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.

Practices that were submitted by local partners are listed first and will have a green box below them that indicates they are local. Users can also use the search features to find promising practices from across the country.

Submit a Promising Practice

Search Filters Clear all
(858 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Reducing Alcohol-Impaired Driving: Multicomponent Interventions with Community Mobilization (USA)

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Prevention & Safety, Adults

Impact: The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) recommends the use of multicomponent interventions with community mobilization on the basis of strong evidence of their effectiveness in reducing alcohol-impaired driving.

CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Restricting Minors’ Access to Tobacco Products: Community Mobilization with Additional Interventions (USA)

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Alcohol & Drug Use, Children, Teens, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Impact: The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) recommends community mobilization combined with additional interventions —such as stronger local laws directed at retailers, active enforcement of retailer sales laws, and retailer education with reinforcement—on the basis of sufficient evidence of effectiveness in reducing youth tobacco use and access to tobacco products from commercial sources.

CDC COMMUNITY GUIDE: Universally Recommended Vaccinations: Home Visits to Increase Vaccination Rates (USA)

CDC

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases, Children, Teens, Adults, Older Adults, Families

Impact: The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) recommends home visits to increase vaccination rates in children and adults.

The CPSTF notes, however, that economic evidence shows home visits can be resource-intensive and costly relative to other options.

Champions for Change (California)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Physical Activity, Families, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: The goal of the movement of Californians who are becoming Champions for Change are: 1. Eating Healthy; 2. Moving More; 3. Drinking more water and fewer sugary drinks; 4. Using CalFresh benefits to help buy healthier foods for your family; 5. Connecting with other Champions for Change.

Impact: A program using social media and integrated grassroots activities can potentially successfully influence healthy behavior and community-level changes when it comes to eating and drinking healthier and exercising more.

Check & Connect

Filed under Good Idea, Education / Educational Attainment, Children, Teens

Goal: The goal of Check & Connect is to encourage middle and high school students to stay on track towards graduation. Check & Connect seeks to foster student engagement at school and with learning. In Check & Connect, engagement is defined as commitment to and investment in learning, as well as identification with and belonging at school. Engagement is associated with desired academic, behavioral, cognitive, and affective outcomes, such as persisting in school and graduating.

Impact: Students who participate in Check & Connect are significantly more likely to stay in high school than similar peers who did not receive the intervention (24%). Students who participate in Check & Connect are significantly more likely to complete high school than peers who did not receive the intervention (20%).

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.
Impact DuPage