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
(730 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Support Healthy Active Kids in Education (SHAKE) (Sonoma, CA)

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

Goal: The goal of the SHAKE program is to use elementary school-based programming to promote childhood health and fitness.

The Compost Club (Sonoma)

Filed under Good Idea, Environmental Health / Energy & Sustainability

Goal: To promote social change and environmental responsibility, reduce carbon output and enable local schools and centers to develop and maintain effective composting and vermiculture systems.

Vamos a Nadar (Let's Go Swimming) (Sonoma)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Prevention & Safety, Children, Families, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: To promote water safety in the Latino community.

King County Asthma Program (King County, WA)

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

Goal: The goal of the King County Asthma Forum is to improve asthma outcomes among low-income children.

Riverside County Greater Avenues for Independence Program (GAIN) Program (Riverside County, CA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Community / Social Environment

Goal: The mission of the program is to work vigorously to free participants from the burden of welfare dependency, and achieve a better, happier lifestyle through self-sufficiency. It will serve the taxpayers of Riverside County by reducing welfare dependency, thus making tax dollars available for other expenditures and needs.

Impact: The program produced a large net savings to the government through increased tax revenues and reduced welfare and food stamps payments (as an estimate, $2.84 saved for every $1.00 invested over five years).

Prime Time Palm Beach County (Palm Beach, FL)

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

Goal: The goal of Prime Time Palm Beach County is to improve the quality of school-age afterschool programs through assessment, guidance, and support.

Impact: Based on the 2009 study findings, Prime Time's Quality Improvement System resulted in improvements made to afterschool programs which enhanced quality programming and important developmental learning experiences for youth.

Alameda County Food Scrap Recycling (Alameda County, CA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Toxins & Contaminants, Urban

Goal: The goal of this program is to reduce food waste in order to achieve the ultimate Alameda County goal of a 75% landfill diversion rate by the year 2010.

Buncombe County Project Access (Buncombe County, NC)

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

Goal: The goal of Project Access is to improve access to specialty health care in Buncombe County.

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.

Child Passenger Safety Partnership of Maricopa County (Maricopa County, AZ)

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

Goal: The goal of this program is to reduce motor vehicle injuries and fatalities among children in Maricopa County.

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