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
(1766 results)

Save a link to this search

Ranking
Featured
Primary Target Audience
Topics and Subtopics
Geographic Type
Search

Abriendo Puertas / Opening Doors Network (USA)

Filed under Effective Practice, Education / Childcare & Early Childhood Education, Children, Families, Racial/Ethnic Minorities

Goal: Abriendo Puertas, developed for and by Latino parents, aims to increase the number of Latino children in the United States that enter school ready to learn and be able to succeed in life by building the capacity and confidence of parents to be strong advocates in the lives of their children.

Babies Can't Wait (Georgia)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Maternal, Fetal & Infant Health, Children, Families

Goal: The goal of Babies Can't Wait is to guarantee access to early intervention services for infants and toddlers with special needs.

Brevard County Volunteer Dental Clinic (Brevard County, FL)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Oral Health

Goal: The goal of this program is to provide timely intervention and oral health service delivery to the stated population in order to reduce impact on local emergency departments and elevate the oral health care of Brevard's low-income citizens.

CareMore: Nonemergency Medical Transport

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

Goal: To provide transportation and improve patient satisfaction for nonemergency medical services.

Impact: CareMore's NEMT was so successful in the first 3 months, the programs were expanded in California, Nevada, Arizona, and Virginia.

Cost Benefit Analysis of Providing Non-Emergency Medical Transportation

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

Goal: The goals of this promising practice were to identify the transportation-disadvantaged population that lacks nonemergency medical care because of low access to transportation; determine the medical conditions that this population experiences and describe other characteristics of these individuals, including geography; estimate the cost of providing the transportation necessary for this population to obtain medical transportation according to various transportation service needs and trip modes; estimate the healthcare costs and benefits that would result if these individuals obtained transportation to non-emergency medical care for key healthcare conditions prevalent for this population; and compare the relative costs (from transportation and routine healthcare) and benefits (such as improved quality of life and better managed care, leading to less emergency care) to determine the cost-effectiveness of providing transportation for selected conditions.

Impact: These results show that adding relatively small transportation costs do not make a disease-specific, otherwise cost-effective environment non-cost-effective. Providing increased access to non-emergency medical care does improve quality of life and saves money per patient.

Flex Your Power Case Study: City and County of San Francisco (San Francisco)

Filed under Effective Practice, Environmental Health / Energy & Sustainability, Urban

Goal: The goal of these projects was to find ways to maximize energy conservation and efficiency through measures with a quick payback period.

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.

Housing for Health Permanent Supportive Housing Program (Los Angeles County)

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

Goal: Housing for Health program goals are to improve patients’ health, reduce costs to the public health system, and demonstrate DHS’s commitment to addressing homelessness within Los Angeles County.

Impact: The average public service utilization cost per participant for the year prior to housing totaled $38,146; in the year after receiving housing, it totaled $15,358. When taking into account PSH costs, RAND observed a 20-percent net cost savings, suggesting a potential cost benefit of the program.

Independent Transportation Network (Portland, ME)

Filed under Effective Practice, Health / Older Adults, Older Adults

Goal: The mission of this program is to provide a community-based, and community supported, economically viable and consumer-oriented, quality transportation service for seniors.

L.A. County's Emergency Survival Program (Los Angeles)

Filed under Good Idea, Community / Governance, Urban

Goal: The goal is to help prepare communities for earthquakes, fires, floods, terrorism, and other natural and man-made disasters.

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.