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
(752 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

All Children Excel (ACE) (Ramsey County, MN)

Filed under Effective Practice, Education / Student Performance K-12, Children

Goal: The goal of this program is to prevent delinquency, substance abuse, and school dropout in high risk children.

Wright County Public Health Wellness On Wheels Program (Wright County, MN)

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

Goal: The objectives of WOW are to promote optimal health, to reduce behavioral risks and to promote early detection and improved management of health problems and risks.

Direct Mailing of Fecal Occult Blood Tests to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening (Wright County, MN)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Cancer, Adults

Goal: The goal of this program was to increase colorectal cancer screening using direct mailings of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) kits for noninvasive colon cancer screening.

Impact: Direct mailing of FOBT kits resulted in an increase in self-reported colon cancer screening adherence.

Mailed Psychoeducational Intervention for Colorectal Cancer Screening (England)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Cancer, Adults

Goal: The goal of this program is to improve colorectal cancer screening rates among older adults.

Impact: Participants in the intervention group had significantly higher colorectal cancer screening attendance, as well as having more positive attitudes about screening and placing a higher priority on screening.

Office of Multi-Cultural Services (Hennepin County, MN)

Filed under Good Idea, Economy / Government Assistance, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: The goal of this program is to provide culturally and linguistically appropriate services for the residents of Hennepin County.

New Families Center (Minneapolis, MN)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Health Care Access & Quality, Families, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: 2004 goals of the New Families Center include screening 1,600 children for eligibility in health coverage programs, enrolling 700 children in health care coverage programs, immunizing over 1,300 children; and serving 900 families in need of health care navigation services to help address individual barriers to getting health care.

Rum River Bicycle Classic (Isanti County, MN)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Physical Activity

Goal: The mission of this project is to provide leadership in promoting environments that offer choices for Active Living.

Healthy Kids Sonoma County (Sonoma)

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

Goal: Healthy Kids plans to enroll all uninsured children who are not eligible for Medi-Cal and who are residents of Sonoma County in the health care and insurance program.

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).

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