When a program does not produce expected changes in the outcomes of interest, program staff must understand why before making programmatic decisions. One mechanism for doing so is the logic model. This article describes how using one such logic model (the ATM approach) was used to improve areas of program planning and implementation. The key components include interviewing stakeholders to identify antecedent conditions to the problem of interest that are placed in a summary map and then prioritizing those conditions to address with program activities. Although the logic modeling process was helpful in making programmatic improvements, there were also several unintended benefits of engaging in the process including: providing a framework for planning and evaluation, helping the program operate more effectively and efficiently, and providing a common language among program staff and the evaluators.
Advisory Committee on Interdisciplinary Community-Based Linkages. (2005). Meeting minutes, May 2005. Retrieved from http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/interdisciplinary/0505minutes.htm
2.
Advisory Committee on Interdisciplinary Community-Based Linkages. (2004). Meeting minutes, February 2004. Retrieved from http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/interdisciplinary/0204.htm
3.
Alter, C., & Murty, S. (1997). Logic modeling: A tool for teaching practice evaluation . Journal of Social Work Education, 33(1), 103-118.
4.
ExpectMore. (2006). Program assessment: Health professions. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/expectmore/summary.10000276.2005.html
5.
Green, L.W., & Kreuter, M.W. (1999). Health promotion planning: An educational and ecological approach (3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.
6.
Huntington, C., & Renger, R. (2003, April-June). NAO's response to the OMB-PART report . NAO News of the National AHEC Organization.
7.
Program performance assessments for the FY 2004 budget (Memorandum 02-10) . (2002, July 26). Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/memoranda/index.html
8.
Renger, R., & Bourdeau, B. (2004). Strategies for values inquiry: An exploratory case study. American Journal of Evaluation, 25(1), 39-49.
9.
Renger, R., & Hurley, C. (2006). From theory to practice: Lessons learned in the application of the ATM approach to developing logic models. American Journal of Evaluation, 29(2), 106-119.
10.
Renger, R., & Titcomb, A. (2002). A three-step approach to teaching logic models . American Journal of Evaluation, 23(4), 493-503.
11.
W. K. Kellogg Foundation. (2001). Logic model development guide. Battle Creek, MI: Author.
