The Logical Framework as an Implementation and Monitoring Tool RBEC Environment & Energy Practice Workshop Almaty, Kazakhstan. 6-9 October 2004 John Hough,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Il Project Cycle Management :A Technical Guide The Logical Framework Approach 1 1.
Advertisements

Reasons for Monitoring and Evaluation at the Project Level
Results Based Monitoring (RBM)
Methodologies of monitoring and evaluating capacity development Makoto Kato Japan 1 UNFCCC Expert Workshop on Monitoring and Evaluating.
Decision Making Tools for Strategic Planning 2014 Nonprofit Capacity Conference Margo Bailey, PhD April 21, 2014 Clarify your strategic plan hierarchy.
Ray C. Rist The World Bank Washington, D.C.
Results-Based Management: Logical Framework Approach
EU Wetland conservation policy. Communication on the Wise Use and Conservation of Wetlands (1995) => first European document dedicated exclusively.
INSTITUTO DE ESTUDIOS POLÍTICOS PARA ÁMERICA LATINA Y ÁFRICA LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH HUMANA.
Comprehensive M&E Systems
Project Cycle Management (PCM)
Results-Based Management: Logical Framework Approach
HOW TO WRITE A GOOD TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR FOR EVALUATION Programme Management Interest Group 19 October 2010 Pinky Mashigo.
CASE STUDIES IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Developing the Logical Frame Work …………….
Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in Asia Bangkok, Thailand 7-8 April 2009 Tracking national portfolios and assessing results.
Monitoring Evaluation Impact Assessment Objectives Be able to n explain basic monitoring and evaluation theory in relation to accountability n Identify.
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH Logical Framework and Indicators.
Evaluation Office 1 Evaluating Capacity Development David Todd Senior Evaluation Officer GEF Evaluation Office.
Lesson 5 – Logical Framework Approach (LFA)
May 12 th Monitoring and Project Control. Objectives Anticipated Outcomes Express why Monitoring and Controlling are Important. Differentiate between.
Improving Results Reporting Operations Managers Workshop Kiev, October 2008 Bratislava Regional Center Management Practice.
Evaluation in the GEF and Training Module on Terminal Evaluations
The Why, What, When & How The Why, What, When & How Midori Paxton & Doley Tshering Regional Technical Adviser Ecosystems and Biodiversity CBPF-MSL Programme.
1 RBM Background Development aid is often provided on a point to point basis with no consistency with countries priorities. Development efforts are often.
The role of assumptions
Project design & Planning The Logical Framework Approach An Over View Icelandic International Development Agency (ICEIDA) Iceland United Nations University.
KEYWORDS REFRESHMENT. Activities: in the context of the Logframe Matrix, these are the actions (tasks) that have to be taken to produce results Analysis.
1 Monitoring and Evaluation John Hough RBEC Environment & Energy Practice Workshop Almaty, 6-9 October 2004.
Log Frames, Annual Work Plans and Budgets John Hough RBEC Environment & Energy Workshop Almaty. 6-9 October 2004.
Results Based Management: Logical Framework Matrix (LFM) December 30 th, 2009 Abeer Shakweer, Ph.D., Planning and Monitoring Manager Science and Technology.
INTRODUCTION TO PROJECT PLANNING AND APPRAISAL LOGICAL FRAME WORK PREPARED BY GEORGE BOTCHIE.
Tracking of GEF Portfolio: Monitoring and Evaluation of Results Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points Aaron Zazueta March 2010 Hanoi, Vietnam.
UNDP Project Document and GEF CEO Endorsement Request Document Midori Paxton & Doley Tshering Regional Technical Advisers Ecosystems and Biodiversity Energy.
The LOGICAL FRAMEWORK Scoping the Essential Elements of a Project Dr. Suchat Katima Mekong Institute.
Sub-Regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in West and Central Africa Accra, Ghana, 9-11 July 2009 Tracking National Portfolios and Assessing Results.
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK by Lorelyn T. Dumaug.
UNDAF M&E Systems Purpose Can explain the importance of functioning M&E system for the UNDAF Can support formulation and implementation of UNDAF M&E plans.
Promising Ideas and Issues to Consider in Reaching Reading and Literacy Goals Logistics of supervision, training, support to teachers Sakil Malik Director.
MAINSTREAMING MONITORING AND EVALUATION IN EDUCATION Can education be effectively managed without an M & E system in place?
Monitoring and Evaluation of GeSCI’s Activities GeSCI Team Meeting 5-6 Dec 2007.
UNDP Handbook for conducting technology needs assessments and Preliminary analysis of countries’ TNAs UNFCCC Seminar on the development and transfer on.
Screen 1 of 22 Food Security Policies – Formulation and Implementation Policy Monitoring and Evaluation LEARNING OBJECTIVES Define the purpose of a monitoring.
INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 1 Click to edit Master title style 1 Evaluation and Review of Experience from UNEP Projects.
Tracking national portfolios and assessing results Sub-regional Workshop for GEF Focal Points in West and Central Africa June 2008, Douala, Cameroon.
Reduction of Mercury in Products Action Plans. 2 Action Plan  describes the activities to be carried out and the related implementation strategies for.
Consultant Advance Research Team. Outline UNDERSTANDING M&E DATA NEEDS PEOPLE, PARTNERSHIP AND PLANNING 1.Organizational structures with HIV M&E functions.
Advanced Engineering Projects Management Dr. Nabil I El Sawalhi Associate Professor of Construction Management 1AEPM 4.
Application of Human Rights Principles in Results Based Management Muhammad Usman Akram, Evaluation Advisor Adapted from RBM training held for UNDP BRC.
UNDP Guidance for National Communication Project Proposals UNFCCC Workshop on the Preparation of National Communications from non-Annex I Parties Manila,
Key Components of a successful Proposal OAS / IACML Workshop on Technical Assistance. San José, Costa Rica May 8, 2007 By: José Luis Alvarez R. Consultant.
Logical Framework Approach 1. Approaches to Activity Design Logical Framework Approach (LFA) – Originally developed in the 1970s, this planning process.
Comprehensive M&E Systems: Identifying Resources to Support M&E Plans for National TB Programs Lisa V. Adams, MD E&E Regional Workshop Kiev, Ukraine May.
Expanded Constituency Workshop The Importance of the Midterm Review A Case Study exercise from Mauritius.
The Logical Framework (Log Frame). Programs & Projects Programs Broad areas of work required to implement policy decisions. Usually focused on a sector.
Logical Framework Approach An Evaluation Toolbox Presentation
Monitoring and Evaluation for UNDP/GEF projects MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF UNDP/GEF PROJECTS Inception Workshop, Baikal Lake Watershed Project,
Working with Logic Models
Building an ENI CBC project
Template Contents of the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS)
The Logical Framework as an Implementation and Monitoring Tool
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Gender-Sensitive Monitoring and Evaluation
Project Cycle Management
Day 2 The LogFrame.
08 March 2016 Briefing to the Portfolio Committee of Tourism on review of the draft APP.
UNDP-UNEP POVERTY & ENVIRONMENT INITIATIVE (PEI): MID-TERM REVIEW
Evaluation in the GEF and Training Module on Terminal Evaluations
Civil Society Facility and Media Programme Call for proposals: EuropeAid/162473/DH/ACT/Multi Webinar no. 3: Preparing effective Concept Note.
How is an M & E framework derived from the logframe?
Presentation transcript:

The Logical Framework as an Implementation and Monitoring Tool RBEC Environment & Energy Practice Workshop Almaty, Kazakhstan. 6-9 October 2004 John Hough, UNDP GEF BD PTA

Reminder: The LogFrame is an Approach not a Matrix Methodology -including a set of tools- to structure and facilitate: Methodology -including a set of tools- to structure and facilitate: èproject planning èproject design èproject management èproject performance assessment

Benefits LFA contributes to: èstructured project design process- logical sequence ètransparency- clear objectives, side effects èparticipation- ownership, sustainability èconsistent project strategy èassessment of performance- indicators (ex-post & during implementation)

Basic Steps and Elements  Problem Analysis  Stakeholder Analysis  Objectives Analysis  Analysis of Alternatives  Project Planning  Project Planning Matrix (PPM) (the “logframe”)

Problem Analysis Establishing “cause and effect” relationships – a “problem tree” Establishing “cause and effect” relationships – a “problem tree” “lack of the solution is not the root cause of the problem”! “lack of the solution is not the root cause of the problem”! Identifying “lack of knowledge” as the problem means that the solution is already pre-determined: ie. “provide knowledge” Identifying “lack of knowledge” as the problem means that the solution is already pre-determined: ie. “provide knowledge” Getting people to focus on what they need to do vs. what they want to do is often the biggest challenge in project development Getting people to focus on what they need to do vs. what they want to do is often the biggest challenge in project development Solution Driven Analysis often leads to solving the wrong problem Solution Driven Analysis often leads to solving the wrong problem

Lessons learned 1. Doing “good work” or “achieving impact”? “achieving impact”? 2. “Seeing the wood for the trees”

è Problem Analysis è Stakeholder Analysis

Stakeholder Analysis Problem Analysis cannot be done without Stakeholder Consultation. Problem Analysis cannot be done without Stakeholder Consultation. Every stakeholder views the problem from a different angle. Every stakeholder views the problem from a different angle. Problem analysis and stakeholder identification and analysis are iterative processes, progress in one almost always means returning to the other. Problem analysis and stakeholder identification and analysis are iterative processes, progress in one almost always means returning to the other.

è Problem Analysis è Stakeholder Analysis è Objectives Analysis

Objectives Analysis What is the project “going after”? What is the project “going after”? What are the indicators? What are the indicators?

è Problem Analysis è Stakeholder Analysis è Objectives Analysis è Alternative Analysis

Alternative Analysis Systematic search for the best project approach. Systematic search for the best project approach.  What outcomes are required to reach the objective?  How best to reach each outcome?  What outputs are required to reach each outcome?  What activities are required to achieve each output?  Set up criteria for assessment of alternatives, such as: Ü resources available Ü political feasibility Ü social impact

Writing the Objective TreeObjective Outcome 1 Outcome 2 Outcome 3

Fundamental Project Design Outcome 1 + Outcome 2 + Outcome 3 = Objective

Lesson Learned there should be no spare outcomes there should be no spare outcomes nor should there be any outcomes that are not essential for the achievement of the objective nor should there be any outcomes that are not essential for the achievement of the objective

In the logical logframe matrix we simply list the outcomes vertically Objective = Outcome 1 + Outcome 2 + Outcome 3

Assumptions  Conditions that are necessary for the success of the project, but which are not under the direct influence of the project.  Assess conditions according to importance and probability  Need to be monitored / risks L Pay attention to “killer assumptions” (= need to re-design project)

Assumptions vs. Risks Assumptions tend to be positive Assumptions tend to be positive eg. “a supportive piece of legislation is passed” Risks tend to negative Risks tend to negative eg. “increased pressure on a protected area as a consequence of a resettlement programme” Assumptions can be formulated negatively as risks, and vice versa – risks as assumptions Assumptions can be formulated negatively as risks, and vice versa – risks as assumptions Assumptions are generally identified during project design Assumptions are generally identified during project design Risks often appear during project implementation Risks often appear during project implementation

Converting Assumptions to Outcomes through Cofinancing If a condition required through an assumption can be brought under the influence of the project, then it becomes a project outcome. If a condition required through an assumption can be brought under the influence of the project, then it becomes a project outcome. The costs of achieving that outcome would count as co-financing The costs of achieving that outcome would count as co-financing

Project Objective Outcome 1 Outcome 2 (Cofinanced) Assumption Combining Outcomes and Assumptions leads to the Objective

Listing these vertically in a logical logframe matrix we get: Objective Objective = Outcome 1 = Outcome 1 + Outcome 2 + Outcome 2 + Outcome 3 + Outcome 3 + Assumption 1 + Assumption 1 + Assumption 2 + Assumption 2

Project Objective Outcome 1 OutputOutput Outcome 2 OutputOutput Outcome 3 OutputOutput From Objectives to Outcomes to Outputs

Similarly these are written vertically: Outcome 1 Outcome 1 = Output 1 = Output 1 + Output 2 + Output 2 + Output 3 + Output 3 + there may be assumptions at this level too! + there may be assumptions at this level too!

ProjectObjective Outcome 1 (GEF Financed) Output Activity Activity Activity Output Activity Activity Outcome 2 (Cofinanced) Output Activity Activity Output Activity Input Assumption From Objectives to Outcomes to Outputs to Activities

3. B asic Steps and Elements Planning Phase Project Planning Matrix (PPM )

ie. the logframe matrix combines the vertical and horizontal logic Objective Objective = Outcomes Assumptions = Outcomes Assumptions = Outputs Assumptions = Outputs Assumptions = Activities Assumptions = Activities Assumptions

3. B asic Steps and Elements Planning Phase Project Planning Matrix (PPM )

Project Planning Matrix (PPM ) Reading /Interpreting the PPM

Project Planning or “LogFrame” Matrix is a “Summary” of the Project èWHY the project is carried out (development objective, immediate objectives) èWHAT the project is supposed to produce (outputs) èHOW the project is going to achieve the outputs (activities) èHOW the success of the project can be measured (indicators) èWHERE the data can be found (means of verification) èWHICH external factors influence the project (assumptions) èWHICH inputs are required for the project (inputs/budget)

In a logframe we are not very interested in activities Activities are the means to an end Activities are the means to an end We are interested in “ends” or “impacts” We are interested in “ends” or “impacts” Summarize the activities in the logframe Summarize the activities in the logframe Overloading the logframe with activities is confusing, and also a waste of effort since they are likely to change in the light of project circumstances Overloading the logframe with activities is confusing, and also a waste of effort since they are likely to change in the light of project circumstances Activities are detailed in a project management annual activity workplan Activities are detailed in a project management annual activity workplan

Lesson learned GEF Projects tend to be “overdesigned” - They place far too much emphasis on “activities” - There is too much emphasis on measuring or counting outputs and activities

GEF Strategic Business Plan Directions and Targets (GEF/C.21/ Inf.11) The SP’s are what we are “going after” GEF Strategic Priority / Target GEF Strategic Priority / Target Project Objective / Target Project Objective / Target Project Outcomes / sub-Targets Project Outcomes / sub-Targets Review the impact indicators associated with these Review the impact indicators associated with these

A word on terminology Development Goal = what the project contributes to, but does not on its own achieve Project Objective = what the project is accountable for delivering Project Outcomes = the constituent elements of a project. The sum of the project outcomes = the project objective

Project targets are rolled up to achieve the SP targets SP1.Target 2: x (y%) countries show improvements in management effectiveness (policy, legislation, capacity, budgets) = Improvements in country 1 + Improvements in country 2 + etc etc

Putting it all together MDG 7 GEF Achievements Convention Goals UNDAF Outcomes GEF 3 Outcomes SRF/MYFF Outcomes Strategic Priority Targets = (Development Goal) = SRF/MYFF Outputs CP / CPAP Outputs Project Objective Project Outcomes Project Outputs Project Activities

Traditional Logframe Table Goals/Objectives/OutcomesKey Performance Indicator Verification Means/Data Collection Strategy Assumptions or Risks Increase protected areas of biodiversity in target region from X% in Year 1 to Y% by Year 2 % of target region protected Reduce CO2 emissions from X in Year 1 to Y by Year 2 Reduction in CO2 emissions

Results Measurement Framework Goals/Objectives/ Outcomes Key Performance Indicator Baseline (Year 1) Target (Year 2) Target (Year 3) Target (end of project) Verification Means/Data Collection Strategy Assumptions or Risks

ie. the Traditional Logframe Matrix and the Results Measurement Framework are easily combined Goals/Objectives/Outc omes Key Performance Indicator Baseline (Year 1) Target (Year 2) Target (Year 3) Verification Means/Data Collection Strategy Assumptions or Risks Increase protected areas of biodiversity in target region from X% in Year 1 to Y% by Year 2 % of target region protected X%Y% Reduce CO2 emissions from X in Year 1 to Y by Year 2 Reduction in CO2 emissions XY

A more objective PIR / APR? Goals/ Objectives/ Outcomes/ Assumptions & Risks Key Performance Indicator Baseline (Year 1) Target (Year 2) Actual Level Achieved (Year 2) Target (Year x) Actual Level Achieved (Year x) Rating (HS, S, PS, U) Excuses offered Increase protected areas of biodiversity in target region from X% in Year 1 to Y% by Year 2 % of target region protected X%Y%Z%? Reduce CO2 emissions from X in Year 1 to Y by Year 2 Reduction in CO2 emissions XYZ?

Using the logframe as an implementation and monitoring tool “Seeing the forest for the trees” Focuses on targets and impacts, not activities or outputs Focuses on targets and impacts, not activities or outputs Enables us to revisit the “alternatives” and adjust the activities or outputs on a regular basis Enables us to revisit the “alternatives” and adjust the activities or outputs on a regular basis Adaptive management Adaptive management

Putting it all together MDG 7 GEF Achievements Convention Outcomes UNDAF Outcomes GEF 3 Outcomes CP/SRF/MYFF Outcomes Strategic Priority Targets = (Development Goal) = CP/SRF/MYFF Outputs Project Objective Project Outcomes Project Outputs Project Activities Project Inputs

Indicators of What? Level of Objective What it is ExamplesIndicators Objective Changes / Impacts Biodiversity conserved Impact Outcomes Attitudes changed Institutions changed Outputs Products / Processes Capacitated people Products / Process Activities Workshops held People trained Inputs $ spent Dollars spent Eguipment supplied Delivery

Convergence: outcomes and indicators StatePressureResponseOutputActivities Development Goal Marine Biodiversity in Chile Fish Populations Fishing Intensity Area of MUMPA’s Regulations Demarcation Staffing Decision Making Financial Tools WorkshopsTraining Disburseme nt Rates Project Objective Increased Fish Populations Project Outcomes Reduced Fishing Intensity OutputsMUMPA’s ActivitiesRegulationsDemarcationStaffing Decision Making Financial Tools

Scaling Objectives Chile Marine Biodiversity Development Goal MUMPA’s Project Objective Development Goal Legal Gazettement of MUMPA’s Outcome Project Objective Development Goal LegislationOutputOutcome Project Objective Development Goal Legal Drafting ActivityOutputOutcome Project Objective Train lawyers InputActivityOutputOutcome

Objectives of Alternative Projects: Reduced Fishing Intensity Reduced Fishing Intensity Increased Fish Populations Increased Fish Populations MUMPA’s MUMPA’s Regulations Regulations Demarcation Demarcation Staffing Staffing Decision Making Decision Making Financial Tools Financial Tools

Indicators of What? Level of Objective What it is ExamplesIndicators Objective Changes / Impacts Biodiversity conserved Impact Outcomes Attitudes changed Institutions changed Outputs Products / Processes Capacitated people Products / Process Activities Workshops held People trained Inputs $ spent Dollars spent Eguipment supplied Delivery

Good Indicators Indicator is a quantitative or qualitative variable or parameter that provides a simple and reliable basis for assessing change or performance (the objective or outcome). Indicator is a quantitative or qualitative variable or parameter that provides a simple and reliable basis for assessing change or performance (the objective or outcome). Verifier. Variable or parameter that retains the essential meaning of the objective and that can be measured on the ground. Verifier. Variable or parameter that retains the essential meaning of the objective and that can be measured on the ground. Qualifier. Contribute to describe the verifier allowing to respond to: what, when, where, who Qualifier. Contribute to describe the verifier allowing to respond to: what, when, where, who Targets/ Baseline - values associated to the verifiers that define how much the objective is planned/expected to be achieved compared to the situation prior to project start. Intermediate targets (milestones) allow assessment of progress. Targets/ Baseline - values associated to the verifiers that define how much the objective is planned/expected to be achieved compared to the situation prior to project start. Intermediate targets (milestones) allow assessment of progress.

Example of a Good Indicator Objective: “Conservation of keystone species” Indicator: At the end of the fifth year (qualifier: when) At the end of the fifth year (qualifier: when) the population sizes (qualifier: what) the population sizes (qualifier: what) of species A, B and C (verifier) of species A, B and C (verifier) within the boundaries of the park (qualifier: where) within the boundaries of the park (qualifier: where) have remained constant (target) have remained constant (target) compared to X number at project-start level (baseline) compared to X number at project-start level (baseline)

Lesson Learned - Procrastination Project designers defer measuring indicators to the inception phase Project designers defer measuring indicators to the inception phase The inception phase defers measuring indicators to project implementation The inception phase defers measuring indicators to project implementation Project implementation defers measuring indicators to the mid-term evaluation Project implementation defers measuring indicators to the mid-term evaluation The mid-term evaluation defers measuring indicators to the second half of project implementation The mid-term evaluation defers measuring indicators to the second half of project implementation Project implementation defers measuring indicators to the final evaluation Project implementation defers measuring indicators to the final evaluation The final evaluators say “we cannot prove this project has achieved anything” The final evaluators say “we cannot prove this project has achieved anything”