Log Frame Analysis

Logical Framework Analysis/Approach (LFA)

OBJECTIVES 1. Introduce Logical Framework Analysis/Approach (LFA) and its uses. 2. Familiarize with the main steps involved in conducting an LFA. 3. Give a concrete example. 4. Exercise on the Project Planning Matrix (?).  

INTRODUCTION LFA was first developed by Practical Concepts Inc. in 1969 for the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). It has since been widely adopted and adapted by the international donor community and is used for participatory project planning, as an analytic tool for project approval, or as a monitoring and evaluation framework.

What is LFA? • A designing approach that can be used for planning, implementing and evaluating projects or programmes.

Purpose of LFA The purpose of LFA is to undertake participatory, objectives-oriented planning that spans the life of project or policy work to build stakeholder team commitment and capacity with a series of workshops. The technique requires stakeholders to come together in a series of workshops to set priorities and plan for implementation and monitoring.

The two terms Logical Framework (LF or Logframe) and the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) are sometimes confused. The LogFrame is a document, the Logical Framework Approach is a project design methodology. For most purposes the three terms; Logical Framework Approach, ZOPP and OOPP are terms for the same project design methodology or process. The terms OOPP and ZOPP mean respectively; Objectives Oriented Project Planning and in German Ziel Orientierte Projek Planung. All three terms refer to a structured meeting process

Steps LFA 1. Situation Analysis – Stakeholder Analysis – Problem Analysis – Objective Analysis 2. Strategy Analysis 3. Project Planning Matrix – Matrix – Assumptions – Objective Indicators – Verification 4. Implementation 5. Monitoring 6. Evaluation

The LFA approach begins by analyzing the existing situation and developing objectives for addressing real needs. A situation analysis has as its core task to find out the actual state of affairs with respect to an issue to be analyzed; it is focused by problems and an attempt to understand the system which determines the existence of the problems. The analysis phase is the most critical, yet most difficult, phase of the logframe approach. The analysis phase consists of three stages: 7.Analysis of stakeholders 8.Analysis of problems

Stakeholders Analysis In using the LFA approach, the stakeholder analysis is an analysis of the problems, fears, interests, expectations, restrictions and potentials of all: • important groups • organisations and institutions • implementing agencies • other projects and • individuals who may have an influence on a situation/(intended) project or are themselves affected by it. Those analyzed in detail should be limited to those who are perceived to: • be able to contribute to questions to be answered . •be important with regard to decisions to be taken. They should constantly be referred to in developing the LFA.

Who are the stakeholders involved in the project and how are they affected?

Key questions to ask in preparation for developing the logframe are:

3.Who will be involved in the logframe development? 4.Where will the development be conducted? 5.Who will facilitate the development of the logframe ? 6.What background materials, papers and expertise may be needed?

The Stakeholders Stakeholders include those who directly benefit from or have a legitimate interest in the company's activities and all those who have an impact and/or are affected by the impact, due to the company's performance and actions. The corporate community and the wider community are all stakeholders. Corporate community includes the management, employees, shareholders, joint ventures/partnerships/subsidiaries, suppliers and contractors, customers and consumers. Wider community includes the ecosystem, the local government, the host communities and the indigenous communities. Foremost, the

Problem Analysis The analysis phase usually begins with an analysis of problems. The problem analysis is undertaken by identifying the main problems and developing a 'problem tree' through an analysis of cause and effects. Key questions. 3.Which are the problems the project is addressing? 4.What are the root causes of those problems? 5.What is the larger picture in which those problems and their root causes exist?

Problem Tree A main output of the problem analysis is the problem tree. The first procedure in problem analysis is brainstorming. Before the brainstorming exercise commences it is important that the facilitator explain the process and the group agrees on some rules for

Agreement and Consensus

If there is no agreement between participants on the statement of the problem, it is unlikely there will be agreement on the solution.  This stage therefore seeks to get consensus on the detailed aspects of the

Brainstorming Brainstorming techniques can be used to identify the main problems. All participants are invited to write their problem ideas on small cards. (approximately 8 in by 4 in.) The participants may write as many cards as they wish. The participants then group the cards or look for cause-effect relationship between the themes on the cards by

Clustering After all of the problems are displayed they should then be clustered into groups of similar issues The problem tree is developed by: 1. moving problems from the clusters of problems 2. adding new problems that emerge 3. problems can be moved up or down the tree as required

Objective Analysis A procedure for systematically 1. identifying 2. categorizing 3. specifying 4. balancing out objectives of all parties involved in a specific situation

Objective Tree In this step the problem statements are converted into objective statements and if possible into an objective tree. 3.Problems are restated as objectives The problem tree is transformed into an objectives tree by restating the problems as objectives. 2. Positive mirror image of the problem tree The objectives tree can be viewed as the

Means and Ends The objectives tree can be considered as an 'ends- means' diagram. The top of the tree is the end that is desired and the lower levels are the means to achieving the end. Based on this objectives tree, certain means are feasible and some are perhaps outside the scope of the problem. Nonetheless, these means provide the foundation for developing programmes, projects or strategies to address the problems discussed earlier.

Just as the problem tree shows causeeffect relationships, the objective tree shows means-end relationships. The means-end relationships show the means by which the project can achieve the desired ends or future desirable conditions. Frequently there are many possible areas that could be the focus of an "intervention" or development project. The next step addresses those choices.

Strategy Analysis • searching for and deciding on solutions • follows the problems and objectives analysis • prerequisite to designing action strategies Points to consider • overall concepts, strategic plans, objectives • people, target groups, organizations, agencies

Conducting a Strategy Analysis 1. ordering sequence of the problem and objective trees 2. clustering objectives 3. feasibility of different interventions 4. continuous task in project management

Alternatives Analysis The objective tree usually shows the large number of possible strategies or means-end links that could contribute to a solution to the problem. Since there will be a limit to the resources that can be applied to the project, it is necessary for the  participants to examine these alternatives and select the most promising strategy. After selection of the decision criteria, these are applied in order to select one or more means-end chains to become the set of objectives that will form the project strategy.

Project Planning Matrix (1) (2) (3) (4)

Matrix Assumptions Objective Indicators Verification

Objectively Verifiable Means of Verification External Factors Narrative Summary Indicators - OVIs  -MOVs (Assumptions)

Development Objective    

 

 

Immediate Objective    

 

 

Outputs (Results) 1. 2.   3.  

 

 

Activities 1. 2. 3. 4.

 

 

Inputs 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Column headings definition of terms Narrative Summary: This term used to describe the text that "narrates" the objectives.  It could have been given the title "Hierarchy of Objectives", but this might be misleading because the bottom cell in the column is a summary of the

Column headings definition of terms Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs): These are the measures, direct or indirect that will verify to what extent the objectives have been fulfilled. The term "objectively" implies that if these should be specified in a way that is independent of  possible bias of the observer.

Column headings definition of terms Means of Verification (MOVs): These statements specify source of the information for the measurements or verification specified in the indicators column. For example, will statistics from an external source be used for the verification or will project resources be used to gather the

Column headings definition of terms External Factors (Assumptions): These are important events, conditions, or decisions which are necessarily outside the control of the project, but which must remain favorable for the project objective to be attained. The implication here is the design team have an obligation to consider what might derail their efforts and to plan responsibly to reduce that risk of

Row headings definition of terms Development Objective: The higher level objective that the project is expected to contribute to. The addition of the word "contribute' implies that this project alone is not expected to achieve the development objective. Other project's immediate objectives are

Row headings definition of terms Immediate Objective: The effect which is expected to be achieved as the result of the project delivering the planned outputs. There is a tendency for this to be expressed in terms of the "change in behavior" of a group, or institution and the project outputs are expected to facilitate this

Row headings definition of terms Outputs: These are the "deliverables" the tangible results that the project management team should be able to guarantee delivering. The objective statements should specify the group or organization that will benefit.

Row headings definition of terms Activities: These are the activities that have to be undertaken by the project to produce the outputs. The activities take time to perform.

Row headings definition of terms Inputs: These are the resources that the project "consumes" in the course of undertaking the activities. Typically they will be human resources, money, materials, equipment, and time.

Vertical Logic • Vertical Logic: The vertical logic is the reasoning which "connects" the  three levels of objectives in the matrix; the outputs, the purpose, and the goal. For example achievement of all the output level objectives should lead to achieving the purpose.  Each of these links between the objectives is connected by a hypotheses.  • For example at the bottom level - the implementation  hypotheses  the implication is "we believe that in the environment of this project the planned outputs will produce the planned result. At

Horizontal Logic • The horizontal logic has similar features to the vertical logic. In this case, the links between the levels of objectives are the items in the  External Factors column. • For example, if the project is successful in implementing all of the planned activities, we ask ourselves, what circumstances or decisions (outside the project's control) could

Implementation Operational phase of a project to achieve the expected outputs/results Plan of Operations 3.workplans / work schedules 4.project budget / resources plans 5.personnel plans 6.material and equipment plan / procurement plan / staff 7.training plans

Plan of Operations Implementation should have a plan of operations i.e. the detailed plan for the implementation of project. It is established by the project team and will be documented as: •workplans / work schedules •project budget / resources plans •personnel plans •material and equipment plan / procurement plan / staff •training plans. The work plan and the project budget constitute the core of the Plan of Operations.

SWOT Analysis S-W

Strengths Weaknesse s

O-T Opportunitie S-O W-O s STRATEGY STRATEGY Threats

S-T W-T STRATEGY STRATEGY

Strengths

• Scholarship program indicates high possibility of continuing demand • High competence in the Adult Education Program • Intervention through CADT giving sense of security to the IPs • Innovative approaches to sourcing of funds • Has established credibility among the donors; increasing interest of funders in Cartwheel’s programs • Developed social capital within government agencies, other

Weaknesses • Low level of success in the PreSchool Program • Mismatch of the products and services to real clients needs • Some programs (medical/dental, etc.) not within their competence • Heavily dependent on grants and donations • Donations showing a downward trend

Opportunities • High demand in secondary, post-secondary education, & adult education • CADT assures the IPs ownership and management of the lands they are tilling • Availability of uncultivated land suitable for high yield vegetables & coffee • Need for sustainable dev’t program demanded by ADSDPP as mandated by NCIP • Available funding for sustainable and capacity-building program • Issues for IPs and needs of the IPs not given significance / priority of the • LGU is one of the major coffee-producing regions •• Low attainment the IPs like , , , , etc., haveeducational several export marketsof for coffee • Lack of access to secondary schools • IPs lack the capacity to participate in the socio-political affairs of the municipality • Volatile peace and order situation • Farming is the primary source of income

Threats

S-O STRATEGY

W-O STRATEGY

S-T STRATEGY

W-T STRATEGY

• Implementation of ADSDPP (political empowerment, peace and order, cultural preservation) • Shift program to adult / secondary / post-secondary • Capacity-building of IPs; education (education) expansion of Adult Education • development (economic (education) benefits) • Bridging market and community (economic benefit) • Capacity-building of IPs through education (education) • development (economic benefits)

• Strengthening and expansion of scholarship program (education)

• Support H/S (St. Therese of • Building collaboration with Miarayon) (education) government, NGOs and the business sector (political & social • development (economic capital, economic benefit) benefits)

Stakehold er

Interest on the Program

MILALITTRA Security of land tenure; productivity / Tribal Leaders Women’s Help provide food for the family; Group additional income; education for the children Fr. Kit Miarayon becoming a pilgrimage site Bautista CFI Parish Priest / Principal Gina – PreSchool CFI

and a bridge between the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich Increased enrolment in high school; improved quality of education; evangelization and preservation of culture equal access to quality Provide education to as many children in the country Increase literacy rate and improve

Position on the Impact of the Program Program Support Capacity-building; political participation; livelihood opportunities Support Additional source of income; Support

Support

Potential opposition Support

self-sufficiency of IPs Barangay Officials

Peace and order; improvement of income of IPs

NCIP

Traders’ group Religious nuns

Promotion and protection of the rights Support of IPs; implementation of IPRA and ADSDPP Promotion of general welfare; local Support autonomy; delivery of basic services; agricultural productivity; peace and order profit from trading activities More Potential opposition Evangelization; promotion of Support education

Land claimants

Legitimization of claims on lands allegedly purchased from the IPs

LGU – Talakag

Support

Oppose

capacity-building; education of children Realization of his dream;

Influenc e on the Program High Moderate High

abridgement of social gaps between rich and poor Increased enrolment; expansion High of services; improvement of educational facility Phasing-out of pre-school High Financial sustainability; focusing High of programs; matching services to needs of IPs Increased employment for the Moderate people; improved peace and order condition Increased performance of High advocacy Increased trust for IPs’ capacity; High improved peace and order condition; increased revenue Decreased income due to Moderate rerouting of products Increased enrolment; potential High increase of the faithful Loss of rights to claim and use the land

High

Action Plan coffee project Activities

Target Output Qty. Quality

Planning

One (1) year plan drafted

Specifications drafted

Sourcing of funds

1 Project funded

Identification of coffee areas for rehabilitation

Time Frame July 2005

In-Charge

Resources

CFI Ex. Dir. & Consultant, BOD

Funds, data

Appropriate and July – on-time December 2005

CFI

Project Proposal

1,000 hectares identified

Suitable for coffee plantation

July – December 2005

CFIMILALITTRA

Funds, staff

Lending of Initial capital

1,000 farmers entered into MOA through MILALITTRA

Credible and reliable partners

Jan 2006 onwards

CFI

Project Funds, staff

Monitoring

1,000 hectares Seasonal and plantation monitored regular

Planting: May-Dec of every year, 2006-2010

CFI staff

Transpo cost, supplies

Establishment of trading partners

At least 2 partners identified (Figaro, Monk’s Blend)

Medium term

Sept- Dec 2005

CFI

Communication

Buying and Trading

At 80% target volume attained

Medium term

2007

CFI

Project Funds

Activities Planning

Target Output Qty. 1 Action Plan

Phasing-out of Pre-schools 2 pre-schools

Quality

Time Frame

In-Charge

Attainable

Resources

August 2005 CFI BOD, TESDA Acceptable terms July 2005 – CFI May 2006

Funds

None

CFI & Therese H/S

None

Signing of MOA with St. Therese H/S

1 MOA signed

Acceptable terms July 2005 – May 2006

Review / Reformulation of Adult Education modules

1 standard module developed

Adult Literacy Program

450 IPs

Appropriate, July 2005 – CFI staff, attuned to May 2006 teachers, indigenous DepEd culture Can read & write, 2006-2010 CFI staff and learned spiritual, teachers cultural, and social values

TNA

At least 3 skills training identified; ex. Food processing, farming tech., etc.

Understandable & measurable

2006-2010

CFI staff, Questionnaire TESDA & other agencies

IEC on Environmental Management

15-20 IP leaders informed

Appropriate & understandable

July 2005

CFI, NCIP, MILALITTRA, & DENR

Funds, resource persons

Tribal Leaders’ Consultation

15-20 IP leaders consulted

participative

Aug 2005

CFI, NCIP, & MILALITTRA

Funds, resource persons

Supplies

Rooms, teachers, teaching materials

Drafting of ADSDPP

Narrative Summary

Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI)

Means of Verification

Assumptions & Risks

Goal Poverty reduction of IPs 60% HH poverty NSO census of 2010; reduction by year 2010 NEDA Report Objectives: •Enterprise Development 1,000 HH involved in CFI Annual Report •Capability-Building livelihood activities MILALITTRA LGU Annual Performance representation in the Report MDC by 2007 Actual implementation CFI Report / MILALITTRA of ADSDPP by year Report to NCIP Output: •Enterprise Development 2008 • reduction of poverty 60% increased family Municipal Treasurer’s incidence income Report • increased productivity • Capability-Building conceptualized by NCIP report • conceptualization 2005; implemented by LGU annual performance and implementation 2006 report of ADSDPP 10% increase in LGU annual performance • increased literacy literacy rate report rate 10% reduction in crime •improved peace and rate

ADSDPP completed and implemented Funds accessed Training conducted

Funds are accessed from funding agency Training conducted

Narrative Summary Activities

Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI)

Means of Verification

Assumptions & Risks

EMTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT Planning

One (1) year plan drafted by July 2005

CFI Plan of Action

Sourcing of funds

1 Project funded by January 2006

Identification of coffee areas for rehabilitation

1,000 hectares identified by 2005

Memomorandum of Collaboration with Agreement with funding concerned agencies agency and business sector established Report of Project Director

Lending of Initial capital 1,000 farmers entered into MOA through MILALITTRA by 2006 Monitoring 1,000 hectares plantation monitored by 2010 Establishment of trading At least 2 partners partners identified (Figaro, Monk’s Blend) by 2005 Buying and Trading 80% target volume of sales attained by 2007

CFI Annual Report Report of Project Director MOA with Figaro and Monk’s Blend CFI Sales Report

Funds are accessed from funding agency

Narrative Summary

Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI)

Means of Verification

Assumptions & Risks

Activities CAPABILITY BUILDING Planning 1 Action Plan drafted Action Plan document by August 2005 Phasing-out of Pre2 pre-schools phased- CFI Annual Report schools out by May 2006 Signing of MOA with St. 1 MOA signed by May MOA with St. Therese Therese H/S 2006 Review / Reformulation 1 standard module Written curriculum of Adult Education developed by May approved by DepEd modules 2006 IPs trained by CFI Annual Report Adult Literacy Program 450 TNA 2010 At least 3 skills training CFI Annual Report and identified; ex. Food DepEd Promotion Report processing, farming tech., etc.; by 2010 IEC on Environmental 15-20 IP leaders Evaluation Report on Management informed by July 2005 Seminar Workshop Tribal Leaders’ 15-20 IP leaders ADSDPP Report / NCIP Consultation consulted by August Report 2005 Precondition Cartwheel adopts this management plan Collaboration established with

How stakeholders are affected by the main problem? Stakeholder

How is the stakeholder affected by the problem?

Capacity / Motivation to participate in addressing the problem Fund sourcing

Relationship with other stakeholders

1. LGU

Potential income is not realized

Give directions to other stakeholder

2. BLGU

Potential income is not realized

Provide counterpart

Sympathetic with the households and can be source of information

3. RHU

Additional workload

Right agency to address the problem

Close coordination with the barangay

4. DAF

Additional workload

Responsible agency for farming technology

Supervise and monitor the beneficiaries

5. Households Directly and most affected

Interest and willingness to participate in the program

Dependent on government agencies and dependent only on available resources

6. HKI

Willing to address the problem

Maybe able to provide assistance to the program

Coordinate with the LGU and other stakeholders

7. Other donors

Willing to address the problem

Maybe able to provide assistance to the program

Coordinate with the LGU and other stakeholders

Expected effect of possible project interventions among stakeholders

Stakeholder

Stakeholder’s main objective

1. LGU

Address the problem

2. BLGU

Address the problem

3. RHU

Implement what is mandated by law

4. DAF 5. Households

Improve health condition

6. HKI

Help and assist project implementation

7. Other donors

Positive impact/benefits

Reduce the incidence of malnutrition among children ages 5 and below

Negative impact/costs

Slow realization of result

Net Impact

Long-term – weight improve, decrease morbidity rate, availability of sources of nutritious food