01
Inputs
What the program actually has: staff time, partners, facilities, and the dollars you are requesting. Clarity here is what makes the rest of the model credible instead of aspirational.
Innovative Learning CenterResearch & Evaluation
Hybrid workshop · Research and Evaluation
A step-by-step workshop for turning your program’s everyday work into a logic model funders can read — and an evaluation plan drawn from the same model.
Hybrid format: on demand + recurring live session. Start with the free workbook
Credentials
25+
years in research and evaluation
Federal
funding experience across agencies and programs
NSF ATE
background in technical and workforce education
Funders love the term. It appears in nearly every proposal. And still, most clients love the word without understanding it. This workshop closes that gap.
A logic model is not a diagram you attach at the end. It is the argument your budget, your activities, and your promised outcomes have to survive.
The structure, the four elements, and the prompts, in your hands at no cost. Many people arrive here already holding it.
Where your specific program gets worked through with an evaluator, not filled into a template. Deliberately not an AI only shortcut. The expert in the room is the product.
Scroll to move through the chain. Each element has to pay for the one after it.
What the program actually has: staff time, partners, facilities, and the dollars you are requesting. Clarity here is what makes the rest of the model credible instead of aspirational.
The work those resources buy. Named plainly, sized honestly, and written so a reviewer can picture the week it happens rather than the category it belongs to.
The countable products of the work. Outputs are where most proposals quietly overreach, promising volume the stated inputs were never going to produce.
The change you are claiming, aligned to realistic resources and written so it can be measured. This is the line that becomes your evaluation plan.
Five working capabilities, in the order a proposal is actually built. Hover any line to open it.
What a reviewer looks for first, what they skim, and where a weak model quietly costs you the score.
Sorting the four elements without the blur that turns most models into a restatement of the same sentence four times.
Testing whether the change you are promising is arithmetically possible with the staff, time, and dollars in the request.
You leave with a model in usable form, not a classroom exercise you still have to translate before submission.
Turning outcomes into measures, sources, and timing, so the plan you are funded on is the plan you can report against.
Bring the program you are writing about now.
Enroll in the workshop →
The teaching is recorded and ready, so you start the moment you enroll and move at the pace your deadline requires.
A standing group session for questions and feedback on the model you are drafting, with the evaluator in the room.
The workbook gives you the structure. This is the guided layer where your specific program gets worked through.
Deliberately not an AI only shortcut. The expert in the room is the product.
Tools can format a logic model. They cannot tell you whether a funder will believe the outcome you just promised, or whether your budget can carry it. That judgment comes from someone who has sat on both sides of the review.
Walk out with a model that drops into the narrative, so the logic section stops being the part you rewrite last.
Walk out able to tell whether the outcomes your team is promising are carried by the resources in the budget.
Walk out with outcomes written as measures, so the plan you were funded on is the plan you can report against.
It is a recurring group session for questions and feedback. You bring the model you are drafting and work through it with the instructor rather than watching another lecture.
No. The workbook is the free structural layer and many people arrive holding it already, but the workshop stands on its own and covers the four elements from the beginning.
The core teaching is on demand, so nothing is gated behind attendance. The live session recurs, which means you join the next one that fits your deadline.
Yes. The four elements and the alignment between resources and promised outcomes are what reviewers look for regardless of the funder. The federal and NSF ATE experience is where the standard was set.
To be confirmed by the instructor before launch. Access terms will be stated on the checkout page.
Making Logic Models Work for Grants: From Proposal to Evaluation Plan
Enroll and begin immediately with the on demand core, then bring your draft to the next live session.
