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
(1918 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Antismoking Media Campaign (Massachusetts)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Adolescent Health, Teens

Goal: To reduce the number of older adolescents who progress to established smoking.

Impact: The television component of the Massachusetts antismoking media campaign may have reduced the rate of progression to established smoking among young adolescents.

Asthma Basics for Children (ABC) (New York, NY)

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

Goal: The goal of the program was to provide a multi-layered asthma management program for parents, children, and staff of early childhood centers.

Impact: The ABC program demonstrates that a multi-layered approach can improve asthma outcomes among preschoolers with a combination of parent and provider education having the greatest impact.

Baltimore Needle Exchange Program (Baltimore, MD)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Alcohol & Drug Use, Women, Men, Racial/Ethnic Minorities, Urban

Goal: The goal of the Baltimore Needle Exchange Program is to reduce HIV, hepatitis, and other infections by reducing the use of unclean needles and to help individuals overcome substance abuse by connecting them to harm reduction services and drug treatment programs. The experimental case manager intervention program at the Baltimore NEP looked to increase the percentage of intravenous drug users who enrolled in city sponsored substance abuse programs following referral at the Baltimore NEP sites.

Impact: The intervention program through Baltimore NEP was effective in increasing entry of intravenous drug users into drug drug treatment programs and highlights the need for more accessible treatment programs and harm-reduction services, such as mobile treatment facilities.

Better Choices, Better Health (USA)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Other Conditions, Adults, Older Adults

Goal: Better Choices, Better HealthTM gives people with chronic conditions the skills to coordinate all the things needed to manage their heath, as well as to help them keep active in their lives.

Blues Program (Cognitive Behavioral Group Depression Intervention)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Mental Health & Mental Disorders, Teens

Goal: To significantly reduce depressive symptoms and to reduce the rates of future major depressive disorder onset among adolescents.

Impact: The Blues Program has been shown to decrease depressive symptoms, decrease rates of major depression onset, decrease rates of substance use, and increase factors that are protective against depression.

CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Breast Cancer Prevention & Control, Provider-Oriented Screening Interventions: Provider Reminder & Recall Systems (USA)

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Cancer, Adults

Goal: The goal of incorporating multicomponent interventions for cancer screenings is to increase breast cancer screenings in communities.

Impact: Multicomponent interventions that include strategies that reduce and address structural barriers increase cancer screening rates by the largest margins.

CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Cancer Prevention & Control, Client-Oriented Screening Interventions: Reducing Out-of-Pocket Costs: Breast Cancer (USA)

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Cancer, Adults, Women

Goal: The goal of the interventions is to reduce client out-of-pocket costs to minimize or remove economic barriers that make it difficult for clients to access cancer screening services.

Impact: Costs can be reduced through a variety of approaches, including vouchers, reimbursements, reduction in co-pays, or adjustments in federal or state insurance coverage. Efforts to reduce client costs may be combined with client education, information about programs, or measures to reduce barriers.

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.
Santa Cruz