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
(1979 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Network Therapy (New York, NY)

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

Goal: The goal of this program is to effectively treat substance abuse by using the patient's social support network to support abstinence.

Impact: Among Network Therapy clients, 64.5% of all samples submitted were negative for opioids, compared with 45.3% of all samples submitted by medication maintenance clients. Furthermore, 88% of urine samples were negative for cocaine for Network Therapy participants, compared with 66% of urine samples collected from treatment-as-usual clients.

New York State Smokers' Quitline (New York)

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

Goal: The New York State Smokers' Quitline is a free and confidential service that provides effective stop smoking services to New Yorkers who want to stop smoking.

Niagara County Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program (Niagara County, NY)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Children's Health, Children

Goal: The goal of this program is to reduce the impact of lead poisoning and to prevent new cases of lead poisoning among Niagara County children.

Non-Emergency Medical Transportation: Findings from a Return on Investment Study

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

Goal: The goal of this study is to examine NEMT’s return on investment and expand research on its financial benefit.

Impact: The findings suggest that NEMT more than pays for itself as part of a care management strategy for people with chronic diseases, resulting in a total positive return on investment of over $40 million per month ($480 million annually) per 30,000 Medicaid beneficiaries.

Nonpoint Source Pollution Partnership (USA)

Filed under Good Idea, Environmental Health / Toxins & Contaminants

Goal: The goal of this program is to maintain and restore water quality in the face of threats and impairments caused by nonpoint source pollution.

Northern Manhattan Start Right Coalition (New York City, NY)

Filed under Evidence-Based Practice, Health / Immunizations & Infectious Diseases, Children, Families, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: The goal of the Northern Manhattan Start Right Coalition is to increase the timely vaccination coverage rate for the 4:3:1:3:3 series for children ages 19 to 35 months.

Impact: The Start Right Coalition increased timely vaccination coverage from 63.0% in 2002 to 96.8% in 2007.

Northern Michigan Diabetes Initiative (Northwest Lower Michigan)

Filed under Good Idea, Health / Diabetes, Children, Teens, Adults, Rural

Goal: The overall goal is to reduce the prevalence of diabetes and improve the care of people with diabetes.

Oakland Pedestrian Safety Project: Walk Oakland! (Oakland, CA)

Filed under Good Idea, Community / Public Safety, Children, Adults, Families

Goal: To prevent pedestrian deaths and injuries in Oakland, California.

Operation Ceasefire (Boston, MA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Community / Crime & Crime Prevention, Children, Urban

Goal: The goals of the program are to carry out a comprehensive strategy to apprehend and prosecute offenders who carry firearms, to put others on notice that offenders face certain and serious punishment for carrying illegal firearms, and to prevent youths from following the same criminal path.

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.