Review My Logframe
Get structured feedback on your logframe's logic, indicator quality, assumptions, and completeness.
Your Prompt
- What You Need
- Paste the complete logframe, including indicators and assumptions, plus any theory of change, period, and known reporting rules.
- Choose This Prompt When
- Choose this to critique an existing logframe; choose Create a Logframe to build one from program design.
Describe your goal, audience, available information and constraints. Your words are added to the prompt as supplied. You can also use the guided fields below.
Kept in this tab while you work. Copy and Start includes this description.
Copy this prompt and paste it into your AI chat to start. If it needs source material, the AI will ask for it.
Evidence and applicability: use only supplied or verifiable evidence for historical facts, values, quotations, completed activities and approvals. Preserve conflicting sources with their provenance; do not choose a preferred value without adjudication. Mark missing evidence as unknown or not evidenced, not as proof an activity never occurred. Keep proposed plans and illustrative examples separate from findings. Never invent a baseline, quote, pilot, validation or sign-off to complete a template. Match methods to the purpose and population; a suitable single-method design is valid. Distinguish descriptive change from causal attribution. Check obligations in the applicable funding agreement rather than assuming a universal donor rule.
Use only program material supplied in this chat. Ask me to paste the logframe to review, program purpose, and any theory of change if essential details are absent. Do not treat this request as evidence that those materials exist.
Review the supplied logframe as written. If no logframe is present, ask the user to paste it before making a document-specific assessment. Identify row or result labels when citing issues. Treat unprovided theory of change and program context as limits, not defects proven in the logframe.
Assess the path from activities to outputs, outcomes, and goal; whether assumptions and external conditions are visible; indicator definition, level, source, baseline and target status; feasible disaggregation; and consistency with any supplied theory of change. For each issue, distinguish a contradiction from an omission and from information that simply was not supplied. Give a prioritized table with location, observation, consequence, and suggested revision. Offer revised wording only where the source supports it, labeling new results or indicators as proposals. Finish with strengths, missing evidence, and questions for the program team. Do not evaluate a sample indicator that is not in the actual logframe.
Check whether any proposed subgroup breakdown is feasible, ethically appropriate, and supported by the indicator source.