Participatory logic modeling in a multi-site initiative to advance implementation science.

Area of Science:

• Program Evaluation
• Implementation Science
• Health Initiatives

Background:

• Logic models are crucial evaluation tools mapping program outcomes.
• Funders encourage logic models, but often exclude grantees from their development.
• Participatory logic modeling is increasingly recognized as essential for effective program evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

• To describe a US funder's engagement of grantees in developing an initiative's logic model.
• To highlight the benefits of participatory logic modeling in a multi-site context.
• To examine the case of the National Cancer Institute's Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC3) initiative.

Main Methods:

• A reflective case study approach was used.
• Representatives from seven funded centers collectively constructed the study.
• The Cross-Center Evaluation (CCE) Work Group documented the logic model development and refinement process.

Main Results:

• Grantees' input significantly altered the initial ISC3 logic model.
• Authentic participation fostered strong grantee buy-in and utilization of the logic model.
• Funded centers adapted their evaluation designs and programmatic strategies based on the logic model.

Conclusions:

• Participatory logic modeling offers mutual benefits for funders, grantees, and evaluators in multi-site initiatives.
• Grantees provide valuable insights into feasibility, required resources, and contextual factors influencing success.
• Collaborative logic model development enhances grantee understanding of funder expectations, improving alignment and outcomes.