The evaluation of intervention is becoming increasingly important in occupational therapy practice and management. Programme logic models aim to assist evaluation by linking programme interventions with intended outcomes. These models include a hierarchy of programme inputs, processes, outputs, outcomes and impacts.
This article reviews the literature regarding programme logic models and uses a case example, the Spinal Outreach Team, to illustrate the utility and limitations of this approach to evaluation. A figure is included which illustrates part of the programme logic model developed for the team. It is concluded that use of a programme logic process by occupational therapists facilitates the development of comprehensive evaluation plans and relevant performance indicators.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BarrJ (1995) The outcomes movement and health status measures. Journal of Allied Health, 24(1), 13–28.
2.
BickmanL (1996) The application of program theory to the evaluation of a managed mental health care system. Evaluation and Program Planning, 19(2), 111–19.
3.
CraneAGinsburgS (1996) Evaluation in the health resources and services administration. Evaluation and the Health Professionals, 19(3), 325–41.
4.
DavisGWannaJWarhurstJWellerP (1993) Public policy in Australia. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
5.
de Clive-LoweS (1996) Outcome measurement, cost-effectiveness and clinical audit: The importance of standardised assessment to occupational therapists in meeting these demands. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 59(8), 357–62.
6.
DuckettSSwerissenH (1996) Specific purpose programs in human services and health: Moving from an input to an output and outcome focus. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 55(3), 7–17.
7.
DwyerJMakinS (1997) Using a program logic model that focuses on performance measurement to develop a program. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 88(6), 421–25.
8.
GuthrieJEnglishL (1997) Performance information and programme evaluation in the Australian public sector. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 10(3), 154–64.
9.
HawePDegelingDHallJ (1992) Evaluating health promotion. A health worker's guide. Sydney: MacLennan and Petty.
10.
HolmesDTeresiJOryM (1993) Serendipity and pseudoscience. A look at health-related program evaluation. Evaluation and the Health Professionals, 16(4), 363–78.
11.
JulianD (1997) The utilisation of the logic model as a system level planning and evaluation device. Evaluation and Program Planning, 20(3), 251–57.
12.
JulianDJonesADeyoD (1995) Open systems evaluation and the logic model: Program planning and evaluation tools. Evaluation and Program Planning, 18(4), 333–41.
13.
KochT (1994) Beyond measurement: Fourth-generation evaluation in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 20(6), 1148–55.
14.
LettsSDunalL (1995) Tackling evaluation: Applying a programme logic model to community rehabilitation for adults with brain injury. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 62(5), 268–77.
15.
LipseyMPollardJ (1989) Driving toward theory in program evaluation: More models to choose from. Evaluation and Program Planning, 12(4), 317–28.
16.
Lloyd-SmithW (1997) Evidence-based practice and occupational therapy. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60(11), 474–78.
17.
MathieAGreeneJ (1997) Stakeholder participation in evaluation: How important is diversity?Evaluation and Program Planning, 20(3), 279–85.
18.
McKeonT (1996) Benchmarks and performance indicators: Two tools for evaluating organisational results and continuous quality improvement efforts (benchmarking). Journal of Nursing Care Quality, 10(3), 12–17.
19.
NutbeamD (1996) Health outcomes and health promotion — defining success in health promotion. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 6(2), 58–60.
20.
OttenbacherKCusickA (1990) Goal attainment scaling as a method of clinical service evaluation. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 44(6), 519–25.
21.
PapineauDKielyM (1996) Participatory evaluation in a community organisation; fostering stakeholder empowerment and utilisation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 19(1), 79–93.
22.
RossiP (1997) Program outcomes: Conceptual and measurement issues. In: MullenEMagnaboscoJ, eds. Outcomes measurement in the human services. Cross-cutting issues and methods. Washington: NASW Press, 20–34.
23.
RushBOgbourneA (1991) Program logic models: Expanding their role and structure for program planning and evaluation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 6(2), 95–106.
24.
RyanA (1992) Monitoring effectiveness in selected social policy programs. In: O'FaircheallaighCRyanB, eds. Program evaluation and performance monitoring. An Australian perspective. Melbourne: Macmillan, 133–52.
25.
TaylorM (1997) What is evidence-based practice?British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 60(11), 470–74.
26.
ThompsonJ (1992) Program evaluation within a health promotion framework. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 83 (Supplement 1), S67–S71.
27.
UnrauY (1993) A program logic model approach to conceptualising social service programs. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 8(1), 117–134.
28.
Van BeurdenE (1994) HOOPS (health outcome orientated problem segmentation): A graphic framework for health promotion planning, program development and evaluation. Health Promotion Journal of Australia, 4(2), 4–8.
29.
WilkinDHallamLDoggettM (1992) Measuring of needs and outcome for primary health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
30.
WinstonJ (1993) Performance indicators: Do they perform?Evaluation News and Comment, 2(3), 22–29.
