In last week’s post, I shared why logic models and theories of change (ToCs) often aren’t useful, especially when they’re created to meet funding requirements instead of guiding real-world decision-making.

This week, I want to shift the focus toward what is useful.

In response to my comment “And too often, [ToCs and logic models] are created to satisfy a requirement, not to support meaningful reflection or strategy”, a program evaluation subject matter expert replied:

Yes! This is why I would design logic models (or whatever term seemed more appropriate) that would be most helpful to the clients in helping them understand their program’s goals and how to approach them, rather than forcing everything into the same standardized template.

The tools I’ve seen my client organizations use to plan and reflect aren’t always ToCs or logic models. They’re things like annual work plans, end-of-program debriefs, and board reports.

And if you’re a funder, these tools can already tell you a lot of what you’re trying to learn about a grantee’s program or service.