The Office of Management and Budget has recommended the termination of numerous federal programs, citing a lack of program results as the primary reason for this decision. In response to this recommendation, several federal agencies have turned to logic modeling to demonstrate that programs are on the path to results accountability. However, approaches to logic modeling in some agencies have not followed the strategies that evaluators recommend as necessary to lead to a high quality logic model. Models of poor quality are unlikely to contribute to improved program accountability or better program results. In this article, the author assesses the quality of the logic-modeling approach taken by one agency to illustrate how a flawed approach to logic modeling may lead to incorrect conclusions about programs and about the benefits of logic models. As a result of this analysis, the author questions the conditions under which capacity building should be considered and whether the field of evaluation needs to be more judicious when mainstreaming methodologies. (Contains 1 table and 2 figures.)