jump to navigation

The evolution of the logic model January 13, 2010

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Communicating outcomes models, Doing evaluation more efficiently, Using the approach, Standards, Outcomes models, DoView , 3comments

I’ve just posted an article on the evolution of the logic model within evaluation. Over the last couple of decades, increasing numbers of evaluators have started using logic models. For those not familiar with what logic models are - they are simply tabular or visual representations of all of the lower-level steps needed to achieve high-level outcomes for a program, organization or other intervention. They go by different names, for instance: program logics, intervention logics, results maps, theories of change, program theories, results hierarchies, strategy maps, end-means diagrams etc.). A traditional way of drawing logic models has evolved (known as the inputs, outputs, intermediate outcomes, final outcomes structured logic model) which often attempts to restrict logic models to a single page. However, many evaluators are now breaking away from the constraints of this traditional format and exploring various alternative ways of representing logic models. (more…)

Developing an M&E plan using a visual approach January 8, 2010

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Doing evaluation more efficiently, Using the approach, Evaluation planning, Easy Outcomes, DoView , add a comment

On various lists I am on I often see requests by people wanting to develop what is called an M&E plan. This terminology is often used in the international development area. It refers to a Monitoring and Evaluation Plan. The way these requests are made makes me think that the way you should monitor and evaluate different projects varies a great deal. (more…)

Christmas is over - back to blogging January 7, 2010

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Outcomes models, DoView , 1 comment so far

I’ve been quiet for some time on the blogging front as I’ve been developing a number of resources on outcomes modeling (logic modeling), evaluation and related topics. Now Christmas is over and I’m back to work I’ll be blogging in the next few weeks about these resources. I’ll also be blogging about DoView 2.0 which has just been released. It’s full of new features suggested by users and I’ve been building a range of really cool outcomes models with clients using the beta version and using that for input into its development. (more…)

Getting outcomes creds and saving time! September 25, 2009

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Doing evaluation more efficiently, Accountability, Outcomes systems architecture, Philanthropy, Strategic planning, Using the approach, Easy Outcomes, Outcomes models, Standards, DoView , add a comment

Public sector organizations these days have two important imperatives: establishing that they are truly ‘results and outcomes-focused’ while also becoming more efficient in their internal organizational activity. The really good news in the outcomes area is that using a central tool of outcomes work - outcomes models (a particular type of visual model of all of the high-level outcomes the organization is seeking to achieve and the steps it is taking to do so) is that organizations and programs can do both at the same time. (more…)

Mapping indicators onto a logic model is obvious - but why haven’t we always done it? August 18, 2009

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Indicators, Outcomes theory, Reporting systems, Measurement, Doing evaluation more efficiently, Easy Outcomes, Outcomes models, Using the approach, DoView , add a comment

I was running a workshop today teaching policy analysts the basics of my approach to program evaluation (Easy Outcomes). One of the participants, when I talked about the importance of always mapping indicators back onto a visual model, commented that when you do it, it’s so obviously the right approach that you can’t understand why we’ve not been doing it for years.

The idea behind this approach is that the way we almost always approach indicator work is to eye-ball a list or table of indicators and ask the question of a group of busy people sitting around a table - ‘does this list of indicators look any good?’
(more…)

Flow of causality in outcomes models and feedback loops August 14, 2009

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Measurement, Outcomes theory, Communicating outcomes models, Using the approach, Outcomes models, DoView , 4comments

A quick technical blog here. Fellow evaluator Rick Davies pointed out in a post on one of my outcomes theory articles (on how to best represent causal models), that strictly visualizing causality as flowing in one direction within an outcomes model (logic model, results map, logframe, theory of change etc.)  could be seen as preventing the representation of feedback loops. This is because if you are, as I usually do, representing causality as flowing from bottom to top within a model (others do it left to right) then when you want to represent a feedback loop it will, of necessity, have to flow back down the logic model against the direction in which causality is being represented. (more…)

The good old ‘one pager’ contraint again July 9, 2009

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Doing evaluation more efficiently, Outcomes systems architecture, Communicating outcomes models, Using the approach, Easy Outcomes, Outcomes models, DoView , add a comment

I’ve been up against the good old ‘one pager’ constraint again in a couple of contexts recently. This is where there is the demand that the outcomes for an organization or program be ‘put on one page’. It comes in various forms and is often a demand from senior management or a perceived demand from them to ‘keep things simple’. Now, there’s nothing wrong with the idea of summarizing things and paper overviews play a role in that. But such things should be seen as one of a range of different types of summaries and products which are produced by an underlying outcomes system, not the beginning and end of an outcomes effort. (more…)

Visual model of what I’m trying to do with my outcomes work April 28, 2009

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Communicating outcomes models, Outcomes theory, Using the approach, Outcomes models, DoView, Easy Outcomes, Blog info , 2comments

Thought that I would apply a taste of my own medicine to my own work, so I drew a visual outcomes model of what it is that I’m trying to do with my work in the outcomes area. It is here. At the top is my high level outcome ‘Make working with outcomes, monitoring, evaluation etc. easier’ and below that is all of the lower-level steps I am using to get to this high-level outcome. I have included hyperlinks out to the various web sites where I am attempting to do the things listed in the lower-level steps.

Paul Duignan, PhD

Outcomes and Evaluation Blog (OutcomesBlog.org)

Social Innovation, evaluation and outcomes April 6, 2009

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Impact evaluation, Outcomes theory & politics, Research influening policy, Outcomes theory, Using the approach, Easy Outcomes, Outcomes models, DoView , add a comment

I attended a launch of the New Zealand national Center for Social Innovation last night. Geoff Mulgan from the Young Foundation (a similar center in the U.K.) talked about social innovation. The social innovation movement is about getting stakeholders and sectors together to do things differently to achieve better social outcomes. Already a dynamic movement, it has recently received a shot in the arm from the global economic melt-down - traditional ways of doing things are increasingly being questioned and people are looking for new solutions. A number of points made by Geoff and in the subsequent discussion are particularly relevant to outcomes and evaluation were: (more…)

Using visual outcomes models to describe and communicate best practice April 3, 2009

Posted by Paul Duignan in : Outcomes theory, Doing evaluation more efficiently, Outcomes systems architecture, Reporting systems, Research influening policy, Strategic planning, Communicating outcomes models, Easy Outcomes, Evaluation planning, Outcomes models, Using the approach, DoView , 1 comment so far

Yesterday I blogged about what is meant by the term ‘best practice’. As I said then, I think that there is some conceptual confusion out there about it, and I am not sure that I have yet tidied it up my own thinking about it in a satisfactory way. However, the great thing is that regardless of how we define it, the idea of identifying the types of things that people currently call best practice and communicating these between programs is a great idea. The most difficult thing in many cases is to get best practice actually applied to on the ground after we have identified it. I have put up an Outcomes Theory Knowledge Base article (link to the article is at the bottom of this posting) on the issue suggesting that an efficient way of describing and communicating best practice may be to use visual outcomes models (a type of logic model). (more…)