Easterling Douglas, Jacob Rebekah R, Brownson Ross C, Haire-Joshu Debra, Gundersen Daniel A, Angier Heather, DeVoe Jennifer E, Likumahuwa-Ackman Sonja, Vu Thuy, Glasgow Russell E, Schnoll Robert
Wake Forest School of Medicine.
Washington University In St Louis: Washington University in St Louis.
Res Sq. 2023 May 18:rs.3.rs-2846665. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2846665/v1.
It is increasingly being recognized that logic models should be developed through a participatory approach which allows input from those who carry out the program being evaluated. While there are many positive examples of participatory logic modeling, funders have generally not used this approach in the context of multi-site initiatives. This article describes an instance where the funder and evaluator of a multi-site initiative fully engaged the funded organizations in developing the initiative logic model. The focus of the case study is Implementation Science Centers in Cancer Control (ISC ), a multi-year initiative funded by the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The case study was collectively constructed by representatives of the seven centers funded under ISC . Members of the Cross-Center Evaluation (CCE) Work Group jointly articulated the process through which the logic model was developed and refined. Individual Work Group members contributed descriptions of how their respective centers reviewed and used the logic model. Cross-cutting themes and lessons emerged through CCE Work Group meetings and the writing process. The initial logic model for ISC changed in significant ways as a result of the input of the funded groups. Authentic participation in the development of the logic model led to strong buy-in among the centers, as evidenced by their utilization. The centers shifted both their evaluation design and their programmatic strategy to better accommodate the expectations reflected in the initiative logic model. The ISC case study provides a positive example of how participatory logic modeling can be mutually beneficial to funders, grantees and evaluators of multi-site initiatives. Funded groups have important insights about what is feasible and what will be required to achieve the initiative's stated objectives. They can also help identify the contextual factors that either inhibit or facilitate success, which can then be incorporated into both the logic model and the evaluation design. In addition, when grantees co-develop the logic model, they have a better understanding and appreciation of the funder's expectations, and thus are better positioned to meet those expectations.
人们越来越认识到，逻辑模型应通过参与式方法来开发，这种方法允许参与被评估项目实施的人员提供意见。虽然有许多参与式逻辑建模的积极范例，但资助者在多地点倡议的背景下一般未采用这种方法。本文描述了一个案例，在该案例中，一个多地点倡议的资助者和评估者让受资助组织充分参与制定倡议逻辑模型。该案例研究的重点是癌症控制实施科学中心（ISC），这是一项由美国国立癌症研究所（NCI）资助的多年期倡议。该案例研究由ISC资助的七个中心的代表共同构建。跨中心评估（CCE）工作组的成员共同阐述了逻辑模型的开发和完善过程。工作组的个别成员介绍了各自中心如何审查和使用逻辑模型。通过CCE工作组会议和撰写过程，出现了一些贯穿各领域的主题和经验教训。由于受资助团体的意见，ISC的初始逻辑模型发生了重大变化。对逻辑模型开发的真正参与导致各中心的大力支持，这从它们的使用情况得到证明。各中心改变了评估设计和项目战略，以更好地符合倡议逻辑模型中反映的期望。ISC案例研究提供了一个积极范例，说明参与式逻辑建模如何能对多地点倡议的资助者、受资助者和评估者都产生互利的效果。受资助团体对什么是可行的以及实现倡议既定目标需要什么有重要见解。他们还可以帮助确定抑制或促进成功的背景因素，然后将这些因素纳入逻辑模型和评估设计中。此外，当受资助者共同开发逻辑模型时，他们对资助者的期望有更好的理解和认识，因此更有能力满足这些期望。
