The Logic Model In The Canadian Health Care System

Introduction
Logic models are either narrative or graphic depictions of reality processes of a program. These processes are built as a result of a problem (situation) in a given context. The logic model provides links between the situation (problem) and processes employed in solving the problem. The processes are explained often in four levels, input, activities, output and outcome. However, for an explicit demonstration of how the processes helped solve the situations, different scholars have suggested sub-division of some of the levels as shown in figure 1 below.

Input also known as resources could be human or financial resources as well as other necessary input to support the program. Activities are those events that produce the

The question is:
‘To what extent has the OIEPB program increased the number of internationally educated physiotherapist as an autonomous/independent practitioner in the Canadian health care system?’
For effective program evaluation using logic model, McLaughlin and Jordan, (2015) described five stages: (a) collecting the relevant information; (b) describing the problem of the program; (c) defining the elements of the logic models in a table; (d) constructing the logic model; and (e) verifying the model.
Stage 1: Collecting the relevant information involves gathering of information pertaining to the program. This could be done through literature review, document review and interviews with different stakeholders. It is often an interactive process between the program managers, evaluators and stakeholders.
Stage 2: Describing the problems simply involves clearly defining the problem (situation of the program). Based on the identified general question above, the problem could be define as the need for increased number of internationally educated physiotherapists as an autonomous/independent practitioner in the Canadian health care system. This can be further explored in details in stage 3

How and to what extent was the clinical placement developed?
3. How was the clinical placement during the OIEBP program assessed to ensure that the IEPTs are ready to face the Physiotherapy Competency Exam- Written or/and Clinical?
4. Is communication between the Alliance (those that conduct the Physiotherapy Competency exams) and the OIEPB program adequate for the effective development of the clinical placement?
5. To what extent did the clinical placement improve the passing of the Physiotherapy Competency Exam- Written or/and clinical by the IEPTs after the Bridging program?
6. Has the improved passing of PCE-written led to an increased number of IEPTs practicing as physiotherapy assistants after the OIEBP program?
7. To what degree has working in a clinic as a physiotherapy assistant by the IEPTS affected the pass rate of the PCE-clinical? (i.e.) being an independent physiotherapist?

Question No, 2: To what extent did the clinical placement improve the passing of the Physiotherapy Competency Exam- Written or clinical of the IEPTs after the Bridging program? This is a corresponding question to the short term outcome components in the logic model above (figure 3) and will be used to describe an evaluation design in the subsequent