Evaluating the ?logical framework approach? towards learning-oriented development evaluation

Abstract

The logical framework approach has spread enormously, including increasingly to stages of review and evaluation. Yet it has had little systematic evaluation itself. Survey of available materials indicates several recurrent failings, some less easily countered than others. In particular: focus on achievement of intended effects by intended routes makes logframes a very limiting tool in evaluation; an assumption of consensual project objectives often becomes problematic in public and inter‐organizational projects; and automatic choice of an audit form of accountability as the priority in evaluations can be at the expense of evaluation as learning. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Evaluation Logics in the Third Sector

“…Conversely, techniques like MSC have been criticised for not being able to produce summary information to judge the overall performance of a programme (Dart & Davies, 2003). Reconciling the ideals of intended effects and belief revision may also be difficult, for example, as the LFA has been criticised for creating a 'lock-frame' that blocks opportunities for learning and adaptation (Gasper, 2000). …”

“…That is, evaluations should proceed according to a step-bystep process, and, more importantly, it is necessary to complete each stage before proceeding to the next, which corresponds to a perspective on social development as a linear process (Crewe & Harrison, 1998;Wallace et al, 2007;Howes, 1992) A bureaucratic evaluation logic also privileges the analysis of 'intended effects,' i.e., whether or not the effects of the project that were envisioned prior to its completion did in fact eventuate. Here, evaluation is focused on the attainment of pre-determined goals (Howes, 1992) and is often associated with a downgrading of the achievement of unintended effects, whether good or bad (Gasper, 2000). The focus on a limited set of outcomes can mean that the true complexity of a program is frequently ignored in the information production process (Blalock, 1999).…”

“…In the context of specific evaluation approaches, 'hierarchy' can be explicit or implicit. For example, in the LFA, there is an explicit hierarchy of project objectives, where achieving what is intended at one level leads to the next one higher up and so on until the final and ultimate goal is reached (Gasper, 2000). In the SROI, there is an implicit hierarchy of forms of data, whereby participant surveys and other qualitative data are 'supplemental' to other more quantitative forms of data.…”

Propuesta metodológica para el diseño de un sistema de indicadores culturales local basado en la planificación estratégica

“…Enfoque Integrado y Marco Lógico, como la metodología estándar para los proyectos de cooperación al desarrollo (European Commission, 1994). El Marco Lógico (Sartorius, 1991;Gasper, 2000;Bakewell y Garbutt, 2005) es una herramienta de trabajo que facilita a un evaluador examinar el desempeño de un programa en todas sus etapas. Permite presentar de forma sistemática y lógica los objetivos de un programa y las relaciones de causalidad que existen entre ellos (Camacho et al, 2001).…”

Delivering sustainability therapy in sustainable development projects

“…Figure 1 provides an example of the conventional Logframe structure favoured by various funding agencies. The theory and practice behind the use of Logframes are described in great detail elsewhere and will not be covered here (PCI 1979;Coleman 1987;Cordingley 1995;Gasper 1997Gasper , 1999Bell 1998Bell , 2000. A summary of the Logframe structure is provided as Figure 1.…”