BACKGROUND: In recent years, the community health worker (CHW) field has grown significantly in the United States, with increasing numbers, roles, and visibility of CHWs. State health department regulators, health program administrators, and community health advocates have observed this growth with uncertainty about the definition of a CHW, how CHW roles differ from those of other health professionals, CHW training needs, and the potential impact of the growing certification and accreditation regulations. OBJECTIVE: Despite the proliferation of regulatory policies, few studies have examined how regulation can most effectively support CHWs in the field. Our objective is to define CHW, identify training needs, and examine possibilities for credentialing from the perspective of CHWs in New York City. METHODS: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) was used to engage CHW leadership and gather input from CHWs in the design and conduct of the study. The academic-community-state partnership designed focus group topic guides, and conducted fifteen focus groups with CHWs in New York City. The focus group responses were analyzed using HyperResearch and formed the basis for policy recommendations to the participating partners. RESULTS: We developed a consensus definition of CHW and its fundamental qualities. We identified unmet training needs in the area of core competencies. We outlined the characteristics of a credentialing process that would support and advance the work of CHWs. CONCLUSIONS: CBPR enabled CHWs to have a direct voice in defining their description, roles, training, and certification preferences. This informed policy recommendations to the state, university, and CHWs through a collaborative process.
BACKGROUND: In recent years, the community health worker (CHW) field has grown significantly in the United States, with increasing numbers, roles, and visibility of CHWs. State health department regulators, health program administrators, and community health advocates have observed this growth with uncertainty about the definition of a CHW, how CHW roles differ from those of other health professionals, CHW training needs, and the potential impact of the growing certification and accreditation regulations. OBJECTIVE: Despite the proliferation of regulatory policies, few studies have examined how regulation can most effectively support CHWs in the field. Our objective is to define CHW, identify training needs, and examine possibilities for credentialing from the perspective of CHWs in New York City. METHODS: Community-based participatory research (CBPR) was used to engage CHW leadership and gather input from CHWs in the design and conduct of the study. The academic-community-state partnership designed focus group topic guides, and conducted fifteen focus groups with CHWs in New York City. The focus group responses were analyzed using HyperResearch and formed the basis for policy recommendations to the participating partners. RESULTS: We developed a consensus definition of CHW and its fundamental qualities. We identified unmet training needs in the area of core competencies. We outlined the characteristics of a credentialing process that would support and advance the work of CHWs. CONCLUSIONS: CBPR enabled CHWs to have a direct voice in defining their description, roles, training, and certification preferences. This informed policy recommendations to the state, university, and CHWs through a collaborative process.
Authors: Samantha Sabo; Maia Ingram; Kerstin M Reinschmidt; Kenneth Schachter; Laurel Jacobs; Jill Guernsey de Zapien; Laurie Robinson; Scott Carvajal Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2013-05-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Alexis Koskan; Daniela B Friedman; DeAnne K Hilfinger Messias; Heather M Brandt; Katrina Walsemann Journal: J Public Health Manag Pract Date: 2013 Sep-Oct
Authors: Lee R Bone; Kristen Edington; Jessica Rosenberg; Jennifer Wenzel; Mary A Garza; Catherine Klein; Lisa Schmitt; Jean G Ford Journal: Prog Community Health Partnersh Date: 2013
Authors: Abimbola Olaniran; Helen Smith; Regine Unkels; Sarah Bar-Zeev; Nynke van den Broek Journal: Glob Health Action Date: 2017 Impact factor: 2.640