1. Is each listed outcome truly an 'outcome'? Does the logic model clearly separate outcomes from outputs, or are the distinctions blurred?
  2.  Does the highest-level outcome represent a meaningful benefit of value to the public? Does it have inherent value?
  3.  Is the model truly logical? Do the relationships among the program elements make sense? Are the casual relationships supported? Three ways to check:

 a. Starting at inputs, ask “why?” at each level: why do we need these inputs? Why do we need to conduct these activities?

 b. Starting at the impact level, and working backward, ask “how?” How are we going to produce these outcomes? The items immediately preceding an outcome should show “how.”

 c. Sometimes components are necessary but not sufficient. Ask yourself, “What else?” For example, achieving healthy one-year-olds requires not only achieving a healthy birth but also achieving proper care during the baby's first year. Asking 'what else?‘ helps spot leaps of faith.

       4. Are the resources realistic? Is what you intend to do even possible given your resources?

       5. How valid are the assumptions? Are they based on experience and research, or are they best guesses?

  1. Does the logic model reflect the opinions and support of key stakeholders? Were any stakeholders left out?

 

Thanks to University of Wisconsin Extension