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
(916 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

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.

Home Again: A Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness in Portland and Multnomah County (Portland and Multnomah County, OR)

Filed under Effective Practice, Economy / Housing & Homes, Urban

Goal: The goal of this program is to end homelessness in the City of Portland and Multnomah County by 2015. As efforts to end homelessness continue, city and county officials will focus on nine actions. Programs throughout the county will address moving people into Housing First, ending the practice of discharging people into homelessness from jails and hospitals, improving outreach, emphasizing permanent solutions, increasing the housing supply, creating new partnerships, improving the rent assistance system, increasing economic opportunity for homeless people and implementing new data collection technology.

Increasing Age-Appropriate Immunization Rates for Children in Butler County and Surrounding Area (Butler County, KS)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases, Children, Rural

Goal: The goal of this program was to increase immunization rates in the Butler County area.

Impact: Immunization rates increased from 53.2% to 72.4% and parents reported a better understanding of the importance of timely vaccinations.

Niagara County Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (Niagara County, NY)

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

Goal: The goal of this program is to reduce the impact of lead poisoning and to prevent new cases of lead poisoning among Niagara County children.

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.

The Anne Arundel County REACH Program (Anne Arundel County, MD)

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

Goal: The goal of this program is to provide health care access to uninsured, low income residents of Anne Arundel County.

The Seattle-King County Healthy Homes Project (Seattle-King County, Washington)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Respiratory Diseases, Children, Families

Goal: The goals of the Seattle-King Healthy Homes project are: to increase knowledge of home environmental health threats and asthma self-management among households with a child who suffers from asthma; help households reduce environmental threats in the household; improve health status and reduce asthma-related medical care utilization.

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.
MiCalhoun