Logical Framework Training Learner Guide PDF

Learner Guide THE PACIFIC GUIDE TO PROJECT PROPOSAL PREPARATION USING THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH VERSION 4. May 2014 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This Learning Resource has been produced by the Pacific Research & Evaluation Associates (PREA) for the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC), through its European Union funded Global Climate Change Alliance: Pacific Small Island States (GCCA: PSIS) project in collaboration with the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP). DISCLAIMER The content of this publication is provided for educational purposes only. No claim is made as to the accuracy or authenticity of the content. The information in this publication is proved on the basis that all persons accessing it undertake responsibility for assessing the relevance and accuracy of its content. No responsibility is taken for any information or services which may appear on any linked websites. If using any information provided in this manual, please ensure proper acknowledgement is noted. Neither PREA nor SPC accepts any liability to any person for the information or advice (or the use of such information or advice) that is provided in this publication or incorporated into it by reference. If you have any questions or feedback regarding this resource, please contact Mr Sanivalati Tubuna: Email: [email protected] www.prea.com.au Contents USING THE LEARNER GUIDE.................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction to the Course................................................................................................................. 2 Learning Objectives............................................................................................................................. 2 Learner Guide Icons............................................................................................................................ 3 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CYCLE....................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION TO THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH (LFA)........................................................ 6 History of the LFA................................................................................................................................ 7 Benefits of the LFA.............................................................................................................................. 8 HOW THE LFA FITS IN THE PMC.............................................................................................................. 8 CRITIQUE OF THE USE OF THE LFA.......................................................................................................... 9 USING THE LFA TO INFORM PROJECT PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT....................................................... 11 CASE STUDY........................................................................................................................................... 12 STEP 1. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................... 15 How to undertake a stakeholder analysis......................................................................................... 15 Tools to undertake a stakeholder analysis....................................................................................... 15 STEP 2.PROBLEM ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................. 17 How to undertake a problem analysis.............................................................................................. 18 STEP 3.SOLUTION ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................. 22 How to undertake a solution analysis............................................................................................... 22 STEP 4.STRATEGY ANALYSIS.................................................................................................................. 24 STEP 5.LOGFRAME MATRIX.................................................................................................................. 26 Project description............................................................................................................................ 28 Assumptions...................................................................................................................................... 29 Indicators.......................................................................................................................................... 31 Sources of verification...................................................................................................................... 33 Reviewing the logframe matrix......................................................................................................... 33 STEP 6. ACTIVITY SCHEDULING............................................................................................................. 35 Activity scheduling............................................................................................................................ 35 STEP 7.RESOURCE SCHEDULING....................................................................................................... 36 WHAT IS MONITORING & EVALUATION?............................................................................................. 39 DEVELOPING A MONITORING & EVALUATION FRAMEWORK.............................................................. 39 Evaluation purpose & boundaries.................................................................................................... 40 Evaluation questions......................................................................................................................... 40 Monitoring & evaluation plan........................................................................................................... 41 WHAT IS A PROJECT PROPOSAL............................................................................................................ 43 WRITING A PROJECT PROPOSAL........................................................................................................... 43 HOW THE LOGFRAME MATRIX INFORMS THE PROPOSAL................................................................... 43 PROJECT PROPOSAL STRUCTURE.......................................................................................................... 44 DONORS................................................................................................................................................ 47 FURTHER RESOURCES........................................................................................................................... 48 REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................... 49 Appendix 1. Logframe Terminology.............................................................................................. 51 Appendix 2. Example problem tree, solution tree/strategy and logframe for LFA training......... 52 Appendix 3. Example of a logframe for an ADB project............................................................... 54 Appendix 4. Theory of Change...................................................................................................... 56 Appendix 5. Monitoring & Evaluation Plan Template.................................................................. 60 SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION  Introduction to the course  Learning objectives  Using the learner guide Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 1 USING THE LEARNER GUIDE The guide is divided into sections and contains icons to help you navigate through the guide. Introduction to the Course This course is designed to introduce the logical framework approach (LFA) as a means to design project proposals for funding assistance in the area of climate change adaptation. The European Union (EU) established the Global Climate Change Alliance (GCCA) in 2007 to strengthen dialogue, exchange of experiences and cooperation on climate change with developing countries most vulnerable to climate change, in particular the Least Developed Countries and the Small Island Developing States. GCCA is the main implementing channel for the EU fast start commitments related to climate change adaptation. The overall objective of the SPC GCCA: PSIS is to support the governments of nine smaller Pacific Island states, namely Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Tonga and Tuvalu, in their efforts to tackle the adverse effects of climate change. The purpose of the project is to promote long-term strategies and approaches to adaptation planning and pave the way for more effective and coordinated aid delivery to address climate change at the national and regional level. Following a regional workshop on Climate Finance and Proposal Preparation held in Apia, Samoa, 26 – 27 October 2012, and supported by the Asia-Pacific Adaptation Network (APAN), Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme (SPREP) and SPC, six of the countries (Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Niue and Tuvalu) involved in the GCCA: PSIS project expressed their interest in having a national training workshop on project proposal preparation using the logical framework approach. This training program responds to that expressed need. Learning Objectives The overall learning objectives of the training course is to build participant capacity in proposal preparation using the logical framework approach. More specifically at the end of this training programme  participants will be able to describe and perform all the steps of the Logical Framework Approach to develop a verified quality logframe matrix  participants will be able to describe and complete the key components of a funding application by pulling relevant data from the logframe matrix.  participants will be more aware of the donors and grant funding programs that can be accessed by PSIS to fund climate change adaptation projects. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 2 Learner Guide Icons A range of icons are used throughout the body of this guide to signal when you have to do something such as completing a learning activity or assessment task. Learning Activities are there to help you reflect on and consolidate your learning. Readings are provided to guide you to further technical information to allow you to further build upon the learning objectives. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 3 SECTION 2. HOW THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH FITS IN THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CYCLE  Introduction to the Project Management Cycle (PMC)  Introduction to the Logical Framework Approach (LFA)  How the LFA fits in to the PMC  Critiques of the use of LFA  Using the LFA to inform project proposal development Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 4 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT CYCLE Projects follow a sequence of phases, called the Project Management Cycle (PMC). The PMC is represented in Figure 1. The phases are explained in Table 1. A project is defined as a set of specific activities within a set timeline. This is different to a programme which typically has a broader scope, and can consist of several ongoing projects within a broader timeframe. Figure 1. The Project Management Cycle Identification Evaluation Analysis Implementation Design Table 1. Phases in the Project Management Cycle Step Description Identification This is where a project idea is proposed, based on the identification of a need or opportunity for funding. Analysis This is where research is undertaken to gain a better understanding of the project and the context in which it is situated. This includes reviewing past project proposals that relate to the project idea, reviewing evaluation reports, and engaging with stakeholders. Design This is where the project design is developed, based on the analysis undertaken in the previous phase. The design will inform the project proposal. Implementation This is where the project, if successful in receiving funding, is implemented. Regular monitoring during the implementation allows the project team to assess whether activities and outputs are delivered as planned, and for changes to be made to adapt to circumstances. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 5 Evaluation This is where the project is assessed against its goal and objective(s), based on agreed targets outlined in the monitoring and evaluation plan. Lessons and recommendations for improvement are made to inform future project identification and design. Note that different sources may use different terms for the phases of the PMC. The LFA principally sits within ‘analysis’ and ‘design’ phases of the PMC. This will be explored in greater detail later in this learner guide. INTRODUCTION TO THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH (LFA) The Logical Framework Approach (LFA) is a widely used project management tool resulting from a push in the late 1960s to professionalise and bring greater accountability to the development field (Wield, 2003). The LFA is described as “a set of interlocking concepts which must be used together in a dynamic fashion to develop a well-designed, objectively-described and evaluable project” (PCI, 1979: 2). It is important to understand the ‘interlocking’ aspect of the LFA, as it is this that leads to its usefulness. One step of the LFA feeds into the subsequent step, and builds the knowledge base upon which to design successful interventions. The steps in the LFA are briefly outlined in Table 2, and covered in greater detail in the next section of this guide. Table 2. Steps making up the LFA Step Description Stakeholder This is where the views of stakeholders are identified and their roles and analysis impact on the project concept are assessed. Problem analysis This is where the core problem is identified, and the causes and effects are articulated in a diagram called a problem tree. Solution analysis This is where the possible solutions are identified, based on reversing the negative statements in the problem tree to form a means-end relationship. Strategy analysis This is where possible solutions are compared against each other and assessed against likelihood of success, cost-efficiency, alignment with organisational strategies and objectives, and any other relevant criteria. Logframe matrix This is the output of the strategy analysis, represented in a 4x4 matrix, which outlines the key elements of the proposed project design and their relationships to each other. It is important to distinguish between the LFA, which is a process, and the logframe matrix, which is a product, or output from the LFA. The LFA is a participatory approach to project design, in that it requires the input of diverse stakeholders. One way to view the LFA is as a diagnostic tool, one which helps to understand why things are way they are, and who (people, organisations etc.) has a role in the way things are the way they are. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 6 The LFA is also a dynamic process, in that each step can be revisited throughout the life of the project. It is not a one-way process. Within projects, there are a number of basic levels of responsibility attributable to the project team, which are also reflected in the LFA. These are described in Table 3. Table 3. Levels of responsibility attributable to the project team Level Description Inputs The resources that are brought in to a project (e.g. funding, experienced staff, materials and technology). Activities The things that are done with the inputs as a means to accomplish our desired objectives (e.g. train people, develop materials, run workshops etc.). Outputs The products or services that the project is committed to producing as a result of the activities. These must be stated as results, which the project team is responsible for delivering, or show cause as to why these were not delivered. Purpose What the outputs are supposed to lead to. This is what the project is predicted to achieve, in terms of a core objective, such as a change in condition of people, community or their environment, if other factors outside of the control of the project align themselves in a positive manner. Goal By accomplishing the purpose, the project is expected to contribute towards an overall objective. History of the LFA The LFA’s roots go back to the early 1970s, when USAID began to implement what was then a new approach to project design. The LFA was a response to three systemic issues in development projects (PCI, 1979):  Project planning was to vague – it was unclear how activities led to objectives being met, and what constituted a successful project  Management responsibility was unclear – the scope of the project that the project team was responsible for delivering was not clear, and neither were assumptions outside of the project’s control clearly identified.  Evaluation was an adversarial process – as a result of unclear objectives and project scope, there were no clear targets to assess the project against. This led to disagreements amongst stakeholders as to what constituted a successfully project. The essence of the LFA is captured in the quote below (PCI, 1979: 3): [The LFA] does not provide answers or make decisions; but it organizes information in such a way that the important questions can be asked, project weaknesses can be identified, and decision- makers can make decisions based on their increased insight and knowledge. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 7 Benefits of the LFA The LFA process has a number of benefits:  It is a participatory process allowing the views of different stakeholder to be identified  It helps articulate the causes and effects to an issue, based on real and perceived reasons as identified by stakeholders.  It allows possible solutions to be identified and different strategies to be analysed  Uncertainty within the project is made explicit  The selected means-end relationship is made clear  It provides a guide for a meaningful monitoring and evaluation plan, where the targets upon which the project success is to be assessed are made clear to all stakeholders. Some key points to remember:  The LFA should be seen as a project management tool, and not an end it itself.  The LFA is a process of interlinked steps, culminating in the development of a logframe matrix.  The logframe matrix is a high level summary of the proposed intervention’s logic, and it’s usefulness is dependent on the thoroughness of the process that led to its development. The ‘Logical Framework - A Manager’s Guide To A Scientific Approach To Design & Evaluation’ (PCI, 1979) provides a detailed guide to the background and process of the LFA. http://usaidsite.carana.com/sites/default/files/resources/pdfs/The-Logical- Framework-A-Managers-Guide.pdf HOW THE LFA FITS IN THE PMC The LFA is a useful project management tool to assist in the design of successful projects. The different steps of the LFA fit into different phases of the PMC as represented in Figure 2 in bold font. Other activities related to the LFA and project proposal development are also identified. It is important to note that the LFA is a dynamic process, which means that the LFA and its components can be revisited at any time within the PMC. This is particularly true for the logframe matrix, which should be reviewed and revised or adapted as necessary during the project implementation phase. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 8 Figure 2. How the LFA fits into the PMC Initial issue or project need / Identification opportunity  Evaluate against Stakeholder analysis logframe and M&E plan  Identify success factors, Problem analysis lessons and recommendations Evaluation Analysis Solution analysis Strategy selection  Monitoring against logframe and M&E plan Logframe matrix Review and revise Implementation Design logframe Activity & Resource schedules  Monitoring &  Monitoring & Evaluation (M&E) Plan Evaluation (M&E) Plan finalised (draft) Proposal assessed and  Project proposal funding received finalised  Project teams should allow sufficient time to undertake the LFA prior to the deadline for proposals. At a minimum, you should allow one month to undertake the steps of the LFA. CRITIQUE OF THE USE OF THE LFA The LFA has been widely criticised in the literature (Aune, 2003; Crawford & Bryce, 2003; Dale, 2003; Mikkelsen, 2005; Pollack, 2007; Wield, 2003) for being, amongst other things:  Output focussed, rather than process oriented,  Representative of a rigid, blueprint, top-down planning approach,  Having little room for wide-ranging stakeholder participation, especially beneficiaries,  Being policy neutral on such aspects as income distribution and gender,  An expert’s tool to control planning, due to training requirement and language that is used, and  Inadequate for monitoring and evaluation. Critiques around specific steps of the LFA and potential ways to overcome the constraints are outlined in Table 4. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 9 Table 4. Critiques of the LFA Critique Means to overcome Stakeholder analysis is a ‘quick’ process Allow adequate time to undertake a thorough whereby experts from outside the project area stakeholder analysis. will briefly analyse the views of the major stakeholders, such as government agencies, Use of Participatory Learning and Action (PLA) non-government organisations, community tools can complement the stakeholder analysis representatives etc, but not necessarily the process. views of the intended beneficiaries, or those which may be marginalised in the community, Note that PLA tools need to be used such as women, the aged, the infirm, or appropriately to ensure that the information is children. Language used is of a technical nature valid, otherwise it can be misused in the same and can further marginalise beneficiaries, manner as the LFA reinforcing the top-down managerial aspect of the LFA. Problem and Solution analysis reflect a Use a ‘soft’ or ‘flexible’ approach to project reductionist approach to project management management, which is grounded in an whereby complex situations are artificially interpretive theory and practice, inductive simplified and explained by simple cause-effect reasoning and exploratory techniques. Such and means-end relationships. This ‘hard’ soft techniques focus on problem structuring, paradigm approach is not always applicable, or thereby allowing goals to be re-defined appropriate, in situations where systemic effects throughout the project life. may be present, or where there is a need to focus on human relations, rather than technical Undertake continuous reviews of the LFA problems. incorporate new ideas and changes in direction. Logframe matrix reflects a rigid, blueprint It is important to note that the LF matrix is a planning, and top-down control over ‘planning’ tool, and that it does not stand development projects. This is based on viewing alone, but is the culmination of preceding the logframe matrix as a static document. steps which inform the matrix. It is there to assist project teams to understand projects at given phases. If a soft paradigm approach is taken, the project manager takes on the role of a facilitator, rather than an expert, and allows for iterations to be fed into the project design and implementation, with changes in the matrix reflecting the evolution of the project. This includes reviewing assumptions and noting changes in the external environment. The ‘Use and Abuse of the Logical Framework Approach’ (Bakewell & Garbutt, 2005) provides a succinct overview of the criticism of the LFA and why it remains the most popular tool amongst funding agencies to guide proposal development. http://www.intrac.org/data/files/resources/518/The-Use-and-Abuse-of-the-Logical- Framework-Approach.pdf Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 10 USING THE LFA TO INFORM PROJECT PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT The LFA provides a tool for the project team to gather the relevant information to understand and articulate the need and means for a successful intervention. The logframe matrix, which is the product of the LFA, provides the framework from which to write up a proposal to a funding agency. It is important to recognise that the LFA precedes the writing of the proposal. The LFA will simplify the process of proposal writing by allowing the project team to clearly understand the need for the project and the context in which it sits, how goal and objective(s) of the project, how these will be met, and the assumptions that need to be met for the project to be successful (Figure 3). Many donors require a logframe matrix as part of a funding proposal, and trying to develop the matrix without the preceding steps of the LFA will lead to difficulty in the proposal writing, and is likely to become evident to the funding agency that reviews the proposal. This may jeopardise the likelihood of being successful in getting funding. As such, you should not retrofit a matrix to an already written proposal. Figure 3. The LFA precedes the writing of the proposal Stakeholder Problem & analysis solution The context analysis The who Strategy The why analysis & logframe The how matrix Write project proposal Note that in addition to using the LFA to guide the development of a project proposal, you can also undertake some preliminary desktop research such as reading evaluation reports related to the project idea, reviewing past project proposals to make sure that you are not covering old ground, and other forms of literature related to the theme of interest. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 11 CASE STUDY The following fictional case study will be used during the training workshop to demonstrate the steps of the logical framework approach. Vaima is a small outer-island situated over three days sailing from the capital. Vaima’s population is around 600 people, and has been decreasing over recent years due to outwards migration towards the capital and larger nearby countries. The main factor driving outwards migration has been the lack of economic opportunity. Vaima’s main food products are fishing of the lagoon, with some limited open-ocean fishing, as well as cultivating root crops, bananas and paw-paw. The main income earning opportunities for Vaima are from the export of fish. Traditionally, Vaima’s fishers have dried surplus fish to sell to neighbouring islands within a half-day’s sail, as well as to the capital, where dried fish is sought after at the weekly markets. The ability of Vaima’s fishers to export dried fish is reliant on the scheduled inter-island cargo service. At present, the inter-island boat that comes from the capital and takes exports back is scheduled to visit Vaima every two weeks, but the services rarely run to schedule due to frequent breakdowns and inclement weather affecting timing. This not only impacts the ability to send dried fish to the capital, but also prevents the importing of salt and soy sauce which are necessary for the marinating and drying process. There have been occasions when the inter-island boat has not visited Vaima for six weeks, and stocks of salt and soy sauce had run out, preventing the drying of excess fish catch. Though they can continue selling to neighbouring islands, the market there is limited due to equally small populations. Vaima’s fishers would also like to diversify their exports to include frozen fish as there is an increasing demand for this in the capital, as well as internationally. The open ocean off Vaima’s coast is a rich tuna fishing ground. However, there is no large-scale freezing capacity on Vaima. A scoping study conducted several years back by a regional organisation indicated that a 5-tonne blast chiller would be feasible on Vaima, but this would also require upgrading the power supply on the island. The current generator is not sufficient for such a large freezer, and the power supply is currently limited to 18 hours per day. Another limiting factor may be the lack of open-ocean boats in Vaima. As the fishers traditionally fished in the lagoon, most boats are small. These can only venture to the open sea when the weather allows it. A number of fishers have been successful in getting small loans to purchase larger boats with larger engines, and there are a number of other fishers who are looking to do the same. If Vaima’s fishers are to export frozen fish, they would also require the inter-island cargo vessel to upgrade its on-board freezer to allow frozen fish to be maintained at minus 30 degrees Celsius. Alternatively, specialised fishing boats that currently operate out of the capital could be chartered to visit Vaima and load up frozen fish for sale in the capital. An NGO based in the capital has developed a business case to show that chartering a fishing boat for fortnightly visits would be cost-effective for Vaima’s fishers to export their frozen fish. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 12 Vaima’s fishers have recently established a co-operative and are working with the Government’s Fishery Department and the NGO to prepare a funding submission to look at what can be done to improve the economic base of Vaima. From the case study above, what is the general issue facing the people of Vaima? Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 13 SECTION 3. THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH  Stakeholder analysis  Problem analysis  Solution analysis  Strategy analysis  Logframe matrix  Project plan  Budget Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 14 STEP 1. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS The stakeholder analysis is the first step in the LFA and it forms the foundation for the following steps. A stakeholder can be defined as any individuals, groups of people, institutions or organisations that may have a significant interest in the success or failure of a potential project around the issue of concern. These may be affected either positively or negatively by a proposed project. When considering stakeholders, it is important to identify both those that are directly targeted by the proposed project, and those that may ultimately benefit from the project’s outcomes. When identifying stakeholders, it is important to consider potentially marginalised groups, such as women, the elderly, youth, the disabled and the poor, so that they are represented in the process, especially if the issue will affect their lives. It is important to identify and understand the different stakeholders and their varying levels of interest, motivation, and capacity that they bring to the issue. Having these matters identified and clarified will make the process of identifying the causes of the problem and potential solutions much easier. How to undertake a stakeholder analysis The stakeholder analysis should be undertaken at a minimum one month prior to the deadline for a project proposal to allow enough time to undertake the process in a thorough manner. The main steps involved in stakeholder analysis are: 1. Clearly identify the issue of concern, 2. Identify all those groups who have a significant interest in the issue. You can use a ‘snowball’ process where you ask each stakeholder to help identify other stakeholders that may have an interest. 3. Investigate, using interviews, surveys, or group workshops, each stakeholder’s role, interest, motivation and capacity (strengths and weaknesses) to participate in the potential project. Also identify their relative power to affect the project, whether positively or negatively. 4. Identify their relationship with other stakeholders, as to whether it is one of cooperation or conflict. 5. Interpret the results of the stakeholder analysis to inform the project design. Questions that you can ask yourself as you review the information include:  Are you targeting those that most need it?  Are stakeholders sufficiently engaged in the issue to have a sense of ownership over the issue and potential solutions?  Are conflicts amongst stakeholder recognised and being addressed? Tools to undertake a stakeholder analysis A number of tools can be used to gather and present information as part of the stakeholder analysis. These are presented in Table 5. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 15 Table 5. Tools that can be used with the stakeholder analysis Tool Description Stakeholder matrix This is the most common tool used in completing a stakeholder analysis. The stakeholder matrix has a number of columns that guide the type of information that is to be collected. A generic stakeholder matrix is presented in Figure 5. Extra columns can be added to collect additional information if this is considered important for specific projects. SWOT analysis SWOT stands for ‘strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats’. Relevant questions to ask in a SWOT analysis are provided below. It is a useful tool to analyse the internal strengths and weaknesses of an organisation and the external opportunities and threats that it faces. You may decide to do a SWOT only for the key stakeholders Venn diagram A Venn diagram provides a visual means to represent the relationship between different stakeholders. The size of the circle depicts the relative influence of an organisation, and its closeness or separation from others indicates the relative interaction or relationship between organisations. Question to ask in a SWOT analysis (Natural Solutions Pacific, 2012) Strengths Weaknesses What advantages does your organisation have in What is your organisation not so good at? Try to be relation to the project? honest and as open as you can. What is your organisation particularly good at? What could be improved upon? What makes your organisation special – what What stops your organisation performing at its particular strengths does you organisation have? best? What necessary skills are missing that you might need for delivering the project? Opportunities Threats Where do you see the best forthcoming What obstacles does the project face? opportunities for the project? What are others doing that might create problems What is changing in the outside world that might for the project in the near future? create new opportunities for the project in the near What high-risk things are you doing that might make future? you vulnerable to external impacts? Figure 5. Example of a stakeholder matrix Stakeholder How they are affected by the Relationship with other issue stakeholders (partnership/conflict) Stakeholder 1 Stakeholder 2 Stakeholder ……. Who are the stakeholders relevant to the case study presented on page 12? List the stakeholders. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 16 The European Commission’s (2004) ‘Aid Delivery Methods, Volume 1 Project Cycle Management Guidelines’ provides a detailed guide to undertaking a stakeholder analysis, and the various tools that can be used. See section 5.2.2. http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/infopoint/publications/europeaid/49a_en.htm STEP 2.PROBLEM ANALYSIS The problem analysis is a process that identifies the cause-effect relationship. The result is commonly known as a ‘problem tree’. A problem analysis should ideally be undertaken as a participatory process involving those stakeholders that have the greatest influence on a project’s likely success, including the target group and ultimate beneficiary. Depending on the relationships between stakeholders, and practicalities, it may be necessary to undertake several problem analyses with various stakeholders, and for the project team to analyse these and consolidate them into a single problem tree. The problem analysis process is as important as the final product (the problem tree) in that it provides the stakeholders to critically analyse and reflect on the causes to a specified problem. By having different stakeholders present, different views and interests can be expressed and this can be a learning and empowering process for all those that take part. The problem tree that is produced should be a robust but simplified version of reality. The problem tree cannot be too complicated or it will not be useful as a guide to tackling the problem. “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.” (EC, 2004). In identifying the causes to a problem, it helps to have a basic understanding of behaviour change as changing an aspect of the human condition is critical to most development issues. Behaviour change goes beyond providing more knowledge about what to do, or why to do something. Other factors may have an important role in resistance to change. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 17 The Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) describes three critical factors that determine the likelihood of a desired behaviour taking place. These are: Personal beliefs A person’s beliefs whether a specific behaviour will have a positive or negative outcome. This will determine whether the person has a positive or negative attitude to the specific behaviour. Normative beliefs What people who are considered important to a person (e.g. family, peers, leaders) think of a specific behaviour. Control beliefs The internal and external factors that facilitate or prevent a specific behaviour taking place. This includes infrastructure, laws, or a person’s real or perceived capabilities/skills to undertake the specific behaviour. It is useful to keep these factors in mind when thinking about causes to a problem, in that it may not just be a ‘lack of knowledge’ that prevents a desired behaviour from taking place, but also norms and the presence of infrastructure or regulations. Community-based social marketing (CBSM; McKenzie-Mohr, 1999) is a framework to design behaviour change interventions. CBSM outlines a range of ‘tools’ designed to overcome barriers to behaviour change. These are also useful to keep in mind in developing the problem tree, solution tree and the logframe matrix. For more information on behaviour change, visit: http://www.evaluationtoolbox.net.au/ - look under the ‘behaviour change’ tab http://www.cbsm.com/ http://www.behaviourworksaustralia.org/ How to undertake a problem analysis Undertaking a problem analysis is a participatory process that can take a half day to a full day to complete, depending on the complexity of the project, and the number of stakeholders taking part. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 18 The process requires a facilitator experienced in the LFA to ensure that all participants can have their say. The process also requires sticky notes, or pieces of paper and ‘blu-tack’ or sticky-tape, as well as a wall, window or other surface to place the pieces of paper. Prior to the problem analysis workshop, the facilitator or project team may want to brief the participants on the issue (i.e. summarise any relevant reports or literature that may provide an insight). This may be done prior to the problem analysis workshop as a briefing paper, or a short presentation prior to developing the problem tree. The steps to undertake a problem tree are: 1. Get participant agreement on what the core problem is. The facilitator can ask all the participants to write down what they think the core problem is on a piece of paper, and then these are posted on the wall. This may be the most challenging part, as stakeholders, and even members of the project team, may have different views. Each piece of paper can be reviewed and discussed as to whether it is a cause to a higher level problem, or an effect. Once a problem statement has been settled on, it may need to be rephrased so that it is specific to a target group and place (who, what, where). How to write a problem statement A problem statement should be phrased as a specific negative situation related to the human condition (development or environmental issue). It should also not be the absence of a solution. For example, ‘low use of LFA in funding applications’ is a problem, whereas ‘lack of knowledge in LFA’ is not. The latter implies overcoming knowledge on its own will fix the problem. A problem statement should not be too broad. The problem should be able to be overcome as a result of your project. The problem statement now has to achieve the ‘who, what, where’ criteria: ‘low rate of success in funding applications by government staff in PSIS’ 2. Once the core problem is settled on, the participants identify the hierarchy of causes and effects (Figure 6). Causes are placed below the problem, and effects above. The question for the facilitator and participants to keep in mind is ‘what causes that’? The identification of causes may lead to considerable discussion, and ‘cause statements’ may be moved about as a result. It is important for the facilitator to ensure that there is general agreement before moving statements around. If there are two or more causes, these can be placed at the same level. The process of identifying causes and effects keeps going until there are no more additions. An example of a problem tree is presented in Figure 7. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 19 Figure 6. Identifying the causes and effects of a core problem 3. The problem tree that has been created can be reviewed. Any gaps should be noted and rectified by adding causes or effects. Once this is done, the problem tree needs to be copied onto paper, or into a software package (e.g. DoView ® http://www.doview.com/. Arrows should be added to connect causes and effects. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 20 Figure 7. Example of a problem tree for the Vaima case study Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 21 STEP 3.SOLUTION ANALYSIS The solution analysis flows on from the problem analysis, and can be undertaken as part of the same workshop. It requires flipping negative statements in the problem tree into positive ones to form a solution tree. The cause-effect relationship from the problem tree is converted into a means-ends relationship in the solution tree. An example of a solution tree is presented in Figure 8. How to undertake a solution analysis 1. Flip negative statements into positive ones. Don’t be afraid to reword the statements as required so they make sense. 2. Review the means-ends relationship. Questions to ask include:  Are there gaps in the logic? If so, add a step where necessary.  Are the lower order objectives realistic and achievable? 3. Once there is a general agreement on the solution tree, transfer it onto paper or a software programme. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 22 Figure 8. Example of a solution tree for the Vaima case study Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 23 STEP 4.STRATEGY ANALYSIS The strategy analysis involves reviewing the solution tree created in the previous step and analysing the different solutions (or means) to achieve the core objective or purpose. This may involve reviewing the options against a set of criteria. For example:  The expected contribution of different solutions to the strategic objectives and priorities of both the project proponent and funding organisation  The complementarity with existing or planned projects  Lessons learnt from previous projects, and reviews of best-practice  Preferences of key stakeholders, including the target group and project partners  Benefits to the target group, and ultimate beneficiaries  Cost efficiency and technical feasibility of implementation  The sustainability of different approaches (i.e. the likelihood that benefits will be maintained without further intervention)  Environmental, social and economic impacts. The strategy analysis will select one or more paths which will form the basis of completing the logframe matrix. Following on from the example solution tree in Figure 8, a strategy to achieve the core objective is presented in Figure 9. In this example, two pathways were selected, based on there being a separate complementary project to provide microfinance to fishers to purchase new boats. If there was no microfinance project, all three pathways would need to be tackled by this project, otherwise there would be a gap in the means to achieve the core objective. If pathways are not tackled by your project, these can be considered assumptions (which are discussed in greater detail in Step 5, the logframe section, of this guide), which are things that need to occur beyond the scope of your project for your core objective to be achieved. In the Vaima example, the assumption would be that ‘fishers have access to loans, or are able to purchase boats’. The ‘Integrated Planning Process, Project Design & Proposal Writing Guide’ by the American Red Cross (2006) explains two tools to guide the selection of strategies- see pages 17 & 18. http://ngolearning.org/evanspmclass/Shared%20Documents/RedCrossLogframes.pdf Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 24 Figure 9. Selecting a strategy (boxes highlighted in blue) to meet the core objective of the Vaima case study Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 25 STEP 5.LOGFRAME MATRIX The logframe matrix displays the key elements of a project design and their relationships to each other in a way that facilitates project analysis, and guides project implementation and monitoring and evaluation. The logframe matrix is generally presented as a table with four columns, and four or five rows (Table 5). The terminology used in the matrix can differ between organisations (see Appendix 1). It is therefore important to clarify amongst project partners, funders and other stakeholders the terminology to be used. The terminology used in the matrix below is defined in Table 3. Table 5. Example logframe matrix Indicators Source of verification Assumptions Goal / Overall objective Purpose / Core objective Outputs / Results Activities In developing a logframe matrix, the following points need to be considered:  The matrix should provide a summary of the project design, and its length will be dictated by the project’s complexity. It should generally be between one and four pages in length.  If the logframe is too long, the project may not be focussed enough. If the logframe is too short, it may be missing parts.  The matrix should only describe the main, or indicative, activities. The detailed activities should be documented separately in an activity schedule. “If you can still ask ‘how?’ questions and not find the answer in the draft Logframe (with the accompanying draft workplan showing activities), then it is not complete.” Red Cross (2006: 23). The completion of the matrix will be guided by the selected strategy, where the higher level ends (top section of solution tree) will form the goal, the purpose (centre) will transfer across, and the outputs and activities will be based on the means (bottom section) to achieve the purpose (Figure 10). Completing the matrix is usually undertaken in a sequential manner, as presented in Figure 11. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 26 Elements from the selected strategy may need to be re-written as they are transferred into the matrix. The first column of the matrix, which presents the project’s hierarchy of objectives, will now be described in greater detail, along with the other columns. Figure 10. How the selected strategy guides the completion of the matrix Figure 11. Sequence to complete the matrix Indicators Source of verification Assumptions Goal / Overall objective 1 8 9 Purpose / 2 10 11 7 Core objective Outputs / 3 12 13 6 Results Activities 4 5 Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 27 Project description The project description outlines the project’s objectives hierarchy, or the logic that supports the project (Figure 12). This is also known as the vertical logic. It describes, reading from the bottom-up, how the project will achieve its ends. Figure 12. The project description outlines the intervention’s logic There are general rules to follow in writing the statements in the project description column. These are described in Table 6. Table 6. Rules relating to the project description Goal Refer to the major issues, thematic areas related to programme or development policies and strategies Refer to your focus population and location Project will only partially contribute to achieving the goal Use clear and concise terminology: “To contribute to…..” is often used Purpose Should only be one purpose. If there is more than one purpose, this may require separate problem trees and logframe matrices that outline linked projects within a broader programme. More specific than the goal and refers to target group, specific location and time period The project should be designed to achieve the purpose Use verbs like: decreased, increased, strengthened, enhanced, improved Outputs Tangible services or products delivered as a result of the activities Project can be held accountable to the delivery of outputs Verbs like: delivered, conducted, produced etc. Number outputs (e.g. 1,2,3) so that they can be linked to activities Activities What will take place to create the outputs Use present tense written with active verb Verbs like: train, provide, produce, establish, create, conduct Number activities to match outputs (e.g. 1.1, 1.2, 2.1, 2.2 etc.) Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 28 Inputs are generally not included in the project description column. They can sometimes be included adjacent to the activities (in the indicator column) and a high level summary of the budget may then be included in the sources of verification column. The format to be adopted should be guided by the requirements of the funding organisations (refer to their guidelines) as well as what makes sense to you and the project team. Review the purpose statements below, and reflect on whether they are correctly worded. Change the wording as required. Original statement To contribute to the prevention and control of climate sensitive diseases Improving rainwater catchment for households in Nauru Strengthened environmental monitoring Assumptions Assumptions refer to key factors outside the direct control of the project team which must hold true if the project is to achieve its results, purpose or goal. If the assumptions do not hold true (certain events do not occur), then this may have a negative impact on the project. Identifying assumptions (or risks) are critical as these may have a strong influence on the project’s likelihood of success. Assumptions form part of the vertical logic of the matrix (Figure 13). Note that there are no assumptions for the ‘goal’ and thus the assumptions column is left blank. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 29 Figure 13. Assumptions refer to factors outside the project’s control that are critical to the project’s vertical logic For example: If you charter a vessel (activity) AND the vessel does not break down because it is well maintained (assumption) THEN there will be reliable and frequent cargo transport (output) An assumption is worded as a positive statement of a condition that must be met in order for the project’s purpose to be achieved. An assumption can also be seen as a risk to the projects if the assumption does not hold true. A risk is as assumption reworded as a negative statement. A risk matrix can be used to guide which assumptions need to be included in logframe (Figure 14). This requires turning assumptions into risks, and including into the matrix those that can be managed, and excluding those that pose little risk (i.e. those that have a low impact and low probability of occurring). An example of flipping an assumption into a risk is presented below Assumption Risk Impact if risk Likelihood of the risk Action to take occurs. occurring Relevant staff Relevant staff High - The Low, - Stakeholder analysis able to attend are unable to project will not identified high level of training attend training succeed unless management support for relevant staff the training. They will attend training release staff from duties to What action attend training. should you take? Note that risks that have a high likelihood of occurring, and have a high impact, should lead to the project being redesigned, as these are likely to impact the project’s success. Assumptions have to be carefully specified and worded to allow continuous monitoring. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 30 Figure 14. A risk matrix can be used to guide the selection of assumptions Indicators Indicators provide a means to assess the project’s success. This is especially important for the purpose and goal, as these may be interpreted differently by various stakeholders. One way to think of indicators is to visualise what a successful project would look like, that is, what conditions would be met. Indicators need to be closely linked to what you are trying to measure, so that you are confident that what you undertook was an important factor in the observed result. Indicators must be targeted. This means that they need to specify the quantity of change expected, the quality of the desired change, and the timeframe in which the desired change is to occur. You can remember this as (QQT, for quantity, quality, timeframe). Indicators may refer to targets that have already been determined by existing strategies or action plans. An example of adding QQT to an indicator is described in Table 7. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 31 Table 7. Adding quantity, quality and timeframe to an indicator Indicator Increased use of LFA by government staff Quantity 50% increase in use of the LFA by A quantity of 50% increase is twenty government staff specified, as well as the number of staff in which the change is expected Quality 50% increase in correct application of A quality is added, in that the LFA is the LFA by twenty government staff to be correctly applied to the in developing project proposals proposal process. TImeframe 50% increase in correct application of A timeframe is added to specify when the LFA by twenty government staff the desired change is to be achieved, in developing project proposals by and when the indicator should be December 2013 measured. Note that not all indicators can include the three factors QQT. The separate elements can be applied to separate indicators. You cannot use indicators from a lower level to demonstrate achievement of a higher level objective. For example, the indicator for ‘staff trained in using the LFA’ (output level) cannot be used as proof that the purpose has been achieved. There should be more than one indicator selected for each level of the vertical logic, but there should not be too many. The number of indicators to choose should be guided by the confidence required to demonstrate achievement of that particular level of the objective hierarchy. Between two and five indicators is generally sufficient. Both quantitative and qualitative indicators should be used where possible (Table 8). Generally, indicators are not included for activities. Table 8. Quantitative and qualitative data Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative refers to numerical data (eg. Qualitative data deal with words or number of people trained, number of rain tanks communication (whether that is text, voice, or installed etc.). visual). Qualitative research seeks, amongst other, to find out what people are doing and Quantitative methods can reach large number why they are doing it, or what stops them from of people, and generally involve a short changing, the meaning people construct for interaction. The popularity of collecting their actions, and how they see their role and quantitative data reflects the old adage “that actions in the wider scheme of things. you can’t manage what you can’t measure”. Qualitative methods generally involve a longer personal interaction, and reach a lower number of people. Qualitative evaluation trades in quantity of respondents (eg. information gathered from questionnaires or other types of survey) for the fewer respondents, but more in- depth and quality information. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 32 Sources of verification Sources of verification refer to:  How the information for indicators should be collected (survey, document analysis, measurements etc.)  Who should collect it  When it should be collected In determining sources of verification, the project team should consider whether appropriate sources already exist. Where new sources are required, it is important to consider the cost of data collection, as well as how valid and accurate the data collection process is. Where indicators relate to a specific change in a condition, baseline data (what is the current state of things) may be required. This will mean that the source of verification requires both baseline and post-project data and data sources. The indicators and sources for the baseline and post project data may be the same, however you will obviously collect the data at different times in the project. Reviewing the logframe matrix Once drafted, the logframe matrix should be reviewed to assess the:  Vertical logic - whether the means-end relationship (column 1) and assumptions (column 4) makes sense  Horizontal logic –what elements of project design will be measured and how It is important to remember that the matrix represents broad steps, and not a detailed project plan. It is also important to remember that the LFA is an iterative process, and the matrix should be reviewed on a regular basis during the project’s implementation, and changes made accordingly. An example logframe based on the LFA training project is presented in Table 9. Appendix E in ‘The Logical Framework Approach- A summary of the theory behind the LFA method’ by Sida (2004) has a list of questions that are useful to reflect on to ensure the completeness of the LFA and resulting logframe matrix. http://resourcecentre.savethechildren.se/node/2033 Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 33 Table 9. Example of a logframe matrix for the Vaima case study Project Information Indicator Source of Verification Assumptions Goal: 30% of island economy National statistics office To contribute to the derived from frozen fish diversification and exports by 2016 strengthening of the local economy and meeting the sustainable development needs of Vaima Purpose: 40% increase in frozen kg of cargo exported Tuna stocks remain Increased fishing income tuna exported by 2015 before, during and after stable / fishery well from export of frozen 60% increase in frozen managed fish from Vaima to the tuna exported by 2015 Income survey before Continued demand / capital by 2016 65% increase in net and after market for frozen tuna income for ocean fishers Price for tuna does not fall Outputs: Fishers able to access 1. Appropriate, reliable Fortnightly trips Shipping schedule microloans and frequent cargo between Vaima and reports Fishers able to catch transport established capital commencing tuna 2. Blast freezer installed mid-2014 Blast freezer does not on island Over 60% of cargo space Ship log break down 3. Fishery management filled on 80% of trips There is 24hr power plan developed for Blast freezer runs at Freezer log & data supply to freezer ocean fishery off Vaima minus 30oC for over 40 logger weeks a year Quotas for tuna fishery Vaima ocean fishery Catch monitored management plan Catch reports – Dept of Fishery officer Activities: INPUTS BUDGET Charter vessel well 1.1 Find suitable charter Project team time $XXXXX maintained and does not vessel Government partners’ break down 1.2 Develop agreement time Fuel for generator with charter vessel NGO time and reports available / affordable 1.3 Develop shipping (CBA fishing charter) schedule Donor funds 2.1 Purchase blast freezer 2.2 Upgrade or replace existing generator 2.3 Test run blast freezer 3.1 Identify fish stocks 3.2 Engage with fishers and determine likely fishing effort 3.3 Develop fishery management plan and communicate to fishers Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 34 STEP 6. ACTIVITY SCHEDULING The logframe matrix should represent a high-level overview of the project’s intervention logic, and how this will be monitored and evaluated. The intervention is documented by specifying only the high level activities to be implemented. The details of the activities to be implemented should be described in an activity schedule, and if required, a Gantt chart. Activity scheduling An activity schedule describes all the activities to be undertaken in enough detail so that a member of the project team, project partner, or funding agency staff can fully understand what will be done, and use this to identify what resources are required. The steps in developing an activity schedule are: 1. List all project activities List all the activities required to complete the project. These are likely to be greater than what is in the logframe matrix. Keep the numbers that were assigned to activities and add numbers to new activities as required. (eg. 1.1 XXXX 1.2 YYYY ) 2. Break activities into two or more manageable The level of detail should be based on having tasks sufficient detail to estimate the resources required. Add another level of number to show how the tasks link to the activities. (e.g 1.1.1 XXXaa 1.1.2 XXXbb 1.2.1 YYYYaaa 1.2.2 YYYbbbb) 3. Identify responsibilities Identify the people (who and how many people, or organisation and position) responsible for delivering specific tasks. 4. Determine the timeline of activities Identify estimated start and end date (what month, or what quarter of the year for long projects) for each task. When developing a Gantt chart, more exact dates and the sequence and interdependence of tasks and activities needs to be clarified. 5. Determine key milestones Identify the key events that provide a measure of progress towards meeting the targets. An example of an activity schedule is presented in Table 10. A Gantt chart can be developed in Microsoft Excel, or using special software such as Microsoft Project, or other similar packages like the free GanttProject www.ganttproject.biz. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 35 Table 10. Example activity schedule for Vaima case study 2014 Ref. # Responsibility Jan Feb Mar Apr 1 Output: Appropriate, reliable and frequent cargo 1.1 Activity: Find suitable charter vessel PM 1.1.1 Task: Develop tender or request for PM services and advertise 1.1.2 Review responses PM 1.1.3 Visit shortlisted candidates to PM and DMT inspect for seaworthiness and officer freezer capacity/maintenance 1.1.4 Select most suitable vessel PM and DMT officer Responsibility Legend PM Project Manager DMT Department of Marine Transport STEP 7.RESOURCE SCHEDULING Project resources and budget required should be presented in a resource schedule. A thorough understanding of the costs of a project is critical for funding agencies as this will influence the decision to invest in the project. In determining the costs, it is important to be realistic as an under- costed project will impact negatively on the project’s implementation, and likelihood of success. An over-costed project may not get funded. The steps in developing a resource schedule are: 1. Copy the activities from the activity schedule into a resource schedule template. 2. Identify the inputs or resources (capital and human) required to fulfil each activity and list them under broad categories such as equipment and salaries. The resources will be guided by the tasks outlined in the activity schedule. 3. Identify the amount of resources required, the cost, and allocate the cost to a funding source (e.g. donor, project proponent, supporting partner). 4. Calculate the total cost. An example of an activity schedule is presented in Table 11. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 36 Table 11. Example resource schedule Activity Quantity per Unit Cost per period Donor In- Total cost period cost ($) ($) ($) kind ($) ($) 2.1 Purchase blast J F M A J F M A freezer Equipment/Capital Blast freezer 1 $15,000 15,000 15,000 Freight 1 $2,000 2,000 2,000 Cement bags 50 $20 1,000 1,000 18,400 Gravel/sand (m3) 10 $40 400 400 Salaries Staff (2) /day 5 10 $200 1,000 2,000 3,000 Technical 8 $200 1,600 1,600 5,320 assistance (2) / day Construction (3pp) 4 $180 720 720 / day … Keep adding activities … Overall totals 3,120 20,600 18,600 5,120 23,720 When developing the resource schedule, keep a look out for opportunities where you can contribute to the funding through in-kind or financial assistance. Demonstrating that your team or country is also contributing to the project demonstrates some commitment and buy-in on your behalf. Also keep a look out for the funding guidelines as there are times when the donor specifies that they want your organisation to provide (match) the funding requested by the donor. Things to consider in developing your budget: Do you need to add a ‘contingency’? This is generally a percentage of the total budget (e.g. 5%) that allows for unforseen costs such as increases in the price of materials, and other expenses above those budgeted. Do you need to consider currency exchange fluctuations in your costing? You may want to cost items in the local currency and then convert them to the currency required by the donor (e.g. USD), and make a note that the cost on the donor’s currency is based on the exchange rate on a certain date. You should clearly note the exchange rate so that the effect of fluctuations on project costs can be assessed. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 37 SECTION 4. MONITORING & EVALUATION  What is a monitoring & evaluation  Developing a monitoring & evaluation framework Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 38 WHAT IS MONITORING & EVALUATION? There are many definitions of evaluation in academic literature and informal websites. For the purpose of this guide, we will define evaluation as a structured process of assessing the success of a project in meeting its goals and to reflect on the lessons learned. Monitoring refers to a process of data collection and analysis which helps serve a number of functions. Firstly, it can be used to determine if a project’s targets are being met. Additionally, monitoring helps determine if a projects inputs and activities (e.g grant funds and workshops) are producing the planned outputs (trained participants). Monitoring helps determine if the way a project is implemented is consistent with its original design. The key difference between monitoring and evaluation is that evaluation is about placing a value judgement on the information gathered during a project, including the monitoring data. The assessment of a project’s success (its evaluation) can be different based on whose value judgement is used. For example, a project manager’s evaluation may be different to that of the project’s participants, or other stakeholders. REASONS TO UNDERTAKE AN EVALUATION To continually improve the delivery of the project To assess whether a project has achieved its intended goals To understand how the project has achieved its intended purpose, or why it may not have done so To identify how efficient the project was in converting resources (funded and in-kind) into activities, outputs and outcomes To assess how sustainable and meaningful the project was for participants To inform decision makers about how to build on or improve a project Evaluation is not just about demonstrating success, it is also about learning why things don’t work. As such, identifying and learning from mistakes is one of the key parts of evaluation. DEVELOPING A MONITORING & EVALUATION FRAMEWORK A monitoring and evaluation (M&E) framework is a document that outlines the program and purpose of the evaluation, what you will collect, when and by whom it is to be collected, what question the information will answer, and the audience you are reporting to. The benefit of a clearly articulated framework is that all stakeholders can be clear about what the evaluation is about and how it will be conducted, and it also provides a risk mitigation measure in the event of changes in staff, whereby new staff can come up to speed on the evaluation. It is advisable to circulate the evaluation framework amongst the intended audience and project stakeholders to ensure that it meets all the requirements and is feasible. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 39 Evaluation purpose & boundaries It is important to scope out your evaluation. This means setting boundaries as to what you seek to answer, and what sort of data you will collect. The logframe matrix will provide the scope of the evaluation, in terms of the purpose, and whether the evaluation extends to the goal (or longer term outcomes). Evaluation questions Evaluation questions are the broad questions that guide the evaluation. These are likely to reflect the values that underpin the evaluation. Evaluation questions should be developed up-front, and in collaboration with the primary audience(s) and other stakeholders who you intend to report to. Evaluation questions go beyond measurements to ask the higher order questions such as whether the intervention is worth it, or could if have been achieved in another way (see Table 12). Overall, evaluation questions should lead to further action such as project improvement, project mainstreaming, or project redesign. In order to answer evaluation questions, monitoring questions must be developed that will inform what data will be collected through the monitoring process. The monitoring questions will ideally be answered through the collection of quantitative and qualitative data. It is important to not leap straight into the collection of data, without thinking about the evaluation questions. Jumping straight in may lead to collecting data that provides no useful information, which is a waste of time and money. Table 12. Broad types of evaluation questions Based on OECD criteria for evaluating development assistance Type of evaluation Evaluation question Relevance To what extent are the objectives of the programme still valid? Are the activities and outputs of the program consistent with the overall goal and the attainment of its objectives? Are the activities and outputs of the program consistent with the intended impacts and effects? Effectiveness To what extent were the objectives achieved / are likely to be achieved? What were the major factors influencing the achievement or non- achievement of the objectives? Efficiency Were activities cost-efficient? Were objectives achieved on time? Was the program or project implemented in the most efficient way compared to alternatives? Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 40 Impact What has happened as a result of the program or project? What real difference has the activity made to the beneficiaries? How many people have been affected? Sustainability To what extent did the benefits of a programme or project continue after donor funding ceased? What were the major factors which influenced the achievement or non- achievement of sustainability of the programme or project? Monitoring & evaluation plan A monitoring and evaluation (M&E) plan is a detailed table that set’s out the high level evaluation questions, specific monitoring questions that sit under the evaluation questions, what is to be collected to answer the questions (indicator of success), and where the information will come from (data source).This builds on the logframe matrix by adding more indicators, data sources etc. as required to answer the key evaluation questions. It is also advisable to assign responsibility for the data collection so that everyone is clear of their roles and responsibilities. You may also want to note any requirements that are needed to collect the data (staff, budget, facilities to run a workshop etc). An evaluation plan template is provided in Appendix 3. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 41 SECTION 5. DEVELOPING PROJECT PROPOSALS  What is a project proposal  How the logframe matrix informs the proposal  Project proposal template Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 42 WHAT IS A PROJECT PROPOSAL A project proposal is a detailed description of a series of activities aimed at solving a certain problem. A proposal is like selling an idea or concept, where the donor is the buyer. You need to know what the buyer is looking for. It is therefore important to undertake research into the type of projects that have been funded in the past, and what the current funding organisation’s priorities are. The proposal should describe in enough detail the:  justification of the project (why is the project it needed?)  methodology and logic of the intervention (how will the project address the need?)  activities and implementation timeline (what is planned and when will it happen)  human, material and financial resources required (inputs) Proposals need to balance providing enough detail without being too lengthy. “The chief purpose of a funding proposal is persuasion, NOT description” (Shapiro, 2011: 4) WRITING A PROJECT PROPOSAL Writing a project proposal should be done once all the steps in the LFA have been completed and the logframe matrix has been developed, though some elements can be done before or in parallel to completing the LFA. Tasks that should be considered before or during the LFA process include:  Making contact with donor’s contact officer. Relationships are important and if the donor knows that your team is submitting a proposal, it may be looked upon favourably, especially if you have asked some questions to confirm your project addresses the donor’s priorities.  Contact colleagues or other organisations that may have received funding from the particular donor  Identifying whether proposal requires completing a template or following specific guidelines  Identifying if the logframe matrix requires a specific format or terminology  Establish a proposal writing team- this may include experts to help with activity and resource scheduling When writing the proposal, it is important to understand the audience that you are writing for. Your research into what they have funded or not funded in the past, what outcomes they seek, and how much they are likely to fund will help guide your proposal writing. HOW THE LOGFRAME MATRIX INFORMS THE PROPOSAL A quality project proposal is the final product of a participatory process that involves research, analysis, learning and feedback from stakeholders. The logframe matrix provides the framework to develop the body of the proposal. You can use the vertical logic to describe your intervention. Your ability to manage or mitigate against risks can be Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 43 demonstrated in a risk matrix based on your assumptions. The indicators and sources of verification will instruct the development of a more thorough M&E plan. The logframe matrix will make your proposal more coherent, logical, appropriate and successful. PROJECT PROPOSAL STRUCTURE The structure of the proposal will be determined by whether the funding agency requires you to complete a specific template or follow guidelines. A generic proposal structure is outlined below (Table 12). Table 12. Example project proposal structure Project title The project title should be short, concise, and refer to the purpose and/or main activity. Project titles that are too long may lead the reader to think that the proposal is vague or unfocussed. Summary The summary should provide a snapshot of the whole proposal. This includes:  the issue that is driving the project  the project’s objectives  the project proponent and partners  key project activities  the total project budget. A summary is generally between 1 – 2 pages in length but can be longer for lengthy proposals. Background / Context This should be a succinct summary of the social, cultural, economic, and environmental background in which the project is situated. It should make reference to existing literature and can also refer to data collected during the stakeholder analysis. Additional supporting information such as large data tables can be presented as appendices to the proposal. Project need This section clearly identifies the core problem, and describes the effects of this problem in order to build the case for intervention. Again Body of the proposal you can pull data from the stakeholder matrix to assist writing this section. Project goal & The project’s goal, purpose, outputs and activities should be described, implementation based on the logframe matrix. The intervention’s logic should be related to the need, problem and the context. The implementation plan should be described in enough detail to provide confidence to the funding organisation that the project has been well thought through and it can be realistically implemented within the budget and timeframe. Here you can also refer to the Logframe matrix in the appendix. Target group The target group should be described in relation to the problem, and why they are being targeted. Ultimate beneficiaries should be identified. Again draw attention to your stakeholder analysis and refer to it as an attached appendix for added strength to your submission. The project proponent The background and experience of the project proponent needs to be (the team / organisation described. Reference can be made to past projects, capacity and submitting the application) capability to deliver on the project, and connections with the target group and the wider context. Budget and timeline A detailed activity schedule and/or Gantt chart, and budget should reflect the planned activities. Monitoring & Evaluation plan A detailed plan that includes the key evaluation questions, indicators, data sources, that cover off on impact, effectiveness, efficiency, Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 44 relevance and sustainability. For a practical guide to developing M&E plans, visit http://www.evaluationtoolbox.net.au/ Appendices Appendices are there to provide material to support your case. Some useful appendices may include:  the logframe matrix  detailed technical description of the project  relevant evaluation reports  optionally, the stakeholder matrix and other LFA outputs. Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 45 SECTION 6. DONORS AND FURTHER RESOURCES  Donors  Further resources on LFA and project proposal Logical Framework Approach – Learner Guide © SPC 2014 46 DONORS Donors are organisations or governments that fund projects. There are several types of funding mechanisms:  Bilateral – where donors are governments that provide funds for specific projects in a country that is prioritised in their foreign aid budget. Examples include AusAid (Australia), NZAid (

Logical Framework Training Learner Guide PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue