# Here are all of the different logic model slides we used, including a blank one.

## Presentation on theme: "Here are all of the different logic model slides we used, including a blank one."— Presentation transcript:

Here are all of the different logic model slides we used, including a blank one

A USEFUL TOOL IN MAPPING OUT A PROGRAM IS A “PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL (SEE ONLINE READINGS. WEEK 1) PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL IF YOU CAN SUCCESSFULLY IDENTIFY ALL OF THESE, THEN THE PROGRAM CAN BE EVALUATED. This should be used to see if there actually is a ‘functional’ program. PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL INPUTS OBJECTIVESACTIVITIESOUTPUTSOUTCOMESIndicators* All resources used and allocated for program. Staff, money, housing, packaged treatments etc. What specific results does the program hope to achieve. What are the anticipated consequences of the program. They must be behavioral, specific and measurable somehow. The more specific it is the more easily it is measured What was done within the program. How were the inputs used to produce outcomes? Program components, activities, services, interventions Products of a programs activities. What was produced by the program. (HOW MANY PEOPLE WENT THROUGH. HOW MANY DOES IT SERVE?) What was the condition of the outputs. To what degree were the objectives met. How was the problem(s) reduced by the program? How have the clients benefited? What were the ultimate effects of the program? Achievement of the program’s objectives. DATA!!! Often these are measurements of outcomes that are indirect. For example in a prevention program to reduce teen pregnancy, there is no way to adequately measure the number of girls who DON”T get pregnant. However, if there is a reduction in Risk factors such as lower truancy and better grades, these might be considered ‘indicators’ of success.

HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF THE PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL USED TO EVALUATE THE M.S.W. PROGRAM. NOTICE WHAT IS MISSING FROM THE M.S.W. PRGRAM LOGIC MODEL. WE MUST REVISE IT!!!! Division of S.W. PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL – SEVERELY FLAWED AND BAD EXAMPLE

Example of Good model men stopping violence. (WHOSE MISSION IS TO STOP MALE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN) IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY AT HOW THE INPUTS OBJECTIVES, ACTIVITIES, OUTPUTS AND OUTCOMES CORRESPOND, YOU CAN SEE THE LOGIC OF THE PROGRAM AND HOW WE THINK CHANGE OCCURS INPUTS OBJECTIVESACTIVITIESOUTPUTSOUTCOMES And measures of them IMPACTS Aka long term outcomes Staff Office Msv manuals Reading materials Staff Training Staff supervision Connection w/court system Judges Probation officers Woemn’s shelters Famous director Model of practice Budget Abusive men 1. To get men to account for their own violence and take responsibility for it. 2. To get men to stop all violent behavior with women 3. To get men to stop all controlling behavior with partner 4. To get men who are stopping their own violent behavior to challenge other men to stop as well. 5. To raise community awareness of domestic viol3nce 24 week Batterers groups with structured activities Weekly batterer check-in Challenge use of language and language education Selected readings for men Weekly Spousal safety checks Make him move out Encourage her to leave him if he is not changing Progress mtgs w/ batterer judge and p.o. Court intervention Sentencing to program with possible jail time Batterer volunteers at other mens trials Small periods of jail Fund-raising events Public speaking & Press releases # men complete program # court diversions # men referred to program by court #weekly safety checks #court appearances by staff # court appearances by batterers in program Annual expenditures \$ money raised #speaking events & #press rel. Men will describe in detail all incidents of violence & be congruent w/ spouse and police report. Men will use their own descriptions of violence to get new men to talk Men will not use minimizing language No arrests for violence Men will check-in w/ all violent & controlling events & agree w/ spouse safety check No violence reports from spouse or anyone No reports of controlling behavior from spouse Lower scores on conflict tactics scale by men No signs of controlling behaviors in grp. Increased volunteer hours by men Increased funding Increased com. Aware Increased training of hum service grps. More accurate press coverage of dv Inc arrest # Men will be violence free at 24mths Men will continue work w/ msv Increase 3 sentencing & trials in court system More arrests by police More batterers programs like ours. Less focus in community on blaming women Increased understanding of wife- battering as dv in community Increased influence of shelters and anti- violence group in legislature

1.In depth example of the logic behind objectives activities and outcomes, can you see the Theory of change? INPUTS OBJECTIVESACTIVITIESOUTPUTSOUTCOMES And measures of them IMPACTS Aka long term outcomes Staff Office Msv manuals Reading materials Staff Training Staff supervision Connection w/court system Judges Probation officers Woemn’s shelters Famous director Model of practice Budget Abusive men 1. To get men to account for their own violence and take responsibility for it. 5. To raise community awareness of domestic viol3nce 24 week Batterers groups with structured activities Weekly batterer check-in Challenge use of language and language education Selected readings for men Fund-raising events Public speaking Press releases Training other organizations (police etc) Men will describe in detail all incidents of violence & be congruent w/ spouse and police report. Men will use their own descriptions of violence to get new men to talk Men will not use minimizing language Men will check-in w/ all violent & controlling events & agree w/ spouse safety check Increased funding Increased com. Aware Increased training of hum service grps. Increased arrests numbers More accurate press coverage of dv Men will continue work w/ msv Men will become victim advoicates Increase 3 sentencing & trials in court system More arrests by police More batterers programs like ours. Less focus in community on blaming women Increased understanding of wife- battering as dv in community Increased influence of shelters and anti- violence group in legislature Notice that impacts Or long-term outcomes tend to be more global and far-reaching

INPUTS OBJECTIVESACTIVITIESOUTPUTSOUTCOMES And measures of them IMPACTS Aka long term outcomes Staff Office Msv manuals Reading materials Staff Training Staff supervision Connection w/court system Judges Probation officers Woemn’s shelters Famous director Model of practice Budget Abusive men 1. To get men to account for their own violence and take responsibility for it. 2. To get men to stop all violent behavior with women 3. To get men to stop all controlling behavior with partner 4. To get men who are stopping their own violent behavior to challenge other men to stop as well. 5. To raise community awareness of domestic viol3nce 24 week Batterers groups with structured activities Weekly batterer check-in # men complete program # court referrals Amount of income generated Reduce domestic violence in the community A bad batterers program. See the flaws. Not enough actibvities to accomplish objectives, no outcomes. This program is only interested in making money. THIS NARROW RANGE OF ACTIVITY IS INADEQUATE TO ACCOMPLISH ALL OF THE PROGRAM OBJECTIVES SOMETHING IN THE PROGRAM NEEDS TO CHANGE! WHAT? THIS PROGRAM LOGIC MODEL IS SIMILAR TO MANY “DV” PROGRAMS I HAVE SEEN. THESE PROGRAMS GREW WHEN PEOPLE REALIZED THEY COULD MAKE MONEY OFF OF BATTERERS. THAT IS WHY THEY ONLY DO GROUPS. BAD PROGRAM!

Here is an example of a program logic model completed by a previous student. The model is for a 16 week parenting skills program objectives inputsActivities Outputs Program outcomes indicators increase parenting skills Reduce parental complaints about child’s behavior Reduce ‘on site’ use of inappropriate parental responses to child in in vivo situations Increase self- esteem of child Reduction of schools based complaints to dfcs Reduce number of dfcs-observed poor parental responses – i.e. yelling, hitting, excdessive punishment observed at in home visits 7 parapro. Staff/teachers 2 msw’s gentle parents, great kids curric Workbooks 2 outreach workers Clear mission statement Measurable program objectives Pine hall Parent library One way mirror with ‘bug in the ear’ electronics Adequate facility \$500k annual budget 16 week parent ed. Classes Individual counseling for parents and children Family counseling Behavioral coaching of parenting with one way mirror and bug in the ear. Follow up home visits Graduation ceremonies Liaison w/ dfcs Recoomedation s filed with dfcs 200 parents graduate in 2006 25 parents seen ind. Coun. 2006 18 children seen ind. Coun. 2006 34 families seen fam. Tx. 2006 Significant increase on posttest ‘parent skills inventory” over pre-test 50% reduction in docuimented parental complaints during 16 week program. 100% reduction in inappropriate parental responses, using bug in the ear method. – as observed by trainers. Increase in child self- esteem as evidenced by increase on Zung child self-esteem scale at post-test, over pre-test. no complaints filed by school or reports to dfcs for one year after completion. No evidence of inappropriate parenting, based on followup home visit observation significant improvement in school grades Reduced truancy No dropouts No police reports No e.r. visits

INPUTS Albany & gainesvile OBJECTIVESACTIVITIESOUTPUTSOUTCOMES And measures of them IMPACTS Aka long term outcomes Mhc staff 1 st step staff Dhr funds Dhr planners Housing authority funds Housing auth planners, Training Housing vouchers Landlords, Apartments Screening tools, Clients, Evaluator, Program supervisors Hospital authorities. E.R. managers. 1. reduce the number of unplanned disruptions to independent living. 2. reduce ‘breaks’ in indept. living. 3. reduce need for unplanned and/or emrgcy. services. 4. reduce need for changes to or interven. in housing sit. 5. reduce the number of critical incidents in people’s lives. 6 have clients live stably and in one place 7. provide services that would be effective in helping clients live independently. Training, planning, supervision, Hospitalization, case magemnt. Crisis int. e.r. services. Med. Mgmt.daily living asst.. Linking and referral, housing advkcacy. Program advocacy, peer support grp., med. Educ. Family work/intervention, partial hospitalization (day prgram), job training, job asst.,, transportation asst., Job coaching, alternate hosuing, crisis resolution services, Landlord managament, landlord education, dual dx services, substance abuse tx, financial mgmt., financial assistance, counseling, living skill training, supportive visits, clinical case mgmt., respite care services # clients going through program #housing vouchers # new landlords & housing 1 scores on the use of crisis intervention services 2 the number of e.r. visditsor unplanned MHC visits #3. Number of days in hospital, number of hospitalization, alternative housing or respite care #4 number of landlord or neigbor complaints #5. number of housing interventions or housing changes #6 number of domestic interventions with roomates, family, neighbors #7 number of total critical incidents. #8 identify services used most frequently or intensively that correlate most strongly with reductions in 1 thru 7 above. 1. Stable alternative housing for people with sever psych. Dx,. In the state of Georgia 2. Establishment of a working model between housing authority and DHR 3. Reduce stigma of mental illness in community 4. Increase independent, stable and respectful living for those with chronic and severe dx within GA. 5. Reduce housing discrminitaion within the state. Example of a PLM that I did for an evaluation of a Program designed to keep mentally ill in the community

INPUTSOBJECTIVESACTIVITIESOUTPUTSOUTCOMES And measures of them IMPACTS Aka long term outcomes

Download ppt "Here are all of the different logic model slides we used, including a blank one."

Similar presentations