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
(1239 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

The Seattle-King County Healthy Homes Project (Seattle-King County, Washington)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Respiratory Diseases, Children, Families

Goal: The goals of the Seattle-King Healthy Homes project are: to increase knowledge of home environmental health threats and asthma self-management among households with a child who suffers from asthma; help households reduce environmental threats in the household; improve health status and reduce asthma-related medical care utilization.

Career Pathways (Seattle-King County, WA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Economy / Employment

Goal: The goal of this program is to improve retention of hospital employees to address critical shortages in health care staffing.

Flex Your Power Case Study: Orange County Water District (Orange County, CA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Energy & Sustainability

Goal: OCWD's goals in 2001 were to reduce energy load, save money and preserve/extend equipment life. Its projects targeted power use in buildings' electrical/lighting systems; chemical and energy management issues concerning the plant treatment process and HVAC systems; and energy use by employees and ultimately customers.

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.

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.

Dental Caries (Cavities): Community Water Fluoridation

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Oral Health

Impact: The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) recommends community water fluoridation to reduce tooth decay (i.e., dental caries or cavities).

Hometown Walk of Hope (Union City, TN)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Cancer, Urban

Goal: The goal of Hometown Walk of Hope is to raise money to help Obion County residents who have been diagnosed with cancer.

Stop Waste (Alameda County, CA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Toxins & Contaminants

Goal: The Waste Management Authority and the Source Reduction and Recycling Board form an integrated Agency dedicated to achieving the most environmentally sound solid waste management and resource conservation program for the people of Alameda County. Within this context, the Agency is committed to achieving a 75% and beyond diversion goal and promoting sustainable consumption and disposal patterns.

Walking School Bus (Houston, TX)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Children's Health, Children, Urban

Goal: The goal of the "walking school bus" is to increase children's rates of active commuting to school and physical activity.

WalkSafe (Florida)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Community / Public Safety, Children, Urban

Goal: The WalkSafe program was developed to improve pediatric pedestrian safety, increase physical activity levels by encouraging children to walk to and from school, and improve the walkability in and around elementary schools.

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.
Nevada Tomorrow