Project/programme planning

Guidance manual
strategy2020
Strategy 2020 voices the collective determination
of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red
Crescent Societies (IFRC) to move forward in tackling
the major challenges that confront humanity in the next
decade. Informed by the needs and vulnerabilities of the
diverse communities with whom we work, as well as the
basic rights and freedoms to which all are entitled, this
strategy seeks to benefit all who look to Red Cross Red
Crescent to help to build a more humane, dignified, and
peaceful world.

Over the next ten years, the collective focus of the IFRC
will be on achieving the following strategic aims:

1. Save lives, protect livelihoods, and strengthen

recovery from disasters and crises

2. Enable healthy and safe living

3. Promote social inclusion and a culture

of non-violence and peace

International Federation of Red Cross

and Red Crescent Societies, Geneva, 2010

Copies of all or part of this document may be made

P.O. Box 372
for non-commercial use, providing the source is
CH-1211 Geneva 19
acknowledged. The International Federation would
Switzerland
appreciate receiving details of its use. Requests for
Telephone: +41 22 730 4222
commercial reproduction should be directed to the
Telefax: +41 22 733 0395
International Federation at [email protected].
E-mail: [email protected]
Cover photo: International Federation Web site: http://www.ifrc.org
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Table of contents

Table of contents
Introduction 3

Part I
Approaches to project / programme management 4
1 Focus on people: an ethical responsibility 5

2 Results-Based Management 5
2.1 The project/programme cycle 6
2.2 Tools and techniques 7

Part II
What is planning? 10
3 Levels of planning 11
3.1 Strategic planning 11
3.2 Operational planning 12

Part III
The planning phase in the project/programme cycle 14
4 Analysis stage 15
4.1 Situation and problem analysis 15
4.2 Development of objectives 22
4.3 Selection of objectives 23

5 Design stage 27
5.1 Defining results and objectives 27
5.2 Logical framework matrix 27
5.3 Designing objectives 29
5.4 Assumptions and risks 31
5.5 Indicators 35
5.6 Means of verification 38

6 Towards implementation 42
6.1 Activity schedule 42
6.2 Budgeting and resource planning 44
6.3 Sustainability analysis 46

7 Looking forward: monitoring and evaluation 48

1
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Table of figures
Figure 1. The project/programme cycle 6
Figure 2. The relationship between strategic and operational planning in the International Federation 12
Figure 3. Stakeholder analysis (comparative table) 18
Figure 4. SWOT analysis of a National Society 20
Figure 5. Simplified problem tree 22
Figure 6. Objectives tree 24
Figure 7. Selection of objectives 24
Figure 8. Objectives analysis table 25
Figure 9. SWOT analysis for a community capacity-building strategy 26
Figure 10. The results chain/objectives hierarchy 27
Figure 11. Logical framework: definitions of terms 28
Figure 12. “If and then” test 33
Figure 13. How to determine an assumption 34
Figure 14. Objective and indicator levels (for a livelihoods project) 36
Figure 15. Logframe for school & community disaster management (DM) project 40
Figure 16. Activity schedule (work plan) 43
Figure 17. Example of a budget structure 44
Figure 18. Project/programme cycle (with M&E highlighted) 48
Figure 19. Detailed problem tree 53

Table of annexes
Annex 1
How to create a “problem tree” 51
Annex 2
How to create and use an objectives tree 54
Annex 3
Glossary of selected terms 56

2
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Introduction

Introduction
The aim of this guidance manual is to introduce the user to project/programme plan-
ning in a Red Cross Red Crescent environment. It describes the different stages of
the planning phase of the “project/programme cycle” within the context of Results-
Based Management (RBM). It also gives an overview of the various components of
RBM and explains how to integrate and apply this approach in practice. In addition,
the manual summarizes briefly the other key phases of the cycle (assessment, imple-
mentation and monitoring, evaluation) and provides references to the key Federation
manuals on these phases.

The manual has been developed primarily for use by people managing projects and pro-
grammes either in a National Society or the secretariat of the International Federation
of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (International Federation). Although it is
mainly designed for use at the country level, the basic principles can be applied to
project and programme planning at any level. The manual draws on two International
Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement publications – the International Federation’s
Project Planning Process (2002) and the ICRC Economic Security Unit’s Programme/
Project Management: The Results-Based Approach (2008) – reflecting the significant
similarity of approach. The International Federation has developed the manual inter-
nally to suit the particular needs and uses of project/programme management within
the organization.

The explanations in this manual are intended only as a guide, which should be ap-
plied with common sense according to the particularities of the context concerned.
The manual will be revised periodically to take account of learning gained from use
in the field. Feedback or questions can be sent to [email protected] or P.O. Box 372,
CH‑1211 Geneva 19, Switzerland for the attention of the performance and account-
ability department.

3
 Part 1/
Approaches
to project /
 programme
management

4
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part one Approaches to project / programme management

1. Focus on people
An ethical responsibility
The International Federation exists to improve the lives of vulnerable people by mobi- The Fundamental
lizing the power of humanity. Those who are vulnerable do not choose to be affected Principles
by risks, disasters or other threats to their well-being. Communities affected by such
threats may at times require assistance from external organizations to supplement their The main way in which the
International Red Cross and
own coping mechanisms. However, there is often an uneven power balance between Red Crescent Movement
humanitarian agencies and the people they seek to help. This, combined with rela- takes ethical issues into
tively little regulation in humanitarian practice, has the potential to lead to a limited account is by ensuring that
amount of choice exercised by those affected by risks or disasters in regard to the as- the seven Fundamental
Principles are taken into
sistance they receive. consideration at all stages
of the intervention.
Therefore, the ethical responsibility to address people’s real needs effectively and with
The fundamental principles
equity and dignity, through their participation, should be a key starting point in the
are: Humanity, Impartiality,
design of humanitarian interventions. One way in which humanitarian organizations, Neutrality, Independence,
including the Red Cross Red Crescent, can fulfil this ethical responsibility is through Voluntary Service, Unity
the adoption of a “results-based” approach to the management of their work. and Universality (see inside
back cover for the full text
of each Principle).

2. Results-Based Management The RBM approach to

project/programme man-
“Results-Based Management” (RBM) refers to an overall approach to managing agement provides a clear
and practical framework
projects and programmes that focuses on defining measurable results and the meth- to help ensure that these
odologies and tools to achieve those results. RBM supports better performance and guiding principles are in-
greater accountability by applying a clear logic: plan, manage and measure an inter- corporated into the design
of an intervention.
vention with a focus on the results you want to achieve.

“Results” are the intended or unintended effects of an intervention, and they can be
positive or negative, depending on multiple factors. In RBM, intended positive results
are used as the basis of planning, while an effort is made to anticipate any ­potential
negative results so that they can best be avoided or minimized.

The intended results of an intervention are often referred to as “objectives”. Results and
objectives can be classified according to their level of importance, with the lower-level
objectives defining the changes that need to occur in order for the higher-level objec-
tives to be achieved.

By setting out in advance the intended results of an intervention and ways in which to
measure whether they are achieved or not, we can see more clearly whether a differ-
ence has genuinely been made for the people concerned.

The different levels of results and objectives, how they are defined and how they
fit into the “logical framework” are explained in detail in Section 5, p. 27.

5
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

> 2.1 The project/programme cycle

There is a range of models that can be used to implement a results-based approach. The
model described and recommended in this manual is based on the “project/programme
cycle”, which depicts the management of an intervention through a sequence of inter-
related phases (see Figure 1).1 These phases help define and think through the design
and management of an intervention. The phases are broadly progressive, with each one
leading into the next. However, the phases are also interrelated and may at times overlap.

The type, duration and importance of activities related to each phase will vary de-
pending on the context. For example, if the initial assessment was very brief, there may
be a need to obtain supplementary information during the planning phase. Similarly,
information gathered during implementation and monitoring will be relevant for a
later evaluation or a possible second instance of assessment, if the intervention con-
tinues beyond one cycle.

For the purposes of this manual, the different phases of the project/programme cycle
are defined as follows:2

Initial assessment: This phase is a process to understand the current situation and
find out whether or not an intervention is required. This is done by identifying the
key factors influencing the situation, including problems and their causes, as well as
the needs, interests, capacities and constraints of the different stakeholders. When an
intervention is required, an assessment can include an initial analysis and proposal of
the type of intervention that could be carried out.3

Planning: The planning phase is the main topic of this manual and is explained in
detail in Part III (pp. 15–50). It is a process to define an intervention’s intended results
(objectives), the inputs and activities needed to accomplish them, the indicators to
measure their achievement, and the key assumptions that can affect the achievement
of the intended results (objectives). Planning takes into consideration the needs, inter-
ests, resources, mandates and capacities of the implementing organization and various
stakeholders. At the end of the planning phase, a project plan is produced and ready
1. Although there are
differences between to implement.
projects and programmes
(see p. 13 for definitions), Figure 1
the basic principles for
good management outlined The project/
here are the same for both. programme cycle
Therefore, “project” and
“project/programme” are at
times used interchangeably
in this manual.
2. These phases are referred
to by other terms and
formulated differently by
different organizations, but
the broad logic is the same.
3. For more information on
assessment, refer to the
International Federation’s
Guidelines for Assessment
in Emergencies, 2008, and
Vulnerability and Capacity
Assessment (VCA), 2006,
both available at http://www.
ifrc.org/what/disasters/
resources/publications.asp.

6
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part one Approaches to project / programme management

Implementation and monitoring: During implementation, activities are car-

ried out to achieve the intended results (objectives). Implementation is specific to each
particular area of intervention, be it water and sanitation, first aid, organizational
development, emergency response or humanitarian advocacy. Detailed guidance on
implementation can therefore be found in manuals dedicated to the area of inter-
vention concerned. “Monitoring” is defined in this manual as “the routine collec-
tion and analysis of information in order to track progress, check compliance and
make informed decisions for project/programme management”. Monitoring systems
should be established during the planning phase to allow collection of information
on the progress made in achieving the objectives during implementation. The re-
sulting progress reports inform decisions on whether or not an intervention needs to
be changed or adapted as the situation evolves.

Evaluation: The “evaluation” phase is defined as “an assessment, as systematic and ob-
jective as possible, of an ongoing or completed project, programme or policy, its design,
implementation and results. The aim is to determine the relevance and fulfilment of
objectives, developmental efficiency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. An evalu-
ation should provide information that is credible and useful, enabling the incorporation
of lessons learned into the decision-making process of both recipients and donors.” 4

As with monitoring, it is critical that reliable indicators are identified during the plan-
ning phase for the purposes of evaluation at various stages of the project/programme.
Evaluation in turn informs the new planning process, whether it is for the continu-
ation of the same intervention, for the implementation of a new intervention or for
ending the intervention.

> 2.2 Tools and techniques

For an intervention to be successful, it is important that each phase of the cycle in-
cludes the involvement of the people the intervention seeks to help. It is also important
to ensure the relevant participation of all those involved in different aspects of the
planning and implementation of the intervention, as well as of decision-makers in gov-
ernance and management and of stakeholders in other organizations or neighbouring
communities.

During each phase of the project/programme cycle, various tools and techniques that
encourage analysis and reflection are used to support well-informed and participatory
decision-making at every stage. Part III of this manual describes the planning phase
of the project/programme cycle, outlining some of the analytical tools and techniques
commonly used in developing an intervention. These include analysis of stakeholders,
problems and their causes, objectives, and alternative options for intervention. The
methods described can help project managers identify the factors that may affect the
success of an intervention. However, it is important to remember that the usefulness
4. This definition is from the
of these methods will depend on how well they are adapted to each specific situation. International Federation’s
Evaluation Policy, adopted
from the OECD/DAC
In this manual, certain tools are recommended, some with specific step-by-step in- (Development Assistance
Committee), Working
structions. These are provided in particular for those new to project/programme design Party on Aid Evaluation,
and who require detailed guidance. In every case, the methods and steps are intended Glossary of Key Terms in
Evaluation and Results Based
only as a guide, which can and should be adapted as necessary for different situations. Management, 2002.

7
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

2.2.1 Limitations
The practice of RBM may be limited if the tools are not used as intended. The logical
framework (logframe) matrix is often used in the planning phase (see Section 5.2,
p. 27). The logframe is probably the planning tool that is best known and most used
by humanitarian and development agencies and donors. As a result, it can often be cre-
ated in a mechanical or bureaucratic way rather than as a practical, logical and flexible
tool to define the key elements of a potential intervention.

To counter this problem, it is important to focus as much on the “analysis stage”

(Section 4, pp. 15–26 as the “design stage” (Section 5, pp. 27–42) and ensure mean-
ingful participation in both stages. Moreover, logframes should be adapted to the
changing situation when necessary and not be allowed to trap a project/programme
into a fixed way of working that has ceased to be relevant.

Lastly, it is useful to remember that the project/programme cycle methodology is pri-

marily designed for an intervention that has the following characteristics:  5

> It is a mechanism to solve a specifically defined problem.

> It has a specified timeframe, completion date and performance parameters.
> It takes advantage of existing opportunities in the context and of local capacities.
> It has a fixed amount of resources.
> It benefits a specific group.
> It is carried out by a team with a team leader.

The core logic of RBM is useful in many models of working but may often need to be
applied differently for ongoing, non-project “service-delivery” models, such as running
a blood donor clinic or providing long-term primary health care.

Key message
The project/programme cycle model provides an appropriate set of methods, tools
and principles to put the “results-based management” approach into practice in
humanitarian and other interventions.

5. See also definitions of

“project” and “programme”
in Section 3.3.1, p. 13.

8
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part one Approaches to project / programme management

9
 Part 2/
What is
planning?

10
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part two What is planning?

Introduction
Planning consists of determining solutions to an unsatisfactory situation by identi-
fying the results that will best address identified problems and needs, and the actions
and resources required to achieve those results. It is the foundation of good perform-
ance management and accountability.

Planning can also be seen as a process of choosing from the different courses of action
available and of prioritizing the steps to take in order to change a particular situation
for the better. Usually, time and resources (material, financial, human) are limited.
These two limitations have a direct consequence on an organization’s ability to im-
prove or resolve a problematic situation. This is why planning is so crucial, especially
in small organizations with limited capacity.

Frequently, planning is considered a difficult exercise, complicated and inaccessible

– a matter reserved for specialized technicians with specific qualifications. But, in
reality, we plan all the time in our daily lives: who has never had to move house or
organize a party or a trip? In these and many other aspects of our lives, we have to
plan what we want to do and with whom, which steps to follow and what we need to
get things done.

3. Levels of planning
Although almost anything can be planned, the ways in which we make plans and
implement them are not always the same. Different levels of planning have to be estab-
lished according to the aims of the planning process.

In the International Federation, a distinction is made between “strategic” and “oper-

ational” planning. Both are integral parts of the overall process of setting priorities and
targets for the organization.

> 3.1 Strategic planning

Strategic planning is the process of deciding where an organization wants to get to
and why, then choosing from the different courses of action available to ensure the
best chance of getting there. It helps an organization to define a clear way forward
in response to emerging opportunities and challenges, while maintaining coherence
and long-term sustainability. It usually covers the long term (roughly a minimum of
three or four years, up to ten years). It guides the overall direction of an organization
by defining its vision and mission and the goals or strategic objectives necessary to
achieve them.

The strategic objectives should be linked to prioritized sectors of intervention based on

the capacities of the organization and other stakeholders and should include a time-
frame and outline evaluation mechanisms. Strategic planning also includes choosing
and designing a framework which sets out the best courses of action to achieve the
stated objectives.

11
 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

A “strategic plan” is the document resulting from this process. One of the key func-
tions of the strategic plan is to guide and influence the development of more detailed
planning at the operational level. Therefore, a strategic plan is a key reference for
project/programme managers when designing, implementing and evaluating a Red
Cross Red Crescent intervention.

> 3.2 Operational planning

Operational planning is the process of determining how the objectives spelt out in the
strategic plan will be achieved “on the ground”. This is done by working through a
series of steps (outlined in Part III), identifying or refining more detailed objectives at
each level, linked to the objectives in the strategic plan. These objectives can then be
grouped and organized into “plans”, “programmes” and “projects”. Operational plan-
ning usually covers the short term (between several months and three years).

In order to translate strategic objectives into practical results, the required actions need
to be planned (in a work plan), along with their costs (in a budget), how the work
will be funded (in a resource mobilization plan) and who will carry out the work (see
Section 6, Towards implementation, p. 42).

Figure 2 The relationship between strategic and operational planning is also a cyclical process,
The relationship with the experience from operational planning being used to inform strategic plan-
between strategic ning, and strategic planning then informing the general direction of operational plan-
and operational
planning in the ning. Operational plans are often made up of several “programmes”, which are in turn
International made up of several “projects”. Projects and programmes consist of several activities,
Federation
which are the smallest elements for which we plan.
Strategic

High level Federation-wide strategic (Strategy 2010 / 2020) The broad

Experience
direction
from
National Society strategic plans, Secretariat strategic plans in strategic
operations
(e.g. for a geographical area or technical sector) planning
influence
guides
strategy Operational (1-3 year) plan operational
development (e.g. for geographical area [country, zone] or technical sector) planning

Programmes Disaster Organizational

Experience Health
(groups together management development
learned programme Broad
Operational

several project plans) programme programme

at the programme
project level directions
influences guide project
strengthening
Preparedness

TB treatment

programme development
Leadership

Legal base
Response

HIV/AIDS
Recovery

Projects
First Aid

training

development
(includes objectives,
activity plan, budget)

> 3.3 Defining “projects” and “programmes”

What constitutes a “programme” and what constitutes a “project” depends to a large
extent on the context. An intervention that is seen as a “programme” in one context,
such as a National Society’s HIV/AIDS programme, may be considered a “project” in
another context, for example when a health programme incorporates an HIV/AIDS
project, a TB project and a first-aid training project.

12
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part two What is planning?

To avoid confusion, it is important to describe a project or a programme in the same

way consistently within one context and to maintain a logical hierarchy of plans, pro-
grammes and projects. Guiding definitions are given below:

Plan

Definition Example
A plan (e.g. for a geographical area or for a techni- Examples include the annual or two-year plans of Na-
cal area) is the highest level of operational planning. It tional Societies or International Federation delegations.
groups several programmes (and their respective pro- These plans represent the overall operation to be imple-
jects, activities, etc.) with a view to achieving part of an mented through various programmes.
organization’s strategic objectives.

Programme

Definition Example
A programme is a set of coordinated projects imple- Examples include a health and care programme consis-
mented to meet specific objectives within defined time, ting of an immunization project and a community-based
cost and performance parameters. Programmes aimed first-aid project or a disaster management programme
at achieving a common goal are grouped under a com- consisting of a community-based capacity building pro-
mon entity (country plan, operation, alliance, etc.). ject, a school-based awareness-raising project and a
project to develop a National Society’s disaster mana-
gement functions.

Project 6

Definition Example
A project is a set of coordinated activities implemented An example would be a community-based first aid pro-
to meet specific objectives within defined time, cost and ject to expand the reach of first aid in a region or a di-
performance parameters. Projects aimed at achieving a saster risk reduction project to increase awareness of
common goal form a programme. disaster preparedness and response measures. These
projects would consist of various activities, like those
described below.

Activity

Definition Example
An activity is a combination of several tasks, all of which Examples of activities include organizing a community
target the same objective. Activities are the lowest level meeting (scheduling the time, finding a location), deve-
of actions that need to be planned. loping communication materials, training volunteers in
certain techniques, or organizing the distribution of relief
Tasks are the simplest actions that make up activities.
supplies.
Examples of tasks include writing a letter, checking
a warehouse inventory or ordering stock.

As described in the “results chain” (see Section 5.1, p. 27), the activities to be undertaken 6. Also called “programme
in an intervention are organized according to the different levels of intended results an component” in International
Federation secretariat annual
intervention sets out to achieve (outputs, outcomes and goal) within that intervention. planning

13
 Part 3/
The planning
phase in the
project/
programme
cycle

14
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

Introduction
As mentioned earlier, the aim of the planning phase is to define an intervention’s
intended results (objectives), the inputs and activities needed to accomplish them, the
indicators to measure their achievement, and the key assumptions that can affect the
achievement of the results (objectives). Planning takes into consideration the needs,
interests, resources, mandates and capacities of the implementing organization and
various stakeholders. At the end of the planning phase, a project plan is produced and
ready to implement.

The planning phase can be divided into several stages and steps, in a number of dif-
ferent ways. For the purposes of this manual, the phase is organized as follows:

Analysis stage
> Situation and problem analysis – This involves identifying the main strengths,
interests, needs, constraints and opportunities of the implementing team and of
key stakeholders and identifying the problems that need to be solved and their
causes and consequences.
> Development of objectives – This involves developing objectives based on the
identified problems and verifying the cause-effect relationships.
> Selection of objectives – This involves identifying the different options available
to achieve the main objective and determining which one the implementing team or
agency is best suited to tackle.

Design stage
> Logical framework (logframe) matrix – This involves refining the intervention’s
objectives, identifying the assumptions, indicators and means of measuring them,
and developing a summary of activities.
> Activity scheduling – This involves determining the sequence of activities, esti-
mating their duration, setting milestones and assigning responsibilities.
> Resource planning – This involves determining the inputs needed and budget on
the basis of the activity schedule.
> Developing a monitoring system for the intervention.

4. Analysis stage
> 4.1 Situation and problem analysis
The aim of the first steps in the analysis stage is to understand in more detail the
information gathered during the assessment phase. It is often a transitional step
between initial assessment and design, but exactly what steps are necessary will
depend on how the initial assessment was carried out.

The conclusions and recommendations of the assessment should be used as the basis 7. See International Federation,
Guidelines for assessment
for a more detailed analysis of the problems to be tackled. If the information collected in emergencies, 2008, and
Vulnerability and capacity
appears to be inaccurate, incomplete or biased, it may be necessary to redo some of the assessment (VCA), 2006,
assessment steps, using the relevant methodology and tools.7 available at http://www.
ifrc.org/what/disasters/
resources/publications.asp.

15
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

It is therefore useful for the people who carried out the initial assessment to partici-
pate in this stage of the planning phase. As a general rule, if the assessment team has
already completed some of the steps outlined here (e.g. stakeholder analysis or problem
analysis) and there is a consensus on the conclusions and recommendations between
all those involved in the assessment and the planning of the intervention, these steps
do not need to be repeated or supplemented.

4.1.1 Tools for analysis

Situation analysis requires tools to summarize, compare, prioritize and organize data.
Many different tools can be used – those provided here are examples only and are not
necessarily the best tools to use in every situation.

Minimum criteria for situation analysis

Whatever tool is used for situation analysis, it should, as > allow room for creativity, to plan the changes
a minimum: needed to improve the situation
> foster participation, including of the people the > gather both qualitative and quantitative data, as
intervention aims to help, the whole planning team well as objective and subjective information
and other National Society staff and volunteers con-
cerned
Note: In the cases where National Society interventions
> allow the team to take decisions on how to inter- are being implemented in partnership with the Inter-
vene national Federation, with the ICRC or with a sister Na-
> include self-assessment, to identify the imple- tional Society, it is important that the analysis is carried
menting agency’s or team’s own capacity to inter- out by the host National Society, with the full participation
vene of its partners.

A tool is only useful if used at the right time and in the right way. The same tool can
also be used at different times.
This manual proposes three tools to analyse the situation in which a team intends to
intervene:

1. Stakeholder analysis – to assess the problems, interests and potential of dif-

ferent groups in relation to the conclusions of the assessment
2. SWOT analysis – a tool with a wide range of uses, including, as suggested here,
to assess the capacity of the implementing agency or team
3. Problem tree analysis – to get an idea of the main problems and their causes,
focusing on cause-effect relationships

The above tools can be supplemented or replaced by other tools, as long as the min-
imum criteria are met.

4.1.2 Stakeholder analysis

A “stakeholder” in this context is a person or group of people who have an
interest in the intervention that is being planned. “Stakeholder analysis” is a
technique used to identify and assess the interests of the people, groups or insti-
tutions that the intervention seeks to help and of others who may significantly
influence the intervention’s success. The overall aim of stakeholder analysis is to
ensure that the intervention takes place in the best possible conditions, by aligning it
realistically with the needs and capacities of the stakeholders.

16
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

One way to conduct this analysis is by drawing up a comparative table. First, the
stakeholders must be identified. In the example given in Figure 2, the stakeholders are
categorized as follows:

a) Institutions that will potentially be involved in the intervention: the imple-

menting National Society, sister National Societies, United Nations agencies, gov-
ernment ministries, the Federation delegation, etc.
b) Target groups, for example vulnerable groups or potential beneficiaries, such
as “mothers with young children”, “youth population under 30 years old” or, for a
capacity-building project, “the National Society’s youth members”, etc.
c) Others, for example various associations, local groups, schools, local NGOs,
community leaders, the media, etc.

Second, the problems, interests, needs, potential, interaction and other relevant factors
are identified and analysed for each stakeholder. The factors to be considered for each
stakeholder may vary from context to context, but some key factors would normally
include:

a) Problems: What are the key problems identified in the assessment and affecting
the stakeholder in question? (e.g. poor health care/education, poor crop yield, high
unemployment, etc.)
b) Interests: What motivates the stakeholder group? (e.g. music and dance, sport,
technology, recognition, etc.)
c) Potential: How can the stakeholder group contribute to resolving the issues iden-
tified? (e.g. high level of commitment in areas of interest, voluntarism, idealism,
free time, knowledge of the environment, etc.)
d) Interaction: How can the implementing team relate to this group? Which chan-
nels of communication can be used? (e.g. youth associations, community centres,
Red Cross Red Crescent members or trainers, school, families, etc.)
e) Others’ actions: Is any other association, organization, group, etc. already im-
plementing a project or action that targets the selected group? If so, identify them
and their actions to avoid any overlap, as well as to establish the basis for a possible
collaboration and to save effort and resources.
f) Red Cross Red Crescent actions: Is there any previous or current Red
Cross Red Crescent project/programme or service targeting this group? If so, the
team should discuss with those implementing the project/programme to see if it is
sufficient as it is or if it needs to be reinforced, improved or replaced.

Ideally, the whole exercise would be carried out in a participatory session with rep-
resentatives of potential stakeholder groups, including potential beneficiaries, Red
Cross Red Crescent staff and volunteers, and government officials. The effective use of
participatory planning methods and group facilitation tools can help ensure that the
views and perspectives of different stakeholder groups are adequately represented and
understood.

The example in Figure 3 is based on assessment information from a disaster-prone

community in the (fictional) country “Xland”, in the “Eastern District”. The aim of
the analysis is to find out more about the roles of the various stakeholders in relation

17
18
Figure 3 Stakeholder analysis (comparative table)

Institutions Target groups Others

Women’s groups, Community leaders, women’s groups, National Society
local authorities ­schoolchildren, other people in the community ­volunteers

Community Women’s Schoolchildren National Society Local

leaders groups volunteers authorities

Problems Have some responsibility Do not have enough Vulnerable to disaster Need better links with Have to ensure the safety
to ensure the safety of the information to prepare for and health risks community to reduce of the community
community disaster disaster risk
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Interests Want to ensure safer Want to get a better Want to be better Want to be able to work Want to demonstrate
community understanding of disaster protected from risk well with the community improvements in
risk community safety
Potential Knowledge of the local In-depth knowledge of the Keen to learn and pass on Committed and skilled Cooperation and support
situation and power community (weather and messages facilitators and community greatly facilitate project
relations harvest patterns) motivators
Interaction Through monthly local Through monthly women’s Arrange school visits Through National Society Through National Society
committee meetings group meetings through teachers who branch structures branch structures
are linked to the National
Society
Others’ Also work with the INGO Some groups have Many children attend Good relations between Generally good relations
action “Disaster Relief Action” relations with church church group activities other NGOs and church
and several church groups groups groups
Red Cross The National Society Xland Red Cross has No ongoing projects, Good regular relations ICRC and Xland Red
Red Crescent (Xland Red Cross) has agreements in place with good relations with all with the ICRC and the Cross have carried out a
action been working for many main groups Red Cross Red Crescent International Federation dissemination campaign
years across the country actors through Xland Red Cross recently
with community leaders Zland Red Cross
(partner National Society)
Currently no active work supporting mothers’ clubs
on disaster management
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

to disaster response and disaster risk reduction. The assessment was carried out by
the Xland Red Cross disaster management team, supported by the International
Federation.

4.1.3 SWOT analysis

Another common tool used to analyse the situation before designing an intervention
is the “SWOT analysis”. This can be used to facilitate participatory group discussions
to identify and compare strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to
different aspects of the situation being analysed.

This tool can be used in many different ways. Different definitions of each “SWOT”
element can be used by the implementing team, depending on what they want to
analyse. Sometimes, “strengths” and “weaknesses” are taken to be factors internal to
an organization and “opportunities” and “threats” to be external factors. An alterna-
tive is to define “strengths” and “weaknesses” as current factors and “opportunities”
and “threats” as future factors. A third approach is not to use a fixed definition but to
leave the exercise very open.

The exercise can be used to analyse organizational capacity, capacity in the commu-
nity or simply general societal factors in relation to the issues identified in the assess-
ment. If a similar analysis has already been carried out at an earlier stage during the
initial assessment,8 SWOT may still be useful to verify and add to this information if
necessary.

If an implementing team uses the SWOT analysis to look at the capacity of the organ-
ization to act on the issues identified in the assessment, some of the key questions to
be answered would be:

> Where are we today in terms of strength and development? (e.g. for a National
Society, the number of members/volunteers, branches at community level, people
served, organizational structure, relationships with donors and partners, etc.)
> Is our environment (political/economic situation, culture, history, traditions,
etc.) favourable to project/programme implementation and the organization’s
own development?
> How could we benefit from the project/programme for its long-term devel-
opment (and not just from the capacity-building component of the project/pro-
gramme)?
> What are the risks related to the project/programme for the organization (i.e.
side effects, hidden costs in the short and long term, burden, additional staff, logis-
tics to sustain in the long term, public image/perception, etc.)?
> What is the expected impact on key aspects of the organization? Is that im-
pact positive or negative for its long-term development?

A SWOT analysis can reveal hidden obstacles to a potential project/programme, es-

pecially when participants have a wide range of interests and knowledge. It can simi- 8. See the International
Federation’s Guidelines for
larly identify positive elements that may not be immediately evident. Used properly, a assessment in emergencies,
SWOT analysis can generate valuable data quickly. 2008, p. 62, and Vulnerability
and capacity assessment
(VCA), 2006.

19
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Figure 4 provides a brief example of a completed SWOT analysis of the Xland Red
Cross Society, reflecting on its capacities in relation to the disaster risks identified in an
assessment report. A brief summary of suggested steps to carry out a SWOT analysis
focusing on organizational capacity is given below.

Figure 4. SWOT analysis of a National Society

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

> Good knowledge of the community > Little influence over local government structures
> Good experience in disaster response and prepar- > No experience in training other institutions
edness in other parts of the country
> Understanding of issues of disaster risk reduction
> Good links with the International Federation
and other National Societies

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

> Good links with schools through Red Cross Youth > Government structures may not be able to support
clubs the work
> Funding and technical assistance are avail- > Communities may not be interested/willing to en-
able from the International Federation and other gage on disaster risk
­National Societies

4.1.3.1 Suggested steps for an organizational

SWOT analysis
Step 1: Ask participants to brainstorm the following question: “What are the
strengths and weaknesses within the organization that could affect the problems we
seek to address?” Ask group members to write their answers in large letters, using one
to three words only, in the appropriate space.

Step 2: Ask participants to do the same with the question: “What are the opportu-
nities and threats outside the organization that could affect the problems we seek to
address?” Record the answers as before.

Depending on the size of the group, the facilitator might divide participants into
one, two or four working groups. Each group should have a minimum of three and
maximum of eight participants. If the facilitator chooses to have two working groups,
he/she can ask one group to think about the strengths and weaknesses, while the other
works on opportunities and threats.

Step 3: After an agreed time (20–30 minutes), each group’s responses are explained
to the others.

Step 4: The facilitator may then guide the group in a “focused discussion” based on
questions such as “What do these results tell us?”, “What decisions should we take?”
and “Are we ready to proceed? If so, what needs to be done first? If not, what needs to
be done before we can proceed?”

20
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

4.1.4 Problem analysis (using the “problem tree” tool)

Problem analysis can be defined as the thorough study of one or more problems
(identified during the assessment stage), to identify their causes and decide whether
and how to tackle them. A “problem” is defined here as “an unsatisfactory situation
that may be difficult to cope with”. Problem analysis is a critical stage of project/pro-
gramme planning, as it guides all subsequent analysis and decision-making on priorities.

Merely listing and ranking problems does not provide for a sufficiently deep analysis
of the situation. The aim of problem analysis is to structure, summarize and organize
the initial findings of an assessment in order to arrive at a clearer understanding of
the situation under analysis. It involves identifying the negative aspects of an existing
situation (i.e. “problems”) and then identifying the immediate and underlying causes.
By identifying the causes of a problem, it is possible to start to identify possible solutions
which will address the problem.

Some form of problem analysis may have been done during the initial assessment, in
which case the information should be revisited, verified, and completed if necessary.
If not, it should be started at this point, using the information discussed and analysed
during the assessment and during the stakeholder and SWOT analyses.

A variety of tools can be used to support problem analysis. One commonly used tool
is the “problem tree”.9 This visual method uses the analogy of a tree to facilitate the
analysis of the problem(s). The exercise produces a summary picture of the existing
negative situation, for example with the main problem as the “trunk”, the causes of the
problem as the “roots” and the effects of the problem as the “branches”.

The problem tree exercise can be carried out in three steps:

Step 1: Discuss in a group the various issues that have been identified in the ­assessment.
Step 2: Identify and agree on the core problem(s) to be addressed.
Step 3: Identify and analyse the causes and effects of the core problem(s).

The third step involves repeatedly asking the question “why does this problem exist?”
(the exercise is sometimes called a “why-why tree”). The analysis then looks at the con-
nections (cause-effect relationship) between the problems identified.

The “problem tree” produced by the exercise should provide a robust but simplified
version of reality. A problem tree cannot and should not contain or explain the com-
plexities of every identifiable cause-effect relationship.

9. A simple version of a problem

(why-why) tree is also given in
the International Federation’s
Guidelines for Assessment in
Emergencies, 2008, p. 62.

21
 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Figure 5. Simplified problem tree

Low resilience to disaster risks Low resilience to health-related risks Economic situation deteriorates

High rates of deaths and injuries related to disasters

in the Eastern District

Poor disaster management Poor disaster management capacity Weak disaster response
capacity in schools in communities structures of local government

No disaster No School People No community No accurate Provincial Few skilled

risk Disaster have poor disaster plans knowledge disaster cen- staff at
reduction Management knowledge of in place of risks, tres under­ ­provincial
subjects Units how to ­vulnerabilities, equipped level
taught in place prepare for capacities in
and respond the community
to disasters

People in the community have many demands on their time

Access to the villages is not possible (road quality insufficient)

External factors which may affect feasibility

• Figure 5 above gives a summarized and simplified version of a problem tree analysis.
• Annex 1. How to create a problem tree (p. 51) presents this method in more
detail, including figure 19 (p. 53) which gives an example of a detailed problem tree
analysis.

The example of a problem analysis given in Figure 5 is based on the same context
as the stakeholder and SWOT analyses, i.e. it investigates the reasons why in one
area of Xland (the Eastern District), capacities to reduce deaths and injuries from
disaster are low.

For all of these tools, the quality of the analysis will be significantly improved by
the use of participatory group facilitation methods,10 as this will help ensure that the
views and perspectives of different stakeholder groups are adequately represented and
understood.

> 4.2 Development of objectives

An objective is an intended result that an intervention sets out to achieve. This is the
10. See International Federation.
How to do a VCA. Geneva, stage at which you begin to define the results you want to achieve at different levels. The
2007, pp. 18–19, for more aim of the exercise is to define the desired future situation for all the identified prob-
information about levels
of participation in group lems, so that you can later identify those that the organization can realistically tackle.
facilitation methods http://
www.ifrc.org/Docs/pubs/
disasters/resources/ It is again critical to conduct the process in a participatory way, involving the main
preparing-disasters/vca/
how-to-do-vca-en.pdf. stakeholders, including representatives of the people whom the intervention aims to help.

22
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

A common method of developing, identifying and selecting objectives is to create an

“objectives tree”, based very closely on the “problem tree”. As with the problem tree,
the objectives tree should provide a simplified but robust summary of reality.

The objectives tree is a tool to aid analysis and the presentation of ideas. Its main
strength is that it keeps the analysis of potential project objectives firmly rooted in ad-
dressing a range of clearly identified priority problems. It will help to:

> Demonstrate and describe the situation in the future if all the identified problems
were remedied
> Identify possible objectives (intended results) and verify the hierarchy between
them
> Illustrate and verify the causal (means-ends) relationships through a diagram
> Establish priorities by:
– assessing how realistic the achievement of some objectives may be and
– identifying additional means that may be required to achieve the intended results

There are two basic steps in creating an objectives tree:

Step 1: Turn each of the problems in the problem tree into positive statements (“ob-
jectives”) by reformulating the negative situations as desirable positive situations, based
on the needs that arise from the problems. Reproduce the shape of the problem tree,
substituting each problem with an objective.

Step 2: Check the logic (the cause-effect relationships) to ensure that the objective
makes sense. Will the achievement of the lower-level objectives help achieve the higher-
level objectives? Modify the objectives, if necessary by:
> Revising the statements to be more clear or accurate
> Adding new objectives that are relevant/necessary
> Removing objectives that are irrelevant or unnecessary

• Annex 2, p. 54, provides a detailed explanation of the creation of an objectives

tree.
• Figure 6, p. 24, provides an example of the objectives tree created from the problem
tree in Figure 5.

> 4.3 Selection of objectives

Once the objectives tree has been created, it provides a set of overall potential objec-
tives for the intervention. However, you cannot solve all of the problems. If you try to
address all of the objectives identified, it is likely to be a very lengthy and expensive
intervention. You will therefore need to focus on one or a few specific areas in the
objectives tree.

This analytical stage is in some respects the most difficult and challenging, as it in-
volves synthesizing a significant amount of information and then making a complex
judgement about the best implementation options to pursue. In practice, a number of
compromises often have to be made to balance different stakeholder interests, the de-
mands of the population, and practical constraints such as likely resource availability.

23
 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Figure 6. Objectives tree

IMPACTS
Resilience to disaster risks Resilience to health-related Economic situation

HIGHER
is improved risks is improved improves

(IMPACT)
Reduce deaths and injuries related

GOAL
to disasters in the Eastern District

OUTCOMES
Disaster management capacity Political and security Disaster management capacity The local government disaster
of schools is improved situation remains stable of communities is improved response structures are strong

Disaster risk School Local People Community Detailed Provincial Skilled staff
reduction ­ isaster
D political know how to disaster assessments disaster are in place

OUTPUTS
lessons are Management leaders prepare and plans are are carried centres at provincial
included in Units are support respond to developed out are well level
curriculum formed the process disaster equipped

People in the community have no new demands on their time preventing them from participating

Access to the villages is possible (road quality sufficient)

Factors outside the control Factors outside the control of the project
of the project which which may affect feasibility but will be
may affect feasibility controlled by other actors

Figure 7. Selection of objectives

IMPACTS
Resilience to disaster risks Resilience to health-related Economic situation

HIGHER
is improved risks is improved improves

(IMPACT)

Reduce deaths and injuries related

GOAL

to disasters in the Eastern District

OUTCOMES

Disaster management capacity Political and security Disaster management capacity The local government disaster
of schools is improved situation remains stable of communities is improved response structures are strong

A. School B. Community C. Local government

capacity building capacity building capacity building
Disaster risk School Local People Community Detailed Provincial Skilled staff
reduction ­ isaster
D political know how to disaster assessments disaster are in place
OUTPUTS

lessons are Management leaders prepare and plans are are carried centres at provincial
included in Units are support respond to developed out are well level
curriculum formed the process disaster equipped

People in the community have no new demands on their time preventing them from participating

Access to the villages is possible (road quality sufficient)

24
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

4.3.1 Suggested method for analysis

Step 1: Define potential solutions.
Look at the objectives tree and group objectives together to define broad potential “so-
lutions”. This is done by looking at which objectives are directly linked to each other
in a cause-effect relationship (see Figure 7: Selection of objectives, p. 24).

During the earlier analysis stage, the potential merits or difficulties of different ways of
addressing the problems may well have already been discussed. These issues and op-
tions must now be looked at more closely to determine the likely scope of the interven-
tion before more detailed design work is undertaken.

Step 2: Select the most appropriate solution.

Based on the set of solutions identified in the objectives tree, the team will now need
to weigh up the different options available and choose the most appropriate one for the
implementing team. This will then determine the scope of the intervention. There is
a variety of tools to assist in this process. Two tools described here are the objectives
analysis table and SWOT analysis. (See Annex 2, p. 54, for a more detailed explan-
ation of how to select the most appropriate solution.)

The objectives analysis table (see Figure 8, below) summarizes and organizes the in-
formation on each issue in a comparative table. It is a useful tool to promote discus-
sion and exchange among the team designing and implementing the intervention. As
Figure 8
always, the quality of the analysis and the viability of the resulting decisions made will
depend on the quality and legitimacy of the data being analysed (costs, prices, avail- Objectives
analysis table
ability, local practices, etc.). The different criteria can be measured using numbers

Which combination Solution A Solution B Solution C Solution D

of objectives will address School Community Local (combine
most effectively the needs capacity capacity government solutions
of the target population? building building capacity A & B)
building
1. Which objectives are compatible with the 2 3 1 3
Red Cross Red Crescent’s fundamental
principles, mandate and policies?

2. Which combination of objectives does 2 3 1 3

the organization and team have the
capacity to address effectively?

3. Are other organizations already 2 2 1 2

­addressing the problem?

4. Constraints and risks: How ­vulnerable 2 1 2 1

is the intervention to ­external factors? (see
also Section 5.4, p. 31)

5. How can local ownership of the project 3 1 2 3

best be supported?

6. How can we take into account respect for 3 2 3 3

local culture?

7. What is/are the most cost-efficient 3 3 2 3

option(s)?

Total 17 15 12 18

25
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

(e.g. 1 to 3, with 3 being the most positive and 1 the least positive); the solution that
scores highest should be selected. The example given in Figure 8 uses one set of cri-
teria, but any relevant set of criteria can be used according to the context. The SWOT
analysis introduced earlier (see Figure 4, p. 20) can also be used.

In this example, SWOT analysis is used to analyse the strengths, weaknesses, oppor-
tunities and threats of a potential community capacity-building strategy. The same
criteria as given in the table above can be used to inform the SWOT analysis. The
use of a SWOT analysis in two different ways (here and earlier for “internal analysis”)
demonstrates that, like all tools, it has many applications and is not necessarily only
employed at one specific point during the planning process.

Figure 9. SWOT analysis for a community capacity-building strategy

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

> Directly reaches the community actors > Does not tackle wider institutional (government)
> More sustainable as builds local knowledge issues
> Relatively low cost as does not require expensive > Does not address the need for improved disaster
equipment management mechanisms in the National Society

OPPORTUNITIES THREATS

> Improves links with the community for other Na- > Lengthy process to establish community rapport
tional Society projects/programmes and precise needs
> Improves National Society knowledge of commu- > Reliant on interest and willingness of the communities
nity issues > Time consuming to visit many communities

Based on the example given above in Figure 7: Selection of objectives, p. 24, and
following the various analyses carried out above:

> The implementing team (a disaster management team from a National Society
working in its own country) decides to carry out a disaster management programme
with two projects (programme components), combining two groups of objectives –
“school capacity building” and “community capacity building”.
> The third possible group of objectives (“local government capacity building”) is ex-
cluded because it is being handled by other actors (e.g. the national government or a
UN agency) and because the intervention team does not have the same expertise or
mandate in this area as it does in community- and school-based work.
> The external factors that the programme cannot address are identified for the mo-
ment as being low risk but will be looked at again in more detail in Section 5.4,
p. 31.

26
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

5. Design stage
The design stage involves clarifying the objectives of the intervention through the
definition of precise and measurable statements of the intended results to be achieved
at different levels. It also entails defining how the results will actually be achieved
through inputs and activities and identifying indicators by which to measure those
results.

> 5.1 Defining results and objectives

“Results” are defined as “the effects of actions, and can be intended or unintended,
positive or negative”. The intended results that an intervention sets out to achieve are
often referred to as “objectives” and are the basis of planning.

Results and objectives can be split by levels of increasing signifi- Goal (Impact)
cance, sometimes referred to as the “results chain” or “objectives
hierarchy”, as shown in Figure 10. The terms are explained in Outcomes
Section 5.2 and examples are given in Section 5.3.
Outputs
The different levels of results/objectives are developed
­according to the information generated during the assess- Activities
ment phase and analysis stage and organized in a sum-
mary table or other structure. The most commonly used Inputs
tool is the logical framework (logframe) matrix.

> 5.2 Logical framework matrix

The logframe matrix consists of a table with four rows and four columns, in which the
Figure 10
key aspects of a project/programme are summarized. It sets out a logical sequence of
The results
cause-effect relationships based on the results chain/objectives hierarchy. The process chain/objectives
of developing and selecting objectives explained earlier is used as the basis for the ob- hierarchy
jectives set out in the logframe matrix.

There are a variety of formats used for logframes, and it is important to have a clear
and common understanding of the different terms used. Figure 11 shows the format,
terminology and definitions that this manual recommends for use in the International
Federation.

The logframe does not show every detail of a project/programme. Further details, such
as the proposal, budget and activity schedule, can be provided in other documents that
accompany the logframe, but they should all be linked very clearly to the logframe.
The logframe is used not only for project/programme design, but also as the basis for
implementation, monitoring and evaluation. It is a living document, which should be
consulted and altered throughout the intervention’s life cycle.

The following section shows one way that a logframe matrix can be created in a
structured way. However, it is important to note that the task can be approached
in different ways. It is a process of improvement by trial and error, not just a set
of linear steps.

27
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

One approach is to fill in all the objectives first, then check whether they are realistic
by looking at the assumptions at each level, before adding the indicators and means of
verification. This is the approach taken here. Another approach is to complete all the
objectives with their indicators and means of verification together before moving on to
develop the assumptions.

As new parts of the logframe are drafted, information previously assembled will often
need to be reviewed and, if required, revised. However, choosing one of the broad ap-
proaches to the completion of the matrix can sometimes help to guide the team. The
sequence of steps presented here is therefore only a guide, to be used if the intervention
team find it helpful. The examples give for the different objectives statements are taken
from the full example of a logframe in Figure 15, p. 40–41.

Figure 11. Logical framework: definitions of terms

Objectives Indicators Means of Assumptions

(What we want (How to verification (What else
to achieve) measure change) (Where/how to get to be aware of)
information)

Goal Impact indicators How the information on the External factors beyond
The long-term results that Quantitative and/or indicator(s) will be collected the control of the inter-
an intervention seeks to qualitative criteria to (can include who will collect vention, necessary for
achieve, which may be measure progress it and how often) the goal to contribute to
contributed to by factors against the goal higher-level results
outside the intervention
Outcome(s) Outcome indicators As above External factors beyond
The primary result(s) that Quantitative and/or the control of the inter-
an intervention seeks to qualitative criteria to vention, necessary for the
achieve, most commonly measure progress outcomes to contribute
in terms of the knowledge, against the outcomes to achieving the goal.
attitudes or practices of
the target group
Outputs Output indicators As above External factors beyond
The tangible products, Quantitative and/or the control of the inter-
goods and services and qualitative criteria to vention, necessary if
other immediate results measure progress outputs are to lead to
that lead to the achieve- against the outputs the achievement of the
ment of outcomes outcomes
Activities Inputs Costs (and sources) External factors beyond
The collection of tasks to The materials and The summary costs for each the control of the inter-
be carried out in order to resources needed to of the identified resources/ vention, necessary for
achieve the outputs implement activities activities; sources of income the activities to achieve
can also be specified the outputs

28
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

> 5.3 Designing objectives

At this stage, the draft objectives selected from the objectives tree should be trans-
ferred to the logframe and further refined if necessary in order to design a complete set
of objectives for the intervention. In keeping with the RBM approach, the logframe
must focus on the achievement of real changes which can be measured.

All the objectives should be written as simple, clear and concise statements that de-
scribe the intended result to be achieved. The different levels of
objectives outlined in Figure 2 are here explained in more detail. Objectives Indicators Means of Assumptions
verification

The goal Goal

The “goal” is a simple, clear statement that describes “the long- Outcome(s)
term results that an intervention seeks to achieve, which may be
contributed to by factors outside the intervention”. It should re- Outputs
flect the ultimate aim of the intervention, i.e. the conditions to be
Activities
changed. It relates to the highest level of results, those over which
you have least control.

For instance, the goal of a mother/child nutrition project could be: “Reduce infant
mortality associated with poor nutrition in target communities”. There are factors that
may contribute to reducing infant mortality other than the nutrition project. Other
health interventions such as immunization campaigns or the construction of health
clinics can have an impact on reducing infant mortality. Livelihood projects which
increase household income can also contribute to the reduction of infant mortality.

Often, the goal may be developed from the main objective set out in the objectives tree
(see Figure 6, p. 24). The goal may also be taken from a lower-level objective in the
objectives tree, especially if the main objective that was originally identified was at a
very high level (e.g. “improve the overall well-being of the community”.)

“Impact” is often used primarily to refer to the actual long-term results brought about
by the intervention, whether positive or negative, primary or secondary, direct or in-
direct, intended or unintended.11 Impact refers to the same level of long-term results as
the goal, but the goal refers to the intended positive results of the intervention only.

Example project goal

Reduce deaths and injuries related to disasters in the Eastern District.

Outcomes
“Outcomes” are “the primary result(s) that an intervention seeks to achieve, most 11. See glossary entry in
Annex 3, adapted from the
commonly in terms of the knowledge, attitudes or practices of the target group”. The OECD/DAC (Development
Assistance Committee),
achievement of the outcome(s) should contribute directly to the achievement of the Working Party on Aid
overall goal. Outcomes are the intended medium-term effects of an intervention’s out- Evaluation, Glossary of Key
Terms in Evaluation and
puts. You have less control over outcomes than outputs. Results Based Management,
2002.

29
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

The outcomes will often be developed from the next level down in the objectives tree
(see Figure 6, p. 24.). The goal and outcomes of an intervention are often taken dir-
ectly from an organization’s strategic plan or influenced by it. Even when this is the
case, the process of defining objectives based on analysis is nonetheless a vital step in
order to check whether there are additional outcomes specific to the situation. It also
acts as a necessary validation of the relevance of the wider strategy to the particular
context in which the project/programme is being developed. One or more outcomes
can be adopted, depending on the context of the intervention.

Example project outcome 1

The capacity of communities to prepare for and respond to disasters is improved.

Outputs
“Outputs” are “the tangible products, goods and services and other immediate results
that lead to the achievement of outcomes”. They are the most immediate effects of an
activity, the results over which you have most control.
The outputs should describe all the results that need to be achieved in order to achieve
the outcome(s), no more, no less. Normally, the key outputs can be developed from
the objectives statements at the next level down of the objectives tree, but it is neces-
sary to verify whether there are any missing or unnecessary outputs.

Example outputs (for outcome 1)

1.1 Disaster Management Plans are developed by Community Disaster Manage-
ment Committees.
1.2 Early warning systems are established to monitor disaster risk.
1.3 Communities’ awareness of the measures to prepare for and respond to dis-
asters is improved.

Activities
“Activities” are the collection of tasks to be carried out in order to achieve the outputs
– the day-to-day actions that need to be carried out in order to achieve the project/
programme outputs and, by extension, the outcome(s).
Activities are not always included in the logframe. Sometimes they are included in de-
tail, sometimes in summary, and sometimes not at all. If they are only summarized or
not included at all in the logframe, they are usually set out in more detail, along with
an activity schedule (work plan), in a separate document (see Section 6.1, p. 42).

Example activities for output 1.1

1.1.1 Organize 10 community planning meetings.
1.1.2 Train peer facilitators and professional trainers.
1.1.3 Develop/translate disaster management awareness materials.

30
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

Inputs/resources, costs and sources

The inputs/resources are the materials and means needed to implement the planned
activities. This concept includes the required personnel (number and profile), equip-
ment, facilities, technical assistance, funds, contracted services, etc.

Example inputs
Space to hold meetings, trainers/peer facilitators, training materials. Costs/sources:
CHF 20,000 (appeal), CHF 3,000 (locally raised funds), volunteer time, donated
venue for meeting.

5.3.1 Verifying the logic of the objectives – if-then causality

The first column of the logframe matrix summarizes the “means-end” logic of the
proposed project/programme (also known as the “intervention logic”). When the ob-
jectives hierarchy is read from the bottom up, it can be expressed in terms of:

IF adequate inputs are provided, THEN activities can be undertaken.

IF the activities are undertaken, THEN outputs can be produced.
IF outputs are produced, THEN the project outcome will be achieved.
IF the project outcome is achieved, THEN this should contribute to the goal.

If reversed, we can say that:

IF we wish to contribute to the goal, THEN we must achieve the project outcome.
IF we wish to achieve the project outcome, THEN we must deliver the outputs.
IF we wish to deliver the outputs, THEN the specified activities must be implemented.
IF we wish to implement the specified activities, THEN we must be able to source
the identified inputs.

This logic is tested and refined by the analysis of assumptions in the fourth column of
the matrix.

> 5.4 Assumptions and risks

“Assumptions” in the logframe are external factors which are Objectives Indicators Means of Assumptions
important for the success of the intervention but are beyond verification

its control. They should also be “probable” – reasonably likely to Goal

occur, not certain or unlikely.
Outcome(s)

For example, in an agriculture project in an area where droughts

Outputs
have occasionally occurred, as assumption would be: “There will
be no drought during the project.” This external factor is clearly out- Activities
side the control of the implementing team and would influence the
project’s success if it did not hold true and a drought did occur.

Other examples of external factors outside the control of the project include political
and economic changes, war/civil disturbance, and the actions of other actors, such as
public agencies, private organizations and civil society organizations.

31
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Assumptions are important to identify because they help check whether the pro-
posed objectives are reasonable and well informed or based on unrealistic opti-
mism or poor initial assessment. The identification of assumptions is a “reality check”
for the potential for success of an intervention and may lead to the modification of the
objectives and their indicators (see Section 4.8).

It is important to monitor assumptions during the life of the intervention, in order to

make decisions about how to manage them. For example, if an unexpected drought
did occur, the implementing team would have to consider how to find alternative
water sources. In the case of factors even further beyond the project’s control – such as
the outbreak or worsening of internal conflict – the project team would have to con-
sider scaling down or even closing the project.

What is the difference between an assumption and a risk?

An assumption describes a risk as a positive statement of the conditions that
need to be met if the intervention is to achieve its objectives. The risk, “the se-
curity situation gets worse”, can be written as the assumption, “the political and
security situation remains stable”. Risks are often identified during the initial as-
sessment stage and restated as assumptions during the design of the logframe.

There are a number of approaches to identifying which assumptions which should

be monitored during the intervention, usually based on a series of key questions.
The process may seem complicated at first, but as you become more familiar with
designing logframes, it will become more straightforward. The following six steps are
recommended to assist in the identification of assumptions, followed by two examples
illustrating how the steps are applied to two potential assumptions, of which one is an
actual assumption (see Figure 13: How to determine an assumption, p. 34).

5.4.1 Recommended steps for identifying an assumption

Step 1: Identify critical external factors/risks.
This is typically done during the initial assessment phase or analysis stage of the plan-
ning phase, e.g. through the problem analysis, SWOT analysis or other such tools. It
may also be done by looking at each objective in the logframe and asking what may
prevent it from being achieved.

Step 2: Restate the external factors/risks as assumptions –

i.e. statements of the positive conditions needed
for the intervention’s success.
Assumptions identify potential problems or risks that can hinder or block the achieve-
ment of objectives, but they are restated as the conditions needed for the success of the
project/programme (see above on the difference between assumptions and risks).

32
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

Objectives Indicators Means of Assumptions Figure 12

verification
“If and then” test
IF Assumptions
Goal at goal level
THEN
IF Assumptions
Outcome(s) AND for outcomes
THEN
IF Assumptions
Outputs AND for outputs
THEN
IF Assumptions
Activities AND for activties

Step 3: Align the assumptions with specific objectives.

Each assumption should be linked to a specific objective in the logframe – they are
conditions which need to hold true in order for the achievement of one level of result
to lead to the next. For example, the assumption “Prices for building materials remain
within the project budget” applies for the output “Transitional shelter kits are distri-
buted”. An “if-and-then” test helps to identify the correct assumption at the correct
level, for example:

> IF “Transitional shelter kits are distributed”

> AND “Prices for building materials remain within the project budget” hold true,
> THEN the outcome “Improve access to transitional shelter in target communities” will
be achieved.

In some instances, a general assumption may apply to all objectives, such as: “The po-
litical situation remains stable allowing for project implementation”. It is best to list such
a global assumption at the goal level, with the understanding that such an assumption
would also affect all the objectives below that if it did not hold true.

Step 4: Check that the assumption is indeed important.

Excessive assumptions can complicate the logframe and monitoring. Therefore, it is
important to limit assumptions to only those that would threaten the intervention’s
success if they did not hold true.

For example, for the output “Transitional shelter kits are distributed ”, it is unnecessary
to list as an assumption that “Public transport is functioning in the area” if shelter kits
would be distributed by agency vehicles and collected by people on foot. However,
assumption related to public transport may be relevant for a different output of the
intervention, e.g. “Volunteers from the region are trained in shelter skills at the central
office” ), if the volunteers would have to use public transport to attend the training.

33
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Figure 13. How to determine an assumption

Steps Two examples of potential assumptions

for a fishing livelihoods project

1. Identify critical external fac- Local fish supply becomes depleted. Economic recession threatens market for fish
tors/risks. products.

2. Restate the factor Fish supply does not become depleted from Economic recession does not threaten the
as an assumption – overfishing. market for fish products.
a statement of the positive
condition needed for success.

3. Align the assumption with the Outcome level: Outcome level:

specific ­objective. IF we achieve the outcome “support the IF we achieve the outcome “support the
development of small-scale fishing businesses development of small-scale fishing businesses
in target communities” in target communities”
AND the assumption “local fish supply does AND the assumption “economic recession
not become depleted” holds true does not threaten the market for fish products”
THEN we will contribute to the goal “improve holds true
livelihoods in target communities”. THEN we will contribute to the goal “improve
livelihoods in target communities”.

4. Check that the ­assumption is Yes – sufficient fish supply is necessary to de- Yes – a healthy economy is necessary to de-
indeed important. velop fishing-based livelihoods. velop fishing-based livelihoods.

5. Check that the ­assumption is This is not included in the logframe as an While the project may be able to anticipate an
indeed outside the control assumption because the project can control economic recession, it is outside of its control
of the project. this by, for example: to prevent it.
> designing activities and objectives that will
educate local fishermen; and
> facilitate community agreements on fishing
rights and times to limit overfishing.

6. Check that the ­assumption is This is not listed as an assumption because it This is included in the logframe as an
­probable. can be controlled (as shown in Step 5). assumption because there is a reasonable
chance that a recession could occur, although
not certain or very unlikely. Therefore the state
of the economy should be monitored during the
lifetime of the intervention.

Step 5: Check that the assumption is indeed outside

the control of the intervention.
It is important to avoid listing as an assumption something that the intervention should
address itself. For example, in the context of a health promotion project, “People are
receptive to personal hygiene messages”, may not be a good assumption when the inter-
vention team can recruit appropriately trained staff or volunteers to consult the target
population to design and market hygiene messages that people will be receptive to.

Step 6: Check that the assumption is “probable”.

An assumption that should be included in the logframe and monitored is one that is
“probable”, i.e. an important external factor that will most likely hold true, but there is
still a reasonable chance that it may not. Due to this element of uncertainty, it is im-
portant to monitor the external factor during the intervention, in order to take action
to address it if necessary.

External factors which are “certain” or “unlikely” require different action. An impor-
tant external factor that is certain to hold true should not be listed as an assumption. It is
certain the positive condition will happen, so no action needs to be taken.

34
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

An important external factor that is unlikely to hold true should not be listed as an as-
sumption. The project/programme design should be modified to address such a risky
external factor.

If it is impossible to modify the intervention to address an external factor which

is unlikely to hold true (i.e. a high risk), it may mean that the intervention is not
viable and needs to be re-examined.

> 5.5 Indicators

An indicator is a unit of measurement that helps determine
Objectives Indicators Means of Assumptions
what progress is being made towards the achievement of an verification
intended result (objective). Indicators set out what information Goal Impact
to collect in order to answer key questions about the progress of an indicators
intervention. These questions relate to different evaluation criteria Outcome(s) Outcome
indicators
(shown in brackets after each question):12
Outputs Output
indicators
> How much did we do? How many resources did we use to get
Activities Process
there? (efficiency) ­indicators
> Are we accomplishing what we set out to do? (effectiveness) (if used)
> How do the people we are seeking to help feel about our work?
(relevance and appropriateness)
> Is the intervention responding to real needs? (effectiveness, relevance and appropriateness)
> Is the work we are doing achieving its goal? (impact)
> Will the benefits to the population be long-lasting, even after the intervention has
finished? (sustainability)

The information collected on the indicators is then used to assess progress and guide
decision-making through the implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the inter-
vention. The information can also help lessons to be learned from an intervention in
order to build on successes and avoid repeating mistakes.

Indicators can be quantitative (e.g. the percentage of farmers adopting new technology,
number of sanitation facilities constructed or renovated) or qualitative (e.g. the level
of commitment of farmers to using new technology, beneficiaries’ perceptions of the
quality of the sanitation facilities provided). It is best to use a combination of both
when possible.

There are different levels of indicators, which follow the logframe’s hierarchy of objec-
tives, as shown in Figure 14, p. 36 (taken from a livelihoods development project). (See
also Figure 15: Logframe for School & Community Disaster Management Project,
p. 40–41, for further examples of indicators at the different levels.

It is usually easier to accurately measure process and output indicators than outcome
indicators, such as changes in behaviour. The higher levels of the indicator hierarchy
require more analysis and synthesis of different information types and sources. This
12. See the International
affects the data collection methods and analysis during the monitoring and evaluation Federation’s Management
phases, which in turn has implications for staffing, budgets and timeframe. Policy for Evaluations 2010
for detailed definitions of
these criteria.

35
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

Figure 14. Objective and indicator levels (for a livelihoods project)

Objective Indicator Main evaluation

level level criteria
Goal: Impact Indicator: > Sustainability
Improve the economic well-being G1 % of people living on less > Impact
of the people living in the target than US$ 1 per day
district.

Outcome 1: Outcome Indicators: > Sustainability

Household economic opportuni- 1a % of households that have functioning > Effectiveness
ties in target communities are income-generation activities
> Relevance and
improved. 1b % of people reached who state their level
­appropriateness
of satisfaction with the opportunities pro-
vided is “satisfied” or “very satisfied”

Output 1.1 Output Indicator: > Efficiency

Income-generation activity plans 1.1a % of participating households having com- > Relevance
are developed in households in pleted an income-generation activity plan
target communities. 1.1b # of income-generation activity plans de-
veloped

Activities: Process (Activity) Indicator: > Efficiency

1.1.1 Household livelihood-support 1.1.1 # of households that participated in the
project planning session planning session

5.5.1 Targets, baselines and the relationship between them

It is important to note that an indicator is a unit of measurement only. It does not have
a target or value set against it until information (e.g. from the assessment phase) can
be analysed to determine a realistic target. A “baseline” is an analysis that describes
the situation prior to an intervention, against which progress can be assessed or com-
parisons made. Ideally, this is a measurement against the indicators before the inter-
vention begins. A “target” is the measurement against the indicator that the project/
programme hopes to reach. The “actual” values are then the levels that are reached
during implementation.

For example, if the baseline measurement is “20% of households have functioning in-
come-generation activities”, doubling this figure to “40% of households” could be a rea-
sonable target, depending on the capacity of the implementing organization. If the
baseline measurement was higher or lower than 20%, then the target would have to
be modified accordingly.

5.5.2 How to define the indicators

Three useful steps can be followed in defining the indicators:

Step 1: Clarify the objectives.

Review the precise intent of the objectives and make sure you are clear on the exact
changes being sought by the intervention. Good indicators start with the formulation
of good objectives that everyone agrees on.

36
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

Step 2: Develop a list of possible indicators.

Usually, many possible indicators can be readily identified. Often, it helps to de-
velop first a long list through brainstorming or drawing on the experiences of similar
projects/programmes. It can be particularly useful to refer to international industry
standard indicators for a similar project/programme. At this point, encourage crea-
tivity and the free flow of ideas.

Step 3: Assess the possible indicators and select the best.

In refining and selecting the final indicators, you should set a high standard and be
practical. Data collection is expensive, so select only those indicators that represent the
most important and basic dimensions of the results sought.

Checking whether indicators meet a set of “SMART” criteria (see box) is a well-known
method that can be used to review suggested indicators to ensure that they will help the
team accurately monitor and evaluate the progress/success of the project/­programme.

SMART criteria
SMART is a well-known formula to verify the quality > Achievable: The measurement of the indicator
of indicators. All indicators should meet the following is feasible and realistic, within the resources and
criteria to be accurately and reliably measured: capacity of the project/programme, and the data
> Specific: The indicator clearly and directly ­measures are available.
a specific result for the objective it is measuring. > Relevant: The indicator provides appropriate infor-
> Measurable: The indicator is unambiguously mation that is best suited to measuring the intended
specified so that all parties agree on what it covers result or change expressed in the objective.
and there are practical ways to measure the indi- > Time-bound: The indicator specifies the specific
cator. timeframe at which it is to be measured.

The same criteria can be used to develop indicators. For example, for the outcome
“The capacity of communities to prepare for, respond to and mitigate disasters
is improved”, the indicator topic would be: “Practice of disaster preparedness measures”.
In order to make this indicator accurately and objectively verifiable, elements meeting
the SMART criteria are added.

SMART criteria Indicator topic: Practice of disaster preparedness measures

Add Specific quality People who practise disaster preparedness measures identified in the community ­disaster
management plan

Add Specific People in the Eastern District who practise disaster preparedness measures identified in the
area/target group community disaster management plan

Add Measureable Percentage of people in the Eastern District who practise 5 or more disaster preparedness
quantity measures identified in the community disaster management plan

Make sure the informa- (Information can be collected through a household survey)
tion is Achievable

Make sure the informa- (“Practising preparedness measures” is relevant to “prepare for disasters”)
tion is Relevant

Make Time-bound Percentage of people in the Eastern District who practise 5 or more disaster preparedness
measures identified in the community disaster management plan within 2 years

Set target after baseline 80% of people in participating communities in the Eastern District who practise 5 or more disas-
has been established ter preparedness measures identified in the community disaster management plan within 2 years

37
 International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

5.5.3 Indicator traps

Some of the most frequent traps that people fall into when identifying indicators are:

Trap How to avoid it

Selection of too many > Be realistic! Indicators only need to capture what is necessary for monitoring and
indicators evaluation and to be realistic in terms of data collection.
Having long lists of indicators that > 1–3 indicators per objective statement are usually sufficient.
nobody ever measures.
“Re-inventing > Look for international or industry standard indicators, e.g. indicators developed
the (indicator) wheel” by UN agencies (such as for the Millennium Development Goals) or for the Demo-
Designing indicators when graphic and Health Surveys, which have been used and tested extensively.
good ones already exist.
Labour-intensive indicators > Check if there are secondary indicator sources. It may be cost-effective to adopt
Selection of overly complex indi- indicators for which data have been or will be collected by a government ministry,
cators requiring labour-intensive international agency, etc.
data-collection and analysis.
Irrelevant indicators Make sure you can answer yes to the following questions:
Selection of indicators that are > Is this statement a criteria or measurement by which we can demonstrate
activities or results statements or progress?
indicators which do not directly > By measuring this indicator, will we know the level of progress?
measure the objective.
Imprecise indicators > Keep the indicators as simple, clear and precise as possible (see SMART criteria).
Indicators that are not specific so > For example, it is better to ask how many children have a weight/height ratio above
they cannot be readily measured. malnourishment levels than to enquire generally whether the household suffers
from malnourishment.
Low-level indicators > Although indicators at the output level are easier to collect and are useful for
Over-concentration project/programme management, they do not show the project’s/programme’s
on ­indicators which measure only progress or impact.
outputs or activities. > It is important to have a few key indicators at output, outcome and impact levels.
Again, other sources of outcome and impact indicators, such as those used by
other agencies, can be useful.

It is important when defining indicators to consider carefully how the actual information
required will be collected, stored and analysed. This topic is covered in the next section.

> 5.6 Means of verification

Objectives Indicators Means of Assumptions
The “means of verification” are the ways in which information
verification will be collected on the indicators to monitor and evaluate the
Goal progress of the intervention. For example, body temperature is an
indicator of health, a thermometer provides the information.
Outcome(s)

The means of verification should be defined at the same time as the

Outputs
formulation of the indicator. This is especially important as it helps
Activities to test whether or not the indicator can be realistically measured at
all, and within a reasonable amount of time, money and effort.

This stage can be split into two steps:

Step 1: Define the sources of information.

Normally this would state from where the information to measure the indicator will
be collected, whether through primary research (reports or other information gathered

38
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

from special studies, surveys, observation, focus group discussions and different par-
ticipatory tools such as those outlined in the Federation’s VCA toolbox 13) and/or
secondary research, i.e. available documentary sources (e.g. administrative records,
progress reports, project accounts, official statistics, etc.).

Sometimes, only the sources of information can be identified in the initial planning stage,
and Step 2 will be completed in more detail when designing the monitoring system.

Step 2: Identify the data collection methods.

In addition, the means of verification can specify how the information will be col-
lected. If this is not done at this stage, it can be carried out when designing the moni-
toring system.

Identifying the data collection methods can include:

> Consulting secondary research sources (as listed above).

> Specifying which primary research methods will be used (as listed above).
> For more detail, one can also include the following information – although this
would more commonly be specified in a monitoring and evaluation plan: who will
participate in the data collection (e.g. contracted survey teams, the district health
office, the project/programme management team, etc.)
> When/how regularly the information will be provided (e.g. monthly, quarterly, an-
nually, etc.)
> How the data will be analysed

You should consider whether the collection of information will be possible with cur-
rent capacities. If the required information cannot easily be collected with existing ca-
pacities, this should be discussed carefully. Can the required information be collected
through existing systems or by improvements to existing systems? If important infor-
mation is not already being collected, additional time and costs should be budgeted for
in the overall intervention plan.

If the means of verification imply that it is much too expensive or complicated to col-
lect information on a particular indicator, consider whether it should be replaced by
an indicator that is easier to measure, which may be an indirect (proxy) indicator. For
example, it can be very difficult to measure real increases in income in a community,
as it is not possible to have access to individuals’ bank statements. However, changes
can be more easily measured in household assets (number of new vehicles or improved
housing) in the community through focus group interviews or even observation, which
gives a good indirect measure of the levels of income in that community.

The collection and analysis of data is an extensive and important topic, addressed in
13. Available at http://www.
more detail in guidelines for monitoring and evaluation produced by the International ifrc.org/Docs/pubs/
disasters/resources/
Federation 14 and others. preparing-disasters/vca/vca-
toolbox-en.pdf.
14. Available on the International
Once all of these steps have been completed, you should have a logframe matrix, Federation’s intranet at
similar to the example given in Figure 15 on the next page. https://fednet.ifrc.org/
sw114678.asp (revised
editions forthcoming).

39
40
Figure 15. Logframe for School & Community Disaster Management (DM) Project

Objectives Indicators Means of verification Assumptions

(What you want to achieve) (How to measure change) (Where and how to get information) (What else to be aware of)
Project goal: G1: ratio of deaths caused by disaster to number G1: Xland Government Disaster Management No major unexpected epidemics,
of people exposed to a disaster in the target dis- Agency statistics for the region (analysed by serious civil unrest or “mega-dis-
Reduce deaths and injuries related to disasters in
trict (10:100,000 within 2 years) project manager, annually) aster” occur.
the Eastern District.
G2: % of injuries caused by disasters within popu- G2: Sample survey by branch disaster man-
lation exposed to a disaster in the target district agement officers/monitoring information from
(5% within 2 years) CDMC meetings (reviewed 6 monthly by
project manager)

Community Disaster Management Capacity Building

Outcome 1: 1a: % of people in participating communities who 1a: Focus group discussions during CDMC The political and security situation
The capacity of communities to prepare for and practise 5 or more disaster preparedness measures meetings (monthly, by CDMC members & Red remains stable allowing community-
respond to disasters is improved. identified in the community DM plan (80% in 2 years) Cross volunteers). level actions to be carried out.
1b: % of targeted communities with identified re- 1b: CDMC meetings/DM plans (collected &
sponse mechanisms in place (80% in 2 years) verified by project officer)
Output 1.1 1.1: # of participating communities that have a 1.1: Copies of DM plans (collected by project The economy remains stable, and
Community Disaster Management Plans are de- tested Disaster Management Plan (16 [out of 20] manager) food shortages do not become
veloped and tested by Community Disaster Man- within 2 years) acute.
1.2: Field officer’s report
agement Committees (CDMCs).
1.2: % of communities with an early warning The security situation in the country
1.3: Focus group discussions (every 3 months,
Output 1.2 system in place (90% within 2 years) does not prevent implementation of
by National Society volunteers & project staff)
Early warning systems to monitor disaster risks the DM plan.
1.3: % of people [of which 50% are female] in – cross-checked during annual disaster simu-
are established.
participating communities who can identify at lation (annually by CDMC members & National Local political leaders support im-
Output 1.3 least 5 preparedness and 5 response measures. Society project officers) plementation of the findings of the
Communities’ awareness of measures to prepare (75% within 1 year) VCA.
for and respond to disasters is improved.

Activities (for Output 1.1) Inputs/resources Costs & sources People in the community have no
new demands on their time pre-
1.1.1: Organize 10 community planning meetings. 1.1.1: Space to hold meetings, trainers/peer CHF 20,000 (appeal), CHF 2,000 (locally
venting them from participating.
facilitators, training materials raised funds), volunteer time, donated space
1.1.2: Engage volunteer peer facilitators.
for meeting/training
1.1.2: Per diems
1.1.3: Develop/translate community DM
awareness materials. 1.1.3: Computers, printers, awareness-raising
materials, translator

Activities for other outputs Inputs & resources for other outputs Costs & sources for other outputs
 School-based Disaster Management Capacity Building
Outcome 2 1a: % of schools that have passed the annual dis- 1a: Ministry of Disaster Management records The political and security situation
aster safety inspection from the Ministry of Dis- remains stable allowing school-level
The capacity of schools to prepare for and re- 1b: Project reporting system through a simula-
aster Management (80% within 2 years) actions to be carried out.
spond to disasters is improved tion checklist
1b: % of participating schools that have success-
fully conducted 1 disaster simulation (60% within
1 year and 80% within 2 years)

Output 2.1 1.1: # of participating schools that have a new DM 1.1a: Copy of school DM plan (checked by Students are not taken out of school
School Disaster Management Plans are devel- Plan tested (20 [out of 25] within 2 years) project manager, every 6 months) by their parents.
oped and tested at participating schools.
1.2: % of DMGs that have at least 2 teachers/ 1.2a: DMU meeting minutes (checked by The majority of teachers remain in
Output 2.2 staff, 2 parents, 2 students, and conduct regular project manager, every 6 months) their jobs for at least 1 year.
School Disaster Management Groups (DMGs) are monthly meetings (80% within 2 years)
1.3a: School classroom reports (project
formed in participating schools.
1.3: % of students [of which 25% are female] in manager & volunteer, every 6 months)
Output 2.3 the targeted schools who have received disaster
Disaster risk reduction lessons are included in the preparedness and disaster risk education
curriculum.

Activities (for output 2.1) Input/ Resources Costs & sources People in the community have no
2.1.1: Organize 10 school planning meetings. new demands on their time pre-
2.1.1: Space to hold meetings, trainers/peer facili- CHF 10,000 (appeal), CHF 3,000 (locally
venting them from participating
2.1.2: Train school teachers in facilitating DM plan- tators, training materials raised funds), volunteer time, donated space
ning. for meeting/training
2.1.2: Classroom, training materials
2.1.3: Develop/translate school-based DM aware-
ness materials. 2.1.3: Computers, printers, awareness raising ma-
terials, translator

Activities for other outputs Inputs & resources for other outputs Costs & sources for other outputs

Note that the targets and timescales given in italics for each indicator would be set after a baseline study has been conducted by the implementing team.

41
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

6. Towards implementation
Once the main aspects of the intervention have been designed following the steps out-
lined above, the next step is to define:

1. How the objectives will be achieved (activities and timeframe)

2. The resources that should/will be mobilized to achieve them (resource schedule,
budget and cash flow)
3. The monitoring (and evaluation) system – how information on the indicators will
be collected, analysed and used to guide the progress of the intervention

> 6.1 Activity schedule

An activity schedule (also called a “work plan”) is a document analysing and graph-
ically presenting project/programme activities. It helps to identify their logical se-
quence, expected duration and any dependencies that exist between activities, and
provides a basis for allocating management responsibility.

6.1.1 Aim of the activity schedule

Once all the objectives, assumptions, indicators and means of verification have been
inserted in the logframe matrix, you will be able to define the activities. Sometimes,
activities are included in the logframe matrix itself, either in detail or in summary
form, sometimes they are not included at all. Whichever option is used, the scheduling
of when activities will take place should be completed in a separate document known
as the activity schedule.

The activity schedule for a project (programme component) should be designed with
a separate set of activities normally for each output of the project. An activity schedule
helps to consider and determine:

> What will happen

> When, and for how long it will happen
> In which order activities have to be carried out (dependencies)

Other elements can also be added to help ensure that activities are completed as
planned. Some key additional elements include:

> Who will do what

> What types of inputs, besides people, will be needed
> Budgets, available income, expenditure
> Specific targets of amounts per period (e.g. Number of food kits distributed, number
of workshops held)

The level of achievement of targets can be more thoroughly monitored in a monitoring

and evaluation plan (see p. 49). The activity schedule can also be used as a basis for
monitoring activities. There are many computer-based and other tools available to facili-
tate activity scheduling. One commonly used tool is the GANTT chart, which normally
includes monitoring of the execution of activities, similar to the example in Figure 16.

42
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

Figure 16. Activity schedule (work plan)

Activities Jan Feb Mar April May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Programme component 1
Output 1.1
Activity 1.1.1 planned
Execution
Activity 1.1.2 planned
Execution
Output 1.2
Activity 1.2.1 planned
Execution
Activity 1.2.2 planned
Execution
Activity 1.2.3 planned
Execution
Output 1.3
Activity 1.3.1 planned
Execution
Activity 1.3.2 planned
Execution
Assessment, monitoring and evaluation
Monitoring
Mid-term/final evaluation

The level of detail required in the activity schedule will depend on the nature and scale
of the project/programme and expected implementation modalities. During the plan-
ning stage, activity specification should be indicative, as it is usually inappropriate to
try and go into too much detail. However, it is useful to establish in which order key
activities will take place. Once funding has been secured, activity scheduling can be
more specific and detailed.

The activity schedule should be viewed as a flexible document that can be altered as
circumstances change. With the activity schedule prepared, the resources required and
the scheduling of costs can be specified.

The activity schedule should be clearly linked to the delivery of project/programme re-
sults (as defined in the logframe matrix), as should the resource schedule and budget.

The most common problem encountered in the development of an activity schedule is

an underestimation of the time required. This can happen for a number of reasons:

> The omission of essential activities and tasks

> Failure to allow sufficiently for the interdependence of activities
> Failure to allow for resource competition (e.g. Scheduling the same person or piece
of equipment to do two or more things at once)
> A desire to impress with the promise of rapid results

43
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

> 6.2 Budgeting and resource planning

Once the team has established the activity schedule, it is time to create a budget de-
tailing the required resources and costs. A budget is a financial plan for a project/
programme. The basic rule is to ensure that all resources and costs needed for each
identified activity are reflected in the budget.

There must be a clear and direct connection between the budget and the activities, re-
sources needed and costs as reflected in the logframe. The budget is a key component
of a good planning process because it:
> Helps check if the project plan is realistic: calculates estimated costs and the funding
that would be required
> Is a prerequisite for funding applications
> Is a vital support for monitoring and evaluation of project/programme progress

The person with the overall direct responsibility for the implementation of the in-
tervention (sometimes called “project/programme manager” or “budget holder”) is
responsible for preparing all budgets related to the project/programme. Finance staff
can provide technical support where needed.

6.2.1 Budget structure

The budget template given below is a useful general structure often used in the
International Federation. It shows which activities are to be budgeted for according to
each output of the logframe matrix, and according to preset (Federation) budget lines.

Figure 17. Example of a budget structure

Budget lines
Project Supplies Capital Transport Personnel General Total
activities
Output 1.1
Activity 1.1.1
Activity 1.1.2
Output 1.2
Activity 1.2.1
Activity 1.2.2
Activity 1.2.3
Output 1.3
Activity 1.3.1
Activity 1.3.2
Assessment, monitoring & evaluation
Monitoring
Mid-term and/or
final evaluation
Total

44
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

6.2.2 The role of the budget

The budget plays an essential role throughout the project/programme cycle.

Planning phase
Budget planning enables project managers and others to form a precise idea of the
project’s likely costs. It ensures that they are realistic in terms of the funds needed to
implement activities to achieve the intended results.

When developing budgets, project managers should have detailed discussions both
with staff responsible for parts of the project and with those managing wider pro-
gramme or operational budgets to ensure that the budgeting is realistic.

Resource mobilization
A realistic plan and budget are crucial for fundraising and any negotiation with the
potential donor. It sets out what the organization will use the funds for and the results
that it is hoped to achieve with those funds. A clear and realistic plan and budget
which creates donor confidence are therefore essential for developing a resource mobi-
lization plan to help secure funding that will enable the intervention to be carried out
as planned.

Implementation phase
A clear and accurate budget is the main basis for ensuring that sufficient financial
resources exist to carry out activities as planned.

Monitoring
An accurate and detailed (activity level) budget allows for ongoing monitoring of ac-
tual expenditure alongside the activity schedule, an essential means of ensuring that
the intervention is going according to plan. Good monitoring enables revisions to be
made to the project plan where necessary, to ensure better implementation in terms of
the realization of the stated objectives.

It is also necessary to review the budget during project implementation. When differ-
ences between budgeted and actual figures are significant, the plan and budget may
need to be revised, or further review and analysis of the reasons may be required.

Financial reporting
The budget is the starting point for financial reporting to donors. Donor confidence
will be increased if reporting against the budget is sound, hence the need for realistic
plans and budgets. It is also important that the narrative and financial reports are pre-
pared together and are coherent.

It is very useful to be able to track a project’s expenditure by activity. This allows the
project manager to see easily and clearly how the implementation of the project is pro-
gressing. There are many ways in which this can be accomplished.

45
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

> 6.3 Sustainability analysis

Interventions must be checked for sustainability before their implementation. An
intervention may be said to be sustainable when it can deliver benefits to the selected
target group for an extended period of time after the main assistance from donors has
ended.19

The following factors should be taken into account when planning/designing and
implementing projects and programmes:

> Policy support measures: Do specific policies need to be established to sup-

port the project/programme?
> Socio-cultural aspects: These have an impact on motivation and participation.
Describe measures to encourage participation of all stakeholders.
> Gender issues: Refer to the gender checklist below.
> Institutional and management capacity: Refer to the SWOT analysis,
p. 20, a tool with a wide range of uses, including, as suggested here, to assess the
capacity of the implementing agency or team
> Environmental issues: Will the project have any environmental impact that
needs to be taken into account? What protection measures need to be put in place
and budgeted for?
> Appropriate technology: Is the technology used culturally appropriate? Will
the technology included in the project/programme build on existing technology/
know-how or on the different needs of men and women?
> Economic and financial issues: Who will cover running, maintenance and
depreciation costs?
> Risk management: Describe how the assumptions/risks identified in the log-
frame will be monitored and the steps that will be taken to minimize the risks, as far
as it is possible to do so.
> Exit strategies: If the project/programme requires initial external intervention
or management, describe how complete control and management of the project/
programme will be progressively transferred to the appropriate stakeholders.

6.3.1 Gender check list 16

It is essential both to ensure the success of the project/programme and as a matter
of policy to consider gender aspects in the design. This is a complex topic, which
is discussed in more detail in a number of publications, including the International
Federation’s Gender Training Manual (2004) and the Inter-Agency Standing
Committee’s Gender Handbook in Humanitarian Action (2006). A short checklist by
project/programme phase is provided below:

Assessment
15. OECD Development
Assistance Committee
> Examine gender roles/relationships in the area where activities are to take place.
(DAC). Principles for project > Understand the problems of women and men, girls and boys from their perspective,
assessment. Paris, 1988.
16. Adapted from March,
and consider age, disability, and socio-economic and ethnic differences.
Candida. Concepts and
frameworks for gender
analysis and planning. A tool
kit. Oxfam UK/Ireland, 1996.

46
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

Planning
> Ensure the proposal addresses problems related to gender identified in the situation
analysis.
> Incorporate the views of women and men, girls and boys in the plan, making sure
that all groups are represented.
> Check whether the project/programme budget includes activities required for
effective mainstreaming of a gender perspective in all steps.
> Identify gender sensitive indicators. Use indicators such as: How have women con-
tributed to discussions and decisions? How have they related to policy changes im-
proving their status? Has there been any change in women’s control over, and access
to, resources?

Implementation and monitoring

> Ensure appropriate participation of both sexes in project/programme implementation.
> Ensure that participation does not merely increase the workload of women but
means their active involvement in decision-making.
> Collect and analyse data disaggregated by gender and by age wherever possible.

Evaluation
> Evaluate the different impacts the project/programme has had on both sexes.
> Include gender sensitivity in the terms of reference and/or women in the evaluation
team.

47
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project / programme planning Guidance manual

7. Looking forward:
monitoring and evaluation
This manual began with an overview of Results-Based Management (RBM), which
focuses on planning for measurable results. Such an approach helps us and others
better assess, and hopefully appreciate, the value of our work.

It then outlined the four phases of the project/programme cycle (see Figure 18) and
examined in detail the analysis and design stages of the planning phase in which meas-
ureable objectives are identified and defined. These objectives are the building blocks
of projects and programmes and are summarized in a logframe matrix. The logframe
also defines the indicators and their means of verification to measure the achievement
of the objectives, and the key assumptions that can affect their achievement.

The assessment and planning phases lay the groundwork for the implementation of
projects/programmes. With implementation, the cycle enters the next two phases,
which include monitoring and evaluation.

Figure 18
The project/
programme cycle
(with M&E highlighted)

Monitoring and evaluation (M&E) build on the logical framework developed

during the planning phase. Therefore, these phases will be the focus of the sequel to
this manual. However, it seems fitting to touch briefly on some of the key points that
concern M&E.

Monitoring refers to the routine collection and analysis of information in order to

track progress, check compliance and make informed decisions for project/programme
management. It focuses on what is being done and how it is being done. Therefore, as
stressed in this manual, it is essential that objectives are well designed, with SMART
indicators (see Section 5.5.2, p. 36) to measure ongoing processes and results. Reliable
monitoring allows project/programme teams to identify trends and patterns, adapt
strategies, and make decisions regarding human, financial and material resources to
enhance project/programme effectiveness.

48
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Part three The planning phase in the project/planning programme cycle

Evaluation refers to the periodic collection and analysis of information that forms
the basis of “an assessment, as systematic and objective as possible, of an ongoing or
completed project, programme or policy, its design, implementation and results. The
aim is to determine the relevance and fulfillment of objectives, developmental effi-
ciency, effectiveness, impact and sustainability. An evaluation should provide informa-
tion that is credible and useful, enabling the incorporation of lessons learned into the
decision-making process of both recipients and donors.” 17

As with monitoring, it is critical that reliable indicators are identified during the plan-
ning phase for the purposes of evaluation at various stages in the project/programme,
whether it is a mid-term or a final evaluation. Evaluation in turn informs the new
planning process, whether it is for the continuation of the same intervention, for the
implementation of a new intervention or for ending the intervention. As with moni-
toring, it is critical that reliable indicators are identified in the planning phase to in-
form the evaluation of the project/programme.

An important tool for monitoring is an M&E plan (sometimes called an “M&E

planning matrix”). The M&E plan expands on the elements in the logframe ma-
trix to identify key informational requirements for each indicator. It is a critical tool
for planning and managing data collection, analysis and use. The M&E plan takes
the logframe one stage further to support project/programme implementation and
­management.

A critical difference between monitoring and evaluation is in their respective focuses:

monitoring tends to focus on operational implementation, while evaluation focuses
on the effects or impact of the implementation. Monitoring and evaluation are inte-
grally linked, as monitoring provides information that can also inform evaluations.
Therefore, it is best to plan for these two critical functions as part of a coherent, com-
prehensive M&E system.

Monitoring and evaluation form the basis for clear and accurate reporting on the
results achieved by an intervention. When objectives and indicators are clearly defined
during the planning phase, and a comprehensive M&E system is set up to collect
information on progress, reporting is greatly facilitated. In this way, reporting is no
longer a headache, but becomes an opportunity for critical analysis and organizational
learning, informing decision-making and impact assessment.

The sequel to this manual will look in further detail at the key components of an
M&E system, from M&E planning to data collection, analysis and reporting. Each
phase of project/programme management plays a critical role in helping us attain
our mission to deliver quality services to people in need in an accountable, effective
manner.
17. This definition is from the
International Federation’s
Evaluation Policy, adopted
from the OECD/DAC,
Working Party on Aid
Evaluation, Glossary of Key
Terms in Evaluation and
Results Based Management,
2002.

49
Annexes/
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Annex 1 How to create a “problem tree”

Annex 1
How to create a “problem tree”
A “problem” is defined here as “an unsatisfactory situation that may be difficult to
cope with”. Problem analysis is a critical stage of project/programme planning, as it
guides all subsequent analysis and decision-making on priorities.

Creating a problem tree should ideally be undertaken as a participatory group exercise,

including, wherever possible and relevant, the people the intervention seeks to help.
It requires pieces of paper or card on which to write individual problem statements,
which can then be sorted visually into cause-effect relationships.

A detailed example of a problem tree is depicted in Figure 19: Detailed problem tree,
p. 53. The example looks at the type of problem tree that could be developed when
investigating the reasons why in one area (the “Eastern District”), capacities to reduce
the effects of disaster are low.

To build a problem tree, follow the step-by-step procedure below and adapt it to the
specific needs of the group.

Step 1: Brainstorm the problems that participants consider to be

priorities.
This step can either be completely open (no preconceived notions as to what partici-
pants’ priority concerns/problems might be) or more directed (specifying a “known”
high priority problem or objective based on a preliminary analysis of existing informa-
tion and stakeholder consultations during the assessment). It is important to agree first
on the definition of a “problem” (see definition above).

Step 2: From the problems identified through the brainstorming

exercise, agree on the main or core problem.
This is a vital part of the process and requires a strong consensus of the group. During
the process, group members should check they have correctly identified the main
problem and that it is a relevant one for their work.

Write the core problem on a post-it note or piece of card and place it in the middle of
the wall or floor. This constitutes the trunk of the tree. To simplify the process, it is
normally best to focus on one main problem at a time.

Step 3: Begin to establish a hierarchy of causes and effects.

> Identify the causes of the main problem by asking “why?” until you can go no
further. Some problems may have more than one cause. Problems directly causing the
main problem are placed underneath the main problem. These are the roots.
> Identify the effects of the main problem by asking “what happens then?” until
you can go no further. Some problems may have more than one effect. Problems
that are identified as direct effects of the main or core problem are placed above the
trunk. These are the branches.

51
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project programme planning Guidance manual

All other problems are then sorted in the same way. If there are two or more causes
combining to produce an effect, they should be placed at the same level in the dia-
gram. Encourage discussion and ensure that participants feel able to move the post-it
notes or cards around.

Step 4: Connect the problems with cause-effect arrows clearly

showing key links.

Step 5: Review the diagram.

Check through the problem tree to make sure that each problem logically leads to the
next. Ask yourself/the group: Are there important problems that have not been men-
tioned yet? If so, specify the problems and include them in an appropriate place. (See
Figure 19 for a detailed example of a completed problem tree.)

Step 6: Consolidate the problems.

At this stage, it may be useful to group problems that appear many times in the tree
and remove some of the layers of the problem tree, to focus on the most immediate
causes and effects of the main problem identified (see Figure 5: Simplified problem
tree, p. 22).

Step 7: Make a copy of the diagram.

Copy the problem tree onto a sheet of paper to keep as a record, or take a picture of it.

The product of the exercise (the problem tree) should provide a robust but simpli-
fied version of reality. A problem tree cannot (and should not) contain or explain
the complexities of every identifiable cause-effect relationship. Once complete,
problem trees represent a summary picture of the existing negative situation.

The process is as important as the product. The exercise should be treated as a learning
­experience and an opportunity for different views and interests to be expressed.

If necessary, the different aspects of a problem area can be further elaborated through
focus groups or interviews.

When the problem tree is created with the target population’s participation, the
­analysis of the problem is enriched and joint learning among all concerned is made
possible.

52
 Figure 19. Detailed problem tree

Low resilience Low resilience Economic Poor sense of security Migration out
to disaster risks to health risks instability and well-being of community

Low capacity to reduce deaths & injuries due to disasters

Poor DM capacity Poor DM capacity Local government disaster

Annex 1 How to create a “problem tree”

in schools in communities response structures are poor

International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies

No teaching No organized No community Poor Provincial Poor project

of disaster DM groups disaster plans knowledge of ­disaster cen- management
risk reduction- in schools how to prepare tres
related topics & respond to under­
in schools disaster equipped
No training
available

No disaster No ideas of No accurate

preparedness/ how to orga- knowledge of
response in nize school risks, vulnera-
curriculum groups bilities, capa- Lack Security Lack
cities of situation of
personnel bad funds

Ministry of Previously Previously

Education did Food Political
poor road people had
not support crisis conflict
­access no spare time
DM education to villages (poor harvest)

53
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project programme planning Guidance manual

Annex 2
How to create and use
an objectives tree
Developing the objectives tree
Step 1: Create an objectives tree using the problem tree as a basis.
Turn each of the problems in the problem tree into positive statements by reformu-
lating the negative situations as desirable positive situations. Reproduce the shape of
the problem tree, keeping the objectives in the same place as the problems.

An objectives tree is created by looking at the needs arising from the problems, the
needs being the link between the problems and the objectives.

PROBLEM  NEED  OBJECTIVE

Poor disaster manage- Means to mitigate effects Community capacity to

ment capacity in com- of disaster prepare for and respond
munities to disasters is improved

Step 2: Check the logic (the cause-effect relationships) to ensure that

the objective makes sense.
Will the achievement of the lower-level objectives help achieve the higher-level objec-
tives? Modify the objectives, if necessary, by:
> revising the statements
> adding new objectives, if these seem to be relevant and necessary to achieve the ob-
jective at the next level up
> removing objectives that do not seem suitable or necessary

There may be some causes near the bottom of the tree that are very general. They
cannot be turned into objectives that can easily be addressed by an intervention.
Instead, they act as external factors that need to be considered and assessed to verify
the feasibility of the intervention (see Section 5.4, p. 31).

Suggested method to select objectives and define

solutions
Step 1: Define potential solutions.
Look at the objectives tree and group objectives to define broad “potential solutions”
to choose from. This is done by looking at which objectives are directly linked to each
other in a cause-effect relationship (see Figure 7, p. 24).

During the “analysis stage”, the potential merits or difficulties of different ways of ad-
dressing the problems may well have already been discussed. These issues and options
must now be looked at more closely to determine the likely scope of the intervention
before more detailed design work is undertaken.

54
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Annex 2 How to create and use an objectives tree

Step 2: Select the most appropriate solution.

Based on the set of solutions identified in the objectives tree, you must now look at
which is the most appropriate solution for you to implement. This will determine the
scope of the intervention. You can do this by considering a range of questions:
> Which objectives will address most effectively the needs of the target population
and other identified vulnerable groups?
> Which objectives are compatible with the Red Cross Red Crescent’s fundamental
principles, mandate and policies?
> Which combination of objectives does our organization and team have the capacity
to address effectively?
> Are other organizations already addressing the problem?
> How can local ownership of the project/programme best be supported, including
through the development of the capacities of local institutions?
> Constraints and risks: How vulnerable is the intervention to external factors? (See
also Section 5.4, p. 31)
> What is/are the most cost-efficient option(s)?
> How can you take into account respect for local culture and strategies?

What will the organization not do?

One useful way of deciding which objectives to tackle is to look at those factors that
the project/programme will not address. These are factors which:
> Could potentially affect an intervention’s success but will be addressed by other ac-
tors
> Are unlikely to seriously affect the success of the project/programme
> Are of relatively small importance in achieving the main objective

Some key “filters” which can be used to determine what the organization cannot or
should not seek to tackle are:

A. Constraints and risks: How vulnerable

is the intervention to external factors?
In the example in Figure 7, p. 24, external factors that cannot be controlled by the
intervention but are expected to remain positive are:
> People in the community have no new demands on their time preventing them from
participating
> Access to the villages is possible (road quality sufficient)
> Local political leaders support the process
> The political and security situation remains stable

B. Capacity, mandate and experience of different organizations

Also in this example, objectives that are important to achieving the main identified
objective but will be undertaken by other organizations are as follows:
> The local government disaster response structures are strong.
> Provincial disaster centres are well equipped.
> Skilled staff are in place at provincial level.

In this example, the assessment information showed that although there was an identi-
fied problem of the local government disaster response structures being weak, it also

55
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Project programme planning Guidance manual

identified that the national government already had an extensive provincial disaster
response capacity-building programme in place to address the issue.

In addition, providing guidance to local government offices is not something in which

the National Society has expertise so would also not get involved in these issues.

C. Existing capacities and opportunities:

What can the affected people do themselves?
It is essential to look at existing capacities within the community, in line with the par-
ticipatory approach and ethical responsibility that underpin this manual. In addition,
building on existing capacities will normally help ensure the sustainability of results
and enhance community resilience. In the example given here, the majority of the ob-
jectives identified are related to working with communities to build on their existing
capacities.

Annex 3
Glossary of selected terms

Term Definition
Activities The collection of tasks to be carried out in order to achieve an output.

Assumption Positively-stated external factors which are important for the success of the intervention,
are probable (not certain/unlikely) to happen, and are beyond its control.

Evaluation An assessment, as systematic and objective as possible, of an ongoing or completed

project, programme or policy, its design, implementation and results. The aim is to deter-
mine the relevance and fulfillment of objectives, developmental efficiency, effectiveness,
impact and sustainability.

Goal The long-term result that an intervention seeks to achieve, which may be contributed to
by factors outside the intervention.

Impact The actual long-term results brought about by the intervention, whether positive or nega-
tive, primary or secondary, direct or indirect, intended or unintended.

Indicator A unit of measurement that helps determine what progress is being made towards the
achievement of an intended result (objective).

Initial assessment A process to understand the current situation and find out whether or not an intervention
is required. This is done by identifying the key factors influencing the situation, including
problems and their causes, as well as the needs, interests, capacities and constraints of
the different stakeholders.

Monitoring The routine collection and analysis of information in order to track progress, check com-
pliance and make informed decisions for project/programme management.

Objectives The intended results of an intervention which can split by levels of increasing significance,
for example outputs, outcomes and goal.

56
International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
Annexe 3 Glossary of selected terms

Term Definition
Operational planning The process of determining how the objectives spelt out in the strategic plan will be
achieved “on the ground”. It usually covers the short term (between several months and
three years).

Outcome(s) The primary result(s) that an intervention seeks to achieve, most commonly in terms of the
knowledge, attitudes or practices of the target group.

Outputs The tangible products, goods and services and other immediate results that lead to the
achievement of outcomes.

Plan The highest level of operational planning, which groups several programmes (and their
respective projects, activities, etc.) with a view to achieving an organization’s strategic
objectives.

Planning The process of defining an intervention’s intended results (objectives), the inputs and ac-
tivities needed to accomplish them, the indicators to measure their achievement, and the
key assumptions that can affect the achievement of the intended results (objectives).

Programme A set of coordinated projects implemented to meet specific objectives within defined
time, cost and performance parameters. Programmes aimed at achieving a common
goal are grouped under a common entity (country plan, operation, alliance, etc.).

Project A set of coordinated activities implemented to meet specific objectives within defined
time, cost and performance parameters. Projects aimed at achieving a common goal
form a programme.

Problem An unsatisfactory situation that may be difficult to cope with.

Results The effects of an intervention. Such effects can be intended or unintended, positive or
negative. The three highest levels of results are outputs, outcomes and impact.

Results (intended) See “Goal”, “Outcome” and “Output”

Strategic planning Strategic planning is the process of deciding where an organization wants to get to and
why. It usually covers the long term (roughly a minimum of three or four years, up to ten
years). It guides the overall direction of an organization.

57
The Fundamental Principles
of the International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Movement

Humanity
The International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, born of a desire to bring assistance with-
out discrimination to the wounded on the battlefield,
endeavours, in its international and national capacity,
to prevent and alleviate human suffering wherever it
may be found. Its purpose is to protect life and health
and to ensure respect for the human being. It pro-
motes mutual understanding, friendship, coopera-
tion and lasting peace amongst all peoples.

Impartiality
It makes no discrimination as to nationality, race, re-
ligious beliefs, class or political opinions. It endea-
vours to relieve the suffering of individuals, being
guided solely by their needs, and to give priority to
the most urgent cases of distress.

Neutrality
In order to enjoy the confidence of all, the Movement
may not take sides in hostilities or engage at any time
in controversies of a political, racial, religious or ideo-
logical nature.

Independence
The Movement is independent. The National Societ-
ies, while auxiliaries in the humanitarian services of
their governments and subject to the laws of their
respective countries, must always maintain their au-
tonomy so that they may be able at all times to act in
accordance with the principles of the Movement.

Voluntary service
It is a voluntary relief movement not prompted in any
manner by desire for gain.

Unity
There can be only one Red Cross or Red Crescent
Society in any one country. It must be open to all. It
must carry on its humanitarian work throughout its
territory.

Universality
The International Red Cross and Red Crescent
Movement, in which all societies have equal status
and share equal responsibilities and duties in helping
each other, is worldwide.
Project/programme planning
Guidance manual
A publication from the International Federation
of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC)
For more information, please contact:
Performance and Accountability Department
P.O. Box 372, CH-1211 Geneva 19, Switzerland
Telephone: +41 22 730 4222
Telefax: +41 22 733 0395
E-mail: [email protected]
Web site: http://www.ifrc.org

The International Federation of

Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies promotes the
humanitarian activities of National
Societies among vulnerable
people.

By coordinating international
disaster relief and encouraging
development support it seeks
to prevent and alleviate human
suffering.
191600 02/2010 E 1,500

The International Federation,

the National Societies and the
International Committee of
the Red Cross together constitute
the International Red Cross and
Red Crescent Movement.