Key Topics

• Definition of a program logic model
• Function of the logic model and its role in evaluation
• Kellogg tool for developing a sound logic model

Introduction

The foundation of an effective program is a clear and strong underlying theory for how a program will marshal resources to achieve desired outcomes. This is expressed in a logic model. A logic model is a depiction of how a program is supposed to work and is helpful to program planners, administrators, and evaluators alike (See for example, Kellogg Foundation, 2004; Rossi et al., 2004; Workgroup on Community Health and Development, n.d.). The logic model links identified needs with activities and activities with resources and outcomes to guide effective program design and implementation. Most federal education or social service grants supporting programmatic interventions require logic models as part of the grant proposal. Logic models can be used within colleges and universities to demonstrate clearly how proposed programs are intended to work to achieve specified outcomes.

Solutions to social problems are often complex and resulting logic models can be complex as well. For the purposes of this text, I simplify the concept of logic model, focusing on the Kellogg Foundation basic logic model. More in-depth discussions of logic models can be found in Rossi et al. (2004), The Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide (n.d.), or in the Workgroup for Community Health and Development’s Community Tool Box. The “Tearless Logic Model” (Lien et al., 2011) is a very good source for how to write a logic model. Of these, the Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide is a widely available and respected standard guide, and, when used in concert with the “tireless” process for creating the model, makes logic model creation relatively straightforward and easy. The Kellogg guide is  freely available for download. This chapter begins with definitions, a description of logic model components, and then presents a guide to developing a simple logic model.

Definition

As noted in Chapter 3, a logic model “synthesizes the main program elements into a picture [literally diagram or table] of how the program is supposed to work. It makes explicit the sequence of events that is presumed to bring about change” (Workgroup for Community Health and Development, Tool Box, Chapter 36, Section 1, pp. 9-10). The Kellogg Foundation (2004) describes a logic model this way:

Basically, a logic model is a systematic and visual way to present and share relationships among the resources available to operate a program, the activities planned, and the desired outcomes. The most basic logic model is a picture or a theory of how a program will work. It uses words and/or pictures to describe the sequence of activities thought to bring about change and how these activities are linked to the results the program is expected to achieve. (W.K. Kellogg, p. 1)

     A logic model is ideally developed in a program’s design stage by program planners and administrators with the goal of carefully planning activities that will lead to desired outcomes.  An existing program’s logic model can also be uncovered (or made explicit) by evaluators as a frame of reference for conducting a program evaluation (Workgroup for Community Health and Development, Community Tool Box, Chapter 36, Section 1, p. 9). More complex logic models include descriptions of each activity, how targeted participants are identified and served, along with an organizational plan for delivering the services. Logic models are often depicted in tables, as in the Kellogg Logic Model tool provided later in this chapter, or in flow charts. Logic models are and should be closely related to a program description, which is a main source of information for identifying the logic model for an existing program.

The Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Guide introduces three different approaches to logic models: a theory approach, an outcomes approach, and an activities approach. A theory approach focuses most on the underlying logic of the program and how it works. The outcomes models focus on the link between activities and outcomes while the activities approach focuses in some detail on the link between resources, activities, and outcomes (Kellogg Foundation, pp. 10-12). This chapter adopts Kellogg’s basic logic modelthat includes all three components. Rather than trying to discern which approach is best, the Kellogg basic logic model is the best place to begin.

Purposes of a Logic Model

There are three purposes or functions of a logic model. The first is to describe how a program does or should work. Think of the logic model as the scaffold or skeleton of the program—a blueprint, a guide to program development. You can also think of it as the program’s theory of operation. When used in the development phase, the logic model helps program planners to fully imagine a program with an eye to identifying which activity is supposed to have an impact on which program goal or outcome and how and what resources are allocated to the activity. Ultimately, the goal is to ensure that the activities planned have a good chance of working to address the identified problem. In a grant proposal, the logic model helps to make a succinct case for how and why the proposed intervention will lead to the intended outcomes. The resulting logic model can then be used to guide evaluation efforts.

The second purpose involves identifying or uncovering the program logic model for an existing program to serve as a basis for subsequent evaluation studies. By identifying resources, activities, outputs and outcomes, a program’s logic model provides a source of questions that might be posed and answered in a program evaluation. In fact, one of the first steps professional evaluators often take is to review or create a logic model of the program being evaluated. A good logic model will tell the evaluator which components of the program are most important to focus on in an evaluation. Implementation assessment, assessment of outcomes, and impact evaluation all rely on describing the logic model as key component of understanding the program.

A third purpose for identifying a logic model is to evaluate whether and to what extent program activities are aligned with goals. That is, is it reasonable to expect the program described on paper to generate intended outcomes? In this case, the focus of the evaluation is the logic of the program itself. Are sufficient resources available to conduct activity X for the intended audience? Is activity X based on need and can it reasonably lead to outcome Y? If not, the program may be based on a faulty logic and doomed to not achieve desired goals and outcomes.

Components of a Logic Model

As described by the Kellogg Foundation (2004), there are several key components to a logic model. These components illustrate the connection between planned activities and intended results. When constructing a logic model to guide program development, the content for each component represents a plan for the intended intervention. Examining a  logic model for an existing program involves identifying the resources, activities, outputs that were actually implemented. The existing model can also be compared to the planned logic model to see whether and how the program in practice has diverged from that which was planned.

The Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide (2004) defines the traditional components of a logic model as follows (direct quote):

YOUR PLANNED WORK describes what resources you think you need to implement your program and what you intend to do.

1. Resources include the human, financial, organizational, and community resources a program has available to direct toward doing the work. Sometimes this component is referred to as Inputs.
2. Program activities are what the program does with the resources. Activities are the processes, tools, events, technology, and actions that are an intentional part of the program implementation. These interventions are used to bring about the intended program changes or results.

YOUR INTENDED RESULTS include all of the program’s desired results (outputs, outcomes, and impact).

1. Outputs are the direct products of program activities and may include types, levels and targets of services to be delivered by the program.

2. Outcomes are the specific changes in program participants’ behavior, knowledge, skills, status and level of functioning. Short-term outcomes should be attainable within 1 to 3 years, while longer-term outcomes should be achievable within a 4 to 6 -year timeframe….

3. Impact is the fundamental intended or unintended change occurring in organizations, communities or systems as a result of program activities within 7 to 10 years. (Kellogg, pg. 2)  [Impact is equivalent to Henning and Roberts’ (2024) program outcomes.]

    Most of the components of the Kellogg logic model framework are quite straightforward. The one exception is that of outputs. The concept of outputs, which is different from outcomes, can be confusing. The Kellogg Foundation expands on their definition of outputs:

They [outputs] are usually described in terms of the size and/or scope of the services and products delivered or produced by the program. They indicate if a program was delivered to the intended audiences at the intended ‘dose.’ A program output, for example, might be the number of classes taught, meetings held, or materials produced and distributed; program participation rates and demography; or hours of each type of service provided. (W.K. Kellogg Foundation Logic Model Development Guide, p. 8. Emphasis in italics added by Twombly.)

Some Caveats

The Kellogg Logic Model focuses on short and long term program outcomes. In the higher education context, it is useful to think of short-term outcomes as immediate outcomes of programs or interventions—how individuals are affected by participation in a program. These are outcomes one would expect from an annual IT security training program, for example. As noted earlier, although one wants to know if participants learn from the training, the longer-term aggregate outcome or impact of requiring IT security training is to reduce or avoid breaches of security and to safeguard the system. Presumably the training leads to more secure systems. There is nothing magic about the Kellogg timeframe. The important take away is that reaching immediate, short-term, outcomes will lead to bigger, cumulative changes such as a safer campus that may take some time to achieve.

Developing and Using the Logic Model

Developing a logic model for a new program is largely a conceptual task informed by a needs assessment, including any literature and/or best practices that influence your thinking about the problem and potential intervention, plus identification of available or needed resources. The program logic model merely puts into a visual format the program or intervention program planners develop to respond to a problem.

When a program is already in place, the task is to uncover the logic model of the functioning program to inform other evaluation activities or to actually assess the adequacy of the logic model. This task of uncovering involves reading program descriptions and talking with program implementers and sponsors to learn more about program activities and how program planners intend those activities to “fix” the problem.

Logic Model Tool

The following table, adapted from the Kellogg Foundation (2004, p. 17), is a widely used and useful resource for developing and recording your own simple logic model. The table can be used both to develop a logic model for a new program or to map out one for an existing program. I have assigned each of the components a letter that is mapped onto Lien et al.’s steps listed below. Please note the “mapping code” used here is not part of the Kellogg Logic Model tool.

Needs: (A) What needs does the proposed intervention address?

Intended audience (A): Who is to be served by the program?

Broad program goal or purpose: If you got it right, in broad terms what would X look like in 5 years? (F)

Summary statement: (G)

When read from left to right, the table version of a logic model represents the program over time from planning to delivery and results.

1. The problem the program addresses (A). Who are the intended participants? (A) This is not part of the formal Kellogg Foundation Logic Model table. It’s what Kellogg refers to as pre-work. I’ve added it to encourage rework and to foster alignment of the problem and needs with activities and outcomes.
2. Resources (B) are the inputs or the staff, materials, time, etc. one needs or has available to operate a program.
3. Activities (C) are the heart of the program, the things you plan to do to bring about the intended changes.
4. Outputs (D) represent the amount of product/service delivered. At the planning stage, this might be simply a more specific statement of how many sessions will be offered, how much service is provided, how many people will be served, etc.
5. Outcomes (E) are the intended changes in participants. If the activities are planned and delivered as intended, then you expect participants to achieve certain outcomes (benefits). Participants will be different in certain ways. As discussed in Chapter 5, 9, and 10, and in later chapters, outcomes should be meaningful, measurable (observable), action-oriented, and sensible (related to the problem and doable given resources).
6. Long term program outcomes (F) represent the cumulative effect of changes in participants or what Henning and Robert’s (2016) call program or aggregate outcomes. Presumably if participants achieve the intended outcomes, then there will be some overall changes in the unit, institution, large groups of people, society, etc. For example, a specific outcome of new student orientation might be that students can name five new acquaintances. The program or aggregate goal is that students will establish a community and sense of belonging.

   One final note. Logic models are meant to be specific. The more specific, the more useful. For example, a logic model could be written at the level of The Office of First Year Experience. It would be a general logic model, however. In this case, one could also expect to see a logic model for each major program such as new student orientation, first year seminars, common book, and a semester long orientation course. Each program has different specific outcomes and activities and needs different resources. In fact, in many cases a large, complicated program could have several logic models: a general overview model and a “mini-model” for each major activity or set of activities.

Developing a Logic Model

Lien et al.’s (2011) “Tearless Logic Model” provides a concise guide for developing a logic model that involves the steps identified below. Their approach is very straightforward, maps nicely on to the Kellogg Tool, and works alternately backwards and forwards as outlined below. Lien et al., ask you to begin with the end—the aggregate program outcomes—in mind, then to identify the target audience, then outcomes, then activities, and resources. Detailed logic models will do this for each goal or each activity and can be very complicated. It is possible to also create a more general overall logic model for the program, for example an office of new student orientation, and then create “mini-models” for each major program within the office, such as first year seminars or common book program. The steps are mapped on to the Logic Model Tool presented above and in the example below.

1. List attributes of the problem the program seeks to address. In the Kellogg approach this is equivalent to pre-work that happens before the logic model is developed; I include needs assessment and problem definition as part of this pre-work. Absent a needs assessment, stakeholders are a good source of problem definition.  A description of the problem to be solved by the program is typically required in any grant proposal requesting resources to begin a new program. Listing the attributes of the problem helps to emphasize the needs the intervention is intended to address. Additionally, this step keeps you focused on the issue at hand. (Section A in the logic model tool above.)
2. Identify broad program goals/outcomes to be achieved by the intervention and its various activities(Column F). Lien et. al (2011) call this “beginning with the end in mind” (p. 3). They suggest program planners ask the question: “If [we] really get it right, what would it look like in 3-5 years?” (p. 3). Think of this as similar to Henning and Roberts’ (2024) aggregate program outcomes. What is the ultimate goal of the program being developed? For an existing program, you might use the following sources to identify program goals/outcomes: program description, goal statements, and interviews with program personnel to identify the program’s long term program outcomes/goals.
3. The next step is to identify who the program serves or intends to serve (ideally from needs assessment). As discussed earlier, a program often serves some participants directly and others indirectly. It is useful to identify both (Column A).
4. Identify outcomes. As Lien et al. (2011, p. 4) ask, “What changes would you expect to see in the [knowledge or] behaviors/actions of those you serve?” (Addition in brackets by Twombly.) You might think about these as immediate outcomes from the program/intervention (Column E). If outcomes from the activities are achieved, they should plausibly result in the unit or college longer term change identified for Column F.
5. Identify program activities designed to address the problem. Lien et al. (2011) ask: “What do you need to do to create the changes we have discussed” (p. 4)? If you are designing the program from scratch, the answer to this question likely comes from the literature and best practices. If you are uncovering the logic model from an existing program, you would look to the program description or perhaps interviews with program personnel to uncover what the program’s activities to see what they are doing (Column C). NOTE: identification of activities is the fifth, not the first, step in this process!
6. Identify specific outputs. Outputs are things “you ‘count’ when you successfully do the ‘activities’” identified (Lien, et al., 2011, p. 4). For example, how many sessions were offered, how many booklets produced, how many participants participate, what will participants be provided (Lien, p. 4)? (Column D)
7. Identify the resources available or resources needed to make your proposed activities happen? If you are uncovering a logic model for an existing program, you will simply identify the available resources. If developing a logic model for a new program, you would specify the resources needed. (Column B).
8. Link a particular intervention/activity with resources and inputs to address the problem and achieve which program goals. (Section G). This step asks you to articulate in a few sentences how the resources and activities lead to outputs that result in (or are intended) to lead to outcomes that address the initial problem. In other words, this is brief statement of a program theory depicted in the logic model and is informed by the literature, your understanding of the problem, by how the program is supposed to work, and your own experience. This step is very useful as a frame for what you propose to do or as a statement of why what you propose should work to achieve your outcomes. It serves as a check on your work. If you summarize the logic model in words and those ideas seem to express what the program intends to do to address the identified problem, you have a sound basis for your program and a good base of information to inform future evaluations. Additionally, you can be more confident that the program resources, activities, and outputs lead to the desired outcomes. Again, this text explanation of how the model works to bring about desired outcomes may not be formal part of the Kellogg Logic Model, but this narrative summary would be part of any grant or other proposal for resources to begin a new program.

Logic Model for Workshop to Increase Knowledge about Sexual Misconduct

Problem: Students lack of knowledge about what constitutes rape and other forms of sexual assault. Students don’t report and have a lack of knowledge of how and where to report. (A)

Broad goals: Train leaders to know sexual assault when they see it and know how to report. Leaders will provide education for students. Incidents will decrease. Campus will be safer. (Column F)

Intended participants: Student leaders (direct) and students more broadly (indirect). (A)

Summary: Peers have been shown to be an effective means to educate students on this topic. Residence hall staff and fraternity and sorority leaders (peers) will be trained about what constitutes sexual assault and where to report incidents, and will provide training events for students with whom they work with the goal that nearly all the students will recognize and be able to report incidents. The long-term goal is a safe campus.

Summary

A program’s logic model is an essential component of a program and of program evaluation. It links the program activities with a specific problem the activities are design to address and with the program’s goals.  The model serves as an important guide to other evaluation activities.

The benefit of mapping out the program logic model is that it helps a program administrator or evaluator to see which activities are intended to respond to which component of a problem by achieving specific outcomes. This is a useful activity in the program planning process to enhance the chances the intervention will work by ensuring that activities chosen are ones that can reasonably be expected to work. For example, if the logic model reveals activities that cannot be tied to a goal or to a problem, then perhaps that activity is not necessary or the right one. Creating a logic model is also useful when conducting an evaluation of an existing program to clearly illustrate how the program administrators think a program is supposed to work, which then guides evaluation questions and activities. The example model provided above directs evaluators to some very clear and simple questions to be asked in an evaluation of the training programs for staff about design, delivery and use of the program as well as intended outcomes.