Skip to main content

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
(2011 results)

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Physical Activity, Children

Goal: The goal of California Farm to School is to teach students about the path that food takes from the farm to their forks while instilling healthy eating habits.

Filed under Good Idea, Economy / Employment, Teens

Goal: The goal of the California Green Corps is to place 1,000 at-risk young adults between the ages of 16 and 24 into "green" jobs in order to stimulate the economy and provide opportunities for disadvantaged youth while improving and protecting the environment.

CDC

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

Impact: Evidence shows that publicly-funded, center-based, comprehensive early childhood development programs for low-income children aged 3 to 5 years can be effective in preventing delay of cognitive development and increasing readiness to learn.

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.

MiCalhoun