The Community Health Worker Training Program Evaluation Report prepared by the Washington State Department of Health Office of Healthy Communities in 2015 targets the assessment of participants who were on the program. This report aims at evaluating how effective the provided education was for employees based on the online survey results. The report describes this program in detail, stating that the Community Health Workers (CHWs) are the personnel who ensure access to health care services and informal counseling. The program goal was to determine the effectiveness of the training program that was offered to 375 CHWs via focusing on their experience and attitudes (“Community health worker training program evaluation report,” n.d.). The need for such training is explained in the report as a way to improve the quality of care. The program was communicated well as it is easy for a reader to understand the key idea of the evaluation.
Great attention is paid to the identification of the participants of the program and the methods of their experience assessment. In particular, the respondents were invited to participate in an online course, and more than 1000 persons accomplished it. After that, it was decided to examine how often they used their skills and knowledge received during education in practice. The above first phase was followed by the second phase of providing feedback through the Opinion online service. The results obtained by the evaluators were divided by the topic and then integrated to present relevant findings. In general, the process of the report evaluation is concise and structured.
The Community Health Worker Training Program Evaluation Report is a well-organized document, the structure of which is appropriate. For the readers’ convenience, the main results are given at the beginning of the paper along with a brief purpose statement. This allows for attracting the attention of the readers and simulating them to learn more about the project. The program also marketed well since it was announced in advance that educational sessions would be initiated online, and potential participants had some time to ponder over joining to it. At the same time, the report also includes contact information and ethical considerations, which are useful for those who have any questions or concerns regarding the program. It should be stressed that a set of tables and figures that are also present allow understanding and comparing data that was collected and analyzed. All the questions and answer options are clarified as well.
If I were to evaluate the results of the Community Health Worker Training Program, I would assess the same areas and add such aspects as patient feedback and quality improvement reports from health organizations the participants worked for. It goes without saying that such data may be rather difficult to access, yet its inclusion is likely to assist in gathering more comprehensive data. The attitudes of patients who received care from the respondents would be helpful to reveal any changes before and after the program provided that these patients want to share their experience. The quality reports may be included in case one or another organization completes them often, for example, once in a quarter. Considering that the given program was conducted in an online environment, I would not perform it differently. It seems that the best way to evaluate it is to use an online survey and open-ended interviews with the participants.