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
(2058 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Environmental and Policy Approaches to Increase Physical Activity: Community-Scale Urban Design Land Use Policies (USA)

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Physical Activity, Children, Teens, Adults, Women, Men, Older Adults, Families, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Impact: Design and land use policies that encourage physical activity in urban areas can help increase overall physical activity in bikers and walkers.

Families Learning and Growing (F.L.A.G.ship) (Marin)

Filed under Good Idea, Education / Literacy, Families

Goal: The program's goal is to provide school readiness activities for families with children, from birth to five years old, who live in isolated and under-served areas of Marin County.

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.

Flex Your Power Case Study: Otay Water District (San Diego County, CA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Energy & Sustainability

Goal: The goal of these projects was to promote water and energy conservation.

Flex Your Power Case Study: South Tahoe Public Utility District (South Lake Tahoe, CA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Energy & Sustainability

Goal: The overall purpose of the energy evaluation was to demonstrate how operational and process modifications could be made to lower the demand and energy costs for various facilities within STPUD. More specifically, the goal was to reduce electrical energy consumed at the plant and to reduce SPPC billings.

Fulmer SPICES: An Overall Assessment Tool for Older Adults (New York, NY)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Older Adults, Older Adults

Goal: The goal of this tool is to improve patient care for older adults by helping nurses to evaluate common conditions.

Geriatric Initiative (Charleston, West Virginia)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Older Adults, Older Adults, Urban

Goal: The goal of the Geriatrics Initiative is to make healthcare more accessible and of higher quality for the elderly population served by Charleston Area Medical Center.

Gilda's Club (New York, NY)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Cancer

Goal: The mission of Gilda's Club is to provide places where men, women, and children with cancer and their families and friends join with others to build social and emotional support as a supplement to medical care.

Great Body Shop

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Alcohol & Drug Use, Children

Goal: The goal of this program is to educate children about health and to prevent substance abuse and violence.

Impact: The Great Body Shop shows that comprehensive substance abuse and violence prevention and health curriculums in schools for elementary and middle school students can improve knowledge, values, thinking skills, and behaviors around substance abuse and violence topic areas.

Health Equity: Tenant-Based Housing Voucher Programs

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Economy / Housing & Homes

Impact: The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) recommends tenant-based housing voucher programs to improve health and health-related outcomes for adults based on sufficient evidence of effectiveness. Health-related outcomes include housing quality and security, healthcare use, and neighborhood opportunities (e.g., lower poverty level, better schools).

Children ages 12 years and younger whose households use vouchers show improvements in education, employment, and income later in life. Outcomes for adolescents vary by gender. Females 10-20 years of age whose families use tenant-based vouchers to live in lower poverty neighborhoods experience better health outcomes while males of the same age experience worse physical and mental health outcomes. Additional research is needed to better understand and address challenges faced by adolescent males.

CPSTF finds societal benefits exceed the cost of tenant-based housing voucher programs that serve families with young children who are living in public housing, provide pre-move counseling, and move families to neighborhoods with greater opportunities.

Tenant-based housing voucher programs give many people access to better housing and neighborhood opportunities, both of which are considered social determinants of health. Because these programs are designed for households with low incomes, they are expected to advance health equity.

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.