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
(1763 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Charleston Dorchester Mental Health Center Partnerships (South Carolina)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Mental Health & Mental Disorders, Children, Adults

Goal: By partnering with key community stakeholders, the Charleston Dorchester Mental Health Center is committed to providing accessible, affordable, quality mental health services to residents of Charleston and Dorchester counties.

Impact: Charleston Dorchester Mental Health Center Partnerships has resulted in increased hospital and emergency services diversion, increased children tenure in communities and schools, and provided essential mental health services to improve the overall quality of life for residents of the community.

Coalbed Methane Outreach Program (CMOP) (USA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Air

Goal: CMOP's goal is to reduce methane emissions from coalbeds by promoting the profitable recovery and use of coal mine methane.

Community Mental Health System

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Mental Health & Mental Disorders, Teens, Adults, Older Adults

Goal: CredibleMind helps surface resources with scientific validity to empower community members to take control of their mental health and spiritual well-being.

Impact: CredibleMind is available to the public and is also available as a customizable solution for community coalitions, health departments, hospitals, health plans, employers and other professional organizations to connect users to local services and resources.

Cost Benefit Analysis of Providing Non-Emergency Medical Transportation

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Health Care Access & Quality

Goal: The goals of this promising practice were to identify the transportation-disadvantaged population that lacks nonemergency medical care because of low access to transportation; determine the medical conditions that this population experiences and describe other characteristics of these individuals, including geography; estimate the cost of providing the transportation necessary for this population to obtain medical transportation according to various transportation service needs and trip modes; estimate the healthcare costs and benefits that would result if these individuals obtained transportation to non-emergency medical care for key healthcare conditions prevalent for this population; and compare the relative costs (from transportation and routine healthcare) and benefits (such as improved quality of life and better managed care, leading to less emergency care) to determine the cost-effectiveness of providing transportation for selected conditions.

Impact: These results show that adding relatively small transportation costs do not make a disease-specific, otherwise cost-effective environment non-cost-effective. Providing increased access to non-emergency medical care does improve quality of life and saves money per patient.

Engaging Men and Boys of Color to Improve Mental Wellbeing (Washington)

Filed under Good Idea, Environmental Health / Built Environment, Children, Teens, Men, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: Making Connections for Mental Health and Wellbeing Among Men and Boys is a national initiative to transform community conditions that influence mental wellbeing. The Prevention Institute works with 13 communities across the U.S. to shift policies, practices, and norms to create greater opportunities for health and resilience, with particular focus on veterans and men and boys of color.

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