Several years ago, I worked on a proposal for a collaborative project. The RFP asked for a narrative and a logic model for the process we were proposing. We spent time crafting both, but I remember thinking: What’s the point of requiring both, especially if you’re still going to come back with additional questions? 

If the narrative is clear and if we can articulate what we’re trying to do, isn’t that enough?

I’ve also had nonprofit clients tell me they only create logic models funding, and never revisit them after submitting their proposal.. Or that they only build ToCs when funders require them, not because they find them useful. But the most striking moment was during a funder ToC session I facilitated, where program officers openly questioned whether they themselves would use the tool once it was built.

Theories of change (ToCs) and logic models are treated as standard tools. For some funders, they’re a default request to understand a grantee’s vision, approach, and impact. For some nonprofits, they’re just another part of the proposal process.

But they aren’t useful.