Evaluation for community-based programs: The integration of logic models and factor analysis
Purpose To discuss the utility of and value of the use of logic models for program evaluation of community-based programs and more specifically, the integration of logic models and factor analysis to develop and revise a survey as part of an effective evaluation plan.Principal results Diverse stakeholders with varying outlooks used a logic model as a framework to reach agreement on a plan for a state-wide evaluation. This evaluation plan utilized a survey of sixth grade students, administered before and after exposure to a year-long abstinence education program. Components of the logic model were linked to specific survey questions. Exploratory factor analysis was then used to assess whether and how the questions in the survey fit with the constructs of the model; confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the hypothesis that the factors identified in the exploratory analysis were consistently represented in the survey.Major conclusions A logic model is a tool that engages stakeholders to link evaluation instruments more closely to specific program objectives. Thus, stakeholders can more closely assess the extent to which project outcomes have been achieved. In addition, use of factor analysis in the evaluation process can help the stakeholders better understand whether evaluation instruments such as a survey adequately assess program effectiveness. Lastly, a logic model process can help to achieve consensus among diverse stakeholders, by allowing them to focus on objectives that are concrete, measurable, and mutually acceptable.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Sydney C. Ludvigson & Serena Ng, 2009. "A Factor Analysis of Bond Risk Premia," NBER Working Papers 15188, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- repec:aph:ajpbhl:10.2105/ajph.2003.019372_3 is not listed on IDEAS
- McLaughlin, John A. & Jordan, Gretchen B., 1999. "Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 65-72.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:3:p:223-233. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.