Advocacy and Public Policy Perceptions and Involvement of Master Certified Health Education Specialists

Abstract

Master Certified Health Education Specialists (MCHES; n = 186) participated in a mail survey on advocacy and public policy. Over half of participants reported that they had contacted a public official or provided policy-related information to consumers or other professionals. Participants identified barriers and benefits to influencing public policy. The greatest benefit was identified as improving the health or welfare of the public while the greatest barrier was that they were busy with other priorities. Participants also described their level of involvement, knowledge, training in advocacy, and their self-efficacy in performing various advocacy activities. Most MCHES reported voting and other basic advocacy functions while far fewer had participated in more advanced advocacy activities. Although nearly 73% had formal training on advocacy and policy, only 26% received it through college coursework. Factors predictive of advocacy and policy involvement were determined through a stepwise regression analysis. Five independent variables predicted the total number of advocacy activities and when combined accounted for nearly 61% of the variance. Government-level health educators’ misconception that they cannot participate in advocacy and public policy issues should be dispelled. Health education specialists with the MCHES credential need coursework and additional training on how to effectively influence public health policy.