Is the LogFrame is the right tool for managing most NGO work?

Loading...

Flash Player 9 (or above) is needed to view presentations.
We have detected that you do not have it on your computer. To install it, go here.

0 comments

Post a comment

    Post a comment
    Embed Video
    Edit your comment Cancel

    Notes on slide 1

    How many people here have written contents of a LogFrame? How many people here have used a LogFrame to monitor or evaluate project progress and achievements?

    LogFrame = the 4 x 4 matrix Logical Framework Approach = LogFrame plus prior planning activities Other recent experience: An NGO funded by the DFID Governance and Transparency Fund

    Where use of LogFrame is especially difficult: Multiple project locations in parallel e.g. countries Where the storyline will be developed by partners not yet identified by the project holder

    Favorites, Groups & Events

    Is the LogFrame is the right tool for managing most NGO work? - Presentation Transcript

    1. Q: Is the LogFrame is the right tool for managing most NGO work? A: Not as it is used. We could do better, with better tools
    2. Caveats
      • Criticism here is of LogFrames only,
        • One member of a wider family of logic models
      • The LogFrame has mutated into many forms
        • There is no one pure model
      • My concern is with finding better alternatives
        • Which are “inter-operative”
      • My evidence: M&E consultancy >1990, plus
        • 3 UNICEF and 1 GTZ project in Indonesia, 3 DFID funded, 1 AusAID funded, 2006-2009
    3. 1. Criticisms of the structure
      • Use of time as the main axis presents three problems
        • Artificial, abstract, confusing distinctions between points in time (A>O>P>G), where none exist in reality
        • No feedback loops (these are not possible, because time cant go backwards)
        • Complex linkages between row events are left out, even if a Problem Tree Analysis was done before
      • Four rows only, and often only two are used
    4. 2. Criticisms of how they are used
      • Goals that are generalisations of lower level events, rather than describe their results
      • Long, complex, unreadable sentences, in the narrative column, trying to say too much
      • A story line that is impossible to follow
      • Frequent absence of references to who is involved, and too many descriptions of abstract change processes
      • Overly simple indicators used to describe complex developments
    5. 3. Wider usage issues
      • Accountability and Learning issues
        • Excessive focus on horizontal logic. Even more so in the new DFID LogFrame layout
        • Opportunities come from explicating and testing the Theory-of-Change (vertical logic). But who is interested?
        • Introduction of weighting of outputs in DFID ARs is a positive development!
    6. A healthy mutation…?
      • Develop a Social Framework , where
      • Each row describes a type of actor
      • The sequence of rows describes a chain of actors , forming a pathway along which influence takes place
      • Assumptions column can describe how these actors are influenced by a wider network of actors surrounding them
    7. Advantages
      • Who is involved and responsible at each level is clear. This enables participation
      • Two way influence process is built in
      • What matters is the functioning of the whole chain (= distributed accountability)
      • Relationships between two levels can be magnified to show detail, by related tools
    8. Sources
      • “ The Logical Framework: A list of useful documents”, at www.mande.co.uk
      • “ The Social Framework as an alternative to the Logical Framework” at www.mande.co.uk
    9. Example Social Framework UK NGO In-country partner Other CSOs A Government Assumptions MOV OVI Forest communities

    + rick daviesrick davies, 5 months ago

    custom

    538 views, 0 favs, 0 embeds more stats

    Presentation made by Rick Davies at the Debate on L more

    More info about this document

    © All Rights Reserved

    Go to text version

    • Total Views 538
      • 538 on SlideShare
      • 0 from embeds
    • Comments 0
    • Favorites 0
    • Downloads 8
    Most viewed embeds

    more

    All embeds

    less

    Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
    Flag as inappropriate

    Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate. If needed, use the feedback form to let us know more details.

    Cancel
    File a copyright complaint
    Having problems? Go to our helpdesk?

    Categories