Community Health Workers (CHWs) have gained national recognition for their role in addressing health disparities and are increasingly integrated into the health care delivery system. There is a lack of consensus, however, regarding empirical evidence on the impact of CHW interventions on health outcomes. In this paper, we present results from the 2010 National Community Health Worker Advocacy Survey (NCHWAS) in an effort to strengthen a generalized understanding of the CHW profession that can be integrated into ongoing efforts to improve the health care delivery system. Results indicate that regardless of geographical location, work setting, and demographic characteristics, CHWs generally share similar professional characteristics, training preparation, and job activities. CHWs are likely to be female, representative of the community they serve, and to work in community health centers, clinics, community-based organizations, and health departments. The most common type of training is on-the-job and conference training. Most CHWs work with clients, groups, other CHWs and less frequently community leaders to address health issues, the most common of which are chronic disease, prevention and health care access. Descriptions of CHW activities documented in the survey demonstrate that CHWs apply core competencies in a synergistic manner in an effort to assure that their clients get the services they need. NCHWAS findings suggest that over the past 50 years, the CHW field has become standardized in response to the unmet needs of their communities. In research and practice, the field would benefit from being considered a health profession rather than an intervention.
Public policy that seeks to achieve sustainable improvements in the social determinants of health, such as income, education, housing, food security and neighborhood conditions, can create positive and sustainable health effects. This paper describes preliminary results of Acción para la Salud, a public health intervention in which Community health workers (CHWs) from five health agencies engaged their community in the process of making positive systems and environmental changes. Academic-community partners trained Acción CHWs in community advocacy and provided ongoing technical assistance in developing strategic advocacy plans. The CHWs documented community advocacy activities through encounter forms in which they identified problems, formulated solutions, and described systems and policy change efforts. Strategy maps described the steps of the advocacy plans. Findings demonstrate that CHWs worked to initiate discussions about underlying social determinants and environment-related factors that impact health, and identified solutions to improve neighborhood conditions, create community opportunities, and increase access to services.
Encounter forms provided a longitudinal perspective of how CHWs engaged in advocacy activities in the three streams. Strategy maps defined desired advocacy outcomes and health benefits. Technical assistance notes identified and documented intermediate outcomes. Focus group and interview data reflected CHW efforts to engage community members in advocacy and the development of community leaders. APPLICATION OF LESSONS LEARNED: We provide a model for application of key principles of CPBR that are vital to effectively capturing the overarching and nuanced aspects of public health advocacy work in dynamic political and organizational environments.
Background Mexican American farmworkers experience high rates of mental health conditions; however, it is difficult for them to access care. Patient-centred care is a systems-wide approach to improving the delivery of services for diverse populations in the primary care setting.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.