Post on 21-Dec-2015
Logic Models
Research Planning and Evaluation
Logic Vs. Model
LOGIC the principles of reasoning reasonable the relationship of elements to each other and a
whole
MODEL small object representing another, often larger
object (represents reality, isn’t reality) preliminary pattern serving as a plan tentative description of a system or theory that
accounts for all its known properties
What are logic models?
A road map Where are you going? How will you get there? What will show that you’ve
arrived?
Logic Models
A visual depiction of a program or project showing what it will do and what it will accomplish
A series of “if-then” relationships that should lead to the desired outcomes
The core of program planning, evaluation, and research
Theory of Change How and why a program or set of activities
will lead to short and long-term outcomes over a specified period of time
A sequential flow of information that shows what you intend to accomplish
What are you trying to change, why you are trying to change it, how you will change it, and what will happen as a result of the change
Logic Models in the Simplest Form
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
AssumptionsThe beliefs we have about the problem, the
program, the participants, and how it will all work together. The problem or existing situation Program operations Expected outcomes and benefits The participants and how they learn, behave,
their motivations Resources Staff/partners Influences from the external environment The knowledge base of participants and partners
An Example…Headaches
HEADACHE
Feel betterGet pills Take pills
Situation INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
Family Members
Budget
Car
Camping Equipment
Drive to state park
Set up camp
Cook, play, talk, laugh, hike
Family members learn about each
other; family bonds; family has
a good time
Every day logic model –
Family Vacation
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and
Evaluation
What does a logic model look like?
Graphic display of boxes and arrows; vertical or horizontalRelationships, linkages
Any shape possibleCircular, dynamicCultural adaptations; storyboards
Level of detailSimpleComplex
Multiple modelsMulti-level programs
Multi-component programs
Why bother? What’s in it for you?
“This seems like a lot of work.”
“Where in the world would I get all the information to put in a logic model?
“I’m a right brain type of person – this isn’t for me.”
“Even if we created one, what would we do with it?”
Benefits of Logic Models Differentiates between “what we are doing” and
“results” Increases understanding about the problem and the
way it will be solved Guides and helps focus work Improved planning and management Increases intentionality and purpose Prevents duplication of activities, partners, data
collection Helps ensure measurement of variables Supports replication, efficacy study Very often a requirement, particularly in grant writing
Limitations of Logic Models
Not a theory
Intentions-not reality
Focuses on expected outcomes
Challenge of causal attribution
Many factors influence process and outcomes
External environmental factors
Doesn’t address an important question:
Are we doing the right thing?
Key Components of a Logic Model
Needs/Gaps Goals Objectives Activities Partners Process Measures Indicators
Need The reason for the service, program,
activity, or intervention. The existing problem and evidence of the problem.
Reducing Violence at Applewood School
NEEDS/GAPS
The rate of youth violent incidents in the Applewood School needs to decrease, as evidenced by a 110% increase since 2000, in suspension due to disruptive or threatening behavior, and a 190% increase since 2000 in suspensions due to assault and battery (student-on-student and student-on-teacher)
Goal
How will you address the need
Reducing Violence at Applewood School
GOAL
Decrease the rate of youth violent incidents in Applewood School
Objective
Created from the goals Adds a time-frame and the specific
level of change desired
Reducing Violence at Applewood School
OBJECTIVE
By 2008, decrease the rate of youth violent incidents in Applewood School by 60%, as evidenced by the reduced number of suspensions due to threatening behavior, unprovoked attacks on students, fighting, fighting with or threatening a teacher, possession or use of a dangerous weapon, arson, and endangering the safety of others.
Resources/Activities
How and when you are going to accomplish your goals and objectives, both short term (present year) and long term (succeeding years)
What do you need to be successful? Inputs
Reducing Violence at Applewood School
RESOURCES/ACTIVITIES
By 2008, decrease the rate of youth violent incidents in Applewood School. Short term: Peer Jury, Aggression Replacement Training, after-school programming, and Child Assault Prevent/Teens Taking Charge parent workshops. Long term: Implement the after school program with 225 at risk students and their parents, present Child Assault Prevention/Teens Taking Charge workshops to school staff, and increase participation in Aggression Replacement Training.
Partners
Those people involved in making this project successful. Specifying who is performing the activity aligned with the objective and when it will be performed is necessary in setting the groundwork for accountability and evaluation.
Reducing Violence at Applewood School
PARTNERS
The rate of youth violent incidents in Applewood School will decrease as a result of collaboration between the school, the Applewood Safety Committee, Police, Dept. of Juvenile Probation, and the YWCA.
Process Measure
What will be provided to assure that the activities are being accomplished?
The process measures were developed with the activity partners to ensure that data collection would be feasible and appropriate to the goals and objectives of the program.
Reducing Violence at Applewood School
PROCESS MEASURE
Applewood school staff will provide monthly reports that include suspension data from the school. Police, Dept. of Juvenile Probation, and YQCA will provide monthly reports on program attendance, activities conducted during the program, and pre/post test scores.
Indicators
The culmination of all subsequent columns, with the addition of how you are going to measure or evaluate the impact of the project.
How will you know it when you see it? What will be the evidence? What are the specific indicators that
will be measured?
Typical activity indicators to track Amount of products, services delivered #/type of customers/clients served Timeliness of service provision Accessibility and convenience of service
Location; hours of operation; staff availability
Accuracy, adequacy, relevance of assistance
Courteousness Customer satisfaction
Reducing Violence at Applewood School
INDICATORS
By 2008, decrease the rate of youth violent incidents in Applewood School by 60%, as evidenced by the reduced number of suspensions due to threatening behavior, unprovoked attack on student, fighting, fighting with or threatening a teacher, possession or use of a dangerous weapon, arson, and endangering the safety of others—as measured by monthly partner reports and a record of each violent incident occurring in the district during the month (including the definition and description).
Methods of data collection
SOURCES OF INFORMATION Existing data
Program records, attendance logs, etc
Pictures, charts, maps, pictorial records
Program participants Others: key informants,
nonparticipants, proponents, critics, staff, collaborators, funders, etc.
DATA COLLECTION METHODS
Survey Interview Test Observation Group techniques Case study Photography Document review Expert or peer review
Check your logic model
1. Is it meaningful?
2. Does it make sense?
3. Is it doable?
4. Can it be verified?
References
Chen, H.T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Hernandez, M. (2000). Using logic models and program theory to build outcome accountability. Education and Treatment of Children, 23(1), 24-40.
Koskin, J.A. (1997). Office of Management and Budget Testimony Before the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight Hearing. February 12.
Safe Schools/Healthy Students. (n.d.). Retrieved February 1, 2007, from http://www.sshs.samhsa.gov/
Weiss, C. H. (1998). Have we learned anything new about the use of evaluation? American Journal of Evaluation, 19(1), 21-34.
University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension Service