Session 4: Project Management in Humanitarian Context Grassroots Pakistan Muhammad Sufyan

Review Session 3

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION and planning

Learning Objectives By the end of the session , participants will be able to Define assumptions and its importance in LFA. Explain indicators and write indicators using Quantity , Quality and Time (QQT) criteria Give examples of Means/Source of Verification Complete the Project Planning Matrix ( LFA) Explain the background of LFA and terminologies used by different donors

General sequence of completion

Assumption Factors external to the project which are likely to influence the work of the project management has little control, and which need to exist to permit progress to the next level in the matrix

Assessment of assumptions

Relationship between assumption and Objective hierarchy

Testing Cause and Effect Link with “IF” …. “AND”…. “THEN” Results + activity Assumptions B. Sustainable resilience to the impact of high food prices of vulnerable, farming households Z. The strategy to increase domestic food production is not undermined by major falls in food prices D. Improved quality and quantity of food supply, in the short- and mid-term, of selected vulnerable households Y. Extra home-produced food is not sold but is used to meet household nutrition needs A. Key immediate constraints to food production addressed W. Contracted input traders reach remoter areas as per contracts. C. Implement work-for-voucher scheme with targeted households X. Selection of targeted households is not a source of conflict

Assumptions - an example Logical framework matrix Post harvest losses Project description Indicators Sources of verification Assumptions Overall objective: Improve the utilization of fisheries and aquatic resources for the benefit of the current and future generations. Purpose/Immediate Objective: 1. To minimize post harvest losses and improve quality and safety of fish products to acceptable standards. • Political stability. • Adequate institutional funding, Interest and determination. • Sufficient stakeholder interest. Results/Outputs/ 1.1 Improved fish handling. Govt..department have sufficient financial and human capacity to support development. • Level of increased income is sufficient to make a significant difference fishery businesses. These indicators are incomplete, discuss how they may be improved by adding quantity, quality and time

Indicators Objectively verifiable 1. Increase training in PCM within org. Base indicator Indicators Objectively verifiable 2. Twenty staff of org and its subdivisions receive training in PCM Add quantity (how much) Good Indicators should include Quantity Qualities Time/dates Add quality / what kind of change 3. Training of mid level managers and professionals within org in PCM increased by 20 (60 to 80) or 33.3% increase between years The 33.3% and 60-80? refer to the increase of participant between the years 2007 and 2008 Characteristics of indicators Objectively verifiable that means that different people should come to the same results when using the indicators in a monitoring or evaluation process; Independent from each other, each one relating to a specific objective Plausible in that the effects observed are direct results of project interventions Specific with regard to quality, quantity, target group, time/ period and place (the 5 dimensions of an indicator) Measurable (directly or indirectly), so that they can be assessed Based on accessible information also in terms of time and money Indicators and milestones form the basis for monitoring as they show to which extent a project’s intended objectives (first in the sense of progress) have been achieved The logical sequence laid down in the LFA between activities (that, carried out lead to) – outputs (that, achieved will lead to the achievement of the) and immediate objective helps to choose monitoring indicators The milestones defined in the activity schedule (based on the Logframe matrix) form part of the basis for monitoring Add time (by when) 4. Training in PCM of mid level managers and professionals within GR increased by 20 (60 to 80) by June 2007 or 33.3% increase between 2007 and 2008

Means/Sources of verification (SoV) Do appropriate external sources already exist (e.g. reports, statistics)? Are these sources specific enough? Are the sources reliable and accessible? Is the cost of obtaining the information reasonable? Should other sources be created?

Examples of MoVs records e.g. of secretariat; minutes, attendance lists, resolutions, budgets, accounts, etc. stakeholder feedback, results of focus groups documents, film, audio surveys and commissioned research reports annual reviews; harmonised partner reviews external evaluation reports local, national and global statistics and data

Example GANTT schedule Time Schedule / Gantt Chart

History of LFA Developed in response to poor planning and monitoring of Development projects The first logical framework developed for USAID at the end of 1960’s GTZ was responsible for the development of ZOPP or Zielorientierte Projekt Planung NORAD made a significant contribution in 1990 with their handbook

Logical Framework – Red Crescent Objectives (What we want to achieve) Indicators (How to measure change) Means of verification (Where / how to get information) Assumptions (What else to be aware of) Goal Outcomes Outputs Here this slide is animated – so that you can ask participants to call out (in plenary) what are the 4 columns of the logframe – and what are the 4 rows Activities Inputs Costs

UNDP MODEL

CIDA Model

Disadvantages Focusing too much on problems rather than opportunities and vision (WAGENINGEN UR 2010) Organisations may promote a blueprint, rigid or inflexible approach, making the logframe a straitjacket to creativity and innovation (THE WORLD BANK 2000) Limited attention to problems of uncertainty where a learning or adaptive approach to project design and management is required (WAGENINGEN UR 2010) The strong focus on results can miss the opportunity to define and improve processes

Thank you!