Enhancing Program Performance with Logic Models
Course Resource Pages
Alter, C., & Egan, M. (1997). Logic modeling:
A tool for teaching critical thinking in social work practice. Journal
of Social Work Education, 33 (1).
Alter, C., & Murty, S. (1997). Logic modeling:
A tool for teaching practice evaluation. Journal of Social Work Education,
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,
Barkman, S., & Machtmes, K. (2001). Four-fold:
A research based model for designing and evaluating the impact of youth
development programs. News & Views, 54 (4), 4-8.
Bennett, C. (1976). Analyzing impacts of extension
programs, ESC-575. Washington, D.C.: Extension Service-U.S. Department
Bennett, C., & Rockwell, K. (1995). Targeting
outcomes of programs (TOP): An integrated approach to planning and evaluation.
Retrieved from http://citnews.unl.edu/TOP/
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: Jossey-Bass
Carroll, J., & McKenna, J. (2001). Theory to
practice: Using the logic model to organize and report research results
in a collaborative project. Journal of Family and Consumer Science,
93 (4), 63-65.
Cato, B., Chen, W., & Corbett-Perez, S. (1998).
Logic model: A tool for planning and evaluating health and recreation
prevention projects. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation &
Dance, 69 (8).
Centers for Disease Control Evaluation Working Group.
(2001) Resources - Logic Model Resources. Retrieved December 19, 2002
from the CDC web site: http://www.cdc.gov/eval/resources.htm#logic
Chen, H. (1990). Theory-driven evaluation.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Chen, H., & Rossi, P. (1983). Evaluating with
sense: The theory-driven approach. Evaluation Review, 7, 283-302.
Chinman, M., Imm, P., & Wandersman, A. (2004). Getting to Outcomes 2004. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved July 24, 2008 from: http://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR101/
Coffman, J. (1999). Learning from logic models:
An example of a family/school partnership program. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard Family Research Project.
CSAPs Western Center for the Application of
Prevention Technologies. (2002) Prevention Works - Step 7: Evaluation.
Retrieved December 19, 2002 from the Center for Substance Abuse and Preventionss
Western Center for the Application of Prevention Technologies, University
of Nevada, Reno, web site: http://captus.samhsa.gov/western/resources/bp/step7/
Curnan, S., & LaCava, L. (2000). Getting ready
for outcome evaluation: Developing a logic model. Community Youth
Development Journal, 16 (1), 8-9.
Earl, S., Carden, F., & Smutylo, T. (2001).
Outcome mapping: Building Learning and Reflection into Development Programs. Retrieved July 24, 2008 from http://www.idrc.ca/en/ev-26586-201-1-DO_TOPIC.html
Flora, C. (1998). Performance based measurement
and community building. Rural Development News, 22 (1).
Framst, G. (1995). Application of program logic
model to agricultural technology transfer program. The Canadian Journal
of Program Evaluation, 10 (2).
Freddolino, P., et al. (1998). It's a great
: Barriers to the use of program logic models in the real
world of program activities. Okemos, MI: Michigan Public Health Institute.
______. (1998). Michigan safe and drug-free
schools and communities evaluation training workshop, Phase I workbook.
Okemos, MI: Michigan Public Health Institute.
Funnell, S. (1997). Program logic: An adaptable
tool for designing and evaluating programs. Australia: Performance
Improvement Poverty, Ltd.
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: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Hatry, H. (1999). Performance measurement: Getting
results. Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute Press.
Hernandez, M. (2000). Using logic models and program
theory to build outcome accountability. Education & Treatment
of Children, 23 (1), 24-41.
Jordan, G. (1999). The state of the art of logic
modeling: Expanding usefulness. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the American Evaluation Association, Orlando, FL.
Jordan, G., & Mortensen, J. (1997). Measuring
the performance of research and technology programs: A balanced scorecard
approach. Journal of Technology Transfer, 22 (2), 13-20.
Julian, D. (1997). The utilization of the logic
model as a system level planning and evaluation device. Evaluation
and Program Planning, 20 (3), 251-257.
Julian, D., Jones, A., & Deyo, D. (1995). Open
systems evaluation and the logic model: Program planning and evaluation
tools. Evaluation and Program Planning, 18 (4), 333-341.
Kellogg Foundation. (2001). Logic model development
guide: Logic models to bring together planning, evaluation & action.
Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
Kirkpatrick, S. (2001). The program logic model:
What, why and how? Retrieved from http://www.charityvillage.com/cv/research/rstrat3.html
Lambur, M., & Mayeske, G. (2000). Logic
modeling: A process for enhancing program effects and evaluation results.
Facilitator training manual. Crofton, MD: The Program Design Institute.
Linney, J, & Wandersman, A. (1991). Prevention
Plus III: Assessing alcohol and other drug prevention programs at the
school and community level. DHHS Publication No. (ADM)91-1817. Rockville,
MD: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Substance
Mayeske, G. (1994). Life cycle program management
and evaluation: An Heuristic approach, Part 1 of 2. Washington, D.C.:
Extension Service, USDA.
Mayeske, G., & Lambur, M. (2001). How to design
better programs: A staff-centered stakeholder approach to program logic
modeling. Journal of Extension, 39 (3).
Mayeske, G., & Lambur, M. (2001). How to
design better programs: A staff-centered stakeholder approach to program
logic modeling. Crofton, MD: The Program Design Institute.
McEwan, K., & Bigelow, D. (1997). Using a logic
models to focus health services on population health goals. The Canadian
Journal of Program Evaluation, 12, 167-174.
McLaughlin, J., & Jordan, G. (1999). Logic models:
A tool for telling your program's performance story. Evaluating and
Program Planning, 22, 65-72.
Millar, A., Simeone, R., & Carnevale, J. (2001).
Logic models: A systems tool for performance management. Evaluation
and Program Planning, 24, 73-81.
Mohr, L. (1995). Impact Analysis for Program
Evaluation, 2nd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Montague, S. 1997. The three Rs of performance.
Ottawa: Canada: Performance Management Network, Inc. September.
Mullen, E., & Magnabosco, J. (1997). Outcomes
measurement in the human services: Cross-cutting issues and methods. Washington,
DC: National Association of Social Work Press.
Patton, M. (1989). A context and boundaries for
theory-driven approach to validity. Evaluation and Program Planning,
Patton, M. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation,
3rd Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Pawson, R, & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic
evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Practical Concepts, Inc. (1971). The logical
framework. Approach and training materials developed for U.S. Agency
for International Development, Washington. D.C. Unpublished manuscript.
Reisman, J. (1994). A field guide to outcome-based
program evaluation. Seattle, WA: Evaluation Forum.
Reisman, J., & Clegg, J. (1999). Outcomes
for Success! Seattle, WA: Evaluation Forum.
Renger, R. and Titcomb, A. 2002. A three-step approach
to teaching logic models. American Journal of Evaluation. 23:4,
Rogers, P. (1998). Alternative causal models
in program theory and evaluation. Paper presented at the annual meeting
of the American Evaluation Association, Chicago, IL.
Rogers, P. (2000). Causal models in program theory
evaluation. In P. Rogers, T. Hacsi, A. Petrosino, & Huebner, T. (Eds),
Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities, New
Directions in Program Evaluation, 87, 47-55. San Francisco, CA:
Rogers, P., Hacsi, T., Petrosino, A., & Huebner,
T. (Eds). (2000). Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities.
New Directions for Evaluation, 87. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Rush, B., & Ogborne, A. (1991). Program logic
models: Expanding their role and structure for program planning and evaluation.
The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 6 (2).
Savas, S., Flemming, W., & Bolig, E. (1998).
Program specification: A precursor to program monitoring and quality improvement.
The Journal of Behavioral Health Services & Research, 25 (2),
Scriven, M. 1991. Evaluation Thesaurus, 4th
Edition. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Scheirer, M. (1999). Getting more "bang"
for your performance measures "buck." Paper presented at
the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association's President's
Prize Competition, Orlando, FL.
Senge, P.M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The
art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
Smith, M. (1989). Evaluability assessment: A
practical approach. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Solem, R. (1987). The logical framework approach
to project design, review and evaluation in A.I.D: Genesis, impact problems
and opportunities. Washington, DC: USAID, Center for Development
Information and Evaluation.
Suchman, E. (1967). Evaluative research: Principles
and practice in public service and social action programs. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation.
Toffolon-Weiss, M., Bertrand, J., & Terrell,
S. (1999). The results framework - An innovative tool for program planning
and evaluation. Evaluation Review, 23 (3), 336-359.
United States Agency for International Development.
(2000). Building a results framework. Performance monitoring and evaluation
TIPS. Washington, DC: USAID Center for Development Information and
United Way of America. (1996). Measuring program outcomes: A practical approach. Arlington, VA: United Way of America. Retrieved January 19, 2010 from http://www.liveunited.org/Outcomes/Resources/MPO/.
Wandersman, A., Imm, P., Chinman, M., & Kaftarian,
S. (2000). Getting to outcomes: A results-based approach to accountability.
Evaluation and Program Planning, 23, 389-395.
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.
Weiss, C. (1998). Evaluation, 2nd Edition,
Chapter 3. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Wholey, J. (1987). Evaluability assessment: Developing
program theory. In L. Bickman, (Ed.), Using Program Theory in Evaluation,
New Directions for Program Evaluation, 33, 77-92. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Wholey, J. (1979.) Evaluation: Promise and performance. Washington,
D.C.: Urban Institute Press.
Williams, H., Webb, A., & Phillips, W. (1991).
Outcome funding: A new approach to targeted grantmaking, 2nd
Edition. Rensselaerville, NY: Rensselaerville Institute.
Williams, R. (2002). Evaluation and Systems
Thinking. Retrieved from http://users.actrix.co.nz/bobwill/evalsys.pdf
Yee, S., & Porter, S. (2001). Introduction
to logic modeling. PowerPoint presentation at the Fourth Annual Surveillance
and Evaluation Workshop. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention: Office on Smoking and Health.
Close this window and
return to the course.