Skip to content
EMPOBase
en

Logframe or theory of change: which one does your proposal need?

By the EMPOBase team · · 4 min read

Short answer

A logframe is a table that lists goals, outcomes, outputs, activities, indicators and assumptions, and it is what most donors ask for in a proposal. A theory of change explains why and how your activities should lead to change, usually as a narrative or diagram. Check the donor's call first. If it is silent, use a logframe for the plan and a short theory of change for the reasoning.

Key points

  • A logframe is a structured table; a theory of change is the reasoning behind it.
  • Follow the donor's call: it often names the format it wants.
  • Write the theory of change first, then draw the logframe from it.
  • Both rest on assumptions; write them down and test them.

What is the difference?

Both tools describe how a project leads to results. They answer different questions.

A logframe (logical framework) answers: what will we deliver, and how will we measure it? It is a matrix. A theory of change answers: why do we believe this work will lead to change, and what must be true for that to happen? It is usually a short narrative, a diagram, or both.

LogframeTheory of change
Main questionWhat will we deliver and measure?Why will this lead to change?
FormTable with rows and columnsNarrative or diagram
StrengthClear, checkable, easy to monitorShows logic, context and pathways
WeaknessCan hide the reasoningCan be vague and hard to measure
Typical useProposal annex, monitoringStrategy, design, learning

What does a logframe contain?

A standard logframe has four rows and four columns.

  • Rows: goal (or impact), outcomes, outputs, activities. Some formats list activities outside the table.
  • Columns: a narrative summary of each result, indicators, sources of data (also called means of verification), and assumptions.

Each row connects to the one below by an “if… then” link. If activities are done, then outputs are produced. If outputs are produced and assumptions hold, then outcomes follow. Our article on what a results framework is shows a related format.

What does a theory of change contain?

A good theory of change is short and plain. It includes:

  1. The problem and who is affected.
  2. The change you want, and for whom.
  3. The main pathways: the steps from your work to that change.
  4. The assumptions behind each step.
  5. The role of other actors, such as government, communities and other NGOs.
  6. What you will watch to learn if the theory is right.

Assumptions are the most useful part. “Mothers will attend the sessions if they are held near the market” is a testable assumption. “People will change behaviour” is not.

Which does the donor want?

Read the call for proposals and the proposal template before you decide. Many donors ask for a logframe or a results framework by name, with set fields. Others ask for a theory of change narrative. Some ask for both.

If the call is silent:

  1. Write a one-page theory of change to clarify your thinking.
  2. Build the logframe from it. Each pathway becomes an outcome or output row.
  3. Add the theory of change to the proposal as a short section or annex.

Do not invent a format when the donor gives one. Reviewers compare many proposals and look for the expected structure.

How do you keep them consistent?

The common error is a logframe that does not match the narrative. Check three things:

  • Every outcome in the logframe appears as a step in the theory of change.
  • Every assumption in the theory of change appears in the logframe, or you explain why not.
  • Every indicator measures a result listed in the logframe, not an activity.

When the context changes during the project, update both together and record the date and reason for the change. This links to change requests in grant-funded projects: a donor may need to approve changes to results.

What are common mistakes with each?

For logframes, the most common errors are:

  • Writing activities as results. “Hold 20 trainings” is an activity, not an outcome.
  • Choosing indicators that nobody can measure with the time and money available.
  • Leaving the assumptions column empty, or filling it with generic phrases.

For a theory of change, watch for:

  • Arrows with no explanation. Each arrow is a claim, so say why it holds.
  • A diagram so large that nobody reads it.
  • Ignoring other actors, as if your project works alone.

A simple test helps for both. Ask a colleague from another department to read it and explain your project back to you. If they cannot, simplify it.

Where EMPOBase fits

EMPOBase’s Programs module supports logframes built around goals, outcomes, outputs and activities, with problem and objective trees and stakeholder records. The indicator library, 235 indicators in 8 sectors, can help you write indicator text. Selecting library text does not create a live link between a logframe row and indicator results; you track results in MEAL. EMPOBase does not write your theory of change. See the indicator library or the platform.

Questions people ask

Can we use both in one proposal?

Yes, and many proposals do. The theory of change explains the logic in a page or less. The logframe then sets out the results, indicators and assumptions in a table.

Is a results framework the same as a logframe?

They are close. A results framework often shows the results chain as a diagram or hierarchy, while a logframe is a matrix with indicators, sources and assumptions. Donors use the terms differently, so check what yours means.

How detailed should a theory of change be?

For a proposal, one page is usually enough: the problem, the main pathways, the key assumptions and the intended change. Longer versions suit programme-level strategy.