Home > Promising Practices

Promising Practices

The Promising Practices database informs professionals and community members about documented approaches to improving community health and quality of life.

The ultimate goal is to support the systematic adoption, implementation, and evaluation of successful programs, practices, and policy changes. The database provides carefully reviewed, documented, and ranked practices that range from good ideas to evidence-based practices.
Learn more about the ranking methodology.

Submit a Promising Practice

Search Filters Clear all
(1316 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

CDC Communities Putting Prevention to Work: King County, WA (King County, WA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Physical Activity, Children, Teens

Goal: The King County Communities Putting Prevention to Work initiative goals are to reduce obesity and tobacco use.

Impact: Communities Putting Prevention to Work in King County is associated with reducing obesity prevalence among students in participating school districts and has made substantial progress towards decreasing tobacco use.

Columbia County Healthy Neighborhoods Program (Columbia County)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Environmental Health / Toxins & Contaminants, Families

Goal: The Healthy Neighborhoods program seeks to reduce housing related illness and injury through prevention and education.

Impact: In the past five years, the HNP visited 31,000 homes with 85,000 residents, and provided the asthma intervention to 11,000 adults and children with asthma. The assessments created a valuable data set about the health effects of housing hazards.

Genesee County Land Bank (Genesee, MI)

Filed under Good Idea, Economy / Housing & Homes

Goal: The goal of the Genesee County Land Bank is to return land obtained through foreclosure to the tax roll at a higher and better condition than when received.

Harris County Pollution Control Ozone Monitoring (Harris County, TX)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Air

Goal: The goal of this program is to increase the amount of reliable air quality data that is available to the public in Harris County.

Healthy for Life in Sonoma County (Sonoma County)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Children's Health, Children, Families

Goal: Healthy for Life in Sonoma County is a pilot school-based intervention that seeks to reduce childhood obesity, increase student physical activity, and improve student access to nutrition and medical resources.

Parenting a Second Time Around (PASTA) (USA)

Filed under Good Idea, Community / Social Environment, Older Adults

Goal: The goal of Parenting the Second Time Around (PASTA) is to train facilitators to lead workshops on childcare for grandparent/caregiver relatives.

Project Access of Durham County (Durham, NC)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Health Care Access & Quality

Goal: Project Access Durham County seeks to provide comprehensive healthcare to low-income, uninsured individuals residing in the county for at least six months.

Steps to a Healthier Yuma County (Yuma County, Arizona)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Physical Activity, Children, Rural

Goal: The goal of Steps to a Healthier Yuma County is to prevent obesity and diabetes in young children.

Telecommuting Program - Arizona (Maricopa County, AZ)

Filed under Effective Practice, Community / Transportation

Goal: The State of Arizona's original interest in telecommuting arose out of the search for solutions to common issues facing many areas in the United States: traffic congestion, air pollution, and energy consumption. However, Arizona has found that telecommuting is a powerful management tool that increases employee productivity while reducing the cost of employee turnover.

Triple P - Positive Parenting Program: Palm Beach County (Palm Beach County, FL)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Community / Social Environment, Children, Families

Goal: Triple P aims to enhance the knowledge, skills, and confidence of parents to prevent behavioral, emotional, and developmental problems in children and prevent child maltreatment.

Impact: Triple P increased confidence in parenting ability and reduced the incidence of verified maltreatment among participants in the program.

An Effective Practice meets the following HCI criteria:

  1. The program description includes at a minimum: the sponsoring organization, program goals, program implementation steps, and outcomes that have demonstrated program success and/or promise in achieving the program goal in one or more localities.
  2. The results from an evaluation of the program include quantitative measures of improvement in outcome of interest (i.e. increase in voter registration, not just delivery of voter registration drive) and/ or the outcome measure is increased or improved compared to the baseline measurement or the control group but the difference is not statistically significant.

A Good Idea meets the following HCI criteria:

  1. The program description includes: the sponsoring organization, program goals, program funding source, program implementation steps and outcomes.
  2. The program evaluation is limited to descriptive measure(s) of success/accomplishment (i.e., program participation rates, number of services/education sessions/radio messages provided). Note: oftentimes, the program has been newly implemented and a program evaluation has not yet been conducted. Programs that have not yet been evaluated, but which show promise in improving health or quality of life, are classified as Good Ideas until an evaluation is conducted.

An Evidence-Based Practice meets the following HCI criteria:

  1. The program description includes at a minimum: the sponsoring organization, program goals, program implementation steps, and outcomes that have demonstrated program success in achieving the program goal in one or more localities.
  2. The results from an evaluation of the program include quantitative measures showing improvement in the outcome(s) of interest after the implementation of the program (i.e. increase in smoking cessation, not just the delivery of a smoking cessation program). The outcome measure(s) is/are compared at relevant time periods before and after the intervention or program implementation. Alternatively, the evaluation study compares the outcome(s) between an intervention group and an appropriate control group.
  3. The study is of peer-review quality and presents numbers in a scientific manner; measurements of precision and reliability are included (e.g. confidence intervals, standard errors), results from statistical tests show a significant difference or change in the outcome measure(s), and relevant point estimates and p-values are presented. Note: if the results from an evaluation of a program are presented in a scientific manner and the outcome measure is improved compared to the baseline measurement or the control group but the difference is not statistically significant, the practice is classified as effective and not evidence-based.