Logic Model Template (2).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Opportunity number
- SFOP0009858
About this file
This document contains a logic model template and details of a related federal grant opportunity from the Department of State Bureau of Conflict Stabilization Operations. The logic model template provides a framework for applicants to outline program goals, objectives, activities, outputs, outcomes, and assumptions. It instructs applicants to include both qualitative and quantitative indicators, and to ensure there is at minimum one output and one outcome per activity as well as outcomes at the objective level.
The federal grant opportunity is solicitation number SFOP0009858 for the Ukraine Veterans Rehabilitation and Reintegration Assistance program. It falls under the federal grant program for Conflict and Stabilization Operations. Applicants should outline how their proposed programs will provide rehabilitation and reintegration support for Ukrainian veterans. The logic model template should help structure proposals to clearly connect program activities to expected outputs and outcomes in support of the stated goals.
Logic Model
View the file
Other files
Show all 12
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Program Title: | |||
| Program Logic Model | |||
| Level | Outcome/Output Indicators | Data Collection Tools | Risks and Assumptions |
| Goal: (overarching envisioned end-state) | |||
| Overall Theory of Change: IF we do x/y/z, THEN we will achieve a/b/c BECAUSE (project assumptions) | |||
| Theory of Change 1: (relates to Objective 1 logic frame) | |||
| Objective 1: (envisioned end-state contributing to goal) | OutCOME 1.1: |
Bruce Hemmer: Bruce Hemmer:
include both qualitative and quantitative indicators OutCOME 1.2:
Bruce Hemmer: Bruce Hemmer:
this section might include important intermediate outcomes that are short of objective but bridge several activities
| Activity 1.1: | OutPUT 1.1.1: |
| OutCOME 1.1.2: |
Bruce Hemmer: Bruce Hemmer:
add additonal outcome indicators as appropriate
| Activity 1.2: | OutPUT 1.2.1: |
| OutCOME 1.2.2: | |
| Theory of Change 2: (relates to Objective 2 logic frame) | |
| Objective 2: (envisioned end-state contributing to goal) | OutCOME 2.1: |
| OutCOME 2.2: | |
| Activity 2.1: | OutPUT 2.1.1: |
| OutCOME 2.1.2: | |
| Activity 2.2: | OutPUT 2.2.1: |
| OutCOME 2.2.2: | |
| Theory of Change 3: (relates to Objective 3 logic frame) | |
| Objective 3: (envisioned end-state contributing to goal) | Outcome 3.1: |
| Outcome 3.2: | |
| Activity 3.1: | OutPUT 3.1.1: |
| OutCOME 3.1.2: | |
| Activity 3.2: | OutPUT 3.2.1: |
| OutCOME 3.2.2: | |
| Notes: Adjust number of objectives and activities as needed. Objectives and goal must be worded as end-states to be achieved, not restatements of activities. There should be a minimum of one output and one outcome per activity, as well as at least one outcome at the objective level. Add more levels of outcomes if appropriate for monitoring needs or tracing causal processes, but keep number of indicators managable. |
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .