This document provides an overview of the logical framework approach to project planning. It discusses what a logical framework is and how it can be used throughout the project cycle. The key aspects of a logical framework include defining objectives in a clear hierarchy, identifying indicators and sources of verification for measuring progress, and considering assumptions and risks. The document also lists some common errors to avoid when constructing a logical framework, such as having vague indicators or defining endogenous assumptions. Overall, the logical framework is presented as a tool for systematically analyzing problems, formulating measurable objectives, and providing a basis for monitoring and evaluation of a project.

1. TRAINING ON PROPOSAL WRITING &
RESOURCE MOBILIZATION FOR FOCUS
PAKISTAN STAFF
KARACHI.
BY
FIDA KARIM
DATED: 28TH MAY, 2014
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK APPROACH OF
PROJECT PLANNING
1

2. WHAT IS A LOGICAL FRAMEWORK ?
The Logical Framework Matrix provides a summary of :
• Why a project is carried out
• What the project is expected to achieve
• How the project is going to achieve it
• Which external factors are crucial for its success
• Where to find the information required to assess the success of the
project
• Which means are required
• How much the project will cost
2

3. THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK MATRIX
3

4. THE LOGFRAME AND THE PROJECT CYCLE
4
* NGO’s mandate
* NGO thematic/geo. orientations
* outcome : Programme strategy
* pre-feasibility project studies
* outcome : decision YES/NO
* all significant aspects of
the idea are studied
* outcome : logical framework
* fundraising strategy
* proposal writing for donors
* outcome : financing
contract(s)
* the agreed resources are
used to achieve the project purpose
* reports / contract amendments
* outcome : decision to continue as
planned or re-orient the project
* relevance and and
fulfilment of objectives
* outcome : how to use results in
future programming

5. ORGANISATIONS USING THE LOGFRAME
• USAID, USA
• GTZ, Germany
• DfID, Great-Britain
• NORAD, Norway
• DANIDA, Denmark
• AUSAID, Australia
• Intercooperation, Switzerland
• Ministry of Foreign Affairs, France
• DGCD, Belgium
• European Commission
5
• DGCS - Min. of For. Aff., Italy
• ICAX - Min. of Industry, Spain
• SIDA, Sweden
• UNIDO, Vienna
• FINNIDA - Min. of For. Aff., Finland
• HELLASCO, Greece
• WWF
• Int. Federation of Red Cross
• UNDP
• FAO

6. AVANTAGES OF THE LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
 Problems are analysed systematically
 The objectives are clearly formulated,
logical and measurable
 The risks and conditions for success of a
project are taken into account
 There is an objective basis for monitoring
and evaluation
6
Your project proposal will be coherent

7. 7
4. The log-frame

8. LEVELS OF OBJECTIVES
8
The broader impact(s) to which your
project will contribute to, but will not
enable to reach entirely
The outcome of your project,
what should be achieved at the
enf of the project.
Specific outputs which will
contribute to the realisation of
your project purpose
Concrete activities that will be
undertaken during the project
Project
Purpose
Expected
Results
Activities
Overall
Objective(s)
4. The log-frame

9. HIERARCHY OF OBJECTIVES/PROJECT STRUCTURE
Impact
Outcome
Outputs
Activities
Inputs
High level impact/longer
term change to which the
project contributes
The project’s central
objective/ its specific and
immediate outcome. What
do you wish to achieve?
What is produced or
delivered by the project
Specific tasks/activities
executed by the project to
produce the outputs.
Physical and non-physical
resources necessary to
undertake activities.
Plan
Dow
n
Implement up

10. EXAMPLE OF IMPROVING SUPPLY OF
POTABLE WATER AND SANITATION
FACILITIES
Impact Improved health and sanitary conditions in
targeted communities.
Outcome Improved access to sustainable water
and sanitation services for target
communities.
Output Improved and renovated water systems
Activity Designing, constructing new water and
sanitation facilities.
Input Human resources, training, expert, funding
etc.
10

11. 4. THE LOG-FRAME
 Define objectively verifiable indicators
(OVI):
 !!! Do not make the confusion between
« criteria » and « indicators » !!!
 A criteria is for instance: « number of… », « increase
in… »
 Whereas an indicator is « 150 persons per month »,
« 34% of increase in … »
11

12. EXAMPLE OF A GOOD INDICATOR
Objective: The irrigation system is working
The indicator should be « SMART »:
 Specific = The irrigation pumps are functioning properly in the
project area
 Measurable = 50 of the irrigation pumps are functioning
properly in the project area
 Acceptable = Is the indicator accepted by all the partners
involved in the implementation of the project ?
 Relevant = Are the irrigation pumps the main problem?
 Time-bound = 100% of the irrigation pumps are functioning
properly in the project area at the end of the project
12
4. The log-frame

13. 4. THE LOG-FRAME
 Consider the various risks and assumptions on
your project:
= external factors that may affect the projects’
implementation and long-term sustainability
= synergetic activities made by other actors
 Do not define assumptions that are endogenous to the
project and the scheduled activities !!
 Only mention relevant hypothesis…
13

14. 14
Is the RISK important to your project?
Yes No
What is its probability? Ignore
Almost certainUnlikely Fairly Unlikely
Can the project strategy be modified to eliminate the risk?
YesNo
Modify strategy, add activitiesSTOP the project
Formulate an assumption
Risks/Assumptions
4. The log-frame

15. INTERVENTION LOGIC OF PROJECT + ASSUMPTIONS
15
IN OUT
Overall
objective
Project
Purpose
Results
Activities
+
+
+
Assumptions
Assumptions
Assumptions
Pre-conditionsIf the activities are carried out,
and if assumptions are valid, then ...
4. The log-frame

16. 10 FREQUENTLY MADE ERRORS IN LOG-FRAME:
MAKE SURE TO…
1. Have only one specific objective.
2. Have a coherence in the hierarchy between objectives and
results.
3. Formulate objectives and results as they were already achieved.
4. Define “SMART indicators” (no activity, no vague indicator like
criteria).
5. Do not transpose the activities as indicators of the results.
6. Do not define indicators next to the general objectives (they are
irrelevant in most cases).
7. Do not define sources of verification that are too expensive or
impossible to get.
In any case, if an expensive source of verification is mentioned,
be sure to integrate it in the activities and within the budget.
8. Do not define hypothesis endogenous to the activities you
should implement.
9. Next to activities, mention the means (HR and material) and the
costs.
10. Do not forget pre-conditions 16