Evaluation for community-based programs: the integration of logic models and factor analysis.

PURPOSE To discuss the utility of and value of the use of logic models for program evaluation of community-based programs and more specifically, the integration of logic models and factor analysis to develop and revise a survey as part of an effective evaluation plan. PRINCIPAL RESULTS Diverse stakeholders with varying outlooks used a logic model as a framework to reach agreement on a plan for a state-wide evaluation. This evaluation plan utilized a survey of sixth grade students, administered before and after exposure to a year-long abstinence education program. Components of the logic model were linked to specific survey questions. Exploratory factor analysis was then used to assess whether and how the questions in the survey fit with the constructs of the model; confirmatory factor analysis was used to test the hypothesis that the factors identified in the exploratory analysis were consistently represented in the survey. MAJOR CONCLUSIONS A logic model is a tool that engages stakeholders to link evaluation instruments more closely to specific program objectives. Thus, stakeholders can more closely assess the extent to which project outcomes have been achieved. In addition, use of factor analysis in the evaluation process can help the stakeholders better understand whether evaluation instruments such as a survey adequately assess program effectiveness. Lastly, a logic model process can help to achieve consensus among diverse stakeholders, by allowing them to focus on objectives that are concrete, measurable, and mutually acceptable.

[1]  Beaufort B Longest,et al.  Logic Models as Aids in Managing Health Programs , 2005, The Journal of nursing administration.

[2]  Justine Wheeler,et al.  Impacts of Four Title V Section 510 Abstinence Education Programs , 2007 .

[3]  Ralph Renger,et al.  How Using a Logic Model Refined Our Program to Ensure Success , 2009, Health promotion practice.

[4]  Rudolph Rummel,et al.  Understanding factor analysis , 1967 .

[5]  Larry Hatcher,et al.  A Step-by-Step Approach to Using the SAS System for Factor Analysis and Structural Equation Modeling , 1994 .

[6]  P. Bearman,et al.  Power in Numbers: Peer Effects on Adolescent Girls’ Sexual Debut and Pregnancy. , 1999 .

[7]  A. Mcalister,et al.  Evaluating the impact of a theory-based sexuality and contraceptive education program. , 1990, Family planning perspectives.

[8]  Linda J Hulton An Evaluation of a School-Based Teenage Pregnancy Prevention Program Using a Logic Model Framework , 2007, The Journal of school nursing : the official publication of the National Association of School Nurses.

[9]  J. V. Fetro,et al.  Reducing the risk: impact of a new curriculum on sexual risk-taking. , 1991, Family planning perspectives.

[10]  G. Semin,et al.  Sexual efficacy of adolescents, permissiveness, and the transition toward nonvirginity: From intention to behavior. , 1999 .

[11]  Barbara A. Israel,et al.  Process evaluation for public health interventions and research , 2002 .

[12]  K. Glanz,et al.  An Ecological Perspective on Health Promotion Programs , 1988, Health education quarterly.

[13]  Peer effects on adolescent girls sexual debut and pregnancy risk. , 1999 .

[14]  J. Santelli,et al.  Abstinence-only education policies and programs: a position paper of the Society for Adolescent Medicine. , 2006, The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine.

[15]  Jae-On Kim,et al.  Factor Analysis: Statistical Methods and Practical Issues , 1978 .

[16]  Robin Darton,et al.  Rotation in Factor Analysis , 1980 .

[17]  Joy A. Frechtling Logic Modeling Methods in Program Evaluation , 2007 .

[18]  John A. McLaughlin,et al.  Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story , 1999 .

[19]  K. Wallston,et al.  Development and validation of the health locus of control (HLC) scale. , 1976, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[20]  Meghan M. Gillen,et al.  Religiosity, sexual behaviors, and sexual attitudes during emerging adulthood , 2004, Journal of sex research.

[21]  I. Ajzen,et al.  Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research , 1977 .

[22]  D. Vlahov,et al.  Childhood sexual abuse and age at initiation of injection drug use. , 2005, American journal of public health.

[23]  A. Bandura Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. , 1982 .

[24]  Lisa J. Crockett,et al.  Timing of first sexual intercourse: The role of social control, social learning, and problem behavior , 1996, Journal of youth and adolescence.

[25]  L. Whitbeck,et al.  Early Adolescent Sexual Activity: A Developmental Study , 1999 .

[26]  S. Walker,et al.  Common reasons why peer education fails. , 1999, Journal of adolescence.

[27]  J. Rohrbaugh,et al.  Religiosity in youth: a personal control against deviant behavior. , 1975, Journal of personality.

[28]  Ralph Renger,et al.  A Three-Step Approach to Teaching Logic Models , 2002 .

[29]  J. Rosenbaum Patient Teenagers? A Comparison of the Sexual Behavior of Virginity Pledgers and Matched Nonpledgers , 2009, Pediatrics.

[30]  Deborah Helitzer,et al.  Development of a Planning and Evaluation Methodology for Assessing the Contribution of Theory to a Diabetes Prevention Lifestyle Intervention , 2008, Health promotion practice.

[31]  L. Bickman The functions of program theory , 1987 .

[32]  James R. Allen,et al.  A Collaborative Approach to Program Evaluation of Community-Based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Projects , 2004, Health promotion practice.

[33]  Serena Ng,et al.  A Factor Analysis of Bond Risk Premia , 2009 .