McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2013 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Chapter Conceptual Framework of the Book: The Gaps Model of Service Quality 2 2-2 Variations of the Gaps….
Logical Framework Analysis – Definition and Example
Logical Framework Analysis (LFA) LFA is an analytical, presentational and management tool which can help planners to: * analyse the existing situation during project preparation; * establish a logical hierarchy of means by which objectives will be reached; * identify the potential risks to achieving the objectives, and to sustainable outcomes; * establish how outputs and outcomes might best be monitored and evaluated; * present a summary of the project in a standard format; and * monitor and review projects during implementation.
A distinction is usefully made between what is known as the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) and the Logical Framework Matrix (LFM). The approach involves problem analysis, stakeholder analysis, developing a hierarchy of objectives and selecting a preferred implementation strategy. The product of this analytical approach is the matrix, which summarises what the project intends to do and how, what the key assumptions are, and how outputs and outcomes will be monitored and evaluated. The Logical Framework Approach consists of 2 phases – the Analysis Phase and the Planning Phase.
The Analysis Phase consists of 4 steps – Stakeholder Analysis, Problem Analysis, Analysis of Objectives and Strategy Analysis whilst the Planning Phase consists of the LFM and Activity and Resource Scheduling. | Intervention logic| Indicators| Sources of verifications| Important assumptions| GOAL| Target groups’ health shall improve| 20% fewer cases of diarrhea, eye infections,malaria, blood parasites| Reports from health clinics inthe project area| | OBJECTIVE| Consumption of clean water shall increase from x to y and the use of latrines from a to b| | Project half –yearly reports| 1.
Water sources remainunpolluted2. Primary health care andeducation are still provided| RESULTS | 1. 50% of the target group supplied with sufficient quantities of clean water2. 50% of existing water points in the target area repaired3. Hygienic habits of the target group improved| 1. water quality tested2. 50% of existing water points in working order3. All water points included in the maintenance programme4. Target groups’ habits more hygienic| 1. Project personnel who visit allconstruction sites when theinstallations are complete2.
Reports from the District3. Half-yearly reports from theMin of Health 4. Examinations of the target group which is given training in health matters| 1. Maintenance system willcontinue to function2. Action to be taken: budget for current costs to be established at the healthauthority3. Target group is willing toadopt new habits in respectof water and sanitation| ACTIVITIES| 1. 1 Train xx personnel1. 2 Designate xx places for water points1. 3 Procure materials1. 4 Drill and construct xx wells2. 1 Train xx “water groups”2. Acquire materials2. 3 Repair xx old waterpoints3. 1 Survey present habits of hygiene3. 2 Train in hygiene| Project and costsForeign financingCapital goods ______ Operating costs ______Infrastructure ______Technical assistance (4)Total cost District 1 $_____Total cost District 2 $_____Total foreign cost ______Local financingPersonnel (unit at local health authority) ____Infrastructure _____Maintenance ______Operating costs Total cost District 1 $_____Total cost District 2 $_____Total local cost ____| 1.
Necessary capital goods,materials and personnel areavailable2. Action to be taken: study tobe made3. Action to be taken: targetgroup participates in planning, implementationand follow-up4. Implementing organizationfulfils its obligations5. Action to be taken: healthauthorities sign anagreement| INPUT| | CONDITIONS| 1. Adequate supply of ground water of good quality2. Government continues to support the project|