Log frame-analysis

3,654 views
3,579 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
2 Comments
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,654
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
299
Comments
2
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Analysis and approach are used interchangeably.
  • CIDA adopted it in 1975 and adapted it using Results Based Management (RBM) which more oriented/focused on RESULTS rather than INPUTS. Participatory Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation framework.
  • It’s a design and an approach. Tools and methodologies. For project development. Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (PME). Participation is very important.
  • Project Development. Participatory is emphasized here. Not top-down methodology in project development.
  • I added two – Monitoring and Evaluation.
  • SO is the preferred strategy
  • Ancestral Domain Sustainable Development and Protection Plan (ADSDPP)
  • Log frame-analysis

    1. 1. Logical Framework Analysis/Approach (LFA)
    2. 2. OBJECTIVES <ul><li>Introduce Logical Framework Analysis/Approach (LFA) and its uses. </li></ul><ul><li>Familiarize with the main steps involved in conducting an LFA. </li></ul><ul><li>Give a concrete example. </li></ul><ul><li>Exercise on the Project Planning Matrix (?). </li></ul><ul><li>  </li></ul>
    3. 3. INTRODUCTION <ul><li>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. </li></ul>
    4. 4. What is LFA? <ul><li>A designing approach that can be used for planning, implementing and evaluating projects or programmes. </li></ul>
    5. 5. Purpose of LFA <ul><li>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 . </li></ul><ul><li>The technique requires stakeholders to come together in a series of workshops to set priorities and plan for implementation and monitoring. </li></ul>
    6. 6. <ul><li>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 . </li></ul><ul><li>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 which we will refer to as LFA. </li></ul>
    7. 7. Steps LFA <ul><li>Situation Analysis </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Stakeholder Analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Problem Analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objective Analysis </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2. Strategy Analysis </li></ul><ul><li>3. Project Planning Matrix </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Matrix </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Assumptions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objective Indicators </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Verification </li></ul></ul><ul><li>4. Implementation </li></ul><ul><li>5. Monitoring </li></ul><ul><li>6. Evaluation </li></ul>
    8. 9. <ul><li>The LFA approach begins by analyzing the existing situation and developing objectives for addressing real needs. </li></ul><ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>The analysis phase is the most critical, yet most difficult, phase of the logframe approach. The analysis phase consists of three stages: </li></ul><ul><li>Analysis of stakeholders </li></ul><ul><li>Analysis of problems </li></ul><ul><li>Analysis of objectives. </li></ul>
    9. 10. Stakeholders Analysis <ul><li>In using the LFA approach, the stakeholder analysis is an analysis of the problems, fears, interests, expectations, restrictions and potentials of all: </li></ul><ul><li>important groups </li></ul><ul><li>organisations and institutions </li></ul><ul><li>implementing agencies </li></ul><ul><li>other projects and </li></ul><ul><li>individuals </li></ul><ul><li>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: </li></ul><ul><li>be able to contribute to questions to be answered . </li></ul><ul><li>be important with regard to decisions to be taken. </li></ul><ul><li>They should constantly be referred to in developing the LFA. </li></ul>
    10. 11. Who are the stakeholders involved in the project and how are they affected? <ul><li>Key questions to ask in preparation for developing the logframe are: </li></ul><ul><li>Who will be involved in the logframe development? </li></ul><ul><li>Where will the development be conducted? </li></ul><ul><li>Who will facilitate the development of the logframe ? </li></ul><ul><li>What background materials, papers and expertise may be needed? </li></ul><ul><li>What materials and logistics are required? </li></ul>
    11. 12. The Stakeholders <ul><li>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 generations to come are indispensable stakeholders and must be taken into account in all corporate affairs. What we do or not do today will certainly impinge on the future generations. </li></ul>
    12. 13. Problem Analysis <ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>Key questions. </li></ul><ul><li>Which are the problems the project is addressing? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the root causes of those problems? </li></ul><ul><li>What is the larger picture in which those problems and their root causes exist? </li></ul><ul><li>What are the links between the problems? </li></ul>
    13. 14. Problem Tree <ul><li>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 brainstorming. </li></ul>
    14. 15. <ul><li>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 problem . </li></ul>Agreement and Consensus
    15. 16. <ul><li>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 arranging the cards to form a problem tree.  </li></ul>Brainstorming
    16. 17. <ul><li>After all of the problems are displayed they should then be clustered into groups of similar issues </li></ul><ul><li>The problem tree is developed by: </li></ul><ul><li>1. moving problems from the clusters of problems </li></ul><ul><li>2. adding new problems that emerge </li></ul><ul><li>3. problems can be moved up or down the tree as required </li></ul>Clustering
    17. 19. Objective Analysis <ul><li>A procedure for systematically </li></ul><ul><li>1. identifying </li></ul><ul><li>2. categorizing </li></ul><ul><li>3. specifying </li></ul><ul><li>4. balancing out </li></ul><ul><li>objectives of all parties involved in a specific situation </li></ul>
    18. 20. Objective Tree <ul><li>In this step the problem statements are converted into objective statements and if possible into an objective tree. </li></ul><ul><li>Problems are restated as objectives </li></ul><ul><li>The problem tree is transformed into an objectives tree by restating the problems as objectives. </li></ul><ul><li>2. Positive mirror image of the problem tree </li></ul><ul><li>The objectives tree can be viewed as the positive mirror image of the problem tree. It is usually necessary to reorder the position of objectives as you develop the tree. </li></ul>
    19. 21. Means and Ends <ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>Nonetheless, these means provide the foundation for developing programmes, projects or strategies to address the problems discussed earlier. </li></ul>
    20. 22. <ul><li>Just as the problem tree shows cause-effect 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. </li></ul><ul><li>Frequently there are many possible areas that could be the focus of an &quot;intervention&quot; or development project. The next step addresses those choices. </li></ul>
    21. 23. Strategy Analysis <ul><li>searching for and deciding on solutions </li></ul><ul><li>follows the problems and objectives analysis </li></ul><ul><li>prerequisite to designing action strategies </li></ul><ul><li>Points to consider </li></ul><ul><li>overall concepts, strategic plans, objectives </li></ul><ul><li>people, target groups, organizations, agencies </li></ul><ul><li>methods, procedures, processes </li></ul><ul><li>technologies, services, products, outputs </li></ul><ul><li>measures, actions, materials, inputs </li></ul>
    22. 24. Conducting a Strategy Analysis <ul><li>1. ordering sequence of the problem and objective trees </li></ul><ul><li>2. clustering objectives </li></ul><ul><li>3. feasibility of different interventions </li></ul><ul><li>4. continuous task in project management </li></ul>
    23. 25. <ul><li>The objective tree usually shows the large number of possible strategies or means-end links that could contribute to a solution to the problem. </li></ul><ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>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. </li></ul>Alternatives Analysis
    24. 26. Project Planning Matrix <ul><li>(1) Matrix </li></ul><ul><li>(2) Assumptions </li></ul><ul><li>(3) Objective Indicators </li></ul><ul><li>(4) Verification </li></ul>
    25. 27. Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators - OVIs Means of Verification   -MOVs External Factors (Assumptions) Development Objective         Immediate Objective         Outputs (Results) 1. 2. 3.         Activities 1. 2. 3. 4. Inputs 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4    
    26. 28. Column headings - definition of terms <ul><li>Narrative Summary: This term used to describe the text that &quot;narrates&quot; the objectives.  It could have been given the title &quot;Hierarchy of Objectives&quot;, but this might be misleading because the bottom cell in the column is a summary of the activities.  </li></ul>
    27. 29. Column headings - definition of terms <ul><li>Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVIs): These are the measures, direct or indirect that will verify to what extent the objectives have been fulfilled. The term &quot;objectively&quot; implies that if these should be specified in a way that is independent of  possible bias of the observer. </li></ul>
    28. 30. Column headings - definition of terms <ul><li>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 statistics.  </li></ul>
    29. 31. Column headings - definition of terms <ul><li>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 &quot;derailment&quot;. </li></ul>
    30. 32. Row headings - definition of terms <ul><li>Development Objective: The higher level objective that the project is expected to contribute to. The addition of the word &quot;contribute' implies that this project alone is not expected to achieve the development objective. Other project's immediate objectives are expected to also contribute. </li></ul>
    31. 33. Row headings - definition of terms <ul><li>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 &quot;change in behavior&quot; of a group, or institution and the project outputs are expected to facilitate this change. </li></ul>
    32. 34. Row headings - definition of terms <ul><li>Outputs: These are the &quot;deliverables&quot; 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. Outputs are delivered, usually on a certain date or dates. </li></ul>
    33. 35. Row headings - definition of terms <ul><li>Activities: These are the activities that have to be undertaken by the project to produce the outputs. The activities take time to perform. </li></ul>
    34. 36. Row headings - definition of terms <ul><li>Inputs: These are the resources that the project &quot;consumes&quot; in the course of undertaking the activities. Typically they will be human resources, money, materials, equipment, and time. </li></ul>
    35. 37. Vertical Logic <ul><li>Vertical Logic: The vertical logic is the reasoning which &quot;connects&quot; 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.  </li></ul><ul><li>For example at the bottom level - the implementation  hypotheses  the implication is &quot;we believe that in the environment of this project the planned outputs will produce the planned result. At this level, the hypotheses are usually supported by research or experience. The explanation of the hypotheses at the other levels is similar. </li></ul>
    36. 38. Horizontal Logic <ul><li>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. </li></ul><ul><li>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 prevent the delivery of the project outputs. </li></ul>
    37. 39. Implementation <ul><li>Operational phase of a project to achieve the expected outputs/results </li></ul><ul><li>Plan of Operations </li></ul><ul><li>workplans / work schedules </li></ul><ul><li>project budget / resources plans </li></ul><ul><li>personnel plans </li></ul><ul><li>material and equipment plan / procurement plan / staff </li></ul><ul><li>training plans </li></ul>
    38. 40. Plan of Operations <ul><li>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: </li></ul><ul><li>workplans / work schedules </li></ul><ul><li>project budget / resources plans </li></ul><ul><li>personnel plans </li></ul><ul><li>material and equipment plan / procurement plan / staff </li></ul><ul><li>training plans. </li></ul><ul><li>The work plan and the project budget constitute the core of the Plan of Operations. </li></ul>
    39. 43. SWOT Analysis S-W O-T Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities S-O STRATEGY W-O STRATEGY Threats S-T STRATEGY W-T STRATEGY
    40. 44. Strengths Weaknesses <ul><li>Scholarship program indicates high possibility of continuing demand </li></ul><ul><li>High competence in the Adult Education Program </li></ul><ul><li>Intervention through CADT giving sense of security to the IPs </li></ul><ul><li>Innovative approaches to sourcing of funds </li></ul><ul><li>Has established credibility among the donors; increasing interest of funders in Cartwheel’s programs </li></ul><ul><li>Developed social capital within government agencies, other development organizations, and business organizations </li></ul><ul><li>Low level of success in the Pre-School Program </li></ul><ul><li>Mismatch of the products and services to real clients needs </li></ul><ul><li>Some programs (medical/dental, etc.) not within their competence </li></ul><ul><li>Heavily dependent on grants and donations </li></ul><ul><li>Donations showing a downward trend </li></ul>
    41. 45. Opportunities <ul><li>High demand in secondary, post-secondary education, & adult education </li></ul><ul><li>CADT assures the IPs ownership and management of the lands they are tilling </li></ul><ul><li>Availability of uncultivated land suitable for high yield vegetables & coffee </li></ul><ul><li>Need for sustainable dev’t program demanded by ADSDPP as mandated by NCIP </li></ul><ul><li>Available funding for sustainable and capacity-building program for IPs </li></ul><ul><li>is one of the major coffee-producing regions </li></ul><ul><li>have several export markets for coffee like , , , , etc., </li></ul>Threats <ul><li>Issues and needs of the IPs not given significance / priority of the LGU </li></ul><ul><li>Low educational attainment of the IPs </li></ul><ul><li>Lack of access to secondary schools </li></ul><ul><li>IPs lack the capacity to participate in the socio-political affairs of the municipality </li></ul><ul><li>Volatile peace and order situation </li></ul><ul><li>Farming is the primary source of income </li></ul><ul><li>Limited access to market </li></ul><ul><li>Disturbances caused by agitation of land claimants </li></ul>
    42. 46. S-O STRATEGY W-O STRATEGY <ul><li>Implementation of ADSDPP (political empowerment, peace and order, cultural preservation) </li></ul><ul><li>Capacity-building of IPs; expansion of Adult Education (education) </li></ul><ul><li>Bridging market and community (economic benefit) </li></ul><ul><li>Shift program to adult / secondary / post-secondary education (education) </li></ul><ul><li>development (economic benefits) </li></ul>S-T STRATEGY W-T STRATEGY <ul><li>Capacity-building of IPs through education (education) </li></ul><ul><li>development (economic benefits) </li></ul><ul><li>Building collaboration with government, NGOs and the business sector (political & social capital, economic benefit) </li></ul><ul><li>Strengthening and expansion of scholarship program (education) </li></ul><ul><li>Support H/S (St. Therese of Miarayon) (education) </li></ul><ul><li>development (economic benefits) </li></ul>
    43. 47. Stakeholder Interest on the Program Position on the Program Impact of the Program Influence on the Program MILALITTRA / Tribal Leaders Security of land tenure; productivity Support Capacity-building; political participation; livelihood opportunities High Women’s Group Help provide food for the family; additional income; education for the children Support Additional source of income; capacity-building; education of children Moderate Fr. Kit Bautista - CFI Miarayon becoming a pilgrimage site and a bridge between the poorest of the poor and richest of the rich Support Realization of his dream; abridgement of social gaps between rich and poor High Parish Priest / Principal Increased enrolment in high school; improved quality of education; evangelization and preservation of culture Support Increased enrolment; expansion of services; improvement of educational facility High Gina – Pre-School Provide equal access to quality education to as many children in the country Potential opposition Phasing-out of pre-school High CFI Increase literacy rate and improve self-sufficiency of IPs Support Financial sustainability; focusing of programs; matching services to needs of IPs High Barangay Officials Peace and order; improvement of income of IPs Support Increased employment for the people; improved peace and order condition Moderate NCIP Promotion and protection of the rights of IPs; implementation of IPRA and ADSDPP Support Increased performance of advocacy High LGU – Talakag Promotion of general welfare; local autonomy; delivery of basic services; agricultural productivity; peace and order Support Increased trust for IPs’ capacity; improved peace and order condition; increased revenue High Traders’ group More profit from trading activities Potential opposition Decreased income due to rerouting of products Moderate Religious nuns Evangelization; promotion of education Support Increased enrolment; potential increase of the faithful High Land claimants Legitimization of claims on lands allegedly purchased from the IPs Oppose Loss of rights to claim and use the land High
    44. 48. <ul><ul><ul><li>Action Plan coffee project </li></ul></ul></ul>Activities Target Output Time Frame In-Charge Resources Qty. Quality Planning One (1) year plan drafted Specifications drafted July 2005 CFI Ex. Dir. & Consultant, BOD Funds, data Sourcing of funds 1 Project funded Appropriate and on-time July – December 2005 CFI Project Proposal Identification of coffee areas for rehabilitation 1,000 hectares identified Suitable for coffee plantation July – December 2005 CFI-MILALITTRA 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 plantation monitored Seasonal and 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
    45. 49. Activities Target Output Time Frame In-Charge Resources Qty. Quality Planning 1 Action Plan Attainable August 2005 CFI BOD, TESDA Funds Phasing-out of Pre-schools 2 pre-schools Acceptable terms July 2005 – May 2006 CFI None Signing of MOA with St. Therese H/S 1 MOA signed Acceptable terms July 2005 – May 2006 CFI & Therese H/S None Review / Reformulation of Adult Education modules 1 standard module developed Appropriate, attuned to indigenous culture July 2005 – May 2006 CFI staff, teachers, DepEd Supplies Adult Literacy Program 450 IPs Can read & write, learned spiritual, cultural, and social values 2006-2010 CFI staff and teachers Rooms, teachers, teaching materials TNA At least 3 skills training identified; ex. Food processing, farming tech., etc. Understandable & measurable 2006-2010 CFI staff, TESDA & other agencies Questionnaire Drafting of ADSDPP 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
    46. 50. Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI) Means of Verification Assumptions & Risks Goal Poverty reduction of IPs 60% HH poverty reduction by year 2010 NSO census of 2010; NEDA Report <ul><li>Objectives : </li></ul><ul><li>Enterprise Development </li></ul><ul><li>Capability-Building </li></ul>1,000 HH involved in livelihood activities MILALITTRA representation in the MDC by 2007 Actual implementation of ADSDPP by year 2008 CFI Annual Report LGU Annual Performance Report CFI Report / MILALITTRA Report to NCIP ADSDPP completed and implemented Funds accessed Training conducted <ul><li>Output : </li></ul><ul><li>Enterprise Development </li></ul><ul><ul><li>reduction of poverty incidence </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>increased productivity </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Capability-Building </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>conceptualization and implementation of ADSDPP </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>increased literacy rate </li></ul></ul><ul><li>improved peace and order situation </li></ul><ul><li>active participation in municipal / provincial affairs </li></ul>60% increased family income conceptualized by 2005; implemented by 2006 10% increase in literacy rate 10% reduction in crime rate More visible increase in tribal activities in cultural celebrations Municipal Treasurer’s Report NCIP report LGU annual performance report LGU annual performance report MILALITTRA newsletters; Cartwheel report Funds are accessed from funding agency Training conducted
    47. 51. Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI) Means of Verification Assumptions & Risks Activities EMTERPRISE DEVELOPMENT Planning One (1) year plan drafted by July 2005 CFI Plan of Action Funds are accessed from funding agency Sourcing of funds 1 Project funded by January 2006 Memomorandum of Agreement with funding agency Collaboration with concerned agencies and business sector established Identification of coffee areas for rehabilitation 1,000 hectares identified by 2005 Report of Project Director Lending of Initial capital 1,000 farmers entered into MOA through MILALITTRA by 2006 CFI Annual Report Monitoring 1,000 hectares plantation monitored by 2010 Report of Project Director Establishment of trading partners At least 2 partners identified (Figaro, Monk’s Blend) by 2005 MOA with Figaro and Monk’s Blend Buying and Trading 80% target volume of sales attained by 2007 CFI Sales Report
    48. 52. Narrative Summary Objectively Verifiable Indicators (OVI) Means of Verification Assumptions & Risks Activities CAPABILITY BUILDING Planning 1 Action Plan drafted by August 2005 Action Plan document Phasing-out of Pre-schools 2 pre-schools phased-out by May 2006 CFI Annual Report Signing of MOA with St. Therese H/S 1 MOA signed by May 2006 MOA with St. Therese Review / Reformulation of Adult Education modules 1 standard module developed by May 2006 Written curriculum approved by DepEd Adult Literacy Program 450 IPs trained by 2010 CFI Annual Report TNA At least 3 skills training identified; ex. Food processing, farming tech., etc.; by 2010 CFI Annual Report and DepEd Promotion Report IEC on Environmental Management 15-20 IP leaders informed by July 2005 Evaluation Report on Seminar Workshop Tribal Leaders’ Consultation 15-20 IP leaders consulted by August 2005 ADSDPP Report / NCIP Report Precondition Cartwheel adopts this management plan Collaboration established with NCIP and other government agencies
    49. 60. 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 Relationship with other stakeholders 1. LGU Potential income is not realized Fund sourcing 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
    50. 61. Expected effect of possible project interventions among stakeholders Stakeholder Stakeholder’s main objective Positive impact/benefits Negative impact/costs Net Impact 1. LGU Address the problem Reduce the incidence of malnutrition among children ages 5 and below Slow realization of result Long-term – weight improve, decrease morbidity rate, availability of sources of nutritious food 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

    ×