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
(738 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Pushback Against Drug Abuse (Marathon County, WI)

Local

Filed under Local, Effective Practice, Health / Alcohol & Drug Use, Teens

Goal: The mission of Pushback Agasint Drug Abuse is to raise awareness of and eliminate the misuse of alcohol and other drugs in Marathon County.

Impact: Overall, communities funded by Drug Free Communities (DFC) have seen a reduction in alcohol and drug use among youth. Community coalitions like Marathon County’s are valuable tools for eliminating youth substance abuse.

LPN Education Partnership (Juab County, Utah)

Filed under Good Idea, Education / Educational Attainment, Adults, Rural

Goal: The goal of this program is to expand educational opportunities in the community while addressing the issue of a continuing nursing shortage at Central Valley Medical Center.

Utah Commission on Marriage (Utah)

Filed under Good Idea, Community / Social Environment, Families

Goal: The Utah Commission on Marriage is charged with making recommendations about how to promote, strengthen and increase awareness of the importance of marriage in Utah.

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.

Green Ribbon Month to Reduce Speeding in School and Residential Areas (Utah)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Prevention & Safety, Children, Teens, Adults

Goal: To decrease the number of children hit by motor vehicles in school zones and crosswalks.

Parenting a Second Time Around (PASTA) (USA)

Filed under Good Idea, Community / Social Environment, Older Adults

Goal: The goal of Parenting the Second Time Around (PASTA) is to train facilitators to lead workshops on childcare for grandparent/caregiver relatives.

Tobacco Control Compliance Check Program (5 Counties in SW Utah)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Alcohol & Drug Use

Goal: The goal of the program is to reduce the tobacco buy rate to minors. To accomplish this, the program aims to produce a "zero sale" result in each of the retail establishments every time a compliance check is conducted.

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.