Developing the
Logical Frame Work Matrix
Project Cycle Management
-----
A short training course in project cycle management for
subdivisions of MFAR in Sri Lanka
MFAR, ICEIDA and UNU-FTP
Ministry of Fisheries and
Aquatic Resources (DFAR)
Icelandic International
Development Agency (ICEIDA)
United Nations University Fisheries
Training Programme (UNU-FTP)
Sri Lanka
Iceland
Iceland
Content
•
•
•
•
Logical framework matrix structure
Sources of verification
Assumptions
Example of logframe matrix, post
harvest losses
Learning objectives
• After this lecture participants will understand
the purpose, structure and how to build a
logical framework matrix (logframe)
The logical framework approach
• The logical framework approach was
developed in the late 1960s to assist the US
Agency of International Development
(USAID) as a tool for:
– Detailed planning with clearly defined objectives
that can be monitored
– Clear management responsibility
– Pre-determined evaluation process
The logical framework matrix
• Also known as the log frame which provides the
documented product of the analytical process
• It consists of a matrix with four columns and four
rows (or more), which summarize the key elements of
a project plan
– The project's hierarchy of objectives
• Project description or intervention logic
– The key external factors critical to the project’s success
• Assumptions
– How the project’s achievements will be monitored and
evaluated
• Indicators and sources of verification
The logframe matrix
Project
strategy
Objectively
verifiable
indicators
Sources of
verification
Assumptions
Overall
objectives
Purpose
Results
Activities
Means
Costs
PRE CONDITION
Information contained in the
logframe matrix
Logframe - how do we use it?
• The logframe is a format for presenting the results of
the LFA as a process and is developed on the basis
of the LFA tools applied earlier during the analysis
phase
– Clear statement of what should be accomplished (outputs)
– Clear statement of important results that can be expected in
the short to medium-term (purpose) and in the long run (goal)
• When the logframe has been completed it is used to
design further scheduling
Logframe in the LFA process
Strength
Opportunities
PESTLE analysis
Stakeholder analysis
SWOT analysis
Weaknesses
Threats
Problem analysis
Objective analysis
The logframe matrix
Project
strategy
Objectively
verifiable
indicators
Sources of
Verification
Means
Cost
Assumptions
Overall
Objectives
Purpose
Results
Strategy analysis
Activities
PRE CONDITION
Schedules
Reports
Connecting the analysis to the logframe
• We know what we have to do to tackle the focal problem by
transforming the problems into objectives and selecting
manageable tasks by doing the strategy analysis
The Logframe Structure
• Vertical logic
– Identifies what the project itends to do and achieve
– Clarifies the causal relationships (means to end)
– Specifies important assumptions and risks
• Horizontal logic
– Specifies indicators to measure progress
– Identifies the sources / means by which indicators
will be verifies
The logframe basics
Means & Cost
• Means are the human, material and service
resources (inputs) needed to carry out
planned activities and management support
activities
• Cost are the financial resources needed to
carry out these activities
Indicators
Base indicator
1. Increase training in PCM
within MFAR
Objectively verifiable
Add quantity (how much)
• Indicators should include
– Quantity
– Qualities
– Time/dates
2. Twenty staff of MFAR and its
subdivisions receive training in
PCM
Add quality / what kind of change
3. Training of mid level managers
and professionals within MFAR in
PCM increased by 20 (60 to 80)
or 33,3% increase between
years
Add time (by when)
4. Training in PCM of mid level
managers and professionals
within MFAR increased by 20 (60
to 80) by June 2007 or 33,3%
increase between 2007 and 2008
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?
SMART
• A good indicator should be SMART
• Specific to the objective it is supposed to measure
• Measurable (either quantitatively or qualitatively)
• Available at an acceptable cost
• Relevant to the information needs of managers
• Time-bound so we know when we can expect the
objective/target to be achieved
Assumptions
• When a choice is made on which objectives to pursue
with a project, number of aspects may be left outside
the scope of the project
• Aspects outside the project may still have to be attained
in order to reach a project’s objectives
• They are then external factors that influence or even
determine the success of the project, but lie outside
the control of the project
Assumptions and pre-conditions
• Problems identified from the stakeholder analysis that
are not tackled by the project itself might have to be
included
• Macro-economic, institutional-political, ecological and
socio-cultural frame conditions, which cannot easily
be influenced, should be considered for inclusion as
assumptions
• A pre-condition is different from an assumption in
that it is a condition that must be fulfilled or met
before project activities can start
Assessment of assumptions
Killer assumptions
• The external factors that are essential for the
project to achieve its objectives, but will most
probably not be realised become so called
killer assumptions
• If the project cannot be redesigned to achieve
its objectives without having to rely on the
realisation of the respective external factor it
should be abandoned
Relationship between assumption and
Objective hierarchy
General sequence of completion
Objectives - an example
Logical framework matrix
Post harvest losses
Project description
Indicators
Sources of verification
Overall objective:
Improve the utilization
of fisheries and aquatic
resources for the
benefit of the current
and future generations.
• Sustainable utilization of fish
stocks.
• Strengthen possibilities of
increased product value.
• Increased annual average
income of fisher's household by 7%
.
• Consistent and certified quality.
• Annual stock size
measurements.
• Census among fishermen,
exporters, sales outlets and
customers.
• Quality control measurements.
• Governmental export reports.
• Sample household surveys.
Purpose/Immediate
Objective:
1. To minimize post
harvest losses and
improve quality and
safety of fish products
to acceptable
standards.
• 10% increase in annual export
volume within the next 5 years.
• 10% annual increase in export
value within the next 5 years.
• 8% annual increase of fish
supply/production in domestic
market within the next 5 years.
• Governmental export reports.
• Sample surveys among
fishermen, exporters, sales
outlets and customers.
• Sample household surveys.
Assumptions
• Political stability.
• Adequate institutional
funding, Interest and
determination.
• Sufficient stakeholder
interest.
Results - an example
Logical framework matrix
Post harvest losses
Project
description
Indicators
Sources of
verification
Assumptions
Results/Outputs/
Deliverables:
1.1 Improved fish
handling.
• 12% increase in HACCP certificated
fish processing facilities for the next 5
years.
•
8% increase in ISO 9000 certificated
fish processing facilities within the next
5 years.
• 750 trained and certified fishers before
the year 2009.
• 7% increase in average income of
small and medium sized fishery
businesses in the next 3 years.
• 7% increase in the volume of landed
fish in the next 3 years.
• 4% annual increase of HACCP
certified multi day boats in the next 3
years.
• HACCP
registration reports.
• ISO registration
reports.
• Govt. statistics.
• Govt. tax
authorities.
• NARA and DFAR
have sufficient financial
and human capacity to
support development.
• Level of increased
income is sufficient to
make a significant
difference fishery
businesses.
1.2 Strengthen
management
practices to
improve quality
and profits.
• 120 managers have undertaken a
short training course in financial
management before 2009.
• 8% of multi-day boats apply an upper
limit of days spent at sea to
maximize/optimize quality instead of
• Training reports.
• Official quality
valuation reports.
• Analysis of
relevant
governmental
• Availability of
qualified staff.
• Sustainability of
harbor maintenance.
Activities an example
Logical framework matrix
Post harvest losses
Project description
Indicators
Activities:
1.1 Improved fish handling
1.1.1 Select 15-20 boat crews
that are willing to co-operate
on improvements in onboard
fish handling
1.1.2. Design a short training
course in fish handling for
fishers.
1.1.3 Train fishers on how to
handle fish onboard.
1.1.4 Install temperature
monitoring device onboard.
1.1.5 Initiate installment of
cold chain procedure.
1.1.6 etc.
Indicators
• Short training course (STC) has
been designed and course material
is ready for printing.
• 10 locations have been selected to
hold STC and 5 local coordinators
have been hired to undertake
practical preparations.
• 10 instructors have been hired to
teach the STC.
• Etc.
Input
• Training coordinator
• Technical adviser
• Travel and training costs
• Cost of new temperature
monitoring equipment
• Funding of a report on assessment
on current "modus operandi" in Sri
Lankan fisheries
Sources of
verification
Include cost for
activity here.
Assumptions
• Inadequate willingness
to seek changes and
improvement
• Lack of follow-up
• Insufficient importance
on quality
controlled/orientated
decision making
“Clear objectives
and stakeholder commitment
drive successful projects.”
World Bank
References
• European Commission (2004). Project Cycle Management
Guidelines. Downloaded 1st March from:
http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/qsm/documents/pcm_manu
al_2004_en.pdf
• World Bank (2005). The logframe Handbook; A Logical
Framework Approach To Project Cycle Management.
Downloaded 2nd March 2007 from: http://wwwwds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/
2005/06/07/000160016_20050607122225/Rendered/PDF/
31240b0LFhandbook.pdf