GEF UNDP FAO PROJECT: REDUCING RATE OF LOSS OF BIODIVERSITY AT SELECTED CROSS BORDERS SITES IN EAST AFRICA.
DISCUSSION NOTE: UNDERSTANDING THE PROJECT LOG FRAME
The project log-frame in the operational Project Document came from the project development process. At the time we saw this as quite a participatory and bottom-up process. It was bottom up in so far as the central government project preparation teams undertook much work at District level, and achieved significant District level buy-in and ownership. District teams praised this level of consultation. At district level we visited forest sites and included community leaders in district consultations, but in retrospect this was insufficient to understand the real interaction issues across a forest-community interface.
The log-frame in the document grew from three national log-frames, which were then amalgamations of district processes. The final log-frame then was a generalised document based on compromise; it became all things to all men.
The first task the project set out to do
was to break down the activities into a set of component tasks. Each task became
an achievable and costed undertaking with responsibility assigned. Despite the
project preparation period it was apparent that there were many start-up
activities that were necessary but were not captured in the log- frame. These
were referred to as IAs or Initial Activities, this included for example
defining exact boundaries of activities at sites the scoping exercises. We
also added CC or Cross Cutting Activities which included developing an M and E
framework. These are included at the start
of national work-plans. The rationale for these activities is set out in the
Inception or start-up Report. These documents should be consulted.
Start-up activities, working at ground level, and especially the start of the M&E consultancy process, impressed on us the need to redo the log-frame process at the ultimate decentralised levels around a forest village set of interactions. The rationale for this is set out in the first of the three consultancy reports. This is summarised in the discussion note on the Consultancy Process.
This is based on four issues:
· Clarifying the complex log-frame, use of a project map, removing non-compatibilities. See list of changes and Project Maps attached to this note.
· Amalgamating the many diverse activities into activity clusters.
· Adding a new output for regional activity.
· Nesting the pattern of activities from local site actions to the composite of actions at district level and at national level. See diagram on nested log-frames attached here.
The main work-plans now revolve around
site processes governed by a site of site-plans and site based log-frames. As
the detailed interventions are within these log-frames, so the details on
indicator verification and assumptions are on the log-frames. See the revised log-frame attached
to this note.
These changes were approved by National
and Regional Steering Committees in 1999. The
full set of logic and rationale is in the first of the Sejal Worah Consultant
Back to Discussion Notes Page