COMMON INDICATOR
AND
TRAINING EXPERIENCES SURVEY
Summary of Results for COOK COUNTY, Illinois, 2023 - 2024 DATE HERE
This report was prepared by the University of Illinois Cancer Center, in collaboration with the ENACT Working Group and the Illinois CHW Survey Group, for the Illinois Department of Public Health.
Please cite this report as: University of Illinois Cancer Center. (2025). Community Health Worker Common Indicator and Training Experiences Survey: Summary of results for Cook County, Illinois, 2023 – 2024.
LIST OF FIGURES
10
10
12
13
13
14
14
15
16
16
16
17
Figure 1: CHW CI and training experiences survey flyer (English)
Figure 2: CHW CI and training experiences survey flyer (Spanish)
Figure 3: Determination of final analytic sample, exclusion criteria, and the number of records excluded at each stage of determination
Figure 4: Age distribution of survey respondents, Cook County, Illinois Respondents (n=259)
Figure 5: Respondents’ gender, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure 6: Respondents’ Race/Ethnicity, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure 7: Selected language for survey, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure 8: Distribution map of CHW survey responses by zip code within Cook County
Figure 9: CHW service type, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure 10:: Years of service as a CHW, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure 11: CHW title, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure 12: Types of organizations where CHWs work, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
18 Figure 13: Map of zip codes within Cook County where survey respondents provide CHW services
19
Figure 14: Completion of a CHW Core 101 training and / or Specialized CHW training (n=259)
19 Figure 15: Completion of specialized CHW training, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
20 Figure 16: Completion of a CHW supervisor training, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
21 Figure 17: Confidence in CHW skills and knowledge competencies (n=259)
22 Figure 18: Percent of CHWs with very high self-rated confidence in CHW competencies, differences by CHW Core 101 training status
23 Figure 19: Employment status of CHWs, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
23 Figure 20: Average and range number of hours worked per week based on employment status
24 Figure 21: Median and range annual salary for full-time CHWs (n=154)
24 Figure 22: Median and range hourly rate for part-time CHWs
25 Figure 23: Benefits offered by employers of full-time CHWs (n=164)
26 Figure 24: Benefits offered by employers of part-time CHWs (n=59)
27 Figure 25: CHW eligibility for promotions / step-ups with pay increase (n=233)
27 Figure 26: CHW eligibility for promotions / step-ups based on employment status (n=220)
28 Figure 27: Distinction between administrative and clinical supervision and whether oversight of supervision is handled by different people
29 Figure 28: Mean and range hours of supervision in the last 30 days, by full- and part-time status
29 Figure 29: CHWs perceived overall quality of individual / group supervision received within the last 30 days
30 Figure 30: Supervisor attitudes and characteristics scale, mean scores from individual statements
30 Figure 31: CHWs participate on hiring panels when CHW supervisors are selected (n=252_
31 Figure 32: Relational Coordination Scale, mean scores from individual statements
32 Figure 33:: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination Scale
33 Figure 34: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination Scale, mean scores from individual statements, differences by self-identified racialized identity
34 Figure 35: Additional Questions about Integration into Teams (n=252)
34 Figure 36: Record Information Access (n=252)
34 Figure 37: CHW has an employer provided workspace (n=252)
35 Figure 38: CHW Involvement in Decision and Policymaking Scale
LIST OF TABLES
37
38
39
40
41
Table 1: Sociodemographic characteristics of survey respondents from Cook County, Illinois (n=259)
Table 2: Serving as a CHW, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Table 3: Types of organizations where CHWs work, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Table 4: Completed CHW Core 101 and specialized trainings, Cook County, Illinois Respondents (n=259)
Table 5: Organizations from which CHWs stated they had taken a training, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=237)
42 Table 6: Confidence in CHW skills and knowledge competencies, Cook County, Illinois respondents (N=259)
43 Table 7: Confidence in CHW skills and knowledge competencies by CHW basic skills (101) training completion status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
44 Table 8: Average number of hours worked per week, by full and part-time status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
45 Table 9: Current reported level of compensation, by employment status (full- or part-time), Cook County Illinois respondents
46 Table 10: Benefits CHWs reported to be offered by their employers, by full-time or part-time employment status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
47 Table 11: Eligibility for promotion/step-ups with pay increases, based on employment status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
48 Table 12: CHWs experience with supervision, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=251)
49 Table 13: Indicator 12: Supervisor attitudes and characteristics scale, Cook County, Illinois respondents
50 Table 14: CHW integration into team, The Relational Coordination Scale, summary score by individual statement and full scale, Cook County, Illinois respondents
51 Table 15: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination on CHW Integration, Cook County, Illinois respondents
52 Table 16: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination on CHW Integration, Differences by self-identified racialized identity, Cook County, Illinois respondents
53 Table 17: Additional questions about CHW integration into teams, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=252)
54 Table 18: CHW involvement in decision and policymaking, Cook County, Illinois respondents
ACRONYMS
CBO Community-Based Organization
CHW Community Health Worker
CHW-CRE Community Health Worker Center for Research and Evaluation
CI Common Indicator
COPD Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
CRM Community Resilience Model
ENACT Environmental Scan of Community Health Worker Assets in Illinois
FQHC Federally Qualified Health Center
IDPH Illinois Department of Public Health
IROFD Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination
MCO Managed Care Organization
PCA Patient Care Assistant
REDCap Research Electronic Data Capture
RCS Relational Coordination Scale
RUCC Rural-Urban Continuum Codes
SAS Statistical Analysis System
SOAR SSI/SSDI Outreach, Access and Recovery
SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
SSDI Social Security Disability Insurance
SSI Supplemental Security Income
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey Team would like to thank all the CHWs, including those going by another title, like promotor or promotora, outreach worker, or community health advocate, that completed the CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey.
The CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey Team would also like to thank Dr. Noelle Wiggins, Pennie Jewell, and Victoria Adewumi of the National CHW Center for Research and Evaluation (formerly, the CHW Common Indicators Project) for their guidance and support throughout the planning process. For more information about the National CHW CI Project, visit https://www.chwcre.org/. The CHW-CRE Leadership Team has previously supported the CHW CI survey efforts in Illinois, wherein they were involved in the creation and fielding of the Illinois Community Health Worker-Common Indicator Employer Survey.1
The ENACT team would like to acknowledge the work of Dr. Margaret Wright Geise and Ekas Singh Abrol from the University of Illinois Cancer Center Data Integration Shared Resource for their contributions to this report, which includes the geospatial visualizations.
The ENACT Project was funded by an IDPH Intergovernmental Agreement.
1 Illinois Community Health Worker-Common Indicator Employer Survey Data Team. Community Health Worker Common Indicator Employer Survey: Summary Results for the State of Illinois. 2023. https://dph.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/idph/publications/idph/topics-and-services/preventionwellness/chw/chw-employer-survey-report_52023.pdf
PROJECT TEAM
The CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey was created and disseminated through a collaborative effort between the following organizations in Illinois:
● Community Health & Emergency Services, Inc.
● Health & Medicine Policy Research Group
● Illinois Community Health Workers Association
● Illinois Department of Public Health
● Illinois Migrant Council
● Illinois Primary Health Care Association
● Illinois Public Health Association
● Rainbow Café LGBTQ Center
● Rincon Family Services
● Sinai Urban Health Institute
● University of Illinois Cancer Center
● University of Illinois Extension
● Valley Kingdom Development Corporation
● West Central Illinois Area Health Education Center
The CHW CI Employer Survey Team consisted of the following members:
● Community Health & Emergency Services, Inc. (Joanie Bishop, Jessica Bradshaw, JP Champion & Kanci Houston)
● Health & Medicine Policy Research Group (Angela Eastlund & Anna Yankelev)
● Illinois Community Health Workers Association (Leticia Boughton Price & Wandy Hernandez)
● Illinois Department of Public Health (Sarahjini Nunn & Lori Weiselberg)
● Illinois Migrant Council (Esperanza Gonzalez, Diana Ramos, Maggie Rivera, Margarita Rivera, & Miguel Sarmiento)
● Illinois Primary Health Care Association (Cheri Hoots, Ashley Colwell & Paula Campbell)
● Illinois Public Health Association (Michelle Sanders & Tracey Smith)
● Rainbow Cafe LGBTQ Center (Claire Hughes & Carrie Vine)
● Rincon Family Services (Jane Norton, Kimberly Skoczelas & Angela Galiotto)
● Sinai Urban Health Institute (Stacy Ignoffo & Patricia Labellarte)
● University of Illinois Cancer Center (Leslie Carnahan, Noor Hasan, Yamilé Molina, Jeanette Santana Gonzalez, Judith Sayad, Brenda Soto, Ed Tsai, Anna Whelan & Hannah Williams)
● University of Illinois Extension (Jennifer McCaffrey & Dee Walls)
● Valley Kingdom Community Development Corporation (Runisia Henry, Kendall Henry, Ronda Wendford & Nathaniel Aikens)
● West Central Illinois Area Health Education Center (Mary Jane Clark, Shelly Fox, & Jordan Cary)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background: In support of work done nationally and statewide, the Community Health Worker Common Indicators (CHW CI) and Training Experiences Survey was launched to support the assessment of the CHW training landscape in Illinois. The University of Illinois Cancer Center, in collaboration with 13 other organizations, launched the survey with funding and support from the Illinois Department of Public Health and guidance from the CHW Center for Research and Evaluation Leadership Team. The Cook County report was developed to supplement the CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey: Summary of results for the State of Illinois, 2023-2024, published in September 2024.
Methodology: The main CHW CI and Training Experiences survey, conducted between December 2023 and February 2024, recruited employed or volunteer adult CHWs residing in Illinois. Multiple non-probability-based recruitment methods were used to recruit participants and materials were available in English and Spanish. Participants completed the survey in English or Spanish via an online REDCap form or a paper instrument. The survey included questions about the CHWs’ background, training experiences, CHW competencies, and CHW CI workforce indicators. All survey responses were assessed for eligibility and missingness, which resulted in an overall analytic sample of 259 respondents from Cook County. Standard data cleaning and analysis procedures before completing data analysis.
Results: Given the breadth of the topics, the results are extensive and wide-ranging. In terms of demographics, the largest groups of survey respondents identified as Black or African American and Hispanic/Latino(a) and most respondents reported residential zipcodes within the city of Chicago. Nearly 74% of respondents reported serving as a CHW for less than 5 years Most respondents (74%) served as CHWs in full-time roles; overall respondents reported working an average of 34.9 hours per week (range: 3 to 80 hours).
About 62% of respondents stated they had completed a CHW Core 101 training; those who had completed this basic skills training, compared to those who had not, were more likely to rate their confidence level as very confident for multiple skills and knowledge competencies. When asked to rate supervisor attitudes and characteristics, respondents rated their supervisors highest on rating scale measures related to encouraging professional growth and understanding community strengths and needs. On average, respondents reported being part of highly collaborative and communicative teams. However, rating scale scores indicate that experiences may vary for those CHWs with racialized identities. Respondents agree that their input is sought by those with influence in decision making processes, but there was less agreement with statements related to direct involvement in actively participating in policymaking or influencing policy.
Conclusion: The findings from the CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey are extensive and far-reaching and contribute to a clearer understanding of the current landscape of CHW demographics, experiences, and skills in Cook County, Illinois. These findings will be used to inform the IDPH Illinois CHW Certification Program while also contributing to other national and state-wide efforts to assess the work and impact of CHWs in the United States.
SURVEY BACKGROUND
Community health workers (CHWs)2 are essential to advancing health equity but this workforce’s sustainability is threatened by low wages, poor job security, and limited advancement and recognition opportunities. Passed in 2021, the Illinois Community Health Worker Certification and Reimbursement Act (410 ILCS 67), intends to address these issues through the creation of a CHW certification program.3
There are efforts to standardize indicators and constructs to assess the work and impact of CHWs in the United States. The CHW Common Indicators (CI)4 are the result of a national effort to identify, develop, and validate constructs and process / outcome indicators to be used across CHW programs and for CHW research and evaluation.5 In support of the legislation, the CHW CI project, and statewide efforts to assess the CHW training landscape, the CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey was conducted in Illinois. The survey was launched through a collaborative effort of 14 organizations with funding and support from the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH). Staff at the University of Illinois Cancer Center (Cancer Center) oversaw data collection, analysis, and reporting. This report, the Community Health Worker Common Indicator and Training Experiences Survey: Summary of results for Cook County, Illinois, 2023-2024, was developed to supplement the statewide summary report.6 A CHW CI-Employer Survey7 was implemented in Illinois in 2022.
2 The CHW Section of the American Public Health Association has adopted the following definition: A CHW is a frontline public health worker who is a trusted member of and/or has an unusually close understanding of the community served. This trusting relationship enables the worker to serve as a liaison/link/intermediary between health/social services and the community to facilitate access to services and improve the quality and cultural competence of service delivery. A CHW also builds individual and community capacity by increasing health knowledge and selfsufficiency through a range of activities such as outreach, community education, informal counseling, social support and advocacy. American Public Health Association. Community Health Workers. apha.org. 2019. https://www.apha.org/apha-communities/member-sections/community-health-workers
3 Illinois General Assembly. Public Health (410 ILCS 67/) Community Health Worker Certification and Reimbursement Act. Ila.gov. 2021. https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs5.asp?ActID=4090&ChapterID=35
4 The National Center for Research and Evaluation continues to develop, pilot, and disseminate process and outcome indicators. Visit https://www.chwcre.org/promotion-of-common-indicators for more information. Groups interested in using the indicators are encouraged to contact info@chwcre.org for more information.
5 Community Health Worker Center for Research and Evaluation. What We Do: Promotion of Common Indicators. 2023. https://www.chwcre.org/promotion-of-common-indicators
6 Illinois Community Health Worker-Common Indicator Employer Survey Data Team. Community Health Worker Common Indicator Employer Survey: Summary Results for the State of Illinois. 2023. https://dph.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/idph/publications/idph/topics-and-services/preventionwellness/chw/chw-employer-survey-report_52023.pdf
7 Illinois Community Health Worker-Common Indicator Employer Survey Data Team. Community Health Worker Common Indicator Employer Survey: Summary Results for the State of Illinois. 2023.
https://dph.illinois.gov/content/dam/soi/en/web/idph/publications/idph/topics-and-services/preventionwellness/chw/chw-employer-survey-report_52023.pdf
METHODOLOGY
Detailed methods used to implement this survey are described in the Community Health Worker Common Indicator and Training Experiences Survey: Summary of results for the State of, Illinois, 2023-2024.
SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, SAMPLING, AND RECRUITMENT
The CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey was conducted between December 1, 2023, and February 16, 2024. Self-reported eligibility requirements for the statewide survey were: 1) experience as a CHW, whether in a paid or volunteer capacity; 2) >18 years of age; and 3) residence in Illinois. Respondents self-reporting a Cook County, Illinois zip code were included in the analytic sample.
The CHW CI and Training Experiences survey team used multiple non-probability-based recruitment methods, including electronic and physical flyers available in English (Figure 1) and Spanish (Figure 2) and word-of-mouth. The survey team emailed the flyer to listservs and established networks of CHWs, CHW trainers, CHW employees, and CHW advocates. The flyer was also distributed in newsletters, social media, and during in-person and virtual meetings.
Participants did not receive an incentive for participation. This project was officially recognized as a quality improvement effort by the University of Illinois at Chicago's research policy (formal determination of quality improvement status, protocol #20230402).
Figure 1: CHW CI and Training Experiences survey flyer (English)
Figure 2: CHW CI and Training Experiences survey flyer (Spanish)
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
After providing informed consent, participants completed the survey in either English or Spanish, via an online REDCap survey or a paper instrument. Nearly all surveys (>99%) were self-administered online.
The survey instrument included 51 items, including questions about CHW’s background and training experiences, self-rated confidence in CHW competencies, demographic information, and the following CHW CI workforce indicators:
• CHW Level of Compensation, Benefits, and Promotion (CHW CI #1)
• CHW Involvement in Decision and Policy Making (CHW CI #4)
• CHW Integration into Teams (CHW CI #5)
• Supportive and Reflective CHW Supervision (CHW CI #12)
The CHW CI workforce indicator questions in the survey had been pilot tested previously.8,9 Prior to the state-wide launch, the survey, inclusive of the CI workforce indicators and the training questions, was further pilot tested in two rounds (English and Spanish) to assess the extent to which the instrument was appropriate, comprehensible, clearly defined, and presented in a suitable manner.
All statistical procedures were performed using SAS (Version 9.4, SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.) and SPSS (Version 29.0, IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY: IBM Corp). First, overall and item specific missingness was assessed; this determined the analytic sample (n=259) (Figure 3). Next, standard data cleaning procedures were implemented; this included removing incomplete responses from the analytic sample, identifying and reviewing outliers, coding open-ended responses, and performing data consistency and quality assurance checks. Statistical comparisons of means and group differences were conducted using several methods (i.e., t-tests, chi-square tests) tailored to the nature of the data. Specific methods are further described in table footnotes.
8 Rodela K, Wiggins N, Maes K, et al. The Community Health Worker (CHW) Common Indicators Project: Engaging CHWs in Measurement to Sustain the Profession. Front Public Health. 2021;9:674858. Published 2021 Jun 22. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.674858
9 Wiggins N, Maes K, Palmisano G, Avila LR, Rodela K, Kieffer E. A Community Participatory Approach to Identify Common Evaluation Indicators for Community Health Worker Practice. Prog Community Health Partnership 2021;15(2):217-224. doi:10.1353/cpr.2021.0023
Figure 3: Determination of final analytic sample, exclusion criteria, and the number of records excluded at each stage of determination
EXCLUDED
Unknown eligibility, n=26
No CHW experience, n=58
EXCLUDED
Did not answer consent question, n=99
Refused consent, n=5
EXCLUDED Incomplete responses, n=233
EXCLUDED
Home zip code not in Cook County, Illinois n=204
Visited survey link n=884
Assessed for Eligibility n=800
Initiated Survey n=696
Completed survey n=463
Included in Analytic Sample n=259
RESULTS
CHW BACKGROUND
SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS
Survey respondents were asked questions about their sociodemographic characteristics, including their age, gender identity, and race/ethnicity. Most respondents were in the 1840 (43%) and 41-60 (37%) age groups (Figure 4).
See Appendix Table 1 for more information.
18-40 years old
41-60 years old
61-79 years old
Respondents described their gender in a "check all that apply" format. Most respondents identified as female (60%) (Figure 5).
See Appendix Table 1 for more information.
Figure 4: Age distribution of survey respondents, Cook County, Illinois Respondents (n=259)
Figure 5: Respondents’ gender, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Respondents were asked to describe their race/ethnicity in a "check all that apply" format. The largest groups of survey respondents identified as Black or African American (31%) and Hispanic/Latino(a) (29%), followed by White (5%) and Multiracial (5%) (Figure 6).
See Appendix Table 1 for more information.
6: Respondents’ Race/Ethnicity, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Most respondents completed the survey in English (74%), while 26% chose Spanish (Figure 7).
See Appendix Table 1 for more information.
Figure 7 : Selected Language for Survey, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure
Survey respondents were asked to provide their zip code of residence to better understand the geographic distribution of participants within Cook County. Most respondents reported residing in zip codes within the City of Chicago, with a smaller number located in suburban areas across Cook County (Figure 8).
Figure 8: Distribution map of CHW survey responses by zip code within Cook County
SERVING AS A CHW
CHW SERVICE TYPE
To better understand the employment status of CHWs, the survey asked respondents whether their role was a paid, employed position or an unpaid, volunteer role. The majority (90%) reported working in a paid CHW position, while 10% served in an unpaid, volunteer capacity (Figure 9).
See Appendix Table 2 for more information.
Survey respondents were asked to estimate the total number of years they had served as a CHW (Figure 10). The largest group, representing 46% of respondents, reported serving for 2-5 years; the average years of service among respondents was 8.5 years.
See Appendix Table 2 for more information.
CHW TITLE
9:
Paid, employed CHW position
Unpaid, volunteer position
Figure 10 : Years of service as a CHW, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259) Less than 2 years 2-5 years 6-10 years
When asked to select the job title that best described their role, respondents most commonly identified as Community Health Workers (59%), followed by Promotor/Promotora (16%). Several other titles were noted (Figure 11).
See Appendix Table 2 for more information.
Figure 11: Current CHW title, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure
CHW Service Type, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Figure 12 shows the types of organizations where respondents reported working as CHWs. The most common workplaces were community-based organizations (44%), health systems or hospitals (15%), and community health organizations (12%).
See Appendix Table 3 for more information.
Figure 12: Types of organizations where CHWs work, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259) Types of organizations where CHWs work, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Community-based organization
Health system / Hospital / Hospital clinic
Community health organization
Federally qualified health center
Community health center (not FQHC)
Social service agency
Academic (4-year university, community college)
Medicaid MCO / Medicaid Health Plan
Faith-based organizarion
Behavioral health organization
Local health department (county, district, city)
Child development lab school
Independent medical clinic / Practice
Schools / School-based health center
Other type of organization
Not currently employed as a CHW
CHW respondents were asked to provide the zip code(s) where they spent the most time working as a CHW. The map in Figure 13 highlights the distribution of reported service zip codes within Cook County, with the highest concentration of service areas located the western and southern parts of the county.
Figure 13: Map of zip codes within Cook County where survey respondents provide CHW services
CHW TRAINING AND COMPETENCIES
CHW TRAINING EXPERIENCES
Respondents were asked if they had completed a Core 101 and/or any specialized training. About 62% had completed a Core 101 and at least one specialized training; 4% had completed a Core 101, but no specialized training; 6% had no Core 101, but had at least one specialized training; and 28% reported no training (Figure 14).
See Appendix Table 4 for more information.
Figure 14: Completion of a Core 101 training and / or Specialized training, Cook County, Illinois Respondents (n=259)
No Core 101 and NO specialized training, 28%
No Core 101, but did complete > 1 specialized training, 6%
Core 101, but no specialized training, 4%
Core 101 AND at least 1 specialized training, 62%
CHWs have taken a diverse range of specialized trainings. Mental Health First Aid was the most frequently reported training (49%), followed by the Diabetes Prevention Program (39%), motivational interviewing (37%), and behavioral health (31%) (Figure 15).
See Appendix Table 4 for more information.
Figure 15: Completion of a specialized CHW training, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Mental Health First Aid
Diabetes Prevention Program
Motivational interviewing
Behavioral health
Health education
Health insurance navigation
Health system navigation2
Asthma/COPD/Live Well Breathe Well
Infection Prevention
Hypertension Prevention Program
Emergency preparedness
Refugee, Immigrant, Migrant populations
Alzheimer’s/Dementia Education
Digital literacy navigation (may include telehealth)
Equity in Action
Cancer Navigation
Parkinson’s Navigation Palliative care
Other
Concerning supervisor training, 12% of respondents reported completing this (Figure 16).
See Appendix Table 4 for more information.
Figure 16: Completion of CHW supervisor training, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Completed training Not completed
ORGANIZATIONS NAMED BY CHWs AS TRAINING PROVIDERS
In the survey, CHWs were asked to name organizations from which they had received any CHW training. Respondents named organizations both in and outside of Illinois.
See Appendix Table 5 for more information.
CHW CONFIDENCE IN SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE COMPETENCIES
Respondents were asked to self-rate their confidence level for several CHW skills and knowledge competencies (Figure 17).10,11 Most CHWs reported feeling very confident in communication (76%), interpersonal skills and relationship building (76%), and outreach skills (70%). Other competencies with a significant portion of respondents feeling very confident included providing direct services (67%), organizational skills (66%), and advocacy (64%). Comparatively, CHWs reported feeling less confident in competencies related to evaluation and research, public health knowledge, and individual community assessment.
See Appendix Table 6 for more information
Figure 17: Confidence in CHW skills and knowledge competencies, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
10 Wiggins, N., & Borbón, I. A. (1998). Core roles and competencies of community health workers. In Final report of the National Community Health Advisor Study (pp. 15–49). Baltimore, MD: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
11 Rosenthal, E.L. Menking, P. and St. John, J. (2018). The Community Health Worker Core Consensus (C3) Project: A Report of the C3 Project Phase 1 and 2, Together Leaning Toward the Sky. A National Project to Inform CHW Policy and Practice.Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, El Paso.
CHW CONFIDENCE IN SKILLS AND KNOWLEDGE COMPETENCIES BY CHW CORE 101 TRAINING COMPLETION STATUS
See Appendix Table 7 for more information
Among survey respondents, CHWs who had completed a CHW Core 101 training were, on average, more likely to rate their confidence level as very confident for 12 out of 13 skills, when compared to those who had not the training; these competencies included: communication, advocacy, cultural competency, understanding of health systems, basic diseases, and behavioral health issues, evaluation and research, outreach skills, and providing direct services (Figure 18). In contrast, capacity-building was the only competency where those who had not completed the training reported higher confidence levels.
Figure 18: Percent of CHW with very high self-rated confidence in CHW competencies, differences by CHW Core 101 training status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
Providing direct services (n=257)
Outreach skills (n=257)
Individual and community assessment (n=254)
Evaluation and research (n=256)
Understanding of health systems, basic diseases, and behavioral health issues(n=256)
Public health knowledge (n=256)
Cultural competency (n=255)
Organizational skills (n=253)
Presentation and facilitation skills (n=255)
Advocacy (n=254)
Capacity-building (n=255)
Service coordination and navigation skills (n=254)
Interpersonal skills and relationship building (n=254)
Communication (n=258)
* indicates a statistically significant difference between groups Completed CHW 101 Basic Skills Training Not Completed
LEVEL OF COMPENSATION, BENEFITS, & PROMOTION (CHW CI #1)
Common Indicator #1, developed by the CHW Center for Research and Evaluation, assesses CHW wages, benefits, and opportunities for advancement; it includes versions for CHWs and employers. The version for CHWs was included in this survey. CHWs were first asked to report the number of hours they typically worked in a week. About 74% of CHWs reported working full-time (35+ hours/week) and about 26% reported working part-time (<35 hours/week) (Figure 19 ).
19: Employment status of CHWs, Cook County, Illinois respondents
Overall, survey respondents reported working an average of 34.9 hours per week (range: 3 to 80 hours). Among Full-time CHWs, survey respondents reported working an average of 40.9 hours per week (range: 35 to 80 hours); while part-time CHWs reported working an average of 18.2 hours per week (range: 3 to 32 hours) (Figure 20).
See Appendix Table 8 for more information
Figure 20: Average and range of number of hours worked per week based on employment status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
Part-time (< 35 hours/week)
Full-time (35+ hours/week) Hours worked per week
Full-time (35+ hours/week), 74% Part-time (<35 hours/week), 26%
Figure
(n=259)
cCHWs were asked to report their earnings by sharing their current annual salary and/or hourly rate and number of hours worked per week. Full-time CHWs (working 35 hours or more per week) for whom an annual salary was calculated (n=154), estimated annual salaries ranged from $25,000 - $92,560; the mean annual salary was $48,626. (Figure 21).
See Appendix Table 9 for more information.
Part-time CHWs (working less than 35 hours per week) for whom an hourly rate was calculated (n=55), estimated hourly rates ranged from $12.00 - $32.05 and the mean hourly rate was $20.03. (Figure 22).
Figure 21: Mean and range of annual salary among full-time (35+ hours/week) CHWs, Cook County Illinois respondents (n=154)
Figure 22: Mean and range of hourly rate among part-time (<35 hours/week) CHWs, Cook County Illinois respondents (n=55)
CHWs were asked about benefits offered by their current employer, including health and disability insurance benefits, paid leave / vacation benefits, reimbursement for workrelated expenses, and other benefits. The most frequently reported benefits offered to fulltime CHWs were health insurance (90%), vacation (85%), dental insurance (81%), and sick leave (76%) (Figure 23). Other commonly reported benefits provided to full-time CHWs included: transportation or mileage reimbursement (64%) and family leave (51%). The least frequently reported benefits offered by employers to full-time CHWs included hazard pay (reported by only 1%), cost of living adjustment (8%), and bonuses (10%).
See Appendix Table 10 for more information.
Figure 23: Benefits offered by employers of full-time CHWs, Cook County respondents (n=164)
Overall, benefits were much less frequently reported among part-time CHWs compared to full-time CHWs. Though only representing a small portion of respondents, the most frequently reported benefits among part-time CHWs included vacation (10%), sick leave (10%), professional development opportunities (9%), transportation or mileage reimbursement (9%), and health insurance (9%) (Figure 24). Additional benefits reported by part-time CHWs included professional development funds (7%), family leave (7%), and educational reimbursement/stipends (5%).
See Appendix Table 10 for more information.
Figure 24: Benefits offered by employers of part-time CHWs, Cook County respondents (n=59)
ELIGIBILITY FOR PROMOTIONS / STEP UPS WITH PAY INCREASES
CHWs were asked whether they are eligible for promotions / step-ups with pay increases at their place of employment (Figure 25). Overall, just under half of all CHWs reported being eligible for promotions / step-ups (47%).
See Appendix Table 11 for more information.
Eligible
Not eligible Missing
When examining eligibility for promotions / step-ups with pay increases among CHWS by employment status, full-time CHWs were more likely to report eligibility when compated to part-time CHWs (Figure 26).
groups
Figure 25: CHW eligibility for promotions / step-ups with pay increases, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=233)
Figure 26: CHW eligibility for promotion status / step-ups based on employment status, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=220)*
SUPPORTIVE & REFLECTIVE CHW SUPERVISION (CHW CI #12)
The CHW version of Indicator #12 has three parts: 1) supervision quantity; 2) supervision quality, and 3) supervisor attitudes and characteristics.
CHWs were asked whether their current position distinguishes between administrative and clinical supervision (Figure 27); about 43% of respondents responded ‘Yes’ that their position distinguishes between those types. Of the respondents whose position does distinguish between the two (n=108), 60% responded that two different people are responsible for supervision.
See Appendix Table 12 for more information.
Figure 27: Distinction between administrative and clinical supervision and whether oversight of supervision is handled by different people
Yes, my position distinguishes between administrative and clinical supervision
No, my position does not distinguish between administrative and clinical supervision
Missing
Yes, two different people responsible for supervision No, one person resonsible for supervision
Missing
SUPERVISION QUANTITY
CHWs were asked to provide the number of hours of individual and group supervision they received in the past 30 days (Figure 28). CHWs who work full-time responded that they received between zero to 160 hours of both individual and group supervision in the last 30 days, while part-time CHWs received between zero and 100 hours. On average, full-time CHWs received about 10.4 hours of individual and 11.4 hours of group supervision in the last 30 days. Part-time CHWs responded that their average number of supervision hours was just a few hours below full-time CHWs for both individual (8 4 hours) and group (9.2 hours) supervision.
See Appendix Table 12 for more information.
Figure 28: Mean and range of supervision hours in the last 30 days, by full- and part-time status
Individual supervision, overall (n=175)
Individual supervision, full-time (n=133)
Individual supervision, part-time (n=31)
Group supervision, overall (n=174)
Group supervision, full-time (n=132)
Group supervision, part-time (n=31)
SUPERVISION QUALITY
CHWs were asked about the overall quality of both individual and group supervision they had received within the last 30 days (Figure 29). More than two-thirds of CHWs responded that the overall quality of individual (69%) and group supervision (68%) they received in the last 30 days was excellent or good. When comparing CHWs’ perceived overall quality of individual and group supervision, they were almost identical.
See Appendix Table 12 for more information.
Figure 29: CHWs percieved overall quality of individual / group supervision received within the last 30 days (n=442)
Individual supervision
Group supervision
Hours of supervision
For Part 3 of the indicator, CHWs were asked to respond to six items characterizing supervision by the person they consider to be their primary supervisor during the past thirty days, with answers on a 4-point Likert scale from “Strongly disagree” (1) to “Strongly Agree” (4). The average overall score was 3.14 (SD = 0.84). Figure 34 shows the average response by question. Average question-specific scores met or exceeded 3.0, on average, for all questions (Figure 30).
See Appendix Table 13 for more information.
Figure 30: Supervisor attitudes and characteristics scale, mean scores from individual statements, Cook County, Illinois respondents
My supervisor understands the strengths and needs of the community/ies we serve. (n=247)
My supervisor understands that improving health requires addressing racism and other forms of oppression. (n=249)
My supervisor has participated in training about the CHW profession. (n=246)
My supervisor encourages my professional growth. (n=249)
My supervisor appreciates my role as a CHW (n=249)
My supervisor advocates for the role of CHWs with upper management. (n=245)
CHWs were asked to rate their level of agreement with the statement, “In my organization, CHWs participate on hiring panels when CHW supervisors are selected. Results were split, with 48% of respondents selecting “strongly agree” or “agree” and 49% of respondents selecting “strongly disagree” or “agree”(Figure 31).
See Appendix Table 13 for more information.
Figure 31: Level of agreement with the statement, "In my organization, CHWs participate on hiring panels when CHW supervisors are selected," Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=252)
Missing, 2%
Strongly agree, 19%
Strongly agree, 16%
Agree, 32%
Disagree, 30%
CHW INTEGRATION INTO TEAMS (CHW CI #5)
Common Indicator #5, developed by the CHW-CRE, includes three sub-measures of integration onto teams. This indicator is composed of three parts: 1) A 7-item Relational Coordination Scale (RCS) created by Gittel and colleagues,12,13 2) A novel scale Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination on CHW Integration (IROFD) and 3) Four additional questions related to CHW integration into teams.
RELATIONAL COORDINATION
The RCS asks participants to respond to a series of questions to assess the extent to which CHWs are members of a collaborative and communicative team with colleagues (i.e., clinicians, health educators, pharmacists, etc.) within professional settings. Each question in the RCS provides five response options coded 1 to 5. The one item that is worded negatively was reversed so that more positive or desirable answers are associated with higher scores. The average overall score was 3.65 (SD = 0.69) Average question-specific scores ranged from 3.4 – 3.9 (Figure 32).
See Appendix Table 14 for more information.
Figure 32: Relational Coordination Scale, mean scores from individual statements, CookCounty, Illinois respondents
How frequently do you communicate about program participants with the other...providers with whom you work? (n=247)
Do the other... providers with whom you work communicate with you in a timely way about program participants? (n=245)
Do the other...providers with whom you work communicate with you accurately about program participants? (n=248)
When an error has been made about program participants, do the other...providers with whom you work blame others rather than sharing responsibility? (n=243)
To what extent do the other...providers with whom you work share your goals for the care of program participants? (n=246)
How much do the other...providers with whom you work know about the work you do with program participants? (n=247)
How much do the other...providers with whom you work respect you and the work you do with program participants? (n=251)
12 Gittell JH, Fairfield KM, Bierbaum B, et al. Impact of relational coordination on quality of care, postoperative pain and functioning, and length of stay: a nine-hospital study of surgical patients. Med Care. 2000;38(8):807-819.
13 Gittell JH, Beswick J, Goldmann D, Wallack SS. Teamwork methods for accountable care: relational coordination and TeamSTEPPS®. Health Care Manage Rev. 2015;40(2):116-125.
INFLUENCE OF RACISM AND OTHER FORMS OF DISCRIMINATION ON CHW INTEGRATION
The IROFD on CHW Integration scale measures the impact of discrimination based on race/ethnicity or culture on integration into teams. Each question in the IROFD on CHW Integration Scale provides five response options coded 1 to 5,14 wherein the lower the score indicates a lower level of reported discrimination. The average overall score was 1.60 (SD = 0.79) Average question-specific scores indicate relatively low levels of discrimination based on race/ethnicity for the sample as a whole (Figure 33).
See Appendix Table 15 for more information.
Figure 33: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination Scale, mean scores from individual statements, Cook County, Illinois respondents
Do you feel dismissed or devalued by the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your ethnic/racial or cultural background? (n=249)
Do you feel isolated from the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your culture or race/ethnicity? (n=249)
Do you feel like you have to be the only voice for your race/ethnicity or culture amongst the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work? (n=251)
Do you feel that the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work make assumptions about you because of your race/ethnicity or culture? (n=251)
14 At the time of data collection, the survey included a 5-point response scale. In August 2024, The National Center for Research and Evaluation released a new data analysis guide, which included guidance about these items to include a 4-point scale. They continue to develop, pilot, and disseminate process and outcome indicators. Visit https://www.chwcre.org/promotion-of-common-indicators for more information.
When examining the difference in the overall mean score, CHWs with a non-racialized identity scored higher (M=1.60, SD= 0.94) than those with a racialized15 identity (M=1.57, SD=0.74), though the difference was not statistically significant. Differences between groups were also reported for each of the individual items in the scale (Figure 34). However, these differences were not statistically significant.
See Appendix Table 16 for more information.
Figure 34: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination Scale, mean scores from individual statements, Differences by self-identified racialized identity, Cook County, Illinois respondents
Do you feel dismissed or devalued by the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your ethnic/racial or cultural background?
Do you feel isolated from the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your culture or race/ethnicity?
Do you feel like you have to be the only voice for your race/ethnicity or culture amongst the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work?
Do you feel that the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work make assumptions about you because of your race/ethnicity or culture?
15 ‘Racialization' refers to the process through which the concept of 'race' is socially constructed and racialized identities are formed. Racialization highlights the historical, social, and political factors that contribute to the institutionalization of racism. Bernard, Wanda T., and Ellice Daniel. “Social Work with Racialized Groups: Frameworks for Practice.” International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, Second Edition, vol. 22, Elsevier Ltd, 2015, pp. 821–26, https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.28031-8.
ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ABOUT CHW INTEGRATION INTO TEAMS
Respondents were asked questions about their integrations into teams. When asked the extent to which they felt comfortable going to other providers with whom they work to discuss participants needs, 67% reported completely or a lot comfortable (Figure 35). When asked about the extent to which providers on their team understood their role and work as a CHW, 57% reported feeling their team understood completely or a lot.
See Appendix Table 17 for more information.
To what extent do you feel comfortable going to the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work to talk about participants' needs?
To what extent do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work understand your roles and what you do as a CHW?
About 72% of CHWs reported having access to participant information in their employer’s participant tracking system (Figure 36).
See Appendix Table 17 for more information.
36: Record information access, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=252)
When asked about their workspace, most (87%) responded that their employer provides them with an adequate, dedicated workspace (Figure 37). See Appendix Table 17 for more information.
See Appendix Table 17 for more information.
Figure 37: CHW has employer-provided workspace, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=252)
Figure 35: Additional questions about integration into teams, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=252)
Figure
CHW INVOLVEMENT IN DECISION AND POLICYMAKING (CI #4)
Common Indicator #4, a scale developed by the CHW Center for Research and Evaluation, measures the degree to which CHWs report being involved in decision- and policymaking, both within and outside of their organizations. Respondents are asked to indicate how much they agree with 6 statements, using four response options of “Strongly disagree,” “Disagree,” “Agree,” and “Strongly Agree,” coded with numeric values of 1 to 4. An average of these scores is taken, with a maximum possible score of 4 and minimum 1.
Across the six items, the average score among respondents was 2.84. Respondents were least likely to report being members of groups that influence policy within their organizations (average score = 2.4) (Figure 38). They were most likely to report having identified the people and organizations that influence change in their communities (average score = 3.2) and that people who influence change seek their opinion and participation (average score = 3.0).
See Appendix Table 18 for more information.
Figure 38: CHW Involvement in Decision and Policymaking Scale, mean scores from individual statements, Cook County, Illinois respondents
As part of my job, I have identified the people or organizations that influence change in my community (n=251)
As part of my job, people who influence change seek my opinion and participation (n=249)
As part of my job, I am a member of one or more groups/organizations that make (i.e. develop and/or enact) policy for my community, city, county, state, or tribe…
My employer/supervisor supports my involvement in policy making on work time (n=243)
I am a member of one or more groups that influence policy in my employing organization (n=246)
I believe that as a CHW, I have influenced policy in my organization or community (n=248)
CONCLUSION
Findings from the CHW CI and Training Experiences Survey provide a better understanding of the CHW workforce in Cook County, Illinois. The results highlight key characteristics of CHWs in the region, their training experiences, and respondents' selfrated confidence related to CHW competencies. Findings from this report offer a clearer picture of the CHW workforce in Chicago and surrounding communities, providing county-level insights that complement the broader statewide findings. Insights from this survey report will help inform the Illinois Department of Public Health's CHW Certification Program and may also provide valuable information to CHW employers, supporters, funders, researchers, and CHWs.
Information regarding common workforce issues that impact CHWs such as low pages, job insecurity, and limited training opportunities, will be an important resource as Illinois makes progress towards the development and implementation of the CHW certification program. The Cook County survey report findings offer a foundation for identifying the next steps and shaping responsive policies and practices. Specifically, the report may offer a clearer understanding of potential next steps and emerging best practices to support the CHW workforce in Illinois.
Cook County is home to a wide-reaching, diverse CHW workforce that plays an important role in addressing the needs of the county's most underrepresented, under-resourced, and underserved populations. Future efforts to support CHWs in Cook County and throughout Illinois should promote improved access to CHW Core 101 training, facilitate better opportunities for professional development, prioritize thriving wages, and cultivate supportive work environments.
Table 1: Sociodemographic characteristics of survey respondents from Cook County, Illinois (n=259)
Table 2: Serving as a CHW, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
1Respondents asked to provide a best estimate, rounded to the nearest year, if they could not recall the exact amount of time
2CHW Bilingual Trainer, CHW Lead (4), CHW Supervisor (3), Community Affairs Specialist II, Community Health Response Worker, Community Health Response Worker Supervisor, Community Response Worker, Director of Operations, Program Coordinator (3), Public Health Ambassador, Quality Director
Table 3: Types of organizations where CHWs work, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=259)
Table 4: Completed CHW Core 101 and specialized trainings, Cook County, Illinois Respondents (n=259)
1Respondents able to check all that applied
2Patient navigation in the clinical space and community services
Table 5: Organizations from which CHWs stated they had taken a training, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=237)
ACCESS Community Health
Age Options
Alas-Wings
Alliance Care360
Alzheimer's Association
American Heart Association
American Lung Association
American Red Cross
Archdiocese of Chicago
Arizona State University
Arturo Velasquez Institute
Ascension Healthcare
Association of Clinical Research Professionals
Association of Diabetes Care & Education Specialists
Blue Door Neighborhood Center
CARA Collective
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
Centers for New Horizons Inc.
Centro Romero
Centro San Bonifacio
Chicago City Colleges
Chicago Cook Workforce Partnership
Chicago Department of Public Health
City Colleges of Chicago
City of Chicago
Cook County Department of Public Health
Cook County Health
Cook County Health Ruth M. Rothstein CORE Center
Cook Workforce Partnership
Coursera
El Sol Neighborhood Educational Center
Emory School of Nursing
Enlace Chicago
Equal Hope
Erie Neighborhood House
Esperanza Health Center
EverThrive
Friend Health
Haymarket Center
HealthConnect One
Healthy Hood Chicago
Heartland Alliance
Help Hub
Howard Brown Health Center
Illinois Breast & Cervical Cancer Program
Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights
Illinois Community Health Workers Association
Illinois Department of Public Health
Illinois Pathways to Health
Illinois Primary Health Care Association
Illinois Public Health Association
Illinois Unidos
Increase the Peace
Institute for Workforce Education
John Hopkins University
La Villita Community Church
Latino Alzheimer's Memory And Disorders Alliance
Lawrence Hall
Loretto Hospital
Loyola University
Malcom X College
MCD Global Health
Medical Home Network
Mental Health First Aid
Midwest AIDS Training + Education Center
Moraine Valley Community College
Mujeres Latinas en Acción
National Alliance on Mental Illness
National Association of Community Health Workers
National Council For Mental Wellbeing
National HIV Classroom Learning Center
National Institutes of Health
National Latina Institute for Reproductive Justice
North Lawndale Employment Network
North Shore Hospital
Northwest Center
Northwestern Hospital
One Lawndale
P.A.S.O.- West Suburban Action Project
Puerto Rican Cultural Center
REM Occupational Health & Wellness
Respond Now
Richard J Daley College
Rincon Family Services
Rush University Medical Center
Safer Foundation
Saint Anthony Hospital
Sertoma Star Services
SGA Youth and Family Services
Sinai Urban Health Institute
Sista Afya Community Mental Wellness
Sisters Working it Out
South Suburban College
Southwest Organizing Project
Spanish Coalition For Housing
Susan G. Komen: Breast Cancer Foundation
TCA Health Inc.
The HAP Foundation
The Resurrection Project
Traliant
UIC Office of Community Engagement and Neighborhood Health Programs (OCEAN-HP)
Un Nuevo Despertar - A New Awakening
Universidad Popular
University of Chicago
University of Chicago Medicine
University of Illinois Cancer Center
University of Illinois Chicago
University of Illinois Chicago School of Public Health
University of Illinois Extension
University of Illinois in Chicago Hospital Health Sciences System
Warren Barr Gold Coast
Wellness West
West Side Health
Table 6: Confidence in CHW skills and knowledge competencies, Cook County, Illinois respondents (N=259)
Table 7: Confidence in CHW skills and knowledge competencies by CHW basic skills (101) training completion status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
1Pearson Chi Square Test or the Fisher-Freeman-Halton Exact Test in instances where expected cell counts were less than 5
Table 8: Average number of hours worked per week, by full and part-time status, Cook County, Illinois respondents Job Status
Table 9: Current reported level of compensation, by employment status (full- or part-time), Cook County Illinois respondents 1
1 CHWs who reported working in unpaid, volunteer only positions (n=39) and CHWs who reported being currently unemployed (n=7) excluded from the analysis. Earnings information for 5 full-time individuals were determined to be outliers and were removed from the analysis; salaries exceed mean calculated and all described their “job title as not listed” so unable to ascertain with certainty whether respondent was currently serving as a CHW
Table 10: Benefits CHWs reported to be offered by their employers, by full-time or part-time employment status, Cook County, Illinois respondents 1 ,2
Reimbursement for work-related expenses
1 Respondents not currently employed (n=7) and without current employment status reported (n=1) were not asked about benefits; Respondents not reporting employment status (full or part-time) (n=36) excluded from stratified analyses
2 E.g., Funds or paid time for participation in external professional associations and attending conferences and trainings
Table 11: Eligibility for promotion/step-ups with pay increases, based on employment status, Cook County, Illinois respondents
1 Respondents who reported working in an unpaid, volunteer only position (n=26) not asked this question
2 Fisher-Freeman-Halton Exact Test (expected cell counts were less than 5) used to examine differences in eligibility for promotions / step ups with pay increases by full- or part-time status
Table 12: CHWs experience with supervision, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=251) 1
Supervision characteristics
1 Respondents not currently employed (n=7) and missing employment
2Includes administrative and/or clinical supervision
Table 13: Indicator 12: Supervisor attitudes and characteristics scale, Cook County, Illinois respondents1 Supervisor Attitudes and Characteristics Summary Scale (n=248)2
My supervisor understands the strengths and needs of the community/ies we serve. (n=247)
My supervisor understands that improving health requires addressing racism and other forms of oppression. (n=249)
My supervisor has participated in training about the CHW profession. (n=246)
My
statement - Inclusion in Hiring Panels3
In my organization, CHWs participate on hiring panels when CHW supervisors are selected (n=252)
1 CHWs not currently employed (n=7) not asked this question.
2 Respondents were excluded from the summary score for the full scale if 4 or more of the 6 questions were unanswered.
3 Item not include in the scale.
Table 14: CHW integration into team, The Relational Coordination Scale, summary score by individual statement and full scale, Cook County, Illinois respondents1,2
Relational Coordination Scale (n=249)2
Statements- Relational Coordination3
How frequently do you communicate about program participants with the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work? (n=247)
Do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work communicate with you in a timely way about program participants? (n=245)
Do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work communicate with you accurately about program participants? (n=248)
When an error has been made about program participants, do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work blame others rather than sharing responsibility? (n=243)
To what extent do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work share your goals for the care of program participants?4 (n=246)
How much do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work know about the work you do with program participants? (n=247) 3.50
How much do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work respect you and the work you do with program participants? (n=251)
1 CHWs not currently employed (n=7) not asked these questions
2 Respondents asked to think about their teams as including the other healthcare, social services and/or education providers with whom they work
3 Respondents were excluded from the summary score for the full scale if 4 or more of the 6 questions were unanswered.
4 This question is referring to shared goals for the client
Table 15: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination on CHW Integration, Cook County, Illinois respondents1
Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination on CHW Integration Scale (n=252)2
Individual Statement -Included in scale Individual StatementsInfluence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination2
Do you feel isolated from the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your culture or race/ethnicity? (n=249)
Do you feel like you have to be the only voice for your race/ethnicity or culture amongst the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work? (n=251)
Do you feel dismissed or devalued by the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your ethnic/racial or cultural background? (n=249)
Do you feel that the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work make assumptions about you because of your race/ethnicity or culture? (n=251)
1 CHWs not currently employed (n=7) not asked these questions.
2 Respondents were excluded from the summary score for the full scale if more than 2 questions were unanswered
Table 16: Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination on CHW Integration, Differences by self-identified racialized identity, Cook County, Illinois respondents1
Racialized Identity Non-Racialized Identity
Influence of Racism and Other Forms of Discrimination on CHW Integration Scale2
Do you feel isolated from the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your culture or race/ethnicity?
Do you feel like you have to be the only voice for your race/ethnicity or culture amongst the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work?
Do you feel dismissed or devalued by the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work because of your ethnic/racial or cultural background?
Do you feel that the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work make assumptions about you because of your race/ethnicity or culture?
1 CHWs not currently employed (n=7) not asked these questions.
3 Respondents were excluded from the summary score for the full scale if more than 2 questions were unanswered
3 The p-value is a statistical measure. A lower p-value (typically less than 0.05) suggests that the observed results are unlikely to have occurred by chance alone, indicating a statistically significant effect or difference. Conversely, a higher p-value suggests that the results could be due to random variation. One-sided TTests, with equal variance between groups assumed, were used.
Table 17: Additional questions about CHW integration into teams, Cook County, Illinois respondents (n=252)
To what extent do you feel comfortable going to the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work to talk about participants' needs?
To what extent do the other healthcare, social service, and/or education providers with whom you work understand your roles and what you do as a CHW?
Do you have access to record information about your participants in your employer’s main participant tracking form/system?
Does your employer provide you with adequate, dedicated space where you can work (e.g., meet with participants, complete paperwork, make phone calls, access a computer, etc.)?
Table 18: CHW involvement in decision and policymaking, Cook County, Illinois respondnets1
CHW Involvement in Decision and Policy Making Scale (n=251)2
CHW Involvement in Decision and Policymaking Scale – Mean
As part of my job, I have identified the people or organizations that influence change in my community (n=251)
As part of my job, people who influence change seek my opinion and participation. (n=249)
As part of my job, I am a member of one or more groups/organizations that make (i.e., develop and/or enact) policy for my community, city, county, state, or tribe (n=250)
My employer/supervisor supports my involvement in policy making on work time (n=243)
I am a member of one or more groups that influence policy in my employing organization (n=246)
I believe that as a CHW, I have influenced policy in my organization or community (n=248)
1 CHWs not currently employed (n=7) not asked these questions
2 Respondents were excluded from the summary score for the full scale if more than 3 questions were unanswered