Assumptions and Risks - Build a Logical Framework (Logframe) for Your Project

Systematic Assumption Operationalization

Your Theory of Change identified critical assumptions—conditions that must hold true for your change logic to work. Now these become systematic risk management with monitoring and mitigation strategies.

From Theory to Practice

Theory of Change assumptions become Logframe risk management plans with specific monitoring indicators, data sources, and mitigation strategies.

Example: Converting Theory of Change Assumption

Theory of Change Assumption:

"Market-responsive training will lead to increased employment if graduates have access to job opportunities and employers are willing to hire locally-trained workers"

↓

Logframe Risk Management:

CRITICAL ASSUMPTION: "Sufficient job opportunities exist for program graduates"

Monitoring Indicator: Number of job openings posted monthly in target sectors
Data Source: Employer surveys and job posting tracking
Frequency: Monthly monitoring
Early Warning: <50% of expected job openings available
Mitigation: Activate employer partnership protocols, expand geographic scope

SUPPORTING ASSUMPTION: "Employers prefer locally-trained workers"

Monitoring Indicator: Employer satisfaction with graduate performance
Data Source: Quarterly employer interviews
Frequency: Quarterly assessment
Early Warning: <60% employer satisfaction ratings
Mitigation: Enhance employer engagement in curriculum design

Community-Informed Assumption Categories

Your stakeholder engagement reveals different types of assumptions that need different monitoring approaches:

graph TB
    %% ========================================
    %% TITLE
    %% ========================================
    TITLE["🧩 ASSUMPTION RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK"]

    %% ========================================
    %% TYPE 1: CONTEXTUAL ASSUMPTIONS
    %% ========================================
    TYPE1["1️⃣ CONTEXTUAL ASSUMPTIONS<br/>Environment enables change"]

    TYPE1_EX["Examples:<br/>• Policy supportive<br/>• Economy stable<br/>• Culture receptive"]

    TYPE1_MONITOR["Monitor:<br/>Policy changes<br/>Economic indicators"]

    TYPE1_MITIGATE["Mitigate:<br/>Adjust approaches<br/>Engage policymakers"]

    %% ========================================
    %% TYPE 2: BEHAVIORAL ASSUMPTIONS
    %% ========================================
    TYPE2["2️⃣ BEHAVIORAL ASSUMPTIONS<br/>Stakeholders act as expected"]

    TYPE2_EX["Examples:<br/>• Target participation<br/>• Leader support<br/>• Partner commitment"]

    TYPE2_MONITOR["Monitor:<br/>Engagement rates<br/>Stakeholder feedback"]

    TYPE2_MITIGATE["Mitigate:<br/>Strengthen relationships<br/>Adjust incentives"]

    %% ========================================
    %% TYPE 3: STRATEGIC ASSUMPTIONS
    %% ========================================
    TYPE3["3️⃣ STRATEGIC ASSUMPTIONS<br/>Approach works as designed"]

    TYPE3_EX["Examples:<br/>• Training → employment<br/>• Quality maintained<br/>• Outputs → outcomes"]

    TYPE3_MONITOR["Monitor:<br/>Outcome indicators<br/>Quality audits"]

    TYPE3_MITIGATE["Mitigate:<br/>Refine activities<br/>Pilot alternatives"]

    %% ========================================
    %% WHEN ASSUMPTIONS FAIL
    %% ========================================
    ACTION["⚠️ WHEN ASSUMPTIONS FAIL"]

    RESPONSE["Response Strategy:<br/>Monitor → Adapt → Revise → Exit (if needed)"]

    %% ========================================
    %% SUCCESS
    %% ========================================
    SUCCESS["✅ PROACTIVE RISK MANAGEMENT<br/>Prepared for adaptation"]

    %% ========================================
    %% RELATIONSHIPS
    %% ========================================
    TITLE --> TYPE1
    TITLE --> TYPE2
    TITLE --> TYPE3

    TYPE1 --> TYPE1_EX
    TYPE1_EX --> TYPE1_MONITOR
    TYPE1_MONITOR --> TYPE1_MITIGATE

    TYPE2 --> TYPE2_EX
    TYPE2_EX --> TYPE2_MONITOR
    TYPE2_MONITOR --> TYPE2_MITIGATE

    TYPE3 --> TYPE3_EX
    TYPE3_EX --> TYPE3_MONITOR
    TYPE3_MONITOR --> TYPE3_MITIGATE

    TYPE1_MITIGATE --> ACTION
    TYPE2_MITIGATE --> ACTION
    TYPE3_MITIGATE --> ACTION

    ACTION --> RESPONSE
    RESPONSE --> SUCCESS

    %% ========================================
    %% FESTA DESIGN SYSTEM COLORS
    %% ========================================

    %% Title - Pepper Green
    style TITLE fill:#10B981,stroke:#059669,stroke-width:4px,color:#fff,font-weight:bold

    %% Assumption Types - Pot of Gold
    style TYPE1 fill:#F59E0B,stroke:#D97706,stroke-width:3px,color:#1F2937,font-weight:bold
    style TYPE2 fill:#F59E0B,stroke:#D97706,stroke-width:3px,color:#1F2937,font-weight:bold
    style TYPE3 fill:#F59E0B,stroke:#D97706,stroke-width:3px,color:#1F2937,font-weight:bold

    %% Examples - Lighter Pot of Gold
    style TYPE1_EX fill:#FDE68A,stroke:#F59E0B,stroke-width:2px,color:#1F2937
    style TYPE2_EX fill:#FDE68A,stroke:#F59E0B,stroke-width:2px,color:#1F2937
    style TYPE3_EX fill:#FDE68A,stroke:#F59E0B,stroke-width:2px,color:#1F2937

    %% Monitoring - Leaf
    style TYPE1_MONITOR fill:#72B043,stroke:#5A8F36,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
    style TYPE2_MONITOR fill:#72B043,stroke:#5A8F36,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
    style TYPE3_MONITOR fill:#72B043,stroke:#5A8F36,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff

    %% Mitigation - Apocalyptic Orange
    style TYPE1_MITIGATE fill:#F37324,stroke:#E05C1B,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
    style TYPE2_MITIGATE fill:#F37324,stroke:#E05C1B,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff
    style TYPE3_MITIGATE fill:#F37324,stroke:#E05C1B,stroke-width:2px,color:#fff

    %% Action - Chicken Comb (alert)
    style ACTION fill:#E12729,stroke:#B91C1C,stroke-width:3px,color:#fff,font-weight:bold
    style RESPONSE fill:#FDBA74,stroke:#E12729,stroke-width:2px,color:#1F2937

    %% Success - Pepper Green
    style SUCCESS fill:#10B981,stroke:#059669,stroke-width:4px,color:#fff,font-weight:bold

Key Insight

Assumptions aren't weaknesses—they're hypotheses you monitor. Contextual assumptions about environment, behavioral assumptions about stakeholders, strategic assumptions about your approach. Each needs monitoring indicators and mitigation strategies. Your community engagement revealed these assumptions—now systematize tracking and response.

Contextual Assumptions (Environment and Setting)

Based on your stakeholder insights about local conditions:

Political and policy environment remains supportive
Economic conditions don't deteriorate beyond community coping capacity
Social and cultural norms continue to support project approaches
Environmental and infrastructure conditions enable implementation

Example: Contextual Assumption

Assumption: "Local government continues to support youth employment initiatives"

Monitoring: Quarterly meetings with government officials; track policy changes

Mitigation: Build relationships with multiple government agencies; document impact for policy advocacy

Behavioral Assumptions (Stakeholder Actions)

Based on your power-interest analysis and community relationships:

Target population participates at levels indicated through consultation
Community leaders maintain support expressed during engagement
Partner organizations fulfill commitments as negotiated
Government and institutional stakeholders provide expected cooperation

Example: Behavioral Assumption

Assumption: "At least 70% of recruited youth complete full training program"

Monitoring: Track attendance and dropout rates weekly; conduct exit interviews

Mitigation: Peer mentoring system; address barriers identified through participant feedback

Strategic Assumptions (Approach Effectiveness)

Based on your Problem Tree analysis and community validation:

Chosen intervention approaches work in local cultural context
Activity sequencing and timing prove appropriate for community rhythm
Quality standards can be maintained throughout implementation
Learning and adaptation processes function effectively with community input

Example: Strategic Assumption

Assumption: "Market-responsive curriculum increases employment outcomes"

Monitoring: Track employment rates of graduates vs. non-participants; employer feedback on skill relevance

Mitigation: Regular curriculum updates based on employer input; pilot new approaches before full implementation

Assumption Monitoring Integration with Stakeholder Relationships

Leverage Existing Relationships

Your stakeholder engagement creates monitoring networks—use these relationships for assumption tracking rather than creating parallel systems.

Primary Stakeholder Monitoring

Use ongoing relationships to track behavioral and contextual assumptions affecting target population:

Regular check-ins with participant representatives
Community feedback sessions on implementation quality
Participatory monitoring of satisfaction and engagement levels

Secondary Stakeholder Monitoring

Leverage expertise and influence relationships to monitor strategic and institutional assumptions:

Quarterly reviews with technical expert partners
Policy monitoring through government stakeholder relationships
Market trend tracking through employer networks

Community-Based Monitoring

Establish simple tracking systems that communities can use to monitor critical assumptions:

Community advisory boards that track local conditions
Peer monitoring systems for participant engagement
Local leader observations of community support levels

Risk Prioritization Framework

Not all assumptions carry equal risk. Prioritize monitoring and mitigation efforts:

Risk Level	Characteristics	Monitoring Approach
CRITICAL	If violated, project fails completely; outside your control	Weekly/monthly monitoring; detailed mitigation plans ready
HIGH	Significantly impacts outcomes; partially controllable	Monthly/quarterly monitoring; proactive mitigation
MEDIUM	Affects implementation quality; mostly controllable	Quarterly monitoring; adaptive management
LOW	Minor impacts; within your control	Annual monitoring; standard management

Nigeria Youth Livelihood Example: Complete Risk Framework

Assumption Risk Management Plan

CRITICAL RISK

Assumption: "Sufficient employer demand for trained youth exists in target area"

Indicator: Monthly job posting trends in target sectors
Data: Employer surveys, business association reports
Warning: <50% of projected opportunities available
Mitigation: Geographic expansion, employer partnership intensification, entrepreneurship track

HIGH RISK

Assumption: "Youth complete training and actively seek employment"

Indicator: Program completion rates, job search activity tracking
Data: Attendance records, participant surveys
Warning: <70% completion or <60% active job seeking
Mitigation: Peer mentoring, barrier removal support, incentive adjustments

MEDIUM RISK

Assumption: "Training quality meets employer standards"

Indicator: Employer satisfaction with graduate performance
Data: Quarterly employer feedback surveys
Warning: <70% employer satisfaction
Mitigation: Curriculum refinement, trainer capacity building

Next Step

Now that you understand risk management planning, explore Step-by-Step Guide to learn the complete 16-step Logframe development process integrating all foundation work.

Converting Assumptions to Risk Management