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
(915 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Chronic Disease Self-Management Program in Wyoming (Cheyenne, WY)

Local

Filed under Local, Evidence-Based Practice, Health

Goal: To help people with chronic conditions take an active role in their health care.

Brevard County Volunteer Dental Clinic (Brevard County, FL)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Oral Health

Goal: The goal of this program is to provide timely intervention and oral health service delivery to the stated population in order to reduce impact on local emergency departments and elevate the oral health care of Brevard's low-income citizens.

Cervical Cancer Screening and Follow-up (Brevard County, FL)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Women's Health, Women

Goal: The goal of this program is to provide timely, effective, clinically appropriate intervention for abnormal Pap tests at no or very-low cost in order to reduce cervical cancer mortality.

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).

Drive-Through Flu Clinic (Grand Forks, ND)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases

Goal: The goal of the Greater Grand Forks Immunization Coalition is to have all residents protected from vaccine-preventable diseases.The Drive-Through Flu Clinic was designed to address barriers to vaccination in the community for residents six months of age and older.

Flex Your Power Case Study: City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Energy & Sustainability, Urban

Goal: The goal of these projects was to find ways to maximize energy conservation and efficiency through measures with a quick payback period.

Flex Your Power Case Study: Kings County (Kings County, CA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Energy & Sustainability

Goal: The energy goals of the committee were to save money, reduce energy usage and to "stay on" during blackouts to avoid sending employees home.

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.

WHACK the Flu (Berkeley, CA)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases, Children

Goal: The goal of the WHACK the Flu project was to provide strategies for children to employ to reduce the transmission of communicable diseases to their families and other contacts.

Avian Flu Outbreak and Vaccination Drill (Yolo County, CA)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases

Goal: The purpose of the exercise was to train health and emergency medical personnel in planning for and responding to large scale disease outbreaks. The most proven method to assure an effective response to a real event is to practice a well-coordinated multi-agency field exercise.

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.