Сравнение на методи

	Logic Model Analysis	Process Evaluation
Област	Public Policy	Public Policy
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Година на възникване	2004	2015
Създател	Program evaluation field; popularised by United Way and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation	Health-promotion & MRC evaluation tradition (Saunders et al.; Moore et al.)
Тип	Visual planning and evaluation framework	Implementation-focused program evaluation
Основополагащ източник	W.K. Kellogg Foundation (2004). Logic Model Development Guide. Battle Creek, MI: W.K. Kellogg Foundation.	Moore, G. F., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., et al. (2015). Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 350, h1258.
Други названия	Logic Model, Logical Framework Analysis, Program Logic, Logframe Analysis	Implementation Evaluation, Implementation Fidelity Evaluation, Program Process Evaluation
Свързани	4	3
Резюме	A logic model is a systematic, visual representation of how a program is understood to work: it lays out the logical relationships among the resources invested (inputs), the things done (activities), the products of those activities (outputs), and the changes expected to follow (outcomes and impact). Logic model analysis is the practice of building, examining and using these models to plan programs, guide implementation, and structure evaluation. Popularised by the United Way and codified in the W.K. Kellogg Foundation's widely used 2004 Logic Model Development Guide, it has become the workhorse framework of program planning and evaluation.	Process evaluation examines how a program or policy was actually implemented, rather than only whether it achieved its outcomes. It documents what was delivered, to whom, how much, how well and in what context, so that outcome findings can be interpreted correctly. By assessing implementation fidelity, dose, reach, and the mechanisms and contextual factors at work, process evaluation explains why an intervention succeeded or failed and distinguishes a flawed program theory from a sound theory that was poorly delivered. The UK Medical Research Council's 2015 guidance and earlier health-promotion frameworks consolidated it as a core component of evaluating complex interventions.