It has always been difficult to create the specifics needed in a logic model (ie. how many staff and hours does this initiative require?)
It is a very linear model - feel like in real-life there is more feedback and interplay
When designing a new intervention, I find there are a lot of blank spaces in the model
Overall, it is a great tool to organize ideas and outline outcomes off the bat!
Thanks for these relevant observations. Many practitioners will agree. In my own work I thought the Logic Model was most helpful at 2 stages -- when first designing a project, with a focus on actionable outcomes; and when modifying the project based on experience, with a focus on showing a clear link between program investments and actionable outcomes.
A rationale model ought to be created by the exploration staff in close cooperation with program staff and any administration or NGO partners who are planning the program and have clear information and comprehension of the program objectives and goals.
A rationale model is created toward the start of SBCC programs so it tends to be utilized to direct the program and guarantee that everybody settles on and comprehends the program's destinations before starting any exercises. Contributors, accomplices, and program chiefs need to have a similar comprehension of the program from the start and all through the program.
This aide is planned basically for program directors or staff who are not prepared scientists themselves yet who need to comprehend the reasoning and cycle of leading examination. This aide can assist supervisors with supporting the requirement for explore and guarantee that examination staff have satisfactory assets to lead the exploration that is should have been sure that the program is proof based and that outcomes can be followed over the long haul and estimated toward the finish of the program. Palo Alto Networks PSE-StrataDC Exam Questions