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
(2066 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Addressing the Social Determinants of Health through the Alameda County, California, Place Matters Policy Initiative (Alameda County, CA)

Filed under Good Idea, Health, Urban

Goal: The goal of the Place Matters initiative is to improve the health of participating communities by “addressing social conditions that lead to poor health” through “identifying the complex root causes of health disparities and defining strategies to address them.”

Impact: AC Place Matters has identified 10 best practices that could help other programs address social determinants of health: find and foster strong leadership, dedicate staff resources to the work, engage staff from across the local health department, contribute to building grassroots power, address root causes, partner with community organizations and leaders, partner with government institutions across sectors, work reactively and proactively, build capacity, and use tools that ensure a focus on health equity.

Buncombe County Project Access (Buncombe County, NC)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Health Care Access & Quality

Goal: The goal of Project Access is to improve access to specialty health care in Buncombe County.

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).

Direct Mailing of Fecal Occult Blood Tests to Increase Colorectal Cancer Screening (Wright County, MN)

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

Goal: The goal of this program was to increase colorectal cancer screening using direct mailings of fecal occult blood test (FOBT) kits for noninvasive colon cancer screening.

Impact: Direct mailing of FOBT kits resulted in an increase in self-reported colon cancer screening adherence.

Mental Health and Mental Illness: Interventions to Reduce Depression Among Older Adults Clinic-Based Depression Care Management

CDC

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

Impact: The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) recommends depression care management in primary care clinics for older adults with major depression or chronic low levels of depression (dysthymia) on the basis of sufficient evidence of effectiveness in improving short-term depression outcomes.

Reducing Emergency Department Visits and Hospitalizations Through Community Health Workers Integrated Into Primary Care: A Cost-Benefit Analysis

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Other Conditions

Goal: The goal of this study is to determine how many Community Health Workers (CHW) would be needed to reduce emergency department (ED) visits and associated hospitalizations among their assigned patients to be cost-neutral from a payer's perspective.

Impact: This study adds significant knowledge to the existing literature on CHW programs, and particularly provides critical information to payers that can be used for making decisions on appropriate payment models

The Anne Arundel County REACH Program (Anne Arundel County, MD)

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

Goal: The goal of this program is to provide health care access to uninsured, low income residents of Anne Arundel County.

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.