Team Members:
Yerlan Zhailaubay
Archana Chhetri
Marianne Thomas
Bree Bacon
Kristin Alexander
Letitia Dragomir
RESULTS FRAMEWORK
Develop 1 SO; 3 IRs with one indicator for each and 3 sub IRs without indicators.
PROBLEM TREE
http://www.bullfrogfilms.com/catalog/l4warm.html
http://www.unsiap.or.jp/participants_work/cos03_homepages/group5/mongolia.htm
LOGICAL FRAMEWORK
| Narrative Summary |
Verifiable Indicators |
Means of Verification |
Important Assumptions |
|
Goal: Reduce net migration of rural residents to urban areas in Mongolia |
X% decrease of net migration of rural to urban areas by 2015
|
Ministry of Labor data; Census Bureau Data |
No outbreak of major conflict in the neighboring countries.
|
|
Purpose: Improve income of residents in rural Mongolia |
X% increase of average household income of residents in rural Mongolia |
Census Bureau Data, Ministry of Finance |
Policies of the national government do not change in a way to endanger the recent economic growth.
|
|
|
Outputs: Network of agricultural extension facilities; system of microfinance institutions |
X# of ag ext offices particpating; X% increase of rural residents using ag ext officies; X# of borrowers groups formed, ea with X# of participants; X% of loans paid on time |
Survey of Ag Ext offices and microfinance institutions; Ministry of Agriculture |
Policies of Ministries of Finance and Agricultural remain constant.
|
|
Activities:
Training workshops for rural residents in animal husbandry and other ag jobs; Recruitment and training of microfinance advisors for ag biz; Materials development workshops for microcredit advisors; Capacity building workshops for ag ext offices; Awareness campaign for ag ext offices resources |
Budget:
Microcredit supervisor recruitment and training...$X; Materials development...$X; Workshops development...$X; Awareness campaign...$X;
|
Budget; Receipts; Invoices |
Local currency is not devalued.
|
Worksheet 4:
Results Framework Assessment
Sector: Mongolia
Name of Strategic Objective:
CRITERIA FOR
ASSESSING THE RESULTS FRAMEWORK
CAUSAL LINKAGE: At each level of the results
framework, does achievement of one result cause the achievement of the other?
Is the linkage direct?
Yes
CONTRIBUTIONS OF
USAID PARTNERS: At
each level of the results framework, have activities been identified (regardless
of whether they will be conducted by USAID or its partners) to cause
the result at the next level? [Note: not all results from USAID partners
need to be identified in the framework but there
may at least be mention of them in the
narrative that accompanies the framework.]
Yes
MANAGEABLE INTEREST
(A): Is
the SO level result one that the team, working with its partners, can
materially affect?
Unsure. Can CARE actually affect business in Mongolia?
MANAGEABLE INTEREST
(B): Is
the team willing to be held accountable for all results within the results
framework, including the SO level result?
Unsure, same as above.
CRITICAL ASSUMPTIONS: Have all the critical
assumptions been identified at each level of the results framework?
N/A
OTHER COMMENTS: RECOMMENDATION:
___ Accept results framework
_x__
Revise results framework and then accept
___ Reject results framework
