Logic ModelsResearch Planning and Evaluation

Logic Vs. ModelLOGIC

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 programsMulti-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 SchoolNEEDS/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 SchoolGOAL

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 SchoolRESOURCES/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 SchoolPARTNERS

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 SchoolPROCESS 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 model1. 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