOPP) Ziel-Orientierte Projekt Planung (Goal Oriented Project Planning)
The Logical Framework Approach is an analytical and management tool which is now used (in one form or another) by most multi-lateral and bi-lateral aid agencies, international NGOs and by many partner governments for the management of development projects.
Developed in the late 1960s to assist the US Agency of International Development to improve its project planning and evaluation system, the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) was designed to address three basic concerns, namely that:
The LFA has since been adopted as a project planning and management tool by most donors, multilateral and bilateral development agencies. Even though different agencies/donors modify the formats, terminology and tools used in their LFA, the basic analytical principles have remained the same.
Indeed, the EU, the main external donor to Serbia, requires the development of a Logframe Matrix as part of its IPA project formulation procedures (LFM is an integral part of IPA Project Fiche). Other donors also use the LFA as a core tool to the project cycle management.
The LFA is a very effective analytical and management tool when understood and intelligently applied. However, it is not a substitute for experience and professional judgment and must also be complemented by the application of other specific tools (such as Economic and Financial Analysis and Environmental Impact Assessment) and through the application of working techniques which promote the effective participation of stakeholders.
Second edition of the Guide to the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) has been developed by the European Integration Office (SEIO), in close cooperation with IPA funded Project Preparation Facility 2008 and SIDA/DfID funded project “Support to SEIO for Effective Partnerships for Improved Aid Effectiveness”. One of the main reasons for making the second edition, as well as what is somewhat different from the first edition (2007) was an attempt to present a complex area in a practical manner and to provide clear guidance to users on how to start drafting a logical framework matrix (LFM) that will furthermore lead towards formulation of high quality projects.
The purpose of the guide is to enable its users to advance the skills in using LFA as a planning tool and in developing LFM with all its elements. The guide also provides the
explanation of the application of the LFA in the context of Project Cycle Management phases and procedures.
The knowledge of the principles of LFA and skills in drafting LFM are essential for all civil servants involved in the programming and design as well as the implementation and management of development projects, but also for all others working in non- governmental organisations, local self-governments, consultant companies, etc. that are involved in project preparation, implementation and management.
These guidelines also aim at providing instruction to develop a Logical Framework Matrix at the various stages of the project management cycle, in order to improve both the consistency and quality of project documents throughout the different stages of the project cycle.
While the first part of the guide presents what is the logical framework approach (LFA) and the two stages of the LFA, second part provides explanation on how to design the logical framework matrix (LFM), in part three the guide presents linkages between logframe approach and the project cycle management.
The concepts described are illustrated by different examples. The main example used all along this guideline is a project related to water treatment taken from the PCM Guidelines published by the European Commission (2004). It has been adapted to meet the specific need of this manual.
Fourth part of this guide is related to annexes, providing practical example of logframe and supported by standardised logframe template, as well as terminology used in guide, presented in terms of glossary and list of sources of information.
The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) is an analytical process and set of tools used to support objectives-oriented project planning and management. It provides a set of interlocking concepts which are used as part of an iterative process to aid structured and systematic analysis of a project or programme idea.
The LFA is a way of describing a project in a logical way so that it is:
**- Well designed
The LFA should be thought of as an ‘aid to thinking’. It allows information to be analysed and organised in a structured way, so that important questions can be asked, weaknesses identified and decision makers can make informed decisions based on their improved understanding of the project rationale, its intended objectives and the means by which objectives will be achieved.
The LFA helps to:
It is useful to distinguish the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) , which is an analytical process, from the Logical Framework Matrix (LFM) , also called Logframe matrix (notably in this guideline), which provides the documented product of the analytical process , a synthetic representation of the project design
Originally developed and applied in science (NASA) and the private sector (management by objectives) for the planning and management of complex projects, the Logical Framework Approach was first formally adopted as a planning tool for overseas development activities by USAID in the early 1970s. Since then it has been adopted and adapted by a large number of agencies involved in providing development assistance. They include the British DFID, Canada’s CIDA, the OECD Expert Group on Aid Evaluation, the International Service for National Agricultural Research (ISNAR), Australia’s AusAID and the German GIZ. With its ‘ZOPP’-version (Ziel-Orientierte Projekt Planung) GIZ has put particular emphasis on the participation of stakeholders in the application of the approach. EC requires application of the LFA and preparation of the Logframe as a part of EU funding applications.
As for any instrument of project cycle management (for more details on project cycle management please refer part 3 of this guide), there can be advantages and limitations of using LFA. They can be summarised as follow 1 :
Advantages
1 Extracted from “The Logical Framework Approach” –4th Edition - NORAD -
Limitations
As with most other donors, one needs to use the logical framework approach for identification and formulation of projects receiving financial assistance from the European Union. It is an analytical process and a set of tools (instruments) to be used in project management.
Log frame matrix, a documented product of the LFA is prepared before a project proposal and makes its integral part. What is achieved in this way is the development of a balanced project which has measurable objectives and takes into account assumptions and risks.
The LFA is composed of two stages used in project identification and formulation:
**1. Analysis stage and
These two phases are carried out progressively during the identification and formulation of the project 2 so to ensure the quality of design and therefore its implementation as well as its ex-post evaluation.
The two main stages of the LFA can be summarised in the table below:
ANALYSIS PHASE PLANNING PHASE Stakeholder analysis - i dentifying & characterising potential major stakeholders; assessing their capacity Problem analysis - or “Problem Tree”. It consists of identifying key problems, constraints & opportunities; determining cause & effect relationships Objective analysis – or “Solutions Tree”. It consists in developing solutions from the identified problems; identifying means to end relationships. Strategy analysis – identifying different strategies to achieve solutions; selecting most appropriate strategy.
Developing Logical Framework matrix - defining project structure, testing its internal logic & risks, formulating measurable indicators of success Activity scheduling – determining the sequence and dependency of activities; estimating their duration, and assigning responsibility Resource scheduling – or “Budgeting”. from the activity schedule, developing input schedules and a budget
The Analysis Stage should be carried out as an iterative learning process, rather than as a simple set of linear ‘steps’. For example, while stakeholder analysis must be carried out early in the process, it must be reviewed and refined as new questions are asked and new information comes to light.
In the Planning Stag e the results of the analysis are transcribed into a practical, operational plan ready to be implemented. It is the stage where the project is technically designed. This stage is again an iterative process, as it may be necessary to review and revise the scope of project activities and expected results once the resource implications and budget become clearer.
Prior to initiating detailed analytical work with stakeholder groups (field work), it is important that those involved in the identification or formulation/preparation of projects are sufficiently aware of the policy, sector and institutional context within which they are undertaking their work.
Key documents to refer to would include donor’s country strategy papers and relevant Government development policy documents, such as the National Development plan (when applicable), the Poverty Reduction Strategy and relevant Sector Policy documents.
The scope and depth of this preliminary analysis will be primarily dependent on how much information is already available and its quality.
In general, it should not be the work of each individual project planning team to undertake ‘new’ analysis of development/sector policies or the broader institutional framework. Rather they should access existing information and then work to ensure that the development of the project idea takes account of these elements of the operating environment.
2 For more details on PCM phases please refer to chapter 3 of this guide
SWOT analysis
SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) is used to analyse the internal strengths and weaknesses of an organisation and the external opportunities and threats that it faces. It can be used either as a tool for general analysis, or to look at how an organisation might address a specific problem or challenge.
The quality of information derived from using this tool depends (as ever) on who is involved and how the process is managed – it basically just provides a structure and focus for discussion. This information is most often represented in a matrix format as in the example below:
Strengths − Grassroots based and quite broad membership − Focused on the specific concerns of a relatively homogenous group − Men and women both represented − Provide a basic small scale credit facility
Weaknesses − Limited lobbying capacity and environmental management skills − Lack of formal constitutions and unclear legal status − Weak linkages with other organisations − Internal disagreements on limiting fishing effort in response to declining fish stocks Opportunity − Growing public/political concern over health impacts of uncontrolled waste disposal − New government legislation in preparation on Environmental Protection largely focused on making polluters pay − The river is potentially rich in resources for local consumption and sale − New markets for fish and fish products developing as a result of improved transport infrastructure to nearby population centres
Threats − Political influence of industrial lobby groups who are opposed to tighter environmental protection laws (namely waste disposal) − New environmental protection legislation may impact on access to traditional fishing grounds and the fishing methods − that can be employed
Good practice
Linking Stakeholder Analysis and the Subsequent Steps
Stakeholder analysis and problem analysis are closely connected as part of the initial “Situation Analysis”. Indeed they should in practice be conducted ‘in tandem’ rather than ‘one after the other’.
All subsequent steps required to prepare a Logical Framework Matrix (or Logframe) should also be related to the stakeholder analysis, making it a point of continuous reference.
Stakeholder analysis is an iterative process that evolves throughout the stages of the LFA, as well as informing decisions at all stages of both analysis and planning/design. Whenever the Logframe needs to be revised the stakeholder analysis should also be reconsidered, as the landscape of stakeholders involved in a project evolves over time. Thus, stakeholder analysis is not an isolated analytical step, but a process.
Purpose and key steps
The problem analysis identifies the negative aspects of an existing situation and establishes the ‘cause and effect’ relationships between the identified problems.
In many respects the problem analysis is the most critical stage of project planning, as it then guides all subsequent analysis and decision-making on priorities.
Rainstorming exercises with stakeholders are best suited for the problem analysis. It is essential to ensure that “root causes” are identified and not just the symptoms of the problem(s).
The problems identified are arranged in a ‘problem-tree’ by establishing the cause and effect relationships between the negative aspects of an existing situation.
Depending on the complexity of the situation to be addressed by the project, preliminary technical or socio-economic studies or assessments might be useful.
How to conduct problem analysis by creating problem tree
Creating a problem tree should ideally be undertaken as a participatory group event.
It is suggested to use individual pieces of paper or cards on which to write individual problem statements, which can then be sorted into cause and effect relationships on a visual display.
Step 1: Identify major existing problems, based upon available information. Openly brainstorm problems which stakeholders consider to be a priority.
This first step can either be completely open (no pre-conceived notions as to what stakeholder’s priority concerns/problems might be), or more directed, through specifying a ‘known’ high order problem or objective (e.g. improved river water quality) based on preliminary analysis of existing information and initial stakeholder consultations.
Write down each problem on a separated visual support (paper/cards)
Step 2: Select an individual starter, a focal problem for analysis.
Step 3: Look for related problems to the starter problem: identify substantial and direct causes/effects of the focal problem
Step 4: Begin to construct the problem tree by establishing a hierarchy of cause and effects relationship between the problems:
Step 5: All other problems are then sorted in the same way – the guiding question being ‘What causes that?’ If there are two or more causes combining to produce an effect, place them at the same level in the diagram.
Step 6: Connect the problems with cause-effect arrows – clearly showing key links
Step 7: Review the diagram, verify its validity and completeness and make necessary adjustment:
Ask yourself/the group – ‘are there important problems that have not been mentioned yet?’ If so, specify the problems and include them at an appropriate place in the diagram.
Step 8: Copy the diagram onto a sheet of paper to keep as a record, and distribute (as appropriate) for further comment/information
The example of problem tree is illustrated bellow:
PROBLEM ANALYSIS - RIVER POLUTION
Catch and income of fishing families in dedine
River water quality is deteriorating
High leveles of solid waste dumped into river
Polluters are not controled
No public information/ education problems available
Polution has been low political priority
Inadequate levels of capital investments and poor businesses planning within local Goverment
Environment Protection Agency inffective and closely aligned with industry interests
Population not aware of the danger of water dumping
Existing legal requlations are inadequate to prevent direct discharge of waste water
40 % of housholds and 20% of businesses not connected to the sewerage network
Most housholds and factories discharge waste water directly into the river
Waste water treated in plants does not meet environmental standards
Riverin ecosystem under serious threat, including dedining fishing stocks
High incidents of water borne diseases and illnesses, particularly among poor families and under 5 years old
OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS - RIVER POLUTION
Catch and income of fishing families is stabilised or increased
River water quality is improved
The quantity of solid waste dumped into river reduced
Polluters are effectively controled
Public information/ education programmes estblished
Polution management is given a highier political priority
Improved capital investments and businesses planning within local Government
Environment Protection Agency is effective and more responsive to a broad range of stakeholder interests
Population more aware of the danger of water dumping
New legal regulations are established which are effective in preventing direct discharge of wastewater
Increased % of housholds and businesses connected to the sewerage network
No of housholds and factories discharging waste water directly into the river reduced
Waste after treatment in plants meets environmental standards
Threat to the riverin ecosystem is reduced and fishing stocks are increased
Incidents of water borne diseases and illnesses is reduced, particularly among poor families and under 5 years old
Good practice
Purpose and key steps
The purpose of this analysis is to identify possible alternative options/strategies, to assess the feasibility of these and agree upon one project strategy.
The Objective Tree usually shows different clusters of objectives that have an inherent means-end linkage. Out of these possible strategies of intervention the most pertinent and feasible one is selected on the basis of a number of criteria, including relevance, likelihood of success, resource availability, etc.
This analytical stage is in some respects the most difficult and challenging, as it involves synthesising a significant amount of information then making a complex judgment about the best implementation strategy (or strategies) to pursue.
In practice a number of compromises often have to be made to balance different stakeholder interests, political demands and practical constraints such as the likely resource availability. Nevertheless, the task is made easier if there is an agreed set of criteria against which to assess the merits of different intervention options.
Possible key criteria for strategy selection could be:
These criteria should be considered in relation to the alternative options and roughly assessed, e.g. high/low; +/-; extensive/limited. Using these criteria will help to determine what should/can be included within the scope of the project, and what should/cannot be included.
Those objectives which fall under the strategy of intervention are selected to elaborate the hierarchy of objectives in the first column of the Logframe matrix. Objectives at the top of the objective tree are translated into the overall objective, while those objectives further down the tree need to be converted into purpose and results statements.
WASTEWATER STRTEGY
ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVE STRATEGIES
Catch and income of fishing fmilies is stabilised or increased
River water quality is improved
The quantity of solid waste dumped into river reduced
Polluters are effectively controled
Population more aware of the danger of water dumping
No of housholds and factories discharging waste water directly into the river reduced
Waste after treatement in plants meets environmental standards
Threat to the riverin ecosystem is reduced and fishing stocks are increased
Incidents of water borne diseases and illnesses is reduced, particularly among poor families and under 5 years old
New legal regulations are established which are effective in preventing direct discharge of wastewater
Increased % of housholds and businesses connected to the sewerage network
Environment Protection Agency is effective and more responsive to a broad range of stakeholder interests
Public information/ education programmes estblished
Polution management is given a highier political priority
Improved capital investments and businesses planning within local Government
WASTE STRATEGY
Good practice
ANALYSES OF STRATEGY
How to conduct analysis of strategies/alternative options
An example illustrating analysis of alternative options is illustrated bellow:
The results of the logical framework analysis are presented and further analysed in the Logframe matrix. The matrix essentially provides a summary of the project down to the activity level.
The Logframe consists of a matrix with four columns and four (or more) rows, summarising the key elements of a project, namely:
The Logframe also provides the basis on which resource requirements (inputs) and costs (budget) are determined.
Logic of intervention
Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Sources of Verification
Assumptions
Overall Objective Purpose Results Activities Means Costs Preconditions
It is recommended to use the log frame as the basis of the funding application and then throughout the project lifecycle to track progress and adapt to changing situations. It can be used to review assumptions and implications, and to keep donors and other stakeholders informed of significant changes. In the context of programming IPA
funds, LFM represents the integral part of the Project Fiche - main document required for project identification.
As already said, the basic matrix consists of four columns and a number of rows (usually three or four rows) as shown bellow. However, some agencies include more rows (levels in the objective hierarchy) to include, for example a summary of indicative activities, a level of ‘component objective’ (between the result and purpose level), which allows results to be clustered under an identified component heading.
The matrix below illustrates a standard logframe and defines the terminology used.
Standard Logframe matrix and definition of terminology
Project
Description
(Intervention
Logic,
Objective Hierarchy) The
intervention logic
of the Logframe identifies
what
the
project
intends
to
do
(strategy
of
intervention) and shows the causal relationshipbetween the different levels of the objectives.
Performance
Questions
and
Indicators
(Objectively Verifiable Indicators, Targets) Indicators measure whether the objectiveson each level are achieved whereas standardsdefine the level of expected performance
Monitoring
Mechanisms
(Means of Verification, Sourceof Verification-information) Means
of
verification
indicate
where
and
in
what
form
information on the achievementof objectives and results can befound, e.g. reports of ministries,project reports, laws, statistics,assessments, etc.
Assumptions (External Factors) Assumptions
are
conditions
which could affect the progressof the project but which are notunder direct control of projectmanagement.An
assumption
is^
a^
positive
statement
of
a
condition
that
must
be
met
for
the
project’s
objectives to be achieved.
Overallobjective(Goal,DevelopmentObjective)
What is the overall objective that the projectwill contribute to? Definition:Project importance to society in terms of thelong-term benefits which are not achieved by theproject aloneScope of project management:The project will partially achieve the overallobjective
What
indicators
are
linked
to
overall
objective? Definition:Measures the extent to which a contributionto the
overall
objective
has
been
made.
Features which can be measured or at leastdescribed precisely in terms of quantity andquality respectively and which show a changein situation. Used during evaluation. However,it is often not appropriate for the project itselfto try and collect this information.
What are information sourcesfor these indicators? Above mentioned
Not required for overall objective
Projectpurpose(ProjectDevelopmentObjective,SpecificObjective)
What is the purpose of project to be realised bythe project? Definition:Central specific objective(s) of the project interms of sustainable benefits to be deliveredto the beneficiaries. Project purpose describesintended situation at the end of the project.Scope of project management:The
attainment
of
the
purpose
is
primarily
dependent on the project results(outputs), butdepends also on factors beyond the project’scontrol.Hint: Projects or programmes should have onepurpose.
Indicators showing the extent to which pro-ject purpose has been achieved? Definition:Conditions at the end of the project indicatingthat the purpose has been achieved.NB:Include appropriate details of quantity, qualityand
time.
Helps
understand
whether
the
purpose has been achievedPurpose indicators are commonly used forproject reviews and evaluations.
What are information sourcesfor these indicators? Above mentioned
Factors
and
conditions
not
under direct project control, butnecessary to achieve the overallproject objective?Hint: To ensure proper verticallogic, it is essential to attributeassumptions
to
the
corresponding
level of intervention (in this boxassumptions
at^
purpose
level
which are relevant for achievingthe overall objective need to bestated).
Results(Outputs)
What are concrete visible results to contributeto realisation of project purpose? What changesand improvements will be achieved by theproject? Definition:Tangible
products
and
services
delivered
or
competences and capacities established directlyas a result of project activities by the completiondate.Scope of project management:Results are under the control / responsibilityof project managementHint: For clarity a minimum one result statementfor each corresponding project component isrecommended.
What are the indicators showing whetherexpected results have been achieved? Definition:Measures
of
the
quantity
and
quality
of
results.Result
indicators
are
predominantly
used
during monitoring and review.
What are information sourcesfor these indicators? Above mentioned
Factors
and
conditions
not
under direct project control, butnecessary to achieve the projectpurpose?Hint: Formulate assumptions atresult level which are relevant forachieving the project’s purpose(s).
Activities
What activities are required and in what orderin order to achieve the expected results? Definition:Specific
tasks
(work
programme)
to
be
undertaken during the project’s lifetime in orderto obtain results.(sometimes optional within the matrix itself ).Scope of project management:Critical factors for carrying out activities areprofessional skills, the availability of sufficientfinancial resources and the absorption capacityof the local partners as well as of the targetgroups and beneficiaries.Hint: The matrix should not include an entirelist of project activities, but focus on
what
the
project is to deliver and not on
how
.
MeansWhat
resources
are
required
for
implementation of listed activities? (by typeof PRAG contract) Sometimes a summary of resources/means isprovided.Indicate
what
are
the
inputs
required,
main resources to be applied e.g.: technicalassistance,
personnel,
equipment,
training,
studies, supplies, etc
CostsWhat are the costs for each ofthe means? Sometimes
as
a
summary
of
costand budget is to be providedWhat
are
the
means/actions
costs, breakdown of the budget.
Factors
and
conditions
not
under
direct
project
control,
but necessary for results to beachieved as planned?Hint: Formulate assumptions atactivity / input level which arerelevant
for
achieving
project
results. PreconditionsWhat
pre-requisites
must
be
fulfilled
for
project
implementation to start? Sometimes optional within thematrix itself
Logic of intervention Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Sources of Verification
Assumptions
Overall Objective (1)
(10) (11) (9)
Purpose (2)
(12) (13) (8)
Results (3)
(14) (15) (7)
Activities (4)
Means (16)
Costs (17)
(6)
Preconditions (5)
The intervention logic of the Logframe identifies what the project intends to do (strategy of intervention) and shows the causal relationship between the different levels of the objectives. This logic is tested and refined by the analysis of assumptions in the fourth column of the matrix (described below in sub - section on assumptions).
Define the overall objective to which your project contributes
The overall objective is the higher-order objective that you are seeking to achieve through this project, often in combination with others. It usually relates to a programme or a sector. Very often a group of projects will share a common overall objective statement.
Since the Overall Objective/Goal describes the anticipated long term objective towards which the project will contribute (project justification). It is to be expressed as ‘To contribute to…..`;
Statements should be kept as clear and concise as possible. If necessary, reformulate the wording from the objectives tree to make them more accurate.
Define the Purpose to be achieved by the project
The Specific Objective/Purpose describes the intended effects of the project (project purpose), the immediate objective for the direct beneficiaries as a precisely stated future condition. It is to be expressed in terms of benefits to the target group being ‘Increased/improved/ etc.’. This is why the project is proposed. It summarises the impact that the project will have. It may describe how the world will be changed as a result of producing the project’s Results. The purpose often describes a change in the behaviour of the project beneficiaries.
There should normally be only one Purpose in a project. The reason for this is very practical. Experience has shown that it is easier to focus project Results on a single
Purpose. If there are several Purposes the project efforts become diffused and the design is weakened. In the case of larger programmes with more than a single purpose, the development of components shall be envisaged (see sub section on project components described below)
Although the Purpose describes the reasons why the Results are being undertaken it is outside the control of the project team. Project team is responsible for producing a certain set of results, but not for what people or institutions will do with those results. This means that the project team should be responsible for achieving certain Results which will help to bring about the desired impact, but it cannot be accountable for achieving the impact.
Define the Results for achieving the Purpose
Results/outputs are expressed as the targets which th project management must achieve and sustain within the life of the project (WHAT do you want the project to achieve). Their combined impact should be sufficient to achieve the immediate purpose. They are to be expressed in terms of a tangible result ‘delivered/produced/ conducted etc.’ They are often described in the Terms of Reference (TOR) 3 for the project. If the necessary resources are available, the project team is directly accountable for achieving these results.
Important
A common problem in formulating objective statements is that the purpose statement is formulated as a re-statement of the sum of the results, rather than as a higher-level achievement. For example in the case of a water treatment project, results leading to the purpose would be formulated as following:
Results:
improved quality of river water
Define the Activities for achieving each result
Activities are expressed as processes, in the present tense starting with an active verb, such as ‘Prepare, design, construct, research …..’. Avoid detailing activities; indicate the basic structure and strategy of the project.
3 For the definition on Terms of Reference please refer to Annex 3 Glossary
Activities define HOW the team will carry out the project. Generally the aim is to provide an indicative list of activities that must be implemented to accomplish each Result. Supply just enough detail to outline the strategy for accomplishing each Activity, and to provide the basis for a Work Breakdown analysis or more elaborate Activity Chart, Bar Chart, or Gantt Chart.
Note: it is recommended that all results should be numbered. Each activity should then be numbered relating it to the corresponding result. (see example below)
Logic of intervention Objectively Verifiable Indicators
Sources of Verification
Assumptions
**Overall Objective Purpose
Results
1.2…
Activities 1.1. 1.1. 1.2. 2.1.1…**
Means Costs
Preconditions
Below is indicated an example of how the statements of the intervention logic column can be formulated: (see also annex 2 formulation of the statements in the logframes)
Objective hierarchy Example of how to write statements Overall Objective To contribute to improved family health, particularly of under 5s, and general health of the riverine eco-system Purpose 1. Improved river water quality Results 1.1. Reduced volume of waste-water directly discharged into the river system by households and factories 1.2. Waste-water treatment standards established enforced Activities (мay not be included in the matrix itself, but rather presented in an actitvity schedule format)
1.1.1. Condudct baseline survey of households and businesse 1.1.2. Complete engineering specifications for expanded sewerage netvork 1.1.3. Prepare tender documents, tender and select contractor 1.1.4. Identify appropriate incentives for factories to use clean technologies 1.1.5. Prepare and deliver public information and awareness program 1.1.6. etc.
Verification of Intervention Logic with IF/THEN test
Once the project strategy has been chosen, the main project elements are derived from the objectives tree and transferred into the first vertical column of the Logframe matrix
Thus, this first column summarises the ‘means-end’ logic of the proposed project. Indicating the main project elements, it describes the intervention logic of the project.
When the objective hierarchy is read from the bottom up, it can be expressed in terms of:
IF adequate inputs/resources are provided , THEN activities can be undertaken; IF activities are undertaken, THEN results can be produced; IF results are produced, THEN the purpose will be achieved; and IF the purpose is achieved, THEN this should contribute toward the overall objective
It can also be read in reverse as we can say that:
IF we wish to contribute to the overall objective THEN we must achieve the purpose; IF we wish to achieve the purpose, THEN we must deliver the specified results; IF we wish to deliver the results, THEN specified activities must be implemented; and IF we wish to implement the specified activities, THEN we must apply identified inputs/resources
Project components
Depending on the type and dimension of the project, it can be useful to group sets of closely related project results, activities and inputs into project ‘components’, particularly for larger/more complex projects.
These ‘components’ can also be thought of as project ‘strategies’ which can be identified on the basis of a number of possible criteria, including:
