What is a results framework?
A results framework is a top-down map that starts from one strategic objective and branches into the intermediate results and sub-results that must happen first, each with an indicator, so a funder can track a program or a whole portfolio against it. Large public donors use it often.
It reads the opposite way from a logic model: the goal comes first and delivery last. A completed framework is a plan for what to look at, not proof that any result occurred.
THE SHORT VERSION
- A results framework reads down from a strategic objective to intermediate results, sub-results and resources: the logic model's levels under other labels.
- Every result states a change and carries one indicator with a written definition, so each funded partner counts it the same way.
- For a funder it is the portfolio view: shared indicators roll up across partners, and a number counted differently is held, not added.
What are the levels of a results framework?
From the top: a strategic objective, intermediate results for the changes in people's lives, intermediate results for what is delivered, sub-results for the work itself, and the resources behind it. Labels vary by funder, but the order holds.
| Level | What it states | Workforce example |
|---|---|---|
| Strategic objective | The long-term change the work serves | Graduates in living-wage jobs |
| Intermediate results (outcomes) | Changes for people that lead there | Placed within 90 days of exit; retained at 12 months |
| Intermediate results (outputs) | What must be delivered first | People enrolled, completed training, certified |
| Sub-results | The work that produces the outputs | Training and mentoring delivered |
| Resources | What the work needs | Trainers, mentors, employer contacts |
Write every result as a change, such as "graduates placed within 90 days of exit", not as a task such as "hold employer meetings". Keep tasks in the workplan, linked to the result they serve. If the line between delivery and change is blurry, read output vs outcome.
How does a funder use a results framework across a portfolio?
The funder's strategic objective sits at the top, and each funded partner's own model hangs beneath it, feeding shared intermediate results that every partner measures the same way. Partners keep their own activities; they share the results and the definitions.
Take the course's fictional regional workforce fund, which funds four job-training partners, A to D. The objective, graduates in living-wage jobs, and two intermediate results, placement within 90 days and retention at 12 months, are shared. Each partner's schedules, curricula and sub-results stay its own.
The shared layer is written down on each onboarding call as a reporting agreement: participants enrolled (unique people, not visits), completed training, placed in a job within 90 days of exit, retained in the same job at 12 months, and starting wage by track. The chapter Turn the onboarding call into a reporting agreement shows how.
AHA Ventures, the investment arm of the American Heart Association, is growing its portfolio from 19 to more than 40 companies. Its head of impact drafts each company's logic model and data dictionary during the onboarding call, with Sopact Sense, so every company's model is ready to sit under the portfolio's objective from the start.
What does a results framework template look like?
A results framework template lists each result with its indicator and definition, its source and timing, and who owns it; copy the columns and replace the fictional rows with yours. The rows below follow the fund's agreement.
| Result | Indicator · definition | Source · timing | Owner · review |
|---|---|---|---|
| Objective: graduates in living-wage jobs | Starting wage, hourly, by track | Placement survey · annual | Partner program lead · fund reviews yearly |
| Placed in a job | Paid work within 90 days of exit | Placement survey · quarterly | Partner program lead · report unknowns |
| Retained | Same job at 12 months | 12-month follow-up · annual | Partner M&E lead · review barriers |
| Completed training | Finished the track | Completion record · quarterly | Training lead · check drop-off |
| Enrolled | Unique people, not visits | Enrollment form · quarterly | Intake lead · check duplicates |
Add baseline and target columns if the funder asks for them. A target should reflect the starting point, delivery capacity and local conditions, and a baseline you have not measured is "not measured yet", never zero.
If you already have a theory of change or logic model, an AI tool can lay it out as a results framework. The prompt forbids it to change what you agreed.
PROMPT · PASTE INTO CLAUDE, CHATGPT OR YOUR AI TOOL
Below are our change model (theory of change or logic model) and our reporting agreement. Lay them out as a results framework. Rules: 1. Map our levels: impact = strategic objective; outcomes and outputs = intermediate results; activities = sub-results; inputs = resources. 2. Do not change any result, definition, time window or number. Change only labels and order. 3. For each result give: indicator and definition, source and timing, owner. Take indicators and sources only from our agreement. 4. If the layout asks for something we do not have, such as a baseline or target, write "not in our data". Do not invent it. 5. End with every place the layout forced a choice, so we can check it. Our change model: [PASTE] Our reporting agreement: [PASTE]
How do you roll up a shared indicator across partners?
Add only the partners whose numbers share the indicator's definition, and show any number counted differently beside the total with the reason it is held. A total is honest only if every part means the same thing.
In the fictional fund, placements within 90 days came in at 42 from Partner A, 31 from B and 27 from D: a portfolio total of 100. Partner C reported 55, counted within six months, so its number is held until C confirms its 90-day count, which can be no higher than 55.
Write the held number into the report: "100 placed within 90 days, from Partners A, B and D; Partner C reported 55 within six months, and we have asked for its 90-day count." A benchmark is optional and fits only when an outside number uses the same definition, such as earlier cohorts. The chapter Roll up and benchmark portfolio results covers both.
At each quarterly review, start with the exceptions: the held number, the missing retention figure, the wage that was not split by track. Record the question, its owner and the next review date. In Sopact Sense, each partner's data can sit in its own folder, the portfolio owner sees aggregated results, and every line of an answer links to a record you can open.
How do you build a results framework, step by step?
Agree the decision it will support, write the strategic objective, work down to the results that must come first, then give each result one indicator, a definition, a source and an owner. Six steps cover it.
- Agree the decision. A board report and a quarterly partner review need different levels of detail.
- Name the objective and who it serves. State what the program can plausibly influence, and no more.
- Work down from the objective. Ask what must be true first, and check the chain with participants and delivery staff.
- Choose few indicators. Five that every partner can collect beat twenty that half of them skip.
- Define each one. Unit, time window, who counts and how missing answers are treated; this becomes the indicator table and then the data dictionary.
- Schedule reviews and keep a change log. Record what changed, who approved it and from which quarter, so a new definition is not mistaken for a change in results.
What can a results framework not prove?
It organizes the results you intend and how you will recognize them; it does not show that the program caused them. The arrows between levels are assumptions until evidence tests them.
A placement result depends on employers hiring, on transport and on the certification being recognized, so write those beside the pathway. If employment rises during a strong local hiring period, weigh that before crediting the training; a causal claim needs a comparison, such as earlier cohorts on the same definition.
Follow-up answers are self-reported and some people never reply, so report the unknowns with each rate. If an AI tool helped draft the framework or a summary, check it against the records; the people who own the results decide what they mean.
How is a results framework different from a logframe or a theory of change?
All three hold the same levels: a theory of change explains why the path should work, a logframe adds indicators, means of verification and assumptions in a matrix, and a results framework reads down from one objective. Build the model once and re-lay it.
The slide lines them up. Outcomes and outputs both become intermediate results, which is why the template above keeps them in separate rows. The chapter One change model, four formats shows the full relabelling.
The video below is about the logframe, the results framework's matrix cousin. Watch for its case that the matrix should guide decisions during the year rather than sit in a proposal; the same holds for your framework. See also the theory of change guide and the logframe matrix.
Start with one shared indicator this quarter
Pick one result that every partner already reports and make it add up honestly before you build the whole framework. Placement or completion usually works.
- Write the strategic objective in one line and place the chosen result beneath it.
- Write the indicator's definition, including its time window and how missing answers count.
- Send it to every partner and ask: "Is this how you count it today?"
- When reports arrive, mark each number as matching the definition or not.
- Add the matches, list each held number beside the total with one line on why, and send the questions.
After the first cycle you have one indicator that adds up across the portfolio, a short list of held numbers with owners, and the template to extend to the next result.
Frequently asked questions
How many indicators should a results framework contain?
There is no fixed number. Use enough to judge the results that matter and the decisions they inform, and no more. In the fictional workforce fund, five indicators cover the objective and every intermediate result. A short list every partner can collect beats a long one half of them skip, because unused indicators cost collection time and add nothing to the review.
Is a results framework a monitoring plan?
It can be the core of one. The framework names the results and indicators; a monitoring plan adds how each is collected, by whom, how often, what quality checks run and when the numbers are reviewed. Many teams keep the framework on one page and put that operational detail in a data dictionary and a review calendar.
Can targets in a results framework change?
Yes, when there is a reason. Record why the target changed, who approved it and which periods use the new one, and keep the original beside it. Silently rewriting a target makes last year's report impossible to read, and it can make a shortfall look like success. The same applies to any change in an indicator's definition.
Can one results framework cover a whole portfolio?
Yes. Put the funder's strategic objective at the top and the shared intermediate results beneath it, with one written definition each. Each funded partner keeps its own activities and any extra indicators its work needs. Roll up only what shares a definition, and show any partner counted differently as held until it is clarified.
What is the difference between a results framework and a logic model?
They hold the same levels. A logic model reads left to right from inputs to impact and is common in program planning. A results framework reads top-down from a strategic objective and is common with large public donors and portfolio funders. Build one model with one set of definitions and lay it out in whichever form each funder asks for.
