Developing a logic model:

Teaching and training guide

February 2008
Ellen Taylor-Powell, PhD
Distinguished Evaluation Specialist
Ellen Henert
Systems Design Specialist







UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-EXTENSION
COOPERATIVE EXTENSION
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION
432 N Lake Street, Madison, WI 53706
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin
System. All rights reserved.
2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Content guide
Page
Sample logic model workshop agendas 3
Glossary of common terms 4
Frequently asked questions 5
Text for learning peripherals 7
Ice breakers 8
Key resource list 37
Bibliography 38

Section Page Activities Page Handouts Page Slides
1. Getting started 11 2-13
2. Everyday logic models 12 Everyday logic models 1
Worksheet Our everyday logic model 2
14-19
3. Program examples 14 Parent Education Program 3
Youth Financial Literacy 4
Elder Nutrition 5
Wisconsin First Book 6
20-27
1 11
What is
a logic model?
4. If-then relationships 15 If-then relationships 7
Worksheet Lets practice 9
Lines and arrows in logic models 11
About causation 12
28-33
5. What makes up a 17
logic model
Basic logic model 13
Program Development Logic Model 14
Logic model components: Definitions 15
Logic model worksheet 16, 17
34-44
6. Activities vs. Outcomes 19 Not how many worms 18
Which are outcomes? 19
45-46
7. Pin the card on the 20
logic model
Pin the card on the logic model 20
Cookie baking logic model 21

2 17
Logic model
components
and language
8. Logic model lingo 21 Logic model lingo 22
Getting to know the language 24
What does the statement really convey? 26

3 22
Benefits of
logic models
9. Benefits of logic models 22 47-50
10. Is there ONE 24
logic model?
Logic models come in various 28
shapes and sizes
Two common logic model variations 29
51-52
11. Comparing chart 25
and flow-diagrams
Comparing table and flow chart 30
Building native communities 31
Multiple chains and directional flows 32
53
12. Families or nested 27
logic models
Multiple logic models 33
Multi-level system 34
Multi-component 35
54-64
4 24
What does
a logic model
look like?
13. Cultural adaptations 28 65-66
Getting started with LM development 36
Ideas for facilitating LM development 37
Where should you start in creating a LM? 40
67-69
14. Card sort 30 Program element cards 41
Logic model layout 47
70
15. Practice creating a 32
logic model
Logic model worksheet 16, 17
Community collaborative case 48
71
5 30
Developing
a logic model
16. How good is your 34
logic model?
Logic model review worksheet 49
How good is your logic model? 51
72
6 35
Logic model
and evaluation
17. Using a logic model to 35
focus an evaluation
What do you (and others) want 52
Parent education example questions 53
LM and common types of evaluation 54
73-86

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 1
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Developing a logic model:
Teaching and training guide
Logic models help us plan, implement, evaluate, and communicate more
effectively. Many funders and organizations require logic models. This
guide provides activities with handouts, slides, and other resources for
facilitators to use in helping individuals and groups create and use logic
models.
The materials in this guide, based on the University of Wisconsin-
Extension logic model format, are appropriate for beginning-level logic
model users. At various points, more advanced concepts and materials are
provided. These are highlighted with the notation:
Level 2
It is assumed that participants have already engaged in strategic planning
and/or spent time understanding the situation and setting priorities as a
precursor to developing a logic model.
Participants can learn independently about logic models using Module 1 of
the online course Enhancing Program Performance with Logic Models
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse Many of the materials provided in this
guide are adapted from this resource.
While materials in this guide are ordered and clustered by section, there is
no one way to facilitate learning about logic models. Many activities
and examples are provided for you to choose from to meet the learning
needs of your audience. Or, create your own, based on the relevant
experience and program contexts of your learners.
Brief history of logic models
Despite the current fanfare, logic models date back to the 1970s. The first
publication that used the term logic model is usually cited as
Evaluation: Promise and Performance by J oseph S. Wholey (1979).
Bennett's hierarchy, The Seven Levels of Evidence (1976), well-known in
Cooperative Extension circles, is an early forerunner of today's logic
model. We see the antecedents and footprints of logic model thinking in
many places: private sector, public sector, nonprofit sector, international
area, and evaluation field.
Private sector. The private sector has experienced total quality
management (TQM) and performance measurement movements.
Public sector. The Government Performance and Results Act
(GPRA) of 1993 moved all federal agencies to focus on results and
link investments to results, not just activities.
Nonprofit sector. The nonprofit sector is concerned with
improving programs to produce valued impacts. The United Way
Page 2 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
is a frontrunner in outcome measurement using the logic model.
(United Way web site: http://www.unitedway.org/outcomes/)
International. Players in the international arena have used
variations of a logic model for a long time. The U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) Log Frame of the 1970s is a
historical precedent to the current logic modeling discourse. Most
international donor agencies use a form of program logic for
planning and evaluation.
Evaluators. Evaluators have played a prominent role in using and
developing the logic model. This may be why the logic model is
often called an evaluation framework. In fact, the origins of the
logic model go back to Suchman (1967) and Weiss (1972). Other
early influences were Bennett's (1976) hierarchy of evidence,
developed to evaluate the effectiveness of Extension programs, and
Wholey's (1979) evaluability techniques, developed to determine if
a program is ready for evaluation. This work was a result of
evaluators being asked to evaluate impact and finding that goals
and objectives were vague; finding that programs didn't exist or
weren't being implemented in a way that would achieve the
expected results; and seeking new approaches for measuring
causality [Bickman (1987), Chen (1990) theory-driven evaluation,
and Weiss (1997) theory-based evaluation]. Development and use
of logic model concepts by evaluators continues to result in a
broad array of theoretical and practical applications (see
Bibliography).
Acknowledgements
Today, many variations and types of logic models exist. The logic model
used in this guide has evolved since 1995 in Cooperative Extension at the
University of Wisconsin, largely in response to the GPRA initiative
(Government Performance and Results Act, 1993) and interest in being a
learning organization. It was originally informed by the Bennett Hierarchy
of Evidence and the USAID Log Frame and has evolved in response to the
burgeoning field of logic model practice. In particular, we would like to
credit ideas and materials that we have used and adapted from United Way
(1996), W. K. Kellogg Foundation (1998), H. Hatry (1999), G. Mayeske
(1994), McLaughlin & J ordan (1999), the Evaluation Forum in Seattle,
WA., and the logic model development work done at the Center for
Disease Control and Prevention.
Citation format:
Taylor-Powell, E., & Henert, E. (2008) Developing a logic model:
Teaching and training guide. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin-
Extension, Cooperative Extension, Program Development and Evaluation.
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide 2/29/2008 Page 3
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Sample logic model workshop agendas
90 minute workshop (participants = beginners)
Time Activity Materials needed
2:45 Welcome - Introductions
Ice breaker
Sign-in sheet
Poster, markers
What is a logic model (LM)?
Getting on the same page with
terminology and basic concepts
mini-lecture with slides
Slides, handouts
Table talk: WHY are so many
funders requesting LMs? Rationale
and benefit of LM
Question on poster paper
2:55
Terminology lingo game
(emphasize activity vs. outcome)
Lingo game
(answer sheet)
Application
Example LM handouts. Review
key aspects of each to highlight
similarities, differences, key
concepts.
Handout example LMs
Large group: Do one together
(Cookie baking example). Adhere
cards to poster as group calls out:
input-output-outcome
Poster paper blank logic
model; cards with tape
3:25

Small group work. Use Parent
education example. Distribute sets
of cards; groups sort cards to
create a LM
Set of Parent Education
cards/ group answer sheet
LM in evaluation
Table talk Why do we use a
logic model in evaluation?
Question on poster
4:00
Mini-lecture Slides
4:10 Wrap-up, workshop evaluation Evaluation cards
1 day workshop
8:30 Welcome, Introductions, Ice breaker
8:45 Logic model : Framework
What it is; Why use it; Theory of change; Causal
connections; Outcomes vs. activities
10:00 BREAK
10:15 Logic model: Practice
Compare logic models; Draw a logic model of your
program; Check your logic model
12:00 LUNCH
1:00 Logic model: issues and opportunities
How, when, where do we use this?
2:00 Using your logic model in evaluation
Why use a logic model; Evaluation questions; What to
evaluate when
2:30 BREAK
2:45 Indicators
Linking an evaluation plan to your logic model
4:00 Wrap-up and next steps

2 day workshop
Day 1:
Developing a logic model
Day 2:
Using a logic model in
evaluation
8:30 Welcome, Introductions,
Ice breaker
8:45 Logic model: Framework
What is it? Why use it?
10:00 BREAK
10:15 Theories of change
Focus on outcomes
12:00 LUNCH
12:45 Logic model: Practice
Creating a logic model of
your program
2:45 BREAK
3:00 Checking our models
4:30 Wrap-up of Day 1;
Announcements
8:30 Evaluation planning:
focus, methods, indicators,
analysis, use
9:00 Engaging stakeholders in
focusing the evaluation
Who wants to know what?
Evaluation questions
10:00 BREAK
10:15 Data collection methods
what to use, when
12:00 LUNCH
12:45 Designing your evaluation
2:45 BREAK
3:00 Evaluation design,
continued
4:00 Final wrap-up
Glossary of common terms
Accountability. Responsibility to provide evidence to stakeholders and funders about the
effectiveness and efficiency of programs.
Baseline. Information about the situation or condition prior to a program or intervention.
Benchmarks. Performance data that are used for comparative purposes.
Impact. The social, economic, civic and/or environmental consequences of the program.
Impacts tend to be longer-term and so may be equated with goals. Impacts may be positive,
negative, and/or neutral: intended or unintended.
Impact indicator. Expression or indication of impact. Evidence that the impact has/is being
achieved.
Inputs. Resources that go into a program including staff time, materials, money, equipment,
facilities, volunteer time.
Logic model. Graphic representation of a program showing the intended relationships
between investments and results.
Measure. Either quantitative or qualitative information that expresses the phenomenon under
study. In the past, the term measure or measurement carried a quantitative implication of
precision and, in the field of education, was synonymous with testing and instrumentation.
Today, the term measure is used broadly to include both quantitative and qualitative
information.
Outcomes. Results or changes from the program such as changes in knowledge, awareness,
skills, attitudes, opinions, aspirations, motivation, behavior, practice, decision-making,
policies, social action, condition, or status. Outcomes may be intended and/or unintended:
positive and negative. Outcomes fall along a continuum from immediate (initial; short-term)
to intermediate (medium-term) to final outcomes (long-term), often synonymous with impact.
Outputs. The activities, products, and participation generated through the investment of
resources. Goods and services delivered.
Program. An educational program is a series of organized learning activities and resources
aimed to help people make improvements in their lives.
Program evaluation. The systematic collection of information about activities,
characteristics and outcomes of programs used to make judgments, improve effectiveness,
add to knowledge, and/or inform decisions about programs in order to improve programs and
be accountable for positive and equitable results and resources invested.
Performance measurement. The ongoing monitoring and reporting of accomplishments,
particularly progress towards pre-established goals.
Qualitative data. Data in a narrative or text format.
Quantitative data. Data in numerical format.
Program Logic Model Framework
Inputs Outputs Outcomes-Impact
Medium Short Long Activities Participation

Page 4 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 5
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1. What is the right way to construct a logic model?
There is no one or right way to develop a logic model. It all depends upon your
purpose, how you will use the logic model (for planning, implementation,
evaluation, or communications), who will use the logic model, your context and
given resources.
2. How general or specific should a logic model be?
Again, this depends upon your purpose and use and the level of program you wish
to portray. A logic model needs to convey what is meaningful and understandable
to its users. A logic model used for implementation or evaluation purposes may
be more detailed than one used for communication. For complex, multi-level or
multi-component initiatives, several logic models may be needed.
Remember, a logic model is not supposed to be an exact representation of your
program. It does not show all the detail. It is just a model.
3. When is the best time to develop a logic model?
Ideally, a logic model is developed during program design as part of program
planning. You can modify and enhance the logic model as the program evolves.
But, you can create a logic model at any time to bring clarity to what you are
doing, create consensus or better understanding about the program, or to help
focus an evaluation.
4. What happens when my logic model shows that the outcomes we want dont
connect to the activities that we are doing?
This suggests that either you need to change your activities to achieve the
outcomes you want, or change the expected outcomes to relate better to the
activities you are doing. This is the purpose of a logic model to check these
relationships and help ensure that our activities will achieve the outcomes we
desire.
5. Do we include specific, numeric targets numbers to achieve in our logic
model?
It depends. Specific targets can serve as rallying points and provide clear
measurable results for which the program aims. Often, they are used when there
is sound evidence to support the number. They may not be appropriate when the
evidence base is weak or the program is new and working in uncharted territory.
6. Do we include data collection methods and measurement strategies in the logic
model?
A logic model describes a program and its theory of change. It is useful in
helping to focus an evaluation. But, evaluation questions, measurement
strategies, and data collection methods are part of an evaluation plan not usually
included in the graphic that makes up a logic model.
7. How is this new? Its just putting boxes around what weve been doing?
Some people do think the logic model isnt new. In fact, those familiar with the
Bennett Hierarchy will see many similarities. The logic model does, however,
focus our work on outcomes in a more concerted way, and on the linkages among
investments and results that creates a theory of change.
Page 6 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
8. How can we move logic models from just paper work to a way of thinking a
mental process that undergirds our programming?
Through practice and commitment.
9. How do logic models relate to plans of work (work plans)?
A logic model is a graphic depiction that provides an overview of a program. A
plan of work is a narrative explanation of how the program will be implemented,
providing specifics about activities, responsibilities and timelines among other
things.
10. What is the difference between process objectives and outcome objectives and the
logic model lingo?
Check with the people and organizations using these words to understand what
they mean. In general, process objectives may be similar to outputs (how the
program is implemented) and outcome objectives may be similar to outcomes
(what the program is expected to achieve).
11. Is storyboarding a type of logic modeling?
When storyboarding is used to describe a program to tell how it operates, what
it does, who benefits and how then it is a type of logic modeling.
12. Doesnt a logic model depend upon impossible predictions about desired end
results? How can we plan for a future that is uncertain?
Many are uncomfortable with the linearity of logic models, the focus on achieving
initial consensus around uncertain results and activities, and setting a path to be
followed. It seems quite prescriptive. An alternative is to agree on some initial
steps and review progress as you proceed. Next steps are determined in
consultation with key stakeholders in relation to progress and current events. A
thorough assessment of the initial situation, problem analysis, and goal setting are
still the starting points in the process.
13. Are there any limitations in using a logic model anything we should be cautious
about?
Yes. The most common limitations include:
(1) a logic model represents intention, it is not reality;
(2) it focuses on expected outcomes so people may overlook unintended outcomes
(positive and negative);
(3) it focuses on positive change change isnt always positive;
(4) it may simplify the complex nature of causal attribution where many factors
influence process and outcomes;
(5) it doesnt address whether we are doing the right thing we may get caught up
in creating a logic model and lose track of whether the program is the right thing
to do; and
(6) may stifle creativity and spontaneity.
14. Does a logic model always have to be so linear?
NO. Various formats are in use; cultural adaptations continue to evolve.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 7
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Text for learning peripherals
Create table tents or posters with key concepts to reinforce learning.
Successful organizations have a clear
understanding of their mission, vision, values,
goals, and program strategies to attain their
expected outcomes.
ASSUMPTIONS are the beliefs we have
about the program, the people involved and
how we think the program will operate.
A logic model depicts the program showing
the relationships between what we do and
what results.
Faulty assumptions are often the reason for
poor results.
If you dont know where you are going, you
will end up somewhere else - Yogi Berra
Logic models help make our assumptions
EXPLICIT.
Logic models help us describe our program
and focus our evaluation work.
Arrows are necessary on a logic model to
show the expected causal connectionswhat
is expected to lead to what.
What do you mean when you use the terms:
goal, objective, outcome, impact?
A clear description of the program is the
beginning-point for evaluation.
Logic models are useful in planning,
implementing, evaluating, and
communicating.
A logic model helps us match evaluation to
the actual program so that we measure what
is appropriate and relevant.
Program evaluation is the systematic
collection of information about the activities,
characteristics and outcomes of programs in
order to make judgments about the program,
improve program effectiveness, and/or inform
decisions about future programming.
[Patton, M. (1997) p. 23]
Program is a set of organized activities
supported by appropriate resources to
achieve an intended result. It may be narrow
or broad in scope with the target being
individual, group, system, or community
change including: service interventions;
education and training; outreach; community
mobilization; advocacy; research; and policy
development.
Multiple logic models, or nested logic models,
may be necessary to characterize complex
programs or multiple component initiatives.
Logic models may be simple or detailed and
complex depending upon your purpose and
use.
INPUTS are the resources that go into the
program.
Some people call a logic model their
roadmap.
OUTPUTS are the activities a program
undertakes. WHAT WE DO
Logic models come in many shapes, sizes
and levels of detail.
OUTCOMES are the changes or benefits that
result from our program activities.
What gets measured, gets done
[Osborne and Gaebler, 1992)]
OUTCOMES =SO WHAT!! This is a great looking logic model, but is this
what we should be doing?
A logic model expresses your theory of
action or theory of change.

Page 8 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Ice breakers
The terms logic model or evaluation or planning often conjure up
anxiety and disinterest. Start with some ice breakers or fun activities to set
the stage for learning.
Ice breaker #1
Is Is not
Pass out 3x 5 cards.
On the note card, ask participants to write three responses to the
following:
A logic model is
A logic model is not
After a few minutes, invite participants to call out their responses.
Responses might include:
Logic model is Logic model is not
a chart reality
a picture of a program new
required by my funder easy to develop
Ice breaker #2
Thats me
Explain to participants that you will read a series of statements and if the
statement is true for the individual, he is to stand up. Ask participants to
sit down between statements.
You might use such statements as the following:
I am new to logic models.
Ive created logic models before.
Ive attended other logic model trainings.
Our program has clear outcomes that we all know and agree to.
My funder requires me to do logic models.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 9
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Ice breaker #3
Starting an exercise routine
Divide participants into groups of 10. Make a set of cards with one step
printed on each card (see steps below). For fewer participants or to have
more groups with fewer cards, reduce the number of steps. Pass out one
card to each person. Explain that each card lists one step in starting an
exercise program. Participants are to order themselves in sequence,
WITHOUT TALKING, to describe the steps one might take in starting a
personal exercise program. Participants may show their cards to each
other but they may not talk.
Steps in starting an exercise program
Check with your doctor about any restrictions
Assess your fitness level
Make a personal commitment to exercise
Set specific, realistic goal
Find an activity(ies) that works for you
Invite family/friends to join you
Start slowly
Maintain exercise program
Achieve goal
Ice breaker #4
Tell me about your program
Because a logic model is a description of a program, sometimes it helps to
have participants start by talking about their programs describing their
programs. This ice breaker can help individuals open up, and help them
focus on and describe their programs. [Adapted from Patton (1997)]
In an open discussion format, ask a series of basic questions (see below)
about participants programs. Keep the tone casual and informal. This is
a time to just let participants talk about their programs in their own way.
Or, invite participants to interview each other to learn about each others
programs, using the set of questions. Then, ask each one to present the
program of the other.
What IS your program? What does your program do?
Who comes to your program? Who is served?
What do they gain? How do they benefit?
How do you know/how would you know that your program is a
success?
Page 10 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Ice breaker #5
Draw it!
Pass out large paper and markers for each person. Explain that often we
can describe our programs using a metaphor. For example, a stone wall
might represent a program. It consists of many small, interlocking parts
that when the stones are all put into place and fit tightly, it creates a
sturdy, finished wall, much like the program. Other examples might
include an oyster, a tree, a rain shower, etc.
Invite participants to think of a metaphor that might serve to describe their
program. Ask them to draw their metaphor on the paper and post their
drawings when finished.
Ask for volunteers to share and describe their drawings.
Note: You might explain, that like the metaphor, a logic model
represents a program but is not the program.
Ice breaker #6
Touch it, feel it!
Place a number of objects (toys, tools, mirror, leaf, picture of a tree, shell,
etc.) on a table. Ask each person to choose one item that could be used to
describe his/her program. Ask them to provide a description in one of
these formats:
My program is like [name of object] because
My program is like [name of object] in these ways
Ask each individual to share her description with one other person in the
group. If this is a group of participants who do not know each other, you
might ask each individual to pair up with someone she does not know to
share their descriptions.
Ask for volunteers to share their descriptions with all.
Ice breaker #7
Virtual lingo
Source: Gloria Fauerbach, Youth Development Agent, Iron County - UW Extension
Ask participants to stand up and use the hand they normally write with to
write their first and last name in the air.
Now ask them to use their other hand to write their names in the air.
(Play Music) Now, write your names with your navel.
Turn to a neighbor and write Inputs, Outputs or Outcomes with any body
part you choose.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 11
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Section 1: What is a logic model?
Desired outcomes
Participants will
increase their knowledge of logic models.
increase their understanding of why use of logic models has
become so widespread.
increase their understanding of logic models as depicting a series
of relationships, linking investments to results that represent a
theory of change.
Activity #1
Getting started
Purpose
To provide background on logic models as an introduction to other
activities
Materials needed
Poster paper, adhesive notes, markers
Slides 2-13
Process
Adapt Ice breaker #1.
Write at the top of two poster papers and post in front of the group:
o A logic model is
o A logic model is not
Ask participants to partner with one other and write 3 answers to
each statement on adhesive notes one answer per note; then post
their notes on the poster paper and read each others ideas.
Pose question to group: What stands out?
Invite participants to share their experiences developing and using logic
models.
Use the slides to share background and facilitate discussion
Group participants in triads. Explain that they have the task of
explaining to their spouse, partner, parent or friend what a logic model
is. Ask them to write down 3 things they would say.
Page 12 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Give them 3 minutes as a group to practice their explanation.
Ask each group to present its explanation to the rest.
Reflection questions
What did you learn about logic models that you didnt know before?
If you have to explain logic models to someone else, what is one key
characteristic you will include in your explanation?
Activity #2
Everyday logic models
Purpose
To demystify logic models by using everyday situations to illustrate logic
models
Materials needed
Handout Everyday logic models
Handout Worksheet Our everyday logic model
Poster paper, 3 x 5 cards
Slides 14-19
Reference: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse (Module 1, Section 1)
Process
Group people into small groups of 3-4 people.
Distribute the handout Everyday logic models. Explain that we use logic
models every day, whether or not we use the term.
Ask the groups to read and discuss the handout and the 3 everyday
examples provided.
Remind participants that in each example, there is a theory of change
the sequence of events that is expected to create a change and help
resolve the problem situation. And, in each example there are some
assumptions that underlie the theory of change.
Review the meaning of assumption as it applies to programs (slides 17-
19).
Ask each group to identify and list at least 2 assumptions for each
example and write them next to the example.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 13
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Invite volunteers to share the assumptions they listed for each logic
model example.
Possible answers: Headache example, we assume that we can find/get
the needed pills; that we take the pills as prescribed; that the pills lead to
improvement not a stomach ache or other negative side effect. Hunger
example, we assume that we can get/find food (that food is available,
accessible, or affordable); and that the food we eat actually satisfies our
hunger and provides the nutrition we need to feel better.
Explain that they will create a simple logic model of an event in their
personal lives. Ask, What is an event youve planned recently? Write
the examples they provide on poster paper.
Examples might include: family vacation; wedding; family reunion; house
renovation; birthday party; retirement party.
Distribute the handout Worksheet: Our everyday logic model (one to
each participant) and 10-15 3x5 cards to each group.
Explain that each group should choose one of the examples (or assign
one to each group) and answer the 3 questions at the top of the
worksheet. They are to write their answers on the 3x5 cards one item
per card. Then, they should arrange their cards in logical sequence on
the table. Place the goal card to the far right. Then, arrange the other
cards to show how they line up to accomplish their goal. Participants
can add additional cards, if necessary. Then, each group should review
its own every day logic model. Finally, each group should answer the
question: What assumptions do we have about the way this event will
occur? Write the answers on a separate card.
Once everyone is finished, invite participants to move around the room
and look at the various everyday logic models theyve created.
Facilitate a discussion about the assumptions they have regarding their
logic models.
Reflection questions
What did this activity teach you about logic models?
What was easy; what were the struggles, if any, in creating your own
every day logic model?
How is this similar to planning and describing a program?
Page 14 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Activity #3
Program examples
Purpose
To examine different example program logic models to see what they look
like and how they are similar and different
Materials needed
Handout Parent Education Program Example Logic Model
Handout Youth Financial Literacy Example Logic Model
Handout Elder Nutrition Example Logic Model
Handout Wisconsin First Book Example Logic Model
Make copies of each example logic model handout. Staple together
as a packet with the parent education example on top. Make one
set for each participant.
Slides 20-27
Process
Distribute the packet of logic model examples.
Present and discuss the first one Parent Education Example logic
model. Explain the situation that gave rise to this program and the
theory of action portrayed in the logic model. Encourage discussion
using the following questions:
1. Which are the inputs, outputs, and outcomes?
2. How do the outcomes differ from the outputs?
3. Who participates in this program? Who is the target?
4. Does the logic model show a clear connection between what is
invested and what is to result? Does it seem logical?
5. What might be some underlying assumptions?
Divide participants into groups of 3.
Explain that they are to review and discuss the remaining three examples
in the packet. Write the following questions on poster paper and post for
the groups to discuss and answer as they review the examples:
1. Are the inputs - outputs - outcomes logically connected?
2. What is similar about the examples? What is different?
3. Which model do you prefer? Why?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 15
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Invite volunteers from each group to share key points from their
discussions relative to each question.
Reflection questions
What did you learn about logic models as a result of this activity?
How are logic models similar? How are they different?
Activity #4
If-then relationships
Purpose
To help participants understand the concept of causal connections that
underlie logic models through the use of if-then relationships
Materials needed
Handout If-then relationships
Handout Worksheet Lets practice sequencing
Handout Lines and arrows in logic models
Slides 28-33
Optional handout About causation Level 2
Reference: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse
Module 1, Section 3: More about your program logic
Process
Explain that logic models show the assumed causal connections that link
what we do with desired results. This is a theory of change that
underlies our programs. These connections can be expressed as if-then
relationships.
Distribute the 3 handouts.
Divide participants into groups of three.
Start with the handout If-then relationships. Instruct the groups to read
the handout and discuss the concept of if-then relationships in their
small groups. Invite volunteers to share key points from their group
discussions.
Turn to the handout Worksheet Lets practice sequencing. Ask the
small groups to complete the worksheet. When finished, ask each group
to share its answers. Discuss and resolve any discrepancies in the way
the groups ordered the items.
Page 16 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Wrap up with the handout Lines and arrows in logic models. Discuss
the complexity of programs and need for multiple lines and arrows to
depict the flows of action.
Ask the small groups to read the handout and prepare a 2 minute
presentation they might use with a community board to explain the need
to include lines and arrows in a logic model they are developing. Invite
each group to give its presentation.
Reflection questions
What did you learn about logic modeling as a result of this activity?
What is ONE thing you will remember about if-then relationships and
the theory of change that underlies logic models?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 17
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Section 2: Logic model components and language
Desired outcomes
Participants will
increase their understanding of the key parts of a logic model.
increase their comfort level with using the logic model
terminology.
Note to facilitator
This guide uses the University of Wisconsin-Extension logic model.
However, when working with an organization, find out whether a
preferred form is already in use or to be used. Look at the United Way
model, the WF Kellogg model, HUD model, and others for examples of
components and terminology.
Reference: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse (Module 1, Section 1)
Activity #5
What makes up a logic model?
Purpose
To give participants an understanding of what makes up a logic model and
how the parts are connected to depict a theory of change.
Materials needed
Handout Basic logic model
Handout Program Development Logic Model
Handout Logic model components: Definitions
Handout Logic model worksheet (2 formats are included)
Slides 34-44
Process
Distribute the handouts
Page 18 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Invite participants to comment or ask questions about the handout Basic
logic model
Turn to the handout Program Development Logic Model. Explain that
we are using the UW-Extension logic model. Many logic model
frameworks are in use today. Each may look slightly different
depending upon the agency and purpose. However, most are quite
similar. To avoid confusion, we will use the framework developed by
the University of Wisconsin-Extension.
Suggest that many like to laminate this handout making it into a
placemat for continued use.
Pose the following questions to group:
1. How does this logic model compare with the framework you
use?
2. What do you notice? What stands out?
Divide the group into smaller groups of 2-3 individuals.
Turn to the handout Logic model components: Definitions and divide the
six components among the groups.
Explain that each group has 5 minutes to prepare a mini-lesson about its
component(s) to teach to the others. Each teaching should include
examples of the component (e.g., an example of an outcome might be
youth participants increase their skills in leading a group).
Ask each group to teach its lesson to the whole group.
Distribute the blank logic model worksheet. Ask participants to think
about his/her own program and write 2-3 items for each logic model
component on the worksheet.
When finished, invite each individual to share their worksheet with
another participant. Each person will critique the others work, assessing
whether inputs outputs outcomes are accurately represented.
Note to facilitator
Be prepared to answer questions about other terms in use: such as goal,
process outcomes, and outcome objectives. You may wish to brainstorm
all terms in use and facilitate a process to clarify meaning.
Reflection questions
What is one thing you learned from this exercise about logic models?
Did you experience any difficulties identifying these components for
your own program?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 19
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Activity #6
Activities vs. Outcomes
Purpose
People often struggle with the difference between outputs and outcomes.
This exercise provides the opportunity to clarify that difference.
Materials needed
Handout Not how many worms
Handout Which are outcomes?
Slides: 45-46
Large poster paper
Process
Distribute the handout Not how many worms (or use slide 45). Explain
that the use of metaphors provides a powerful way to learn.
Review the popular childrens story The Little Engine that Could. It
provides a great message about working as a team, who really steps up,
etc.; but gives no evidence that toys and food got to children, only that
services were delivered. [Patton (2001)]
Pass out large poster paper. Ask individuals to work as pairs to think up
a metaphor, childrens story or popular saying that captures the
distinction between activities and outcomes.
Invite them to write or draw their creation on the paper and post for all
to see. You may wish to use these as learning peripherals now and in
the future.
Distribute the handout Which are outcomes?
Invite participants to complete it individually.
Compare answers as a group discuss discrepancies.
Additional resources
Appendix A: Understanding outcomes in Building Capacity in Evaluating
Outcomes ([Taylor-Powell (2008)]
Activity #7
Pin the card on the logic model
Source: adapted from Gloria Fauerbach, Youth Development Agent, Iron County - UW Extension
Purpose
To provide the opportunity for people to practice and reinforce their
understanding of logic model components, using a fun and interactive
exercise with chocolate chip cookies as the example
Materials needed
Make a large poster with Input;
Outputs, Outcomes printed across
the top.
Handout Pin the card on the logic
model Cookie baking cards
Make a set of cards using the handout, affix tape to the back of each card
so it can be put easily on the poster.
Handout Cookie baking logic model
Treat Chocolate chip cookies to eat!
Process
INPUT

OUTPUT OUTCOMES
Engage your learners by asking: Who likes chocolate chip cookies?
Who has made chocolate chip cookies? Say that it looks like this is a
well-informed group on the subject of chocolate chip cookie-baking!
Explain that you have cards with items relevant to making chocolate
chip cookies to be classified as input, output or outcome.
Read each card. Ask the group to call out where it should be place on the
poster. Place the card in its place on the poster.
Go through all the cards. Invite conversation and discussion.
Distribute the handout Cookie baking logic model. Ask participants to
compare the depiction on the poster with what is displayed on the
handout. Facilitate discussion about differences. For instance, cookies
might be considered an outcome, but if no one likes or eats them, they
are not of benefit. So, cookies do not stand as an outcome. A dirty
kitchen can be considered an unintended outcome or a negative
outcome. Bakery assistant opens a bakery can be thought of as an
unintended positive outcome often good things happen that we dont
plan for in advance.
Ask participants how they might improve, change, add other cards to the
logic model.
NOTE: This activity can also be done as a small group card game.
Make 1 poster and 1 deck of cards (for each group of 3-4).
Page 20 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 21
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Distribute to each group. Explain they are to shuffle and deal the cards
one at a time, face down, to each person around the table until all of the
cards are gone. Each person should read the word(s) on their first card
aloud to the group. As a team, they decide if the card describes an Input,
an Output or an Outcome and place the card in is place.
Groups work 5-7 min. to sort all cards to the Input, Output or Outcome
groups to answer the questions on the posters.
Reflection questions
What did you learn about logic models from doing this exercise?
Which components seem harder to determine and define? Which ones
seem easier to distinguish?
Activity #8
Logic model lingo
Purpose
To help participants better understand the meaning of common terms and
feel more comfortable using the logic model terminology
Materials needed
Several handouts are included to reinforce the logic model language
choose one or several as appropriate for your participants.
Handout Logic model lingo
Handout Getting to know the language
Handout What does the statement really convey?
Process
Distribute the handout(s) chosen. Ask participants to read the
instructions at the top and complete the handout(s) individually
When everyone is done, review each item and ask participants to call out
their answers (see answer sheets).
Facilitate questions and clarification. Remind participants that the items
are written devoid of context and program description. Sometimes, an
output may seem like an outcome, or a long-term outcome for one
program could be a medium term outcome for another program. If there
is discrepancy in the way an item is labeled, ask individuals to explain
their positions.
Wrap up with Ice breaker #7 Virtual Lingo.
Page 22 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Section 3: Benefits of logic models
Desired outcomes
Participants will
increase their understanding of the value logic models can bring to
their work.
Activity #9
Benefits of logic models
Purpose
To encourage participants to think about why a logic model is important
and what value it might bring to their work
Materials needed
Poster paper; colored, blank 4x6 note cards; markers
Slides 47-50
Process
Ask participants to name all the reasons they think using a logic model
could be beneficial.
Record responses on poster paper.
Possible responses might include
Helps us to focus on outcomes
Builds understanding of our programs and accomplishments
Helps us to clarify what we intend
Helps reveal assumptions
Provides a common language
Guides and helps focus work; helps keep us from over-promising
Increases intentionality and purpose
Provides coherence across complex tasks and diverse
environments
Can enhance teamwork
Guides prioritization and allocation of resources
Promotes communication
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 23
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Share anecdotes and testimonials that weve documented from our
UWEX work:
Wow so that is what my program is all about
Ive never seen our program on one page before
Im now able to say no to things; if it doesnt fit within our logic model, I
can say no.
I can do this
This took time and effort but it was worth it; our team never would have
gotten here otherwise.
It helped us to think as a team to build a team program vs. an
individual program.
Acknowledge that some people dislike the jargon and the model but
experience shows that creating logic models leads to better
understanding and appreciation of programs and helps focus an
evaluation.
Distribute colored note cards one to each person and markers. Ask
participants to write down ONE benefit of logic models they consider
most important. Invite participants to take their note card home, post it
at their work space, and see if, over time, the benefit exists.
Reflection questions:
What is a potential benefit of logic models you hadnt thought of before?
What have you learned about the value of logic models?
Page 24 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Section 4: What does a logic model look like?
Desired outcomes
Participants will
increase their understanding that there is no one right or best logic
model.
increase their ability to choose a logic model format that best suits
their purpose and program context.
Activity #10
Is there ONE logic model?
Purpose
To help participants realize that logic models can look different and that
there is no single or right logic model
Materials needed
Pre-assignment: Ask participants to bring copies of the logic model used
in their own agencies and/or by their funders. The facilitator should
search the web and bring a variety of examples to share.
Handout Logic models come in various shapes and sizes
Handout Two common logic model variations
Poster paper, markers
Slides 51-52, notes page for slide 52
Process
Distribute the handout Logic models come in various shapes and sizes.
Invite participants to work in pairs to review and discuss the handout.
Ask them to share with each other different types of logic models
theyve seen.
Go over the handout together. Ask for volunteers to share key points
about each one of the examples on the handout.
Pose the question to the group:
o Why is there so much variation in logic models?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 25
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
List answers on poster paper.
Possible answers might include: different purposes and different uses
mean that logic models need to look different; different organizations
have developed different formats to meet their own needs; it is an
evolving field so models and approaches changes as more is learned;
programs are different and need different formats; different people like to
do things differently; cultural differences
Ask participants to share the logic model examples they brought and/or
the model currently in use in their own agency.
Reinforce that there is no ONE right or BEST logic model. Encourage
participants to know and use the model expected by their organization or
funder(s).
Note to facilitator: For another activity, use or adapt Activity #3 from
Section 1 that includes 4 different logic models for participants to explore
and discuss.
Distribute the handout Two common logic model variations.
Facilitate a discussion relative to the examples using the explanation
provided on the slide 52 notes page as required.
Reflection questions:
What is one thing you learned about logic models?
What is a new way to format a logic model that you hadnt seen before?
Activity #11
Comparing chart and flow-diagram logic models
Purpose
To help participants understand the difference between a table and
flowchart logic model
Materials needed
Handout Comparing table and flow chart formats
Handout Building native communities: financial skills for families
Handout Multiple chains and directional flows
Slide 53
Page 26 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Process
Distribute the handout Comparing table and flow-chart diagrams.
As a group discussion, pose the following questions:
1. What are differences between the table format and the flow
chart formats?
2. What might be the advantages and disadvantages of each?
Distribute the handout Building native communities.
Group participants into pairs.
Explain that the Building native communities logic model uses a table
format. Ask each pair to convert it into a flowchart logic model by
drawing boxes around each unique item and connecting the boxes with
arrows to show the assumed causal connections. If they think additional
boxes are needed for additional inputs-outputs-or outcomes, they should
create them. Encourage them to make their flowchart logic model as
CLEAR and descriptive as possible. Encourage them to check all
assumed connections and make sure they make sense (there are no
intended miracles).
Invite volunteers to share their flow chart logic models and explain what
they did.
1. What additional boxes, if any, did you include?
2. What, if any, challenges did you have in creating this flowchart
model?
3. How did this work to create this flow-chart logic model as a
team?
Remind participants that
o there are often multiple chains within one logic model. Different
chains are often associated with different target audiences.
o there may be vertical as well as circular flows of action. In fact, it
may be more realistic to think of a program as a spiral moving
forward involving various feedback loops. For example, a policy
change can lead back to changes in individual knowledge and
attitudes that, in turn, leads forward to the desired changes in
individual behavior.
Distribute the handout Multiple chains and directional flows.
Invite participants to look at the handout and pose the following
questions:
1. What stands out? (numbering of the boxes helps in
communications)
2. What do the various arrows, and their direction, indicate?
(feedback loops indicate that what happens at one place is
expected to circle back to influence another change)
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 27
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Reflection questions
How are table and flow-chart logic models different?
Which type to you (your agency) most often use?
What is one thing you learned from this activity?
Activity #12
Families or nested logic models
Level 2
Purpose
To help participants apply logic model concepts to more complex
initiatives and situations
Materials needed
Handout Multiple logic models
Handout Multi-level system
Handout Multi- component
Slides 54-64
Process
Remind participants that logic models can be broad or specific. The
level of detail depicted in a logic model depends upon its intended use
and audience. For example, a logic model used to explain a program to
key stakeholders may be less detailed than a logic model used by
program staff to focus an evaluation or monitor activities.
For broad, complex programs, multiple logic models may be necessary.
A global model may depict the overall program while more specific
logic models depict different levels or components within the overall
program. These are called families of logic models or nested logic
models.
Divide participants into groups of 3.
Distribute the 3 handouts. Facilitate a discussion covering the main
points on the handout Multiple logic models.
Then, ask the groups to discuss the other 2 handouts, focusing on the
following questions relative to each handout. Have one in the group
Page 28 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
serve as recorder in order to share their key discussion points with the
whole group:
1. What is the handout describing?
2. What makes sense to you? Doesnt make sense?
3. Do you know of an initiative that might be displayed in this
way? Explain.
Ask volunteers to share their key points.
Use slides to illustrate examples.
Reflection questions
What did you learn about logic models that you didnt know before?
How might you apply the idea of nested logic models in your work?
What are the challenges/strengths of using nested or families of logic
models?
Activity #13
Cultural adaptations
Purpose
To provide participants the opportunity to think about the cultural milieu
in which they work and what type of logic model, if any, would be most
suitable
Materials needed
Slides 65-66
Process
Explain that many think the logic model is linear and Eurocentric and
may not be culturally sensitive or appropriate.
Invite participants to tell about the cultures found in their program
contexts.
Discuss as a group:
1. What might be some barriers to using a logic model in that
program context?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 29
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
2. Will the format of INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES be
appropriate? Will the use of boxes and arrows make sense to
people with whom you want to communicate?
3. Many funders require logic models in a certain format. How
can you be sensitive to your cultural context and also fulfill the
funder requirements?
Reflection questions
What have you learned about logic modeling that you had not thought
about before?
How might logic modeling be more culturally sensitive?
Are you aware of situations where you would not advise the use of logic
models?
Page 30 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Section 5: Developing a logic model
Desired outcomes
Participants will
increase their ability to create logic models of their own programs.
Note to facilitator
Activities in this section that engage participants in creating a logic model
of their own programs assume they have done thorough situational and
problem analyses before beginning logic model development.
** See the handout Getting started with logic model development
for individuals or program teams creating their own program logic
models.
** See handout Ideas for facilitating logic model development
** See handout Where should you start in creating a logic model?
** Use slides 67-69 as appropriate.
Tips
Use a flannel board, sticky wall, or poster paper, and
adhesive notes or 3x5 cards that can be written on, sorted, and
moved around.
Plan for several work sessions, spaced over time.
Distribute and use the Blank Logic Model worksheet as a guide, or
for at-home work.
Activity #14
Card sort
Purpose
To provide the opportunity for participants to practice developing a logic
model using a simple program example
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 31
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Materials needed
Handouts Program element cards and Suggested placement of elements.
Three sets [cards and suggested placement (logic model)] are included for
3 different programs: Pregnant teen program; Parent education program;
Hmong literacy program;
Choose one or more of the examples. Make enough cards for each team of
3-4 members to have one set of cards. Copy the suggested placement
(logic model) for each person.
Optional handout Logic model layout
Optional slide 70
Process
Divide participants into groups of 3-4.
Distribute one set of cards to each group. Explain that each set of cards
represents one program. Participants are to place the cards on the table
in a logical order depicting the theory of action of the program. You
may instruct the teams to lay out the cards from Inputs >Outputs >
Outcomes (see optional handout), or let them use an open space on the
table and lay out the cards in any way they please.
When finished, invite participants to move around the room and look at
all logic models, noting similarities and differences.
Provide the answer logic model for each example
Facilitate feedback and discussion:
1. How does your logic model compare to the example logic
model?
2. How do your logic models differ from each other? What are
similarities?
3. What are the underlying assumptions in these descriptions of
the program?
Reflection questions
What did you learn about creating a logic model by doing this activity?
What was easy about doing this activity? What was hard?
Page 32 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Activity #15
PRACTICE creating a logic model
Purpose
To provide the opportunity for participants to work together creating a
logic model of a familiar program before working on their own logic
models
Materials needed
Identify a program that is familiar to everyone. Create a large poster that
looks like the following:
Name of the program:
Goal of the Program:

Situation:

INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Activities Participation Short-term Medium-term Long-term



Poster paper, adhesive notes; markers
Handout Logic model worksheet
Optional handout Community collaborative case example
Optional slide 71
Process
Divide participants into groups of 4-5 individuals. Explain that each
group will develop a logic model of a familiar program TOGETHER as
practice.
Present the poster and go over the program, its goal, and the situation
that the program is addressing.
Pass out one sheet of poster paper to each group. Ask each group to
write across the top of its paper:
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Activities Participation Short-term Medium-term Long-term
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 33
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Ask the group to create a simple logic model of the program. They may
write directly on the poster paper or write items on adhesive notes to
place on the poster paper. The advantage of using the adhesive notes is
that they can be easily moved as participants work on their logic model.
Ask the groups to draw lines and arrows to connect the various items on
their logic models.
When finished, ask each group to post its model on the wall. Review
and discuss the various logic models. Create a composite logic model
based on the best from each of the small group logic models.
Optional activity
Group participants into small groups of 3-5 people. Explain that each
group represents a group of friends that wants to start a book club. They
are meeting today to get the book club started. As such, they should:
o Develop a list of activities and outcomes (benefits) for their book
club and resources they will need.
o Write each item on an adhesive note. One item per adhesive note.
Write using markers and large letters so everyone can see.
o Place the adhesive notes on the poster paper
o Move the notes around to depict the logical sequencing and draw
lines and arrows to show the expected causal connections.
o Post the poster paper and invite each group to explain what their
book club will do.
Tell participants they will apply this same exercise to their program.
Distribute the handout Logic model worksheet.
Provide space and time for individuals (or program teams) to work on
their own programs. Provide poster paper, markers and adhesive notes
for people to use as they wish.
Invite participants to take their models home, work on them and come
together again to share and refine.
Optional activity
Use the handout Community collaborative case example or slide 71
following a similar process as above.
Reflection questions
What was easy about doing this exercise? What was hard?
What did you learn about creating a logic model of a program?
Page 34 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Activity #16
How good is your logic model?
Purpose
To give participants a structure for reviewing their logic models and
improving them as necessary
Materials needed
Handout Logic model review worksheet
Handout How good is your logic model?
Slide 72
Process
Distribute and review together the handout Logic model review
worksheet
Invite members who have worked on a logic model together to complete
the worksheet together, or work individually.
Share questions and observations.
Allow time for participants to refine or improve their logic models as
necessary.
Distribute copies of the handout How good is your logic model? for
participants to take home.
Reflection questions:
Do you think you will use the handout in your own work? When? How?
How might you ensure that your logic model is a good as it can be?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 35
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Section 6: Logic model and evaluation
Desired outcomes
Participants will
increase their understanding of how logic models can help with
evaluation.
Additional resources
Section 7: Using Logic Models in Evaluation: Indicators and Measures in
the online course Enhancing Program Performance with Logic Models
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse
Appendix B: Understanding evaluation in Building Capacity in Evaluating
Outcomes [Taylor-Powell, E. (2008)]
Activity #17
Using a logic model to focus an evaluation
Purpose
To provide the opportunity for participants to understand how a logic
model can help focus an evaluation
Materials needed
Handout What do you (and others) want to know about this program?
Handout Parent education example: questions
Optional handout for discussion purposes or as take home for
participants: Logic model and common types of evaluation
Slides 73-86
Poster paper, markers
Process
Distribute the handout What do you (and others) want to know about
this program?
Divide participants into groups of 3-4 individuals. Explain that they are
taking the role of program staff for this parent education program. The
logic model on the handout is their logic model they developed it to
describe a program they are starting. They are aware of the need to
Page 36 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
think about evaluation as the program is planned. But, they dont know
what they should be evaluating what data should they be collecting?
Ask each group to brainstorm information they might want to know, as
the program staff, about this program. What questions would they want
to answer through their evaluation of the program? Ask them to list
their questions on a poster and cluster questions that are alike.
Distribute the handout Parent education example: questions. Ask
groups to compare their questions to those on the handout.
Remind participants that we often dont have the resources to evaluate
everything. Ask them to identify their top priorities: what are the five
most important questions? Highlight or mark these questions.
Now, ask the small groups to change roles. They are now to assume the
role of the program funder. As funders, what questions would they want
answered about this program? Again, ask participants to list these on the
poster paper and cluster questions that are alike. Prioritize the top five
funder questions.
Invite the small groups to share their lists of priority questions. Create a
single list of questions, eliminating duplicates. For each question, ask
participants to determine when data would need to be collected to
answer the question.
To wrap up, pose the following questions to the group:
1. How did the logic model help you think about WHAT the
evaluation should focus on what questions the evaluation
would answer?
2. How did the logic model help you to think about WHEN you
need to collect evaluation information when to collect the
data to answer these questions?
3. Should we expect to measure the long-term outcomes with an
end-of-workshop survey?
4. Do you see any other benefits in using a logic model to help
focus an evaluation? Any disadvantages?
Note to facilitator
Use slides provided as needed. See additional resources listed above for
other resources related to evaluation.
Reflection questions:
How does a logic model help focus an evaluation?
How does a logic model help us focus on what is appropriate to measure
and the timing of our measurements?
How might you use a logic model in your own evaluation work?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 37
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Key resource list
Innovation Network
http://www.innonet.org/
Targeting Outcomes of Programs
http://citnews.unl.edu/TOP/english/
The Evaluation Forum.
1932 First Avenue, Suite 403; Seattle, W 98101
http://www.evaluationforum.com/publications/
Tobacco Technical Assistance Consortium.
http://www.ttac.org/power-of-proof/setting_stage/logic_midels/6-5.html
U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services (2005). Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention. Office of the Director, Office of Strategy and Innovation.
Introduction to Program Evaluation for Public Health Programs: A Self-Study
Guide. Atlanta, GA. http://www.cdc.gov/eval/evalguide.pdf
United Way of America. Measuring program outcomes: A practical approach
http://national.unitedway.org/outcomes/resources/mpo/
University of Kansas, Community Toolbox
http://ctb.ku.edu/tools/en/section_1877.htm
University of Wisconsin, Online logic model course
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse
University of Wisconsin-Program Development and Evaluation
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evallogicmodel.html
http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evallogicmodelworksheets.html
W.F. Kellogg logic model
http://www.wkkf.org/
http://www.wkkf.org/default.aspx?tabid=101&CID=281&CatID=281&ItemID=2813669
&NID=20&LanguageID=0
Western CAPT. CSAPS Western Center for the Application of Prevention Technology
http://captus.samhsa.gov/western/resources/bp/step7/index.cfm
Page 38 2/29/2008 DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Bibliography
American Heritage Dictionary, 2
nd
College Edition (1991). New York, N.Y. : Dell
Publishing.
Anderson, A. (2000). Using theory of change in program planning and evaluation.
Aspen, CO: Aspen Institute. PowerPoint presentation at the annual meeting of
the American Evaluation Association, Honolulu, HI.
Bennett, C. (1976). Analyzing impacts of extension programs, ESC-575. Washington,
D.C.: Extension Service-U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Bickman, L. (1987). The functions of program theory. In L. Bickman (Ed.), Using
Program Theory in Evaluation, New Directions for Program Evaluation, 33, 5-
18. San Francisco, CA: J ossey-Bass Publishers.
Chapel, T. (2006). Reducing fear and loathing of evaluation: Making good evaluation
choices for EPHTN efforts. CDC webinar slide presentation. Available at:
http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/tracking/webinars/jan06/chapel.pdf
Chen, H. (1990). Theory-driven evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Freddolino, P. (1998). Michigan safe and drug-free schools and communities evaluation
training workshop, Phase I workbook. Okemos, MI: Michigan Public Health
Institute.
Funnell, S. (2000). Developing and using a program theory matrix for program
evaluation and performance monitoring. In P. Rogers, T. Hacsi, A. Petrosino, &
T. Huebner (Eds.), Program Theory in Evaluation: Challenges and Opportunities,
New Directions for Evaluation, 87, 91-101. San Francisco, CA: J ossey-Bass
Publishers.
Hatry, H. (1999). Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, D.C.: Urban
Institute Press.
Hendricks, M. EVALTALK, on-line, 7/9/98
Hernandez, M. (2000). Using logic models and program theory to build outcome
accountability. Education & Treatment of Children, 23 (1), 24-41.
HUD logic model. Logic model training for HUD SuperNOFA Grantees. US Dept of
Housing and Urban Development. PowerPoint presentation prepared for Satellite
Broadcast, J une 1, 2004 by the Center for Applied Management, Camp Hill, PA
Kaplan, S. & Garrett, K. (2005). The use of logic models by community based initiatives.
Evaluation and Program Planning, 28(2), 167-172.
Mayeske, G. (1994). Life cycle program management and evaluation: An Heuristic
approach, Part 1 of 2. Washington, D.C.: Extension Service, USDA.
McLaughlin, J ., & J ordan, G. (1999). Logic models: A tool for telling your program's
performance story. Evaluating and Program Planning, 22, 65-72.
Osborne, D. & Gaebler, T. (1992). Reinventing Government: How the entrepreneurial
spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Outcomes Based Evaluations using the Logic Model: Building capacity of substance
abuse program staff and administrators to develop and utilize science based
prevention interventions. CSAP/SAMHSA. March 2002.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 Page 39
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Patton, M. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation, 3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Patton (2001)
Pawson, R, & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Poister, T. (2003). Measuring performance in public and nonprofit organizations. San
Francisco, CA: J ossey-Bass.
Rockwell and Bennett (n.d.). Targeting Outcomes of Programs (TOP).
http://citnews.unl.edu/TOP/english
Rogers, P. (2000). Causal models in program theory evaluation. In Rogers, P., Hacsi, T.
Petrosino, A. & Huebner, T. (Eds), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges
and opportunities, New Directions in Program Evaluation (87), 47-55. San
Francisco, CA: J ossey-Bass Publishers.
Scriven , M. 1991. Evaluation Thesaurus (p. 77), 4th Edition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
Suchman, E. (1967). Evaluative research: Principles and practice in public service and
social action programs. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Taylor-Powell, E. (2008). Building Capacity in Evaluating Outcomes. Madison, WI:
University of Wisconsin-Extension, Cooperative Extension, Program
Development and Evaluation. http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande
Taylor-Powell, E., J ones, A.L., and Henert, E. (2002). Enhancing program performance
with logic models. Available at: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse
Turner (1998)
United Way of America (1999)
W. K. Kellogg Foundation (1998). W. K .Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development
Guide. available at
http://www.wkkf.org/default.aspx?tabid=101&CID=281&CatID=281&ItemID=2813669
&NID=20&LanguageID=0
Wauchope, B. (2001). Using logic models in a multi-site, multi-level evaluation.
PowerPoint presentation at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation
Association, St. Louis, MO.
Weick (1995). Sensemaking in Organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, cited in
Rogers, P. (2000).
Weiss, C.H. (1972). Evaluation Research: Methods for Assessing Program Effectiveness.
Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
Weiss, C. (1997). Evaluation, 2
nd
Ed., Chapter 3. Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall
Wholey, J . (1979). Evaluation: Promise and performance. Washington, D.C.: Urban
Institute Press.
Williams, R. (2002). Evaluation and Systems Thinking. Retrieved August 15, 2002 from
http://users.actrix.co.nz/bobwill/

Everyday Logic models
Headache
You are suffering from a severe headache. Your experience says
certain pills help. So, the logic model shows you first need to get the
pills. Then, you take the pills as prescribed. As a consequence, you
feel better. The end result is that the headache is gone and you are
feeling better.

Hunger
Think about being hungry. You are so hungry. What is involved to
satisfy that hunger?
Probably what you want is food. So, first you need to find some food.
Then, you need to eat that food. Then, you will be satisfied and feel
better.

Family Vacation
Summer vacation time is coming up. We like to camp and are planning
our annual family camping trip. We have existing resources including:
Mom, Dad, sister and brother plus our vacation budget, our car and
camping equipment. These resources make it possible for us to drive
to a state park, set up camp and engage in a variety of camping
activities. As a result of camping together, we will benefit in a number
of ways: we will learn more about each other, we will increase our
bond as a family unit, and we will have fun!

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 1
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 2
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

3.
2.
1.
What assumptions do we have about the way this event will
occur?
Worksheet: Our everyday logic model
Question 1. What is our GOAL?



Question 2. What do we need to do to accomplish our goal?
a.
b.
c.
d.


Questions 3. What resources do we need?
a.
b.
c.
d.


ARRANGE YOUR CARDS ON THE TABLE





GOAL
Example logic model
Parent education program
Situation:
During a county needs assessment, a majority of parents reported they were having difficulty parenting and suffering stress as
a result.



DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 3
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Example logic model
Youth financial literacy
Situation:
High school youth lack basic skills in management of their personal finances. Many are unable to balance a checkbook and most have
little knowledge of basic principles of earning, spending, saving and investing. Many young people fail in managing their first
consumer credit experience and establish bad financial management habits that follow them through life.

INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Short-term Medium-term Long-term; final

Money
Review
research
Develop and
deliver age-
appropriate
curriculum
High
school
youth
Keep track of
spending
Reduce
unnecessary
spending
Pay bills on
time
Save money
regularly
Youth
establish
sound
financial
habits
Partnership of
local financial
institutions,
schools, and
Extension
Assess
needs
Time
Research -
base
Youth increase
their knowledge
of money-
management
basics
Increase their
understanding of
credit and debt
Increase abilities
to manage and
use checking
and savings
accounts
Increase
motivation to live
within budget

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 4
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Example logic model
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 5
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Elder nutrition
Situation:
Older adults who make healthier choices live longer and better lives. Diet and exercise play the most important roles in determining
the quality and length of life for the elderly. Older adults, especially the very old, consume inadequate amounts of key nutrients.
Low-income adults tend to have poorer diets than their higher income peers.

INPUTS

OUTPUTS
Activities Participation
OUTCOMES IMPACT
Short Medium Longer term

Community-based
nutrition educators

Agency partners
who collaborate

Campus-based
specialists that
support county
educators

Research base

Funding and other
resources that
support this program











Educational
sessions
Presentations
Learn-while-
you-wait
Games and
interactive
learning
activities
Posters, print
materials

Topics:
Eating more
fruits and
vegetables
Storing and
handling food
safely
Portion sizes
Choosing
Healthy snacks
Balancing food
with physical
activity


Low-income Seniors
at Senior Dining
Sites and Senior
Housing Sites



















Short-term changes
we expect:

Participants
increase their
knowledge about
the importance of
choosing nutritious
foods

Participants
increase their
knowledge about
food handling
safety

Participants think
differently about
their food choices

Participants plan to
make nutrition-
related behavior
changes, including
physical activity
Medium term changes
we expect:

Participants eat more
fruits and vegetables

Participants handle
foods safely

Participants read labels

Participants control
portion size

Participants choose
more healthy foods

Participants engage in
appropriate physical
activity


Long-term
changes we
expect:

The elderly
enjoy healthier
lives

Example logic model
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 6
Wisconsin First Book
1

Give young children who wouldnt
otherwise have books an opportunity to be
read to and own their first new books.







I
n
t
e
r
m
e
d
i
a
t
e

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
s

Increase emergent
literacy skills
Share love of reading
with young children
Read the books to
children at home
Experience
intergenerational
relationships
Increase cultural
societal awareness of
community
Do an activity with
children from the
activity sheets
Children Readers Families
I
n
i
t
i
a
l

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
s

Children are read to
and receive books
Volunteers read in
classrooms
Families receive new books and
opportunities to read in the home
O
u
t
p
u
t
s

#of Books #of Readers #of Children #of Volunteer Hours #of reading
i
L
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
s

Partnerships developed Fundraising
Reading volunteers prepare to read
(pre-read, gather crafts, travel)
Promotional items (displays,
celebrations, quilt)
Reading volunteers trained
Volunteers assist with project support,
creating book bags, craft items, etc.
Volunteers recognized
A
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s

First Book County Coordinator Volunteers
Books & Activity Sheets
Head Start/Even Start/Child Care Staff
UW-Ex. Family Living Educator
UW-Ex. Family Living Programs
HCE Leadership/membership Funding
Wisconsin Public Television
I
n
p
u
t
s


1
Source: Lynne Blinkenburg, Wisconsin Public TV
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 7
If-then relationships
Many who use logic models talk about them as a series of if-then sequences. If X,
then Y. If Y, then Z.
Reading from left to right, a logic model portrays a series of if-then relationships.

Starting at the left, let's see how this works:
If you have certain resources, then you will be able to provide activities,
produce services or products for targeted individuals or groups. If you reach
those individuals or groups, then they will benefit in certain specific ways in
the short term.
If the short-term benefits are achieved to the extent expected, then the
medium-term benefits can be accomplished.
If the medium-term benefits for participants/organizations/decision-makers
are achieved to the extent expected, then you would expect the longer-term
improvements and final impact in terms of social, economic, environmental,
or civic changes to occur.
This is the foundation of logic models and the theory of causal association.
Such if-then relationships may seem too simple and linear for the complex
programs and environments in which we work. However, in working out these
sequences, we uncover gaps in logic, clarify assumptions, and more clearly
understand how investments are likely to lead to results.
Where we have sound research, the if-then relationships are clear and strong. Often,
however, we work in situations, and with issues and audiences, where the research
base is not well developed. It is your theory or theories the explanation that
links program inputs with activities to outcomes: the chain of response that leads to
ultimate, end results.
When developing a logic model, think about the underlying assumptions. Are they
realistic and sound? What evidence or research supports your assumptions?
Let's look at two examples of if-then relationships. Identify and check assumptions
for each if-then relationship.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 8
Family Support Initiative

If the program invests time and money, then a resource inventory can be developed.
If there is a resource inventory, then families will know what resources and services
are available. If families know, then they will be able to access the appropriate
services to meet their needs. If families access the appropriate services, then the
needs of the families will be met.
Possible assumptions for the Family Support Initiative:
a resource inventory is linked to improvement in client well-being.
the program will have the necessary time, money, and expertise to develop the
resource inventory.
once the resource inventory is developed, people will use it, particularly the
identified target group.
once accessed, the service will, in fact, meet the client's need.
interagency coordination will make a difference relative to these families
needs.
Instructional Module

If we have necessary resources (money, web technology expertise, content expertise),
then we can design and deliver a web-based instructional module appropriate for our
educators. If we design and deliver this instructional module, then our educators will
access it and learn about and develop skills in logic models. If the educators acquire
this knowledge and skill development, then they will use logic models in their
programming. If the educators use logic models in their programming, then
programming will be improved and evaluation resources will be used wisely.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 9
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Worksheet - Lets practice sequencing
Read about the situation; then, read the if-then statements that follow. Determine the correct
order for the statements. Indicate your choices by placing the corresponding number in the
first column. The statement you decide is first should have a number 1 next to it, the second a
number 2, and so on. Identify and discuss the assumptions underlying the theory of change.
Situation 1
A nutrition education program for the elderly. A community needs assessment
revealed that many elderly do not eat well. They report that it is difficult to get to the
grocery store to purchase food and to prepare meals on a regular basis. They do not
understand the relationship between nutrition and health.
If recipients use available services and prepare healthful food more regularly,
If we have time, resources, expertise, and access to the target group,
then we can provide culturally-appropriate nutrition information about available
community services, easy food preparation, and the importance of nutrition.
then recipients will better understand the importance of good nutrition and regular meals
and they will have increased knowledge about how to obtain and use food resources
available in their community.
If we provide culturally-appropriate information about community services, food
preparation and the relationship between nutrition and health,
then recipients will use available services and prepare healthful food more regularly.
then recipients will eat better and have improved nutritional status.
If recipients better understand the relationship between nutrition and health and the
importance of regular meals and have better access to healthful food through the use of
community services,
What assumptions underlie this theory of change?
Situation2
When a local utility company sought a conditional-use permit to construct wind
turbines in Quietburg, a controversial public issue emerged. Some residents were in
favor of the development while others adamantly opposed it. An initial needs-
assessment identified seven major areas related to the issue that needed attention.
If the residents have correct, balanced information and are effectively engaged,
If the residents make better-informed decisions,
then the controversial public issue will be resolved.
then the residents will have the best evidence, unbiased information, and have their
voices heard.
then the residents can make better-informed decisions.
If we bring research and expert opinion to bear and facilitate public dialogue,
What assumptions underlie this theory of change?

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 10
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Correct sequences
Situation 1
7 If recipients use available services and prepare healthful food more regularly,
1 If we have time, resources, expertise, and access to the target group,
2
then we can provide culturally-appropriate nutrition information about available community services,
easy food preparation, and the importance of nutrition.
4
then recipients will better understand the importance of good nutrition and regular meals and they will
have increased knowledge about how to obtain and use food resources available in their community.
3
If we provide culturally-appropriate information about community services, food preparation and the
relationship between nutrition and health,
6 then recipients will use available services and prepare healthful food more regularly.
8 then recipients will eat better and have improved nutritional status.
5
If recipients better understand the relationship between nutrition and health and the importance of
regular meals and have better access to healthful food through the use of community services,

If we have time, resources, expertise, and access to the target group, then we can provide culturally-appropriate
nutrition information about available community services, easy food preparation, and the importance of
nutrition.
If we provide culturally-appropriate information about community services, food preparation and the
relationship between nutrition and health, then recipients will better understand the importance of good
nutrition and regular meals and they will have increased knowledge about how to obtain and use food resources
available in their community.
If recipients better understand the relationship between nutrition and health and the importance of regular meals
and have better access to healthful food through the use of community services, then recipients will use
available services and prepare healthful food more regularly.
If recipients use available services and prepare healthful food more regularly, then recipients will eat better and
have improved nutritional status.
Situation 2
3 If the residents have correct, balanced information and are effectively engaged,
5 If the residents make better-informed decisions,
6 then the controversial public issue will be resolved.
2 then the residents will have the best evidence, unbiased information, and have their voices heard.
4 then the residents can make better-informed decisions.
1 If we bring research and expert opinion to bear and facilitate public dialogue,

If we bring research and expert opinion to bear and facilitate public dialogue, then the residents will have the
best evidence, unbiased information, and have their voices heard.
If the residents have correct, balanced information and are effectively engaged, then the residents can make
better-informed decisions.
If the residents make better-informed decisions, then the controversial public issue will be resolved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 11
Lines and arrows in logic models

It is the linkages - not just what is labeled as input, output, or outcome - that give the
model its power. Lines and directional arrows depict these linkages, or your
theory of action. All lines and arrows may be included. Or, they may be abbreviated
and implied. The flows may be vertical and horizontal, one-direction or two-
directional, and show feedback loops. The feedback arrows often depict learning and
modifications made, or envisioned, during the course of program implementation.



Drawing the lines and arrows is often messy and time-consuming, but necessary.
Doing so helps make sure we've addressed all the logical connections. In the final
display, we may only include the primary linkages; otherwise, the logic model may
become too difficult to read.
The final outcome theoretically links back to the beginning to make a difference, an
impact, on the originating situation. The large feedback arrow at the top right of our
logic model is an attempt to illustrate this connection and the dynamics of
programming. Some people like to depict a logic model as a circle that explicitly
connects the end to the beginning. In actuality, program environments are dynamic
and situations change so the beginning rarely stays the same.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 12
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
About causation
The relation between mosquitos and mosquito bites
(Scriven, 1991: 77)
Cause: something that produces an effect, result, or consequence.
(American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd College Edition, 1991)
The idea of causation is central to the logic model. The logic model depicts a program's
assumed causal connections. Yet, cause-effect relationships are problematic in our world of
community programming. Experience shows us that:
1. In most all cases, programs have only a partial influence over results. External factors
beyond the program's control influence the flow of events. This applies particularly to
longer-term outcomes.
2. The myriad of factors that affect the development and implementation of community
initiatives make it difficult to tease out causal connections. Participants have their
own characteristics and are embedded in a web of influences that affect participant
outcomes (family relationships, experiences, economy, culture, etc.). The external
environment affects and is affected by the program. Many factors may come into play
before, during, and after program implementation in an almost constant dynamic of
influences.
3. Seldom is there one cause. There are more likely multiple cause-effect chains that
interact.
4. Short project time lines make it difficult to document the assumed causal connections.
5. Measuring causal relationships and controlling for contextual factors through
experimental or quasi-experimental designs is often not feasible and expensive.
6. Data collected through various methods - quantitative and qualitative - often show
different (and sometimes contradictory) causal associations. Seldom do we prove
that a particular outcome is the result of a particular intervention.
7. Causal relationships are rarely as simple and clear as the mosquito example above or
as the if-then relationships suggest. Rather, there are multiple and interacting
relationships that affect change, often functioning as feedback loops with the
possibility of delays (see Rogers, 2000; Funnell, 2000; and Williams, 2002).
Systems theory suggests a dynamic and circular approach to understanding causal
relationships rather than a uni-dimensional, linear approach. Logic models can be created to
depict these more iterative causal mechanisms and relationships by adding feedback loops
and two-way arrows, narrative explanations, or a matrix. Limitations are imposed by the
necessity of communicating on paper in a two-dimensional space.
Remember, the logic model is a model not reality. It depicts assumed causal connections,
not true cause-effect relationships. However, even simple models are very useful. They can
help clarify expected linkages, tease out underlying assumptions, focus on principles to test,
educate funders and policy makers, and move a program into action and learning.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 13
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

A bit more detail


Simplest form of logic model
Basic logic model
INPUTS

Program
investments
What we
invest
What we
do
Who we
reach
What results

INPUTS





Activities

OUTPUTS OUTCOMES

Participation


OUTPUTS



Short

SO WHAT??
What is the VALUE?

Medium


OUTCOMES

Long-
term


DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 14

University of Wisconsin-Extension Logic Model
2007 University of Wisconsin-Extension, Cooperative Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
Planning Implementation Evaluation

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 15
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Logic model components: Definitions
Even though programs are diverse, they all share common elements. Programs are
developed in response to a situation. Programs have INPUTS, OUTPUTS,
OUTCOMES. A logic model displays the relationships among these core elements
and brings attention to underlying assumptions set within the programs environment
of external factors.
SITUATION
The originating problem, or issue, set within a complex of sociopolitical,
environmental and economic circumstances. The situation is the beginning point of
logic model development.
INPUTS
What goes into the program: resources and contributions that are invested. Inputs
include such elements as staff, money, time, equipment, partnerships, and the
research base
OUTPUTS
What we do and whom we reach: activities, services, events, products and the people
reached. Outputs include such elements as workshops, conferences, counseling,
products produced and the individuals, clients, groups, families, and organizations
targeted to be reached by the activities.
OUTCOMES
What results: the value or changes for individuals, families, groups, agencies,
businesses, communities, and/or systems. Outcomes include short-term benefits such
as changes in awareness, knowledge, skills, attitudes, opinions and intent. Outcomes
include medium-term benefits such as changes in behaviors, decision-making and
actions. Outcomes include long-term benefits (often called impact) such as changes in
social, economic, civic, and environmental conditions.
ASSUMPTIONS
The beliefs we have about: the program, the people involved, and how we think the
program will work. Assumptions include our ideas about the problem or situation; the
way the program will operate; what the program expects to achieve; how the
participants learn and behave, their motivations, etc.; the resources and staff; the
external environment; the knowledge base; and the internal environment. Faulty
assumptions are often the reason for poor results.
EXTERNAL FACTORS
Aspects external to the program that influence the way the program operates, and are
influenced by the program. Dynamic systems interactions include the cultural milieu,
biophysical environment, economic structure, housing patterns, demographic make-
up, family circumstances, values, political environment, background and experiences
of participants, media, policies and priorities, etc. Elements that effect the program
over which there is little control.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 16
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
LOGIC MODEL WORKSHEET

INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Activities Participants Short Medium Long-term


DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 17
Short Term Medium Term Long Term
Outcomes Impact
What the ultimate
impact(s) is
What the medium
term changes are
What the short
term changes are
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Activities Participation
Outputs
Who we reach
LOGIC MODEL WORKSHEET
What we do




Inputs
What we invest












DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 18
Not how many worms...


Not how many worms
the bird feeds its young, but
how well the fledgling flies

(United Way of America, 1999)



2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 19
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Which are outcomes?
Nutrition Education Programs
___ (1) Older adults increased the amount of calcium-rich foods they eat
___ (2) A series of lessons on healthy eating was taught in collaboration with a drug treatment
program
___ (3) Participants serve more than one kind of vegetable to their families every day after
participating
___ (4) Participants report savings as a result of wiser spending at the grocery store
___ (5) 75 adults have consistently attended all the nutrition workshops
Food Safety Programs
___ (1) The ServSafe education program is working with 80% of all food service managers in
the state
___ (2) Food poisonings dropped from 677 in 1996 to 225 in 1997
___ (3) Food service workers reported increased knowledge of safe handling practices
___ (4) Food safety skills were taught to state fair food vendors and restaurant workers
___ (5) Food safety information in English and Spanish is available on the University web site
Small Business Development Programs
___ (1) The small business development network grew from 10 to 13 offices in two years
___ (2) Clients generated nearly $40 million in sales
___ (3) Clients received 12,138 hours of counseling in 1999
___ (4) 6,349 participants attended 380 seminars and workshops
___ (5) Clients created and retained 681 jobs
Youth Citizenship Programs
___ (1) 4-H groups in 45 counties participated in community service projects
___ (2) Teens volunteered in community service an average of 10 hours over the year
___ (3) Teens reported increased ability to identify and help solve a community need
___ (4) Teens feel more engaged in and responsible for their community
___ (5) A local industry contributed $1500 to the 4-H community service project
Quality Assurance
___ (1) Producers decreased their use of medications and made biosecurity improvements to
prevent health problems
___ (2) 724 adults and 1026 youth participated in training sessions
___ (3) Producers changed management practices because of what they learned
___ (4) Veterinarians co-taught the sessions
___ (5) Overall herd health increased reducing production costs
Adapted from United Way, Outcome Measurement, 1999
Answer key:
Nutrition: 1,3,4; Food safety: 2,3,; Small business: 2,5; Youth Citizenship: 3, 4; Quality Assurance: 1, 3, 5

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 20
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Pin the Card on the Logic Model
- Cookie baking Cards
Flour Baking soda Salt
Butter
Brown sugar
Vanilla
Sugar Eggs Nuts
Chocolate chips Cookie baker Bakers helper
Preheat oven
Grease cookie
sheet
Measure
ingredients
Sift together Stir ingredients
Drop by
spoonful
Bake dough
Put cookies on
plate
Hungry cookie
eaters
Hungry cookie
eaters like the
taste
Hungry cookie
eaters eat the
cookies
Satiated cookie
monsters
Happy baker Dirty kitchen
Bakers helper
opens a bakery


DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 21
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Preheat oven
Grease cookie
sheet
Hungry cookie
eaters eat the
cookies

Satiated
cookie monster
Measure
ingredients
Sift together

Hungry cookie
eaters like the taste
Happy baker
Stir ingredients
Hungry
cookie
eaters
Drop by
spoonful


Bake dough
Cookie baker
Bakers helper
Butter
Sugar
Eggs
Flour
Vanilla
Baking soda
Brown sugar
Salt
Nuts
Chocolate Chips
Put cookies on
plate


Dirty
kitchen
Bakers helper
decides to open
a bakery
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
SITUATION: Kids are hungry for chocolate chip cookies
Cookie baking logic model


DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 22
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Logic model lingo
1 Input 0 Cannot identify
2 Output: Activity, Participation
3 Outcome
a. Short - Learning
b. Medium - Action
c. Long-term Ultimate benefit
Place a number code, from above, on each line. Be prepared to explain your choice.
_____ a. Teens learned leadership skills
_____ b. A new curriculum was developed
_____ c. Students reported increased confidence in negotiation skills
_____ d. Training programs included seminars and workshops
_____ e. Parents from around the state attended
_____ f. Operators applied their new skills on the job
_____ g. Two agencies partnered to design the program
_____ h. Volunteers provided over 300 hours of support to the project
_____ i. Teen mentors were trained
_____ j. Owners learned how to develop a woodland management plan
_____ k. Sessions were held in 10 locations
_____ l. Reported cases of abuse declined
_____ m. Food safety skills were taught to food vendors and restaurant workers
_____ n. Books were distributed to children
_____ o. Parents increased their employment skills
_____ p. Increased numbers of high school students graduate
_____ q. We helped the community assess the needs of families
______ r. Specialists educated owners about effective production methods
_____ s. Youth serving agencies increased their collaboration
_____ t. Teens established a teen court and hear cases monthly
_____ u. 3 two-day workshops were conducted in each region
_____ v. Newsletters are distributed in three languages
_____ w. 30 listeners per week tune into the radio broadcast
_____ x. Teens learned to counsel other teens on tobacco prevention
_____ y. Town enacted a policy for youth curfew
_____ z. More kids walk to school

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 23
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Logic model lingo (answers)
1 Input 0 Cannot identify
2 Output: Activity, Participation
3 Outcome
a. Short - Learning
b. Medium - Action
c. Long-term Ultimate benefit
Place a number code, from above, on each line. Be prepared to explain your choice.
3a a. Teens learned new leadership skills
2 b. A new curriculum was developed
3a c. Students increased their confidence in negotiation skills
2 d. Training programs included seminars and workshops
2 e. Parents from around the state attended
3b f. Operators applied new skills on the job
1 g. Two agencies partnered to design the program
1 h. Volunteers provided over 300 hours of support to the project
2 i. Teen mentors were trained
3a j. Owners learned how to develop a woodland management plan
2 k. Sessions were held in 10 locations
3c l. Reported cases of abuse declined
2 m. Food safety skills were taught to food vendors and restaurant workers
2 n. Books were distributed to children
3a o. Parents increased their employment skills
3c p. Greater percentage of high school students graduate
2 q. We helped the community assess the needs of families
2 r. Specialists educated business owners about effective production methods
and business management
3b s. Youth serving agencies have increased their collaboration
3b t. Teens established a teen court and hear cases monthly
2 u. 3 two-day workshops were conducted in each region
2 v. Newsletters are distributed in three languages
2 w. 300 listeners per week tune into the radio broadcast
3a x. Teens learned to counsel other teens on tobacco prevention
3b y. Town enacted a policy for youth curfew
3c z. More kids walk to school

Note: Several of the above are debatable given the program goal that is assumed.
Participants should be able to explain, defend their choice. To test outcomes, ask so
what?

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 24
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Getting to know the language
Read the situation, then consider the list of program components. Determine whether each component
is an input, output, outcome, assumption, or external factor, and check the corresponding box.
Situation: Agricultural runoff is one of the biggest contributors to non-point source water pollution.
Cows on dairy farms produce large quantities of manure. In Why County, 75 percent of dairy farmers
spread manure as fertilizer on fields to increase yields and meet the nitrogen needs of crops.
Phosphorus is added as a nutritional supplement to animal diet to maximize milk production. The
phosphorus ends up in the manure and eventually in the water supply.
Program Components
I
n
p
u
t

O
u
t
p
u
t
-
-

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

O
u
t
p
u
t
-
-

P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
-
-

S
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
-
-

M
e
d
i
u
m
-
t
e
r
m

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
-
-

L
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

E
x
t
e
r
n
a
l


f
a
c
t
o
r

Reducing phosphorus saves time and money
Staff
Improved water quality
Participants increased knowledge of tracking
phosphorus levels

Participants increased knowledge of link between
cattle diet and water quality

Educational workshops
Low phosphorus feed is readily available
Participants make appropriate adjustments to cattle
feed

Participants set up record-keeping systems to track
phosphorus

Other sources reinforce use of high phosphorus
diets

Participants increase understanding of
recommended phosphorus levels

Participants monitor phosphorus levels in feed,
manure, and soil

Money
Participants save on feed costs
On-farm visits
Research
Participants reduce phosphorus use
Partners
Farmers at risk of overfeeding phosphorus
Government programs regulate and offer incentives
Materials

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 25
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Suggested answers for getting to know the language
Program Components
I
n
p
u
t

O
u
t
p
u
t
-
-

A
c
t
i
v
i
t
y

O
u
t
p
u
t
-
-

P
a
r
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
i
o
n

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
-
-

S
h
o
r
t
-
t
e
r
m

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
-
-

M
e
d
i
u
m
-
t
e
r
m

O
u
t
c
o
m
e
-
-

L
o
n
g
-
t
e
r
m

A
s
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n

E
x
t
e
r
n
a
l


f
a
c
t
o
r

Reducing phosphorus saves time and money
Staff

Improved water quality
Participants increased knowledge of tracking
phosphorus levels

Participants increased knowledge of link between
cattle diet and water quality

Educational workshops
Low phosphorus feed is readily available
Participants make appropriate adjustments to cattle
feed

Participants set up record-keeping systems to track
phosphorus

Other sources reinforce use of high phosphorus
diets

Participants increase understanding of
recommended phosphorus levels

Participants monitor phosphorus levels in feed,
manure, and soil

Money

Participants save on feed costs
On-farm visits
Research

Participants reduce phosphorus use
Partners

Farmers at risk of overfeeding phosphorus
Government programs regulate and offer incentives
Materials



DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 26
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
What does the statement
really convey?
Program Statement
Input
Output
Outcome
Economic
development
After a series of six seminars on starting a small business,
participants opened 10 businesses, providing employment
opportunities for 27 county citizens.

Comprehensive
planning
Evaluations showed that participants gained a better
understanding of Smart Growth and comprehensive planning,
and were more confident in their ability to make good decisions
about how to approach comprehensive planning. The program
helped to strengthen ties between Extension, Regional Planning
and County Zoning offices.

Food security Over 50 community officials and interested citizens attended a
poverty simulation in J une that focused on specific County data
surrounding the issue of poverty and food security.

Land use and
agriculture
1400 farmers were provided agricultural land use statistics by
township. 35 elected county officials received agricultural land
use statistics by township.

Basin initiative Evaluations at the end of the drinking water testing program
showed 93% of respondents agreed that the program increased
their understanding of groundwater and the potential for
groundwater contamination. Intended actions as a result of the
program included: future water testing, drilling a new well,
checking into well abandonment, and updating teaching
materials for a high school class.

Developing
leaders and
organizations
Three agencies partnered to design and deliver a program.
Tobacco control Training and technical assistance on the logic model are being
provided to the Division of Public Health and the Wisconsin
Tobacco Control Board who are adapting the model for their
long-term planning and evaluation initiatives.

Strategic planning Faculty members presented information regarding Strategic
Planning Training at a national Community Resource and
Economic Development Conference in Orlando, Florida. The
juried presentation was made to Community Development
Educators from across the country.

Health and
physical activity
After nearly 2 years of planning by multiple agencies, the 19
mile bike/walking trail was unveiled amid enthusiastic applause
during the mid-summer community festival.

Environment Two hundred and five people attended the Land Stewardship
Conference, including eight children who took part in a new
Kids Corner educational offering.

Parenting
education

Sixty-five percent of families that participated in the Wisconsin
Bookworms program used recommend activities with their child
at home; 81% read to their children more often and 50% visited
the public library more often.


DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 27
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Suggested answers for What does the statement really convey?
Program Statement
Input
Output
Outcome
Economic
development
After a series of six seminars on starting a small business,
participants opened 10 businesses, providing employment
opportunities for 27 county citizens.

Outcome
Comprehensive
planning
Evaluations showed that participants gained a better
understanding of Smart Growth and comprehensive planning,
and were more confident in their ability to make good decisions
about how to approach comprehensive planning. The program
helped to strengthen ties between Extension, Regional Planning
and County Zoning offices.

Outcome
Food security Over 50 community officials and interested citizens attended a
poverty simulation in J une that focused on specific County data
surrounding the issue of poverty and food security.

Output
Land use and
agriculture
1400 farmers were provided agricultural land use statistics by
township. 35 elected county officials received agricultural land
use statistics by township..

Output
Basin initiative Evaluations at the end of the drinking water testing program
showed 93% of the respondents agreed that the program
increased their understanding of groundwater and the potential
for groundwater contamination. Intended actions as a result of
the program included: future water testing, drilling a new well,
checking into well abandonment, and updating teaching
materials for a high school class.

Outcome
Developing
leaders and
organizations
Three agencies partnered to design and deliver a program.
Output
Tobacco control Training and technical assistance on the logic model are being
provided to the Division of Public Health and the Wisconsin
Tobacco Control Board who are adapting the model for their
long-term planning and evaluation initiatives.

Output/
Outcome
Strategic planning Faculty members presented information regarding Strategic
Planning Training at a national Community Resource and
Economic Development Conference in Orlando, Florida. The
juried presentation was made to Community Development
Educators from across the country.


Output
Health and
physical activity
After nearly 2 years of planning by multiple agencies, the 19
mile bike/walking trail was unveiled amid enthusiastic applause
during the mid-summer community festival.

Output
Environment Two hundred and five people attended the Land Stewardship
Conference, including eight children who took part in a new
Kids Corner educational offering.

Output
Parenting
education

Sixty-five percent of families that participated in the Wisconsin
Bookworms program used recommend activities with their child
at home; 81% read to their children more often, and 50% visited
the public library more often.

Outcome

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 28
Logic models come in various
shapes and sizes
Logic models come in as many sizes and shapes as the programs they represent
[W. F. Kellogg Foundation, 2001, p. 7]

Table format. Sometimes a logic model is built as a table with
lists of items in the input, output, and outcome columns. The
model may include limited directional arrows to illustrate
connections and relationships. It may include numbered lists
to show order within a column or to indicate rows of
connections across the columns.
Flow-chart format. These logic models use boxes, with lines
and arrows connecting the boxes to illustrate the causal
linkages. Boxes may be numbered.
Some logic models use circles and other shapes. We've had
community groups use metaphors such as oysters, trees,
footprints, and an octopus to depict their programs. Individual
cultural groups may prefer other forms and presentations such
as circles and storyboarding.
Some logic models are simple; others are complex. Some are
vertical; others are horizontal
Some logic models are abbreviated and show only key
components to be highlighted; some don't include
assumptions, situation, or external factors; some only include
outputs and outcomes.
Remember that the logic model is just a MODEL. In the effort to simplify and communicate using
one page, we often produce logic models that abbreviate program complexities. Most important is
that the logic model be clear and understandable to those who will use it. To capture the program
theory, the logic model needs to show the logical linkages between and among elements.
Think about who will use the logic model--to/with whom the logic model is to communicate:
you or your staff, funders, administrators, elected officials.
Settle on a graphic representation that best fits the user and use.
Recognize that deciding on a single image that displays the program theory is often the most
difficult part of developing and using a logic model.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 29
Two common logic model variations

The UWEX logic model:


INPUTS Medium-term
OUTCOMES
OUTPUTS Short-term
OUTCOMES
Long-term
OUTCOMES
Participation Activities

The UWEX model divides OUTPUTS into activities and participation. See the
online logic model course for explanation: http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse



United Way and other agencies model
Another very common model separates activities and output and may not include
participation. This is the model typically used by United Way, Center for Disease
Control and Prevention and many other agencies. It looks like the following:


Short-term
OUTCOMES
Medium-term
OUTCOMES
OUTPUTS ACTIVITIES
INPUTS
Long-term
OUTCOMES

In this model, outputs are considered a product of the activity. For example, an
activity might be deliver services and the output would be #of services actually
delivered. See the W.K. Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide,
page 8, for explanation. In the UWEX logic model, such products are included as
indicators of accomplishments and are measured in the evaluation plan.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 30
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Comparing
table and flowchart formats
Logic Model Table format


















Logic Model Flowchart format









INPUT
What we
invest
Inputs
OUTPUTS


OUTCOMES





Outputs
Activities Participation
Outcomes Impact
Short Term Medium Term Long
T
What we
do
Who we
reach
What the
short-term
changes
are
What the
medium
term
changes
are
What the
ultimate
impact(s)
is

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 31
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Building Native Communities:
Financial skills for families
Situation:
Many tribal members lack basic financial management knowledge and skills and do not use their local financial institutions that would
help them manage their financial resources.
What will result OUTCOMES What we
invest
What we will do Who we reach
Short-term Medium-term Long-term; final


Fannie
Mae/First
Nations
Curriculum


Ext. Staff


Credit Union


Grant $$



Federal funds

Test, adapt curriculum

Partner with Credit Union

Deliver six sessions
1. Building a healthy
economy
2. Spending plans
3. Checking/savings
accounts
4. Credit and credit
reports
5. Accessing credit
6. Know your local credit
union

Do in-home counseling

Build a resource library

Disseminate information






Tribal families




Casino employees




Credit union
referrals










Increased knowledge of
family financial basics

Increased knowledge of
checking and savings
accounts and how to use

Increased understanding of
credit and credit reports

Increased ability to fill out a
credit application

Increased ability to create a
spending plan

Increased confidence in local
credit union


Set financial goals

Use savings and
spending plan


Maintain good credit
standing

Make informed
financial decisions

Use credit union
(financial institution)





Tribal families
wisely manage their
financial resources



DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 32
Multiple chains
and directional flows
Our programs are seldom simple, single chains of if-then relationships. More likely,
there are several chains of connections, and vertical as well as horizontal flows of
action. It may be more realistic to think of a program as a spiral involving various
feedback loops. For example, a policy change might lead back to changes in
knowledge and attitudes that, in turn, lead forward to behavioral change. Perhaps, as
we implement a program, we find that the targeted numbers of participants are not
attending, and we use that information to redesign our strategy or to inform the next
planning cycle. Or, our program may cause a change in an external factor that, in
turn, feeds back and leads to a change in the program direction.

In this logic model, you see a number of rows (or chains) that depict various
sequences of events. You also see arrows showing both vertical and horizontal flows
and feedback loops. The several rows or chains might represent different activities or
target audiences and the sequence of events pertaining to each. The graphic also
shows double-headed arrows and feedback loops. Feedback loops are common in
many programs. As we learn, we feed that information back into the program and
modify it. Or, something may happen that causes the program to redirect. Often
program logic models have:
Several branches (Funnell, 2000) or lines of connections (chains, causal models).
Multiple lines or chains, and arrows.
Feedback loops.
Several or various theories of change (see Weiss, 1998 and Rogers, 2000).
Alternative pathways of change.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 33
Multiple Logic Models
Multi-level
Multiple logic models may be needed to clarify various levels, issues or goals of a
broad single system. A national initiative, for example, might include the national
(most macro) level, the state level, and the community level. Each level is depicted
with a logic model in a series of hierarchically linked models. The level of detail may
become more specific as the focus narrows.
These nested logic models (Wauchope, 2001; Hernandez, 2000) depict the hierarchy of
various levels and how they connect within a single system. Each logic model is built
with reference to the level above (or below) and in relation to the organization's or
program's overall mission. One example of the use of multi-level logic models is in a
national community nutrition education effort with disparate programs at multiple
sites across the United States. The establishment of consistency of purpose and
method is essential to the successful implementation of an accountability system.

Multi-component
In a complex, multifaceted initiative several models might depict the various
programmatic components, goals, sites, or target populations. Each of these sub
models and its expected outcomes links to the overall logic model to ensure that
programmatic outcomes are achieved. For example, for a community-wide nutrition
education program, there may be one program logic model that provides the big
picture of the total program and then separate, sub logic models for the specific
programs, components, or target populations within the community-wide effort.

2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 34
Multi-Level System

This first logic model Level
One- displays a global picture
of a comprehensive,
statewide tobacco control
initiative comprised of nine
major programs. Each of the
nine can be detailed in its
own logic model as shown
below for one major program.
The second logic model -
Level Two - highlights the
community level program and
shows this community
program is comprised of four
components. The fourth
component, Develop
Coalitions, undergirds and
supports the other three.
Each component can be
detailed in its own logic model
as shown below for the
Promote smoke-free policy
change initiative.
The third logic model -
Level Three - depicts one
aspect of the Community
programs. It shows the
actual program delivered. At
this level we have enough
detail to create an
implementation and
evaluation plan.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 35
Multi-component

This logic model provides greater detail about the theory of change that underlies the parent
education component of the overall initiative.
This logic model displays a comprehensive parent support initiative comprised of 6
component parts. To provide more detail, each component can be blown up to depict the
actual program delivered. For example, the parent education component is magnified in the
following logic model.
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 36
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Getting started with
logic model development
Step 1: Purpose and use
What is the purpose of your logic model? Why are you developing a logic
model?
Who will use it? How?
Step 2: Involve others.
Who should participate in creating the logic model?
Who should facilitate the logic model development process?
Step 3: Set the boundaries for the logic model.
What will the logic model depict: a single, focused endeavor; a comprehensive
initiative; a group process; or organizational endeavor?
What level of detail is needed?
Step 4: Understand the situation.
What is the situation (problem) giving rise to this program?
Step 5: Explore the research, knowledge base.
What do we know about the problem/audience/context? What are the relevant
barriers and facilitators?

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 37
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Ideas for facilitating
logic model development
Because much of the value of logic modeling is in creating a shared understanding of
a program, it is advisable to create a logic model using a group process. Broader
participation in logic model development results in a higher quality and more useful
logic model.
Think about time that will be devoted to the process, number of meetings, size and
composition of the group. Create a plan for developing the logic model with roles,
responsibilities, timeline, and resources needed.
Any of the following options can be broken into smaller segments and accomplished
over several meetings.
Option#1
Cover wall with paper. Write the long-term impact on the far right side (or top, or
bottom).
Identify resources, activities, participants, outcomes. Individuals or groups of two
might write each of these on individual post-it notes one item per post-it note.
Ensure that outcomes are written as outcome statements (see Appendix A) and that
participants are specified.
Post the notes on the wall; working together to position all the post-it notes in a
logical order. Check the if-then relationships. Identify gaps, missing links in the
causal chain. Add more post-it notes as necessary. Remove those that are duplicates
or fail to fit in the order place these in a parking lot for later consideration.
Use markers to draw arrows connecting the post-it notes.
Record and make copies for all.
Plan another meeting to review and refine the logic model.
Option #2
Divide people working on the same program into smaller subgroups.
Each subgroup createsa logic model of the program, using techniques described
above
Sub-groups bring their individual models back to the whole group to compare and
discuss.
The whole group works together to merge and create one logic model for the
program.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 38
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Option #3
1
st
meeting. Purpose: to create a chain of outcomes for the program
Invite members to a group meeting. Ask them to bring a list of program outcomes
each outcome written on a 3x5 index card (one outcome per card). Instruct members
how to write the outcome as an outcome statement that designates WHO is
intended to change and the CHANGE expected (e.g., participating teens will increase
their money management skills).
Cover wall with paper. On the right side, at the top, write LONG-TERM
OUTCOME. On the left side, at the top, write SHORT-TERM OUTCOME.
Ask each individual to tape his/her index card along a continuum from shorter to
longer-term outcomes.
Members should work together and line up their outcomes. Encourage members to
cluster their outcomes by participant (target group) category with a chain of outcomes
for each target group. You may wish to write the names of the various target
audiences in a column on the left side.
Facilitate discussion and consensus about what goes where. Identify gaps and add
more cards as needed. Remove duplicates or any that fail to fit in the sequence
place them in a parking lot for later consideration.
Discuss and list all assumptions underlying the chain of outcomes as depicted.
Discuss and list all external factors that may influence or be influenced by the
outcomes as depicted.
Finalize the chain of outcomes and identify gaps, omissions, concerns, issues. Check
the holding lot and include or reject items.
Copy and send to each member. Schedule next meeting.
2
nd
meeting. Purpose: to link resources and activities to the identified outcomes
Review and refine the chain of outcomes. Move to ACTIVITIES and
RESOURCES. Brainstorm:
o What do we do (the activities) and who do we reach (participation)?
o What resources do we invest?
Volunteers record each item on a separate index card as the group brainstorms.
Place more paper to the left of the chain of outcomes. People place the index cards
on the paper, connecting the resources and activities to the chain of outcomes.
Draw lines and arrows connecting the various items on the logic model.
Discuss and refine until members are satisfied with the composite logic model
Some may want to spend more time than others trying to create the perfect logic
model. They might be encouraged to work on the logic model separately.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 39
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Option #4
Use web-based systems, email, or other distance communication methods to create a
logic model for a geographically dispersed group.
Adapt the preceding ideas to facilitate discussion and sharing of logic model drafts
using distance communication.
Option # 5
Subcommittee creates the logic model
Certain individuals may have experience, interest, or particular expertise in logic
model development. This individual or small group may be in charge of drafting
the logic model. (You may hire an external consultant to do this)
They create a draft for group review and input.
They continue to refine and share the logic model with the full group until the logic
model reflects the groups description of the program
TIPS:
Work in small, interactive group settings that are collaborative and sensitive.
Use everyday, culturally appropriate, examples to introduce ideas.
Do not fixate on the use of difficult terminology. Use words and terms that make the
most sense. Sometimes, simply linking activities to a range of results, which in turn
lead to other results, may be more appropriate (without using the language of inputs-
outputs-outcomes).
Build on a sense of shared vision and participatory decision-making. If this is lacking,
the value and use of logic model is likely to be minimal.
Create a draft model; revise it; continue to refine it over time.
Identify a mentor or coach for each logic model developed who questions the
strengths and weaknesses of the underlying program theory and assumptions.
Recognize that logic model development is not quick or easy
Encourage participants to post their logic models where they can be seen and used
Provide for ongoing technical assistance and support

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 40
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Where to start
in creating a logic model?
Reference: online course http://www.uwex.edu/ces/lmcourse
Always start with the situational analysis and identification of the long-term desired end
result the goal of your program.

Approach 1: Work backwards
1. Start at the end. What is your long-term desired outcome?
2. Move backwards and identify the chain of outcomes that lead to the final, long-term
result.
3. Move backwards: WHO must participate who is expected to achieve the expected
outcomes?
4. Move backwards: What ACTIVITIES must be provided/produced/completed so that
the identified individuals (groups) will achieve the desired outcomes? If necessary,
cluster activities into strategies (activities that fit together conceptually) such as
training, media work, coalition development activities.
5. Move backwards: What RESOURCES are needed to make sure the activities are
accomplished?

Approach 2: Focus on activities
Program staff and stakeholders are often most comfortable talking about what they
DO in the program or intend to dothe program ACTIVITIES.
Write down all activities involved in (or planned for) the program workshops,
services, products, etc.
For each activity, complete one of the following statements, continue repeating and
completing the statement until your reach a logical end point.
We do __________, SO THAT __________ will occur.
IF we do__________, THEN__________ will occur.
You can also use the question But, why? For example: But, why do I advertise the
workshop? Answer: so that people will attend. But, why? Answer: so that people will
be increase their knowledge aboutetc.
Continue until a chain of connections is created that links program activities to
desired end results.
List the resources needed to ensure the chain of connections is achieved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 41
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Program element cards
Pregnant teens program

Program manager, registered
nurse, 3 counselors
Agency resources are allocated to
the teen parent program
Small community grant
Manuals, videos and other
teaching tools
Agency and high schools identify
pregnant teens to participate in
the program
Parenting curriculum for teens is
developed
Parenting classes are held in high
school twice a week for 1 hr for
teen moms from 3 months prior to
one year after delivery
Teens attend parenting classes
regularly
Teens increase knowledge of
prenatal nutrition and health
Teens follow prenatal nutrition
and health guidelines
Teens provide proper care,
feeding and social interaction to
babies
Teens deliver healthy babies
Teens increase knowledge of
early childhood development and
baby care
Teens babies achieve milestones
for motor, verbal and social
development


DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 42
Suggested Placement of Elements Pregnant teens program
























Agency
resources
are
allocated to
the teen
parent
program
Program
manager,
registered
nurse, 3
counselors
Small
community
grant
Agency
and high
schools
identify
pregnant
teens to
participate
in the
program
Teens
increase
knowledge
of prenatal
nutrition
and health
Parenting
curriculum
for teens is
developed
Teens
attend
parenting
classes
regularly
Teens
follow
prenatal
nutrition
and health
guidelines
Teens
provide
proper
care,
feeding and
social
interaction
to babies
Teens
deliver
healthy
babies
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Manuals,
videos and
other
teaching
tools
Teens
increase
knowledge
of early
childhood
develop-
ment and
baby care
LONG-TERM SHORT MEDIUM
Teens
babies
achieve
milestones
for motor,
verbal and
social
develop-
ment
Parenting
classes are
held in
high school
twice a
week for 1
hr for teen
moms from
3 months
prior to one
year after
delivery
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 43
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Program Cards Parenting education program

Staff Parents of 3-10 year olds attend
Money
Parents increase knowledge of child
development
Partners
Parents better understand their own
parenting styles and childs needs
Research
Parents gain skills and confidence in
effective parenting practices
Assess parent education programs
Parents identify appropriate actions
to take
Design-deliver evidence-based
program of 8 sessions
Parents use effective parenting
practices
Facilitate parent support groups Improved child-parent relations


DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 44
Suggested Placement of Elements Parent Education program


2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 45
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Program Cards Hmong Literacy Program
Three credit course in Hmong
Language designed as part of ESL
sequence
K-12 teachers seeking DPI
certification attend course
Course offered at convenient times
and locations around the state
Improved English language of
Hmong elementary school students
Improved educational performance
of Hmong students
Financing from 104generated tuition
Program Manager and Project
Assistant manage the program
Improved communications between
teachers, students, parents,
community
Ad hoc faculty member and
Chairperson of Department teach
course
Teachers greet parents in Hmong
Teachers use Hmong in classroom
Teachers incorporate aspects of
Hmong culture in teaching
Teachers increase knowledge in
structure and grammar of Hmong
language
Teachers incorporate knowledge of
Hmong language into the way they
teach English
Teachers learn Hmong greetings and
basic conversation
Teachers gain understanding of
differences between languages and
cultures

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 46
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Suggested Placement of Elements Hmong literacy program

Ad hoc
faculty
member and
chairperson
of department
teach course
Program
manager and
project
assistant
manage the
program
Financing
from 104
generated
tuition
3 credit
course in
Hmong
language
designed as
part of ESL
sequence
Teachers
increase
knowledge in
structure and
grammar of
Hmong
language
Course
offered at
convenient
times and
locations
around the
state
K-12 teachers
seeking DPI
certification
attend course
Teachers
learn Hmong
greetings and
basic
conversation
Teachers gain
understanding
of differences
between
languages
and cultures
Teachers
incorporate
knowledge of
Hmong
language into
way they
teach English
Teachers use
Hmong in
classroom
Teachers
greet parents
in Hmong
Teachers
incorporate
aspects of
Hmong
culture in
teaching
Improved
educational
performance
of Hmong
students
Improved
communi-
cations
between
teachers,
students,
parents,
community
OUTCOMES
Improved
English
language
skills of
Hmong
students
INPUTS OUTPUTS

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 47
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Logic model layout

INPUTS OUTPUTS
OUTCOMES
Parent Education Program example
Situation: During a county needs assessment, a majority of parents reported that they were having difficulty parenting, felt stressed
and were unhappy with their parent-child relationships.
Reduced
stress
Improved
child-
parent
relations

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 48
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Community collaborative case example
A community collaborative, including the local school district, Extension, and the
local UW-system campus has received a grant for a project titled A Day at the
University. The project is a post-secondary education day for Hispanic students
grades 7-8 held on the local UW campus. The school district will release the students
from school to attend the day long event which will include workshops, a student
panel, lunch, and an informance. Students will be given an assignment to be shared
in their schools reflecting the knowledge gained during their Day at the University.
Objectives for the day are: the students will gain an understanding that college is a
possibility for them through advanced planning and wise choices; they will be able to
explain basic types of financial aid and how to qualify; they will know some key
resources available to help them as they move through high school; and they will
meet several successful Hispanic community leaders who are college graduates.
Create a logic model based on this description
Write down questions that youd ask the project staff to further clarify the projects
theory of change.

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 49
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Logic Model Review Worksheet
Inputs
Are all the major resources listed such as:
Service providers, e.g., staff, volunteers
Support from key groups or organizations
Funding sources, e.g., private or public funding, donations, fee for service
Research base
Do the resources seem comprehensive?
Do the inputs seem to match the program?

Comments: _________________________________________



Activities
Are all the major activities listed that comprise the program, e.g., outreach, counseling, case
management, meal service, home visiting, training workshops, information and referral, small
group sessions?
Is it clear what the program will actually do?
Do the activities seem sufficient?

Comments: _________________________________________



Participation
Is it clear who the activities are to reach and benefit? (e.g., youth ages 6-11)
Are all primary audiences included?
Are the mix and intensity of activities appropriate for the type of clients/participants? (e.g.,
greater intensity for higher-risk populations than for lower-risk ones)

Comments: _________________________________________




DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 50
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Outcomes
Is each outcome truly an outcome?
Are the outcomes written as change statements? Will things increase, decrease or stay the same?
Are the outcomes linked as progressive steps towards a long-term goal?
Are the outcomes meaningful and relevant?
Are the outcomes realistic and attainable?

Comments: _________________________________________



Overall Review Questions
Do the inputs, outputs, and outcomes link together in a sequence to achieve the desired result? Is
the logic model truly logical?
Do the steps that turn inputs into outputs into outcomes seem sensible and logical?
Can the program, as described in this logic model, be implemented with available resources? Is
what you intend to do possible, given your resources? If not, what will be done?
What might be unintended or negative outcomes?
Does the one-page graphic communicate well?

Comments: _________________________________________




DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 51
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
How Good Is Your Logic Model?
Ask yourself:
Is each listed outcome truly an 'outcome'? Does the logic model clearly separate
outcomes from outputs, or are the distinctions blurred?
Does the highest-level outcome represent a meaningful benefit of value to the public?
Does it have inherent value? Can it be associated with the program?
Is the model truly logical? Do the relationships among the program elements make
sense? Are the casual relationships supported? Three ways to check:
Starting at inputs, ask why? at each level: why do we need these inputs? Why do
we need to conduct these activities?
Starting at the impact level, and working backward, ask how? How are we going to
produce these outcomes? The items immediately preceding an outcome should show
how.
Sometimes components are necessary but not sufficient. Ask yourself, What else?
For example, achieving healthy one-year-olds requires not only achieving a healthy
birth but also achieving proper care during the baby's first year. Asking 'what else?'
helps spot leaps of faith.
Are the resources realistic? Is what you intend to do even possible given your
resources?
How valid are the assumptions? Are they based on experience and research, or are
they best guesses?
Does the logic model reflect the opinions and support of key stakeholders? Were any
stakeholders left out?
Adapted from Mike Hendricks, EVALTALK, on-line, 7/9/98; Freddolino, P. 1998, Michigan Safe and Drug-
Free Schools and Communities; Evaluation Training Workshop, Phase 1; Michigan Department of
Community Health.

What do you (and others)
want to know about this program?

Assess
parent ed
programs
Design-
deliver
evidence-
based
program
of 8
sessions
Parents
increase
knowledge of
child dev
Parents
of 3-10
year
olds
attend
Facilitate
support
groups
Parents better
understanding
their own
parenting style
Parents use
effective
parenting
practices
Improved
child-
parent
relations
Parents
identify
appropriate
actions to
take
Reduced
stress
Parents gain
skills in new
ways to
parent
Staff
Money
Partners
Research
INPUTS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Strong
families
Parents gain
confidence in
their abilities
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 52
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.

Parent education example: Questions


Staff
Money
Partners
Parents
increase
knowledge of
child dev.
Parents better
understand
their own
parenting
style
Parents use
effective
parenting
practices
Improved
child-parent
relations
Research
Facilitate
support
groups
Parents gain
skills in
effective
parenting
practices
Parents
identify
appropriate
actions to
take
To what
extent are
relations
improved?
What else
happened?
To what
extent did
behaviors
change? For
whom? Why?
What else
happened?
To what
extent did
knowledge
and skills
increase? For
whom? Why?
What else
happened?
Who/how many
attended/did not
attend? Did they
attend all
sessions/support
activities? Were
they satisfied
why/why not?
What is quality
of curriculum?
How many
sessions were
held? What is
quality of
delivery?
#, quality of
support groups?
What
amount of
$ and time
were
invested?
Deliver
series of 8
interactive
sessions
Develop
parent ed
curriculum
What do you want to know?
DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 53

Parents
of 3-10
year olds

Whatintheprogramcontext
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
andexternalenvironmentaffectedoperationsand
outcomes?Whichofourassumptionsarecorrect?Incorrect?

Logic model and common types of evaluation

DEVELOPING A LOGIC MODEL: TEACHING AND TRAINING GUIDE 2/29/2008 HANDOUT 54
Needs/asset
assessment:
Whatarethe
characteristics,needs,
prioritiesoftarget
population?
Whatarepotential
barriers/facilitators?
Whatismost
appropriatetodo?
Process
evaluation:
Howisprogram
implemented?
Areactivitiesdelivered
asintended?Fidelityof
implementation?
Areparticipantsbeing
reachedasintended?
Whatareparticipant
reactions?
Outcome
evaluation:
Towhatextentare
desiredchanges
occurring?Goalsmet?
Whoisbenefiting/not
benefiting?How?
Whatseemstowork?Not
work?
Whatareunintended
outcomes?
Impact
evaluation:
Towhatextentcan
changesbeattributed
totheprogram?
Whataretheneteffects?
Whatarefinal
consequences?
Isprogramworth
resourcesitcosts?
Types of evaluation
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
1
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
2
In its simplest form, alogic model is agraphic representation that shows thelogical p , g g p p g
relationships between:
Theresources that go into theprogram INPUTS
Theactivities theprogramundertakes OUTPUTS
Thechanges or benefits that result OUTCOMES
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
3
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
4
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
5
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
6
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
7
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
8
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
9
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
10
Lets not think that this Logic Model is brand new. Actually, theconcepts have
been around sincethelate1960s in thewritings of Suchman, 1967 and Wholeys
evaluability assessment model.
It hascometotheforefront again andisbeingdevelopedandappliedinavarietyof It has cometo theforefront again, and is being developed and applied in avariety of
settings as aresult of avariety of factors:
Privatesector: part of total quality management and performancemeasurement
movement
Public sector, theGPRA has moved all federal agencies to focus on results and link
investments to results, not just activities.
Non-profit sector is concerned with improving programs to producevalued impacts
with theUnited Way being afrontrunner in outcomemeasurement using thelogic
model.
International programs. Theplayers in theinternational arenafor along timehave
used variations of alogic model. TheLog Frameof theUS Agency for International
Development of the1980s is ahistorical precedent to thecurrent logic modeling
discourse.
And, professional evaluators haveplayed aprominent rolein using and developing
thelogic model. This is why it is often called an evaluation framework. This is a
result of evaluators being asked to evaluateimpact and finding, too often, that
programs didnt exist, or werent being implemented in away that would achieve
theexpected impact. Consequently, evaluators began working with programmers to
lay out thelogic of programs. Weseetheoutgrowth particularly in Chens theory-
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
11
y g p g g p y y
driven evaluation (1990) and Weiss (1997) theory-based evaluation.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
12
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
13
Lets takeasimpleexample onethat wecan all relateto.
How many of us havehad aheadacheat onetimeor another? (headache
SITUATION)
What do wedo? Our experiencemay bethat certain pills help
So, weneed to get thepills (INPUTS),
Then wetakethepills (OUTPUTS)
As aconsequence, our headachegoes away and wefeel better. (OUTCOME)
Number of embedded assumption: assumes that wecan find/get theneeded pills;
that wetakethepills as prescribed; that thepills lead to improvement not a
stomachacheor other negativesideeffect. All programshavesuchassumptions stomach acheor other negativesideeffect. All programs havesuch assumptions
often thebasis for failureor less than expected results
But, you can seethelogic of thediagramand theend results theimpact that is
expected. What really matters isnt whether weget thepills and takethepills, but
whether wefeel better as aresult
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
14
In this case, wearehungry.
Our experiencetells us that if wecould just get somefood
Then, eat thefood;
Then wewill not longer behungry and wewill feel better.
Thereal thing is that wewant to feel better- thedesired end result.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
15
In this example, it is summertimeand wewant to takeafamily vacation.
Wehavehad experienceand know (our own personal research tells us) that camping
is something weall enjoy doing together. So, in order to takeacamping trip, we
need..
If this thenthat If this, then that.
Logic models involveamental process. A logic model shows theseries of
connections and logical linkages that is expected to result in achievement of our
goal.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
16
Assumptions are the beliefs, principles, ideas we have about the program, the people
involved and the way we think the program will operate. Assumptions underlie
all that we do. Examples of assumptions include:
Community coalitions are an effective strategy for addressing community
problems
Our partners will participate actively in program delivery
The funding will be adequate and available when needed The funding will be adequate and available when needed
The target participant want to learn and change their behaviors
In a2004 study by Kaplan and Garrett, assessing underlying assumptions was
found to beoneof themost important parts of logic modeling but it is
often minimized or overlooked. [Kaplan & Garrett (2005)]
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
17
Possibleanswers: what you will learn, driving time, theworkshop, its value, who
youd see etc.)
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
18
Possibleanswers: what you will learn, driving time, theworkshop, its value, who
youd see etc.)
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
19
SLIDE 8 Now, afinancial education program; this onetargeted to high school
students may besomeof you recognizethis program
Thesituation is that:
Theprojected theory of changeunderlying theprogramis that IF
partners invest resources, then HS financial programof 7 units can bedeveloped and
delivered
Then teenscangainknowledgeandskillsinmoneymanagenet Then, teens can gain knowledgeand skills in money managenet
Then, teens will makebetter decisions about their useof money
Then, teens will establish sound financial habits
Theory of changein this programis based on thecommon knowledgeand skill
development leads to behavioral change
Teens homogenous group
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
20
Lets apply this to atypical Extension example ppy yp p
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
21
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
22
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
23
This logic model depicts a3 hour training workshop. Thetrainer will measureoutcomes at
theshort-termlevel accountablehere - commensuratewith thescopeof thetraining and
what could beexpected froma3 hour workshop.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
24
This logic model illustrates theforward and backward connections (feedback loops) g ( p )
that arecommon in programs.
Another chain of outcomes could bedeveloped for theadults
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
25
Multiplechains showing multipleclusters of programs
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
26
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
27
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
28
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
29
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
30
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
31
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
32
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
33
in its simplest form, alogic model is agraphic representation that shows thelogical p , g g p p g
relationships between:
Theresources that go into theprogram INPUTS
Theactivities theprogramundertakes OUTPUTS
Thechanges or benefits that results OUTCOMES
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
34
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
35
Herewehaveafull depiction of programdevelopment. Weseethat everything
starts with aclear articulation of theoriginating situation fromwhich priorities are
set. This sets into motion theprogrammatic response as displayed in thelogic
model of what is expected to occurtheconnections and relationships between
inputs-outputs- and outcomes.
Often not included in thegraphical LM display but important to articulateare
Assumptions
External factors, for example, do financial institutions exist; arethey accessible
(barriers and facilitators)
Evaluation runs over thecourseof theprogramand is part of theprogramdesign.
Looks linear but is not
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
36
Whilethesituation statement may not bepresent on thelogic model graphic itself, it y p g g p ,
is thecritical first step in logic model development.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
37
INPUTS includesuch resources as staff, time, money, staff, technology, research
base, partnerships
In order to beableto deliver
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
38
OUTPUTS aretheactivitiesthat areundertakentoreachtargetedparticipants/populations. Thus, outputs
i l d A i i i dP i i i S l f i i i h h h includeActivitiesandParticipation. Somepeoplerefer toparticipation asreach who theprogram
istoreach;
Activitiesmight include(Examples)
Createacommunity-widecoalition
Trainstaff andvolunteers
Developacommunicationstrategy
Implement anactionplan Implement anactionplan
Participation(who theprogramisto reach; who issupposedtoparticipate- individuals, families,
groups, businesses, organization, communities). Examplesmight include:
All low incomefamilieslivinginthecity of Grant
Businesseswithfewer than50employees
Community groupsinPalmetto neighborhood
Middleschool youthidentifiedaslow achievers
All dairy producersinMilk County
Employeesof AbleCity Government
Beasspecific aspossiblewithwho istargeted.
NoteSATISFACTION: Satisfactionisnot anoutcomebecausebeingsatisfied withsomethingdoesnt
meanthat someonehaschangedor improved. Beingsatisfiedisoftenaprecursor to learning, but does
notguaranteelearning. Participantsmay besatisfiedwiththeprogram, or likeyouasaperson, or want to
comeagain but suchreactionsdonot indicatethat theyhavechangedor benefitedinany
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
39
comeagain, but suchreactionsdo not indicatethat they havechangedor benefitedinany
way. Thus, intheUWEX logic model, satisfactionisconsideredanOutput, not anOutcome.
OUTCOMES
Inorder tofacilitate/achieveoutcomes, that extendalongacontinuum or chainof outcomesfromshort tolong-termor impact.
For example, changesinknowledge, skills, attitudesandintent: For example, changesinknowledge, skills, attitudesandintent:
Changeinknowledgemight beincreasedunderstandingof thepurposeof abudget, or loanterms
Changeinskillsmight behow to developaspendingplan
Changeinattitudemight be
Changeinconfidencemight beincreasedconfidenceto ask questions; go to abank andseek service
Changeinintent might be
Changeinbehavior
Changeindecisionmaking
Changeinindividual family financial institution communityconditions Changeinindividual, family, financial institution, community conditions
Unit of analysis??
Sebstadprovidesillustrativeoutcomesfor 5thematic areas
Outcomesarethechangesor benefitsfor individuals, families, groups, businesses, organizations, andcommunities.
Outcomesoccur alongapathfromshort-termachievementsto longer-termendresults(impacts). Outcomesinclude
Short-term: Changesinawareness, knowledge, skills, attitudes, opinions, motivation, intent suchas
Increasedknowledgeof povertysimpact onindividualsandthecommunity
Goal representsa general, bigpicturestatement of desiredresults.
Increasedskillsinleadingagroup Increasedskillsinleadingagroup
Greater intentiontoexercise
Medium-term: Changesinbehaviors, decisionmaking, action
Participatingyouthuseaspendingplan
Producersmakeinformeddecisionsconcerningfarmtransfer
Community installsbikepaths
Long-term: Changesinsocial, economic, civic, environmental conditionssuchas
Reduceddebt
I d t lit
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
40
Improvedwater quality
Increasedcommunity safety
Theultimateresult of aprogramisusually referredto asimpact. Impactsmight beachievedinoneyear or take10or more
yearsto beachieved. Suchlong-termimpactsmay or may not bereflectedinthelogic model, dependingonscopeof the
initiative, purposeandaudienceof thelogic model.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
41
Many Extension staff will remember theBennett hierarchy of the1970s that was so
popular and widely used throughout Extension. TheBennett hierarchy is a
precursor of thepresent day logic model. You can seethesimilarities in this
graphic.
Rockwell and Bennett havesincedeveloped atoolkit titled, Targeting Outcomes of
Programs (TOP) that is availableon theweb at http://citnews.unl.edu/TOP/english/
Seeit for moreinformation.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
42
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
43
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
44
Oneof themost important distinctions in logic model development is thedifference
between outputs and outcomes
what wedo VERSUS what results (outcomes-benefits)
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
45
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
46
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
47
Increases understanding about programand how different peopleview theprogram
Wonderful techniquefor starting aconversation
Different stakeholders may havedifferent view of program all may havethesame
end goal in mind, but different strategies for getting there. Way to arriveat
consensus or understanding
If thi i h t d dt If this is our program, what do weneed to measure
Funding morefavorableif you can clearly demonstratehow and why they will
succeed
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
48
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
49
Ahas;
Wow, that is what my programis all about; feelings of good job done
I can do this (referring to evaluation)
This took alot of timeand was hard work but it was worth it; our teamnever would
havegotten hereotherwise.
To begin to think in process ways; helped us to think as ateam - to work build a
t i di id l teamprogramvs. an individual program
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
50
Logic model is graphic display g g p p y
Any shapeis possiblebut importancelies in showing expected causal connections
Level of detail: simple, complex
Multiplemodels families of models for multi-level programs; multi-component
programs
Reinforcethat alogic model needs to be:
visually engaging,
appropriatein its level of detail,
easy to understand,
reflectiveof thecontext in which theprogramoperates.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
51
Wehavebeen using thelogic model developed by Wisconsin University Extension
that has becomethemodel for Extension nationwide.
Other agencies may useaslightly different configuration of thesecomponents. For
grant writing, it is important to know what logic model format is required.
In theUWEX model, activities and participation arecategorized as part of Outputs.
Weemphasizeparticipation target audience.
Another verycommonmodel separatesactivitiesandoutput andmaynot include Another very common model separates activities and output and may not include
participation. This is themodel typically used by United Way, Center for Disease
Control and Prevention and many other agencies.
In this model, outputs areconsidered aproduct of theactivity. For example, an
activity might bedeliver services and theoutput would be#of services actually
delivered.
Other modelsmayor maynot includeAssumptionsandExternal Factors Some Other models may or may not includeAssumptions and External Factors. Some
models includeindicators and measures within thelogic model framework. While
therearesomedifferences in thecomponents and layout of logic model components
in usetoday, acommon themeis that thecomponents depict asequenceof events
that links investments to result.
Ask participants:
What different logicmodel componentshaveyouseeninuse?
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
52
What different logic model components haveyou seen in use?
What specific logic model configuration is your organization using?
Programs arent linear g
Arrows in logic models help to show expected causal connections thecausal
roadmap
In planning, may lay out in fairly linear fashion sequenceof expected
l i hi b i i i l i ld lik h relationships; but in practice implementation, seldomoccurs likethat
Loop back; jump forward
As lay out logic model, useful also to consider alternativecausal pathways
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
53
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
54
2
nd
generation of logic modelling
Family of related logic models, or nested models. Often helpful with complex
programs whereonelogic model sketches out thebroad pathways of change the
macro or view fromspace, and others elaboratedifferent layers (national, state,
county) or separatecomponents in greater detail. Individually, each model conveys
only essential information but together they tell thecompletestory of how the
initiativefunctions.
Each oneis an elaboration of theoneabove not different
Think about zooming in with each subsequent model unpacking activities and
relationships in greater detail. Often need moredetail for programstaff but may be
toomuchfor discussionwithfundersandstakeholders too much for discussion with funders and stakeholders.
How detailed? Depends upon purpose use
stakeholders vs. programmanagers and staff
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
55
Staff ableto understand how theoutcomes they achievefit into thelarger
organization.
Each subsequent level is embedded in theorganizations macro theory of changethat
is expressed in its mission statement.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
56
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
57
Theoverarching generic model that shows in broad brush strokes theoverall
initiativethat brought 4 key partners Research, Extension, Policy makers and
Producers together to address theproblemof deleterious ammoniagas coming off
dairy farms.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
58
This sub-logic model shows theResearch part of theoverall initiative.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
59
Counter-marketing: paid television, radio, billboard, and print counter-advertising,
mediaadvocacy, efforts to reduceor replacetobacco industry sponsorships and
promotions.
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
60
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
61
Tobacco users: Populations with tobacco-related health disparities
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
62
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
63
Didnt includearrows sincebecomes too crowded confusing
Dotted lines =porous boundaries with influences fromwithin and without
Systemwithin which this sits total environment
Credit: CDC
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
64
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
65
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
66
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
67
Logic model only represents reality, it is not reality
Programs arenot linear
Programs aredynamic interrelationships that rarely follow sequential order
Logic model focuses on expected outcomes: also need to pay attention to
unintended or unexpected outcomes: positive, negative, neutral
Challengeof causal attribution
Programis likely to bejust oneof many factors influencing outcomes
Consider other factors that may beaffecting observed outcomes
Does not prove that programcaused results
Contribution vs. attribution
Doesnt address: Arewedoing theright thing
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
68
Paperwork: Tedious; negateteamenergy; Timeconsuming way to avoiddoing
Excessivefocusonintendedoutcomes. Turner (1998) cautionsabout excessively narrow relianceon
apriori theoriesof programinterventionsandoverlookingunanticipatedconsequences. Weiss(1997)
techniqueof negativeprogramtheory canbeuseful additionto combat thisconcern. Negative
programtheory exploreshow program, evenif competently implemented, might result innegativeor
someother outcomes
Timeconsuming so muchtimeandenergy spent ondevelopingthemodel that it isnot usedto guide
evaluation; only cursory dataarecollectedandanalyzed
Common to searchfor evidencethat confirmsthecausal chainmight betakenasall that isrequired
for evaluation, leadingto poor decisionmaking
Universal vs. context specific: most logic modelsdescribemechanismsthat arethoughtto be
universal; However, context oftenplaysaninfluential role; mechanismsoperatewithinparticular
contexts. Programmodels/theoriesmight articulateboththemechanismsthat areunderstoodto cause
h i d d d h i hi h h h i ff i (P dTill theintendedoutcomesandthecontextsinwhichthesemechanismsareeffective(PawsonandTilley,
1997)
Rogers(2000) citesWeick (1995: 54-57) lmmight beauseful heuristic for purposeful action
withoutbeingcorrect. Herecountsthestory of areconnaissanceunit lost inthesnow intheSwiss
Alpsfor 3dayswho eventually managedto findtheir way safely back to campwiththehelpof amap
amap, they later discovered, of thePyrennesnottheAlps. Thisincident raisestheintriguing
possibility that whenyouarelost, any oldmapwill doOncepeoplebeginto act,they generate
tangibleoutcomesinsomecontextandthishelpsthemdiscoverwhat isoccurring,what needs
t b l i d d h t h ldb d t W i k t t S t liff H i
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
69
to beexplained,andwhat shouldbedonenext. Weick goesonto quoteSutcliffe: Havingan
accurateenvironmental mapmay belessimportant thanhavingsomemapthat bringsorder to the
worldandpromptsaction
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
70
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
71
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
72
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
73
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
74
Seethat thequestions wemight ask lineup with thecommon types of evaluations:
need assessment, process evaluation, outcomeevaluation and impact evaluation
(and thetypeof questions inherent in each type)
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
75
Remember, thelogic model is adepiction of theprogram evaluation needs to , g p p g
match theprogram. Tailor questions and indicators to particular programand
purposeof theevaluation.
Match evaluation questions to theprogram stageof programdevelopment and
purpose: improvement, assess worth/merit; new knowledge; compliance
Indicators
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
76
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
77
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
78
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
79
Onceweveidentify and prioritized what it is that wewill measure, then wemoveto
determining how wewill measureit. What would betheindicators for theoutcomes and
process variables youveselected. How would you know it?
Again, someof you havebegun to lay this out in your evaluation plansWhat dataor
evidencewill you useto say/know that adoption has occurred; physical activity has
increased; servicelinkages arebetter?
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
80
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
81
Explain how fits with collecting dataover courseof program; integrateinto planning
and programdelivery
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
82
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
83
Then, wecometo collecting theinformation often what many seeor defineas
evaluation.
Many of you haveidentified existing sources of datathat you can use and others
haveidentified specific people(participants, key informants, others) who will be
their sources of information
Think about therangeof social sciencedatacollection methods availableto you.
What suits your questions, respondents, cultural setting thebest?
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
84
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
85
Developing a logic model: Teaching and training guide
2008 by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. All rights reserved.
86