Skip Navigation

Strengthen the Evidence for Maternal and Child Health Programs

Sign up for MCHalert eNewsletter

Evidence Tools
MCHbest. Postpartum Mental Health Screening.

MCHbest Logo

Strategy. Community Health Workers

Approach. Support Community Health Workers to provide postpartum mental health screenings to women from populations of focus.

Return to main MCHbest page >>

Overview. Community health workers (CHWs), sometimes called lay health workers, promotoras(es) de salud, community health representatives. (in tribal health programs), or community health advisors, serve a variety of functions, including providing outreach, education, referral and follow-up, case management, support, home visiting services.[1] and collecting data to identify communities’ health needs.[2] CHWs may work autonomously in the community or as part of a multi-disciplinary team in primary or specialty care. Training varies with intended role and location, though it is usually less than three years.[3] CHW services are usually provided to communities with fewer resources and to individuals who experience barriers in accessing healthcare [3, 4] and individuals who were previously incarcerated,[5] as well as providing coverage in rural areas.[6] CHWs provide appropriate care, usually focused on disease education, management, and prevention, and less often, maternal and child health through home visiting programs.[3] CHWs can work in clinics, schools, individuals’ homes, and other community locations.[7] CHWs’ traditional employers are public health departments and community-based organizations, although employment by health systems and insurers is increasing.[8] CHWs can provide a range of maternal and child health services, often as part of home visiting programs.[23] Community health workers appear to enhance access to pre- and post-natal care,[18, 23, 24] can increase breastfeeding initiation and exclusivity[18, 25], and may decrease the severity of postpartum depression symptoms.[25]

Evidence. Moderate Evidence. Strategies with this rating are likely to work. These strategies have been tested more than once and results trend positive overall; however, further research is needed to confirm effects, especially with multiple population groups. These strategies also trend positive in combination with other strategies. (Clarifying Note: The WWFH database calls this "some evidence").

Access the peer-reviewed evidence through the MCH Digital Library or related evidence source. (Read more about understanding evidence ratings).

Source. What Works for Health (WWFH) Database (County Health Rankings and Roadmaps)

Outcome Components. This strategy has shown to have impact on the following outcomes (Read more about these categories):

  • Access to/Receipt of Care. This strategy increases the ability for individuals to obtain healthcare services when needed, including preventive, diagnostic, and treatment services.
  • Mental Health. This strategy promotes emotional, psychological, and social well-being of individuals and communities.
  • Social Determinants of Health. This strategy advances economic, social, and environmental factors that affect health outcomes. SDOH include the conditions in the environments in which people are born, live, learn, work, play, worship, and age that affect a wide range of health, functioning, and quality-of-life outcomes and risks.

Detailed Outcomes. For specific outcomes related to each study supporting this strategy, access the peer-reviewed evidence and read the Intervention Results for each study.

Intervention Type. Outreach (Read more about intervention types and levels as defined by the Public Health Intervention Wheel).

Intervention Level. Community-Focused

Examples from the Field. There are currently no ESMs that use this strategy. As Title V agencies begin to incorporate this strategy into ESMs, examples will be available here. Until then, you can search for ESMs that have similar intervention components in the ESM database.

Sample ESMs. Here are sample ESMs to use as models for your own measures using the Results-Based Accountability framework (for suggestions on how to develop programs to support this strategy, see The Role of Title V in Adapting Strategies).

Quadrant 1:
Measuring Quantity of Effort
("What/how much did we do?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Number of Community Health Workers (CHWs) trained to provide postpartum mental health screenings to women from communities experiencing health challenges. (Shows the capacity building efforts to prepare CHWs for this role)
  • Number of women from communities experiencing health challenges who receive postpartum mental health screenings from CHWs. (Indicates the reach and volume of the approach)

Quadrant 2:
Measuring Quality of Effort
("How well did we do it?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Percent of CHWs who demonstrate proficiency in using validated postpartum mental health screening tools and protocols. (Shows the quality and fidelity of the screening process)
  • Percent of postpartum mental health screening sessions conducted by CHWs that adhere to trauma-informed practices. (Indicates the responsiveness and safety of the approach)

Quadrant 3:
Measuring Quantity of Effect
("Is anyone better off?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Number of partnerships established between CHW programs and mental health service providers to facilitate seamless referrals and care coordination for postpartum women. (Shows the collaboration and system integration efforts to support the approach)
  • Number of CHWs who receive ongoing supervision, support, and professional development opportunities to maintain and enhance their postpartum mental health screening skills. (Indicates the investment in CHW workforce development and sustainability)

OUTCOME MEASURES:

  • Number of women from communities experiencing health challenges who develop positive coping strategies and support networks as a result of CHW postpartum mental health screenings and referrals. (Shows the approach's impact on building resilience and social connectedness)
  • Number of best practices and lessons learned from CHW postpartum mental health screening initiatives that are shared and replicated across communities experiencing health challenges. (Indicates the approach's contribution to field-building and spread of promising approaches)

Quadrant 4:
Measuring Quality of Effect
("How are they better off?")

PROCESS MEASURES:

  • Percent of CHWs providing postpartum mental health screenings who are recruited from and reflective of the practical experiences of the communities served. (Shows the representativeness of the CHW workforce)
  • Percent of CHW postpartum mental health screening programs that have sustainable funding and resources to maintain and expand their reach and impact over time. (Indicates the long-term viability and prioritization of the approach)

OUTCOME MEASURES:

  • Percent reduction in differences in postpartum mental health outcomes and access to care for women from communities participating in CHW screening programs. (Shows the approach's impact on advancing health outcomes)
  • Percent of healthcare systems and policymakers who recognize and invest in CHWs as vital partners in promoting postpartum mental health screening and care for communities experiencing health differences. (Indicates the approach's influence on driving systemic change and resource allocation)

Note. When looking at your ESMs, SPMs, or other strategies:

  1. Move from measuring quantity to quality.
  2. Move from measuring effort to effect.
  3. Quadrant 1 strategies should be used sparingly, when no other data exists.
  4. The most effective measurement combines strategies in all levels, with most in Quadrants 2 and 4.

Learn More. Read how to create stronger ESMs and how to measure ESM impact more meaningfully through Results-Based Accountability.

References

1 NACHW-Mason 202[1] - Mason TH, Rush CH, Sugarman MK. Statewide training approaches for community health workers. Boston: National Association of Community Health Workers (NACHW); 2021.

2 US BLS-CHWs 202[1] - US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Occupational employment and wages, May 2021. 21-1094 Community health workers.

3 Olaniran 2017 - Olaniran A, Smith H, Unkels R, Bar-Zeev S, van den Broek N. Who is a community health worker? A systematic review of definitions. Global Health Action. 2017;10(1):1272223.

4 Scott 2018 - Scott K, Beckham S, Gross M, et al. What do we know about community-based health worker programs? A systematic review of existing reviews on community health workers. Human Resources for Health. 2018;16:39.

5 Wang 2019a - Wang EA, Lin H, Aminawung JA, et al. Propensity-matched study of enhanced primary care on contact with the criminal justice system among individuals recently released from prison to New Haven. BMJ Open. 2019;9:e028097.

6 RHIhub-CHW - Rural Health Information Hub (RHIhub). Community health workers toolkit.

7 Schroeder 2018 - Schroeder K, McCormick R, Perez A, Lipman TH. The role and impact of community health workers in childhood obesity interventions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Obesity Reviews. 2018;19(10):1371-1384.

8 Jones 2022a - Jones TM, Jeung C, Schulte A, Lewis CM, Maddox PJ. Hourly wages and turnover of community health workers according to US state certification policy and Medicaid reimbursement, 2010–2021. American Journal of Public Health. 2022;112(10):1480-1488.

9 Andrews 2004 - Andrews JO, Felton G, Wewers ME, Heath J. Use of community health workers in research with ethnic minority women. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 2004;36(4):358-365.

10 Scharff 2022 - Scharff D, Enard KR, Tao D, et al. Community health worker impact on knowledge, antenatal care, and birth outcomes: A systematic review. Maternal and Child Health. 2022;26:79-101.

11 AZ DHS-Health Start 202[1] - McCue K, Sabo S, Wightman P, Jimenez D, Rumann S. Health Start program evaluation, 2006-2016: Final impact report. Phoenix, AZ: Arizona Department of Health Services; 2021.

12 Cochrane-Lewin 2010 - Lewin S, Munabi-Babigumira S, Glenton C, et al. Lay health workers in primary and community health care for maternal and child health and the management of infectious diseases. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2010;(3):CD004015.

This project is supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) under grant number U02MC31613, MCH Advanced Education Policy, $3.5 M. This information or content and conclusions are those of the author and should not be construed as the official position or policy of, nor should any endorsements be inferred by HRSA, HHS or the U.S. Government.