Copy URL
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
(2144 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Checkpoints Program (Connecticut)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Community / Public Safety, Teens

Goal: The goal of the Checkpoints Program is to encourage parental limits on teen driving, and decrease risky teen driving.

Impact: The Checkpoints Program increased the rate at which parents placed greater limits on high-risk teen driving conditions and decreased traffic violations among teens.

Children’s Health Fund (USA)

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

Goal: The Children’s Health Fund’s mission is to provide health care to the nation's most medically underserved children through the development and support of primary care medical programs. The fund also responds to public health crises and works to promote access to health care for all children.

Impact: Children's Health Fund provides medical, dental, and mental health care to approximately 83,000 low-income and homeless children and their family members each year through mobile medical clinics.

Colorado on the Move (Colorado)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Physical Activity, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: The goal of this program is to increase participants' physical activity.

Communities Mobilizing for Change on Alcohol

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Alcohol & Drug Use, Teens

Goal: The goal of CMCA is to change policies and practices of major community institutions to reduce underage access to alcohol.

Impact: CMCA intervention significantly and favorably affected drinking behavior of 18- to 20-year olds and also significantly and favorably affected the practices of establishments serving alcohol. Alcohol merchants increased age-identification checking and reduced their sales to minors. Older teenagers (18 to 20 years old) reduced their provision of alcohol to other teens and were less likely to try to buy alcohol or drink in a bar. Arrests for driving under the influence of alcohol declined significantly among 18- to 20-year-olds.

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.