Community-Defined Evidence Practices (CDEPs)

Both evidence-based interventions and community-defined evidence practices (CDEPs) play critical roles in addressing various substance misuse prevention needs of communities. While evidence-based interventions have undergone rigorous testing and been supported by multiple studies to earn their “evidence-based” designation, not all effective programs have followed such a standardized research trajectory. Some impactful interventions may not yet meet formal criteria, but still demonstrate remarkable success through culturally grounded approaches and community validation.

Some evidence-based interventions have been successfully adapted and applied in various settings; however, their effectiveness may not always translate seamlessly across different communities due to variations in cultural values, resources, and readiness to act. CDEPs are developed by and for communities, emerging from lived experiences, shared values, and contextual knowledge. While these practices may not be widely replicable across different contexts, they can be equally—if not more—impactful, precisely because they are tailored to the unique needs of the populations they serve.

CDEPs have earned recognition for producing positive outcomes in real-world contexts. They reflect ways of knowing that may fall outside traditional academic frameworks but are deeply aligned with community-defined measures of success. These approaches are especially important in communities that have been underserved.

Because CDEPs are shaped by the communities that use them, they are often more responsive to the realities of communities of color, Indigenous peoples, immigrants, and other minority groups. By centering cultural beliefs, historical context, language, and local priorities, these practices foster trust, enhance engagement, and support lasting change.

Key characteristics of CDEPs

Culturally Grounded Practices: CDEPs are deeply embedded in cultural traditions and beliefs. Since cultural values shape how individuals perceive health, education, and support, aligning interventions with these values enhances relevance and efficacy. Programs that reflect community identities and traditions foster trust and increase the likelihood of sustained engagement and meaningful outcomes.
Community-Driven Development: These practices are created and supported by the communities they serve. This ensures they address real needs and reflect authentic priorities. When communities are centered in the design, implementation, and evaluation processes, interventions are more likely to be embraced, trusted, and sustained over time. This approach shifts the paradigm from conducting research on communities to doing research with and for them.
Effectiveness Demonstrated Through Real-World Experience: CDEPs derive their credibility from lived experience and practical application. By valuing outcomes observed in real-life settings, CDEPs broaden our definition of what constitutes valid evidence. This helps bridge the gap between research and practice, offering solutions that are responsive, adaptable, and beneficial.

Though CDEPs may not meet the traditional standards of evidence-based interventions, they should still adhere to thoughtful criteria. These include clearly defined practices, demonstrated understanding of the target population, consistent community utilization, the potential to track outcomes, and long-term sustainability.

Some examples of CDEPs include:

Community-led health initiatives: Health programs created and driven by community members to directly address the unique health concerns, needs, and strengths of their population. These initiatives often rely on local knowledge, leadership, and culturally relevant approaches.
Culturally-tailored interventions: Programs intentionally adapted to reflect the cultural beliefs, traditions, and practices of a specific community. These interventions enhance relevance, trust, and engagement, increasing their effectiveness.

Like evidence-based interventions, CDEPs should be implemented with sound data collection, fidelity monitoring, and thoughtful evaluation. Effectiveness can take many forms, and choosing the right approach depends on a deep understanding of your community’s unique context, values, and priorities.

References

Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2017). Considering culture: Building the best evidence-based practices for children of color. Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved from https://www.aecf.org/resources/considering-culture
Echo-Hawk, H. (2011). Indigenous Communities and Evidence Building. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 43(4), 269–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2011.628920
Martinez, Ken & Callejas, Linda & Hernandez, Mario. (2010). Community-Defined Evidence: A Bottom-Up Behavioral Health Approach to Measure What Works in Communities of Color. Emotional & Behavioral Disorders in Youth, 6, 11-16.