Community Health Representative Workforce: Integration across systems and teams to address the social determinants of indigenous health and wellbeing.

Tribally employed, Community Health Representatives (CHRs) serving Indigenous and American Indian and Alaskan Native (AIAN) peoples are culturally and linguistically embedded community leaders, with the unique ability to serve as the link and intermediary between community members and systems. Unique to the CHR workforce scope of practice is the expectation for high level integration within the medical and social service care team. This explicit role outlined in the scope of work sets an expectation for both CHR and care teams to deliver integrated patient, family, and systems level care coordination and case management. This paper aims to build from our previous manuscript published in Volume 1 of the special issue Community Health Workers Practice from Recruitment to Integration. In that Volume, we explored through a Community Case Study CHR Managers' perspectives on the challenges and opportunities for full CHR integration into health systems and teams serving AIAN. In this paper, we offer new information about the current CHR and CHR Managers' involvements and perceived level of integration within health care teams and the broader public health systems addressing the social and structural determinants of health. We approach this topic considering the COVID-19 pandemic and how CHRs and CHR Programs were included and not included in tribal pandemic response efforts.

Community Health Representative Workforce: Meeting the Moment in American Indian Health Equity.

In 2018, the Community Health Representative (CHR) workforce celebrated their 50th year and serve as the oldest and only federally funded Community Health Worker (CHW) workforce in the United States. CHRs are a highly trained, well-established standardized workforce serving the medical and social needs of American Indian communities. Nationally, the CHR workforce consists of ~1,700 CHRs, representing 264 Tribes. Of the 22 Tribes of Arizona, 19 Tribes operate a CHR Program and employ ~250 CHRs, equivalent to ~30% of the total CHW workforce in the state. Since 2015, Tribal CHR Programs of Arizona have come together for annual CHR Policy Summits to dialogue and plan for the unique issues and opportunities facing CHR workforce sustainability and advancement. Overtime, the Policy Summits have resulted in the Arizona CHR Workforce Movement, which advocates for inclusion of CHRs in state and national level dialogue regarding workforce standardization, certification, training, supervision, and financing. This community case study describes the impetus, collaborative process, and selected results of a 2019-2020 multi-phase CHR workforce assessment. Specifically, we highlight CHR core roles and competencies, contributions to the social determinant of health and well-being and the level to which CHRs are integrated within systems and teams. We offer recommendations for strengthening the workforce, increasing awareness of CHR roles and competencies, integrating CHRs within teams and systems, and mechanism for sustainability.

Establishing voluntary certification of community health workers in Arizona: a policy case study of building a unified workforce.

BACKGROUND: Community health workers (CHWs) are widely recognized as essential to addressing disparities in health care delivery and outcomes in US vulnerable populations. In the state of Arizona, the sustainability of the workforce is threatened by low wages, poor job security, and limited opportunities for training and advancement within the profession. CHW voluntary certification offers an avenue to increase the recognition, compensation, training, and standardization of the workforce. However, passing voluntary certification legislation in an anti-regulatory state such as Arizona posed a major challenge that required a robust advocacy effort. CASE PRESENTATION: In this article, we describe the process of unifying the two major CHW workforces in Arizona, promotoras de salud in US-Mexico border communities and community health representatives (CHRs) serving American Indian communities. Differences in the origins, financing, and even language of the population-served contributed to historically divergent interests between CHRs and promotoras. In order to move forward as a collective workforce, it was imperative to integrate the perspectives of CHRs, who have a regular funding stream and work closely through the Indian Health Services, with those of promotoras, who are more likely to be grant-funded in community-based efforts. As a unified workforce, CHWs were better positioned to gain advocacy support from key health care providers and health insurance companies with policy influence. We seek to elucidate the lessons learned in our process that may be relevant to CHWs representing diverse communities across the US and internationally. CONCLUSIONS: Legislated voluntary certification provides a pathway for further professionalization of the CHW workforce by establishing a standard definition and set of core competencies. Voluntary certification also provides guidance to organizations in developing appropriate training and job activities, as well as ongoing professional development opportunities. In developing certification with CHWs representing different populations, and in particular Tribal Nations, it is essential to assure that the CHW definition is in alignment with all groups and that the scope of practice reflects CHW roles in both clinic and community-based settings. The Arizona experience underscores the benefits of a flexible approach that leverages existing strengths in organizations and the population served.