Date and Time of Training: August 22, 2011 / 5:30-8:30pm
Training Topic: Outcome-Based Program Models: Logic Model
Location: Black Creek Meeting Room, United Way of Greater Toronto
Facilitator(s): Christa Romaldi
AMP’s second training, held at the United Way’s Black Creek Meeting Room, focused on the development of Logic Models as the foundation for effective and intentional programming. While we drew a connection between the Theory of Change Model (see previous training) and the Logic Model, we were also careful to distinguish the differences between the two.
Theory of change models address overarching strategy, while logic models demonstrate how programs will be implemented on the ground. They can be used to demonstrate activities and goals, and are easy to read and follow. Logic models can also be used to replicate programs, while theory of change models are complex and grounded in a specific context.
At this training, organizations learned about the different parts of the logic model and how to use the models in their organizations. In groups, each organization worked on developing a logic model for capacity-building goals that they determined during the previous training session. The facilitator provided input and guidance during the planning session, and answered clarification questions. The organizations commented that the logic model was a clear and simple tool applicable to their programming needs.
Each of the participating AMP organizations developed logic models for each of their capacity-building goals. The facilitator provided feedback on the logic models, and suggested that these models feed into the organizations’ workplans. Other participating organizations were encouraged to develop logic models for capacity-building goals and programs.
The organizations really appreciated having time to work on their logic models and receive facilitator feedback during their trainings. They felt that the training content was practical and beneficial to their organizations.
The organizations reported that they would have preferred to have some of the training materials sent prior to the training, giving them time to absorb the material prior to the training. Some also mentioned that they would have preferred more interactive activities and more time to work on their priorities.