The American Psychiatric Association (APA) has updated its Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including with new information specifically addressed to individuals in the European Economic Area. As described in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, this website utilizes cookies, including for the purpose of offering an optimal online experience and services tailored to your preferences.

Please read the entire Privacy Policy and Terms of Use. By closing this message, browsing this website, continuing the navigation, or otherwise continuing to use the APA's websites, you confirm that you understand and accept the terms of the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use, including the utilization of cookies.

×
Brief ReportsFull Access

Peer Support Specialist Work and Experiences During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A National Longitudinal Study

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.202100718

Abstract

Objective:

The study followed up with peer support specialists (PSSs) responding to an earlier survey to assess the pandemic’s continued employment and personal effects.

Methods:

A December 2020 online survey was conducted with respondents to a May 2020 survey. Items on employment status, work tasks, challenges, support, and benefits were included. Responses were analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics.

Results:

A total of 496 PSSs completed both surveys. Unemployment remained at 7%. The proportion with full-time employment increased by December, but financial instability also increased. Tasks involving individual support and group facilitation, which had decreased significantly, rebounded somewhat by December, when nearly all PSSs (86%) reported having some new tasks. Job satisfaction remained stable and high. In both surveys, about 75% reported pandemic-related benefits. Symptoms and housing instability among clients increased.

Conclusions:

Pandemic-related PSS unemployment was relatively stable, and work tasks evolved. Respondents reported increasing needs among clients, as well as pandemic-related work benefits.

HIGHLIGHTS

  • Responses of a group of peer support specialists (PSSs) to an online survey in May 2020 and again in December 2020 suggested that in the first pandemic year, levels of unemployment remained relatively stable and job tasks changed substantially.

  • PSSs reported high levels of satisfaction with support they received from their employers, and three-quarters of them identified pandemic-related benefits, such as opportunities to learn new technological skills.

  • For their clients, PSSs reported increases in housing instability, mental health symptoms, substance use issues, and interpersonal violence over the course of the pandemic.

Peer support specialists (PSSs) are a vital and growing part of the mental health services workforce (1), are employed in a wide range of mental health care settings, and perform broad and varied work tasks (2). We conducted two online surveys—in spring 2020 (3) and in winter 2020—to examine effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on PSSs.

Much has been learned about the physical, mental, and economic health effects of the pandemic in the general public and health workforce (46). Job loss was enormous before employment rates rebounded in summer 2020 (7). Studies suggest greater physical isolation, distress, misuse of substances, adverse mental and behavioral health symptoms, suicidal ideation, and increased sexual and physical violence (810) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Individuals with disabilities, those from diverse backgrounds, and those with a lower level of education reported greater anxiety and depression (5). Data have also been accumulating specifically about the impact of the pandemic on health care workers, with about half reporting serious psychiatric symptoms, including suicidal ideation (4). Estimates from a systematic review suggest that most if not all health care providers will experience some adverse psychological outcomes (11) as a result of the pandemic. Although these studies did not focus on mental health care workers or on PSSs, it is safe to assume that those workers have not been exempt from negative psychological effects of the pandemic.

In addition to the pandemic’s psychosocial effects, widespread alterations in the way people work have been noted (12), including the growth of telehealth and virtual mental health services (13). In light of these changes in work and of findings from our first survey, we examined the pandemic’s continued impact on PSSs in the United States and how these impacts changed throughout 2020.

Methods

Two online surveys were conducted with the assistance of the National Association of Peer Supporters (NAPS), the first of which yielded 1,279 responses from May to June 2020 (3). NAPS distributed the survey through its e-mail Listserv of approximately 6,000 PSSs and non-PSSs; snowball sampling occurred. Of the individuals responding to the first survey, 93% (N=1,187) agreed to be queried again. The second survey was conducted with those respondents in November and December 2020. Both the first and the second surveys were conducted with Qualtrics. The Boston University Institutional Review Board approved all research procedures and materials. As with the first survey, the second survey contained items related to demographic factors, work history and status, work tasks, and challenges and benefits related to the pandemic. The second survey and research procedures were similar to those reported for the first survey (3). For some questions, we had three data points: retrospective information about status in the periods before the pandemic, which was collected in the first survey, and information provided in responses to the first and the second surveys.

The second online survey was distributed via e-mail to respondents to the first survey who agreed to be contacted a second time (N=1,187). Eligibility criteria for the first survey were as follows: resides in the United States, 18 years or older, and had worked or volunteered as a PSS for at least 5 hours a week in February 2020, prior to the pandemic. Inclusion criteria were verified by using screening questions in the first survey.

Responses were collected in November and December 2020. Two reminders were sent, and a final total of 571 surveys were received. We deleted incomplete responses (N=75), which resulted in a final sample size of 496 for the second survey.

Responses were downloaded from Qualtrics into SPSS, version 25.0, for analysis. We conducted chi-square and t tests to compare demographic characteristics and responses to the first survey of those who responded to both surveys (N=496) and of those who completed only the first survey (N=783). No statistically significant differences were found for a variety of demographic characteristics (gender, age, region, race, ethnicity, educational attainment, income, and employer type) or initial survey responses (including work challenges, pandemic benefits, work tasks, and satisfaction with support) (all p>0.05, results not shown). Only one significant difference was found between responders and nonresponders to the second survey, which was related to the variable “engagement in new tasks.” In the first survey, a somewhat higher proportion of those who completed both surveys reported engaging in new tasks, compared with those who completed only the first survey (76% versus 70%; χ2=4.07 df=1, p=0.025). Given the large number of comparisons in which no differences were found, we concluded that respondents to the second survey were not significantly different from respondents to the first survey and were representative of the first sample.

To determine changes over the course of the pandemic in 2020, we used frequency tables, chi-square tests, and paired t tests. Some respondents did not complete all survey items, and percentages presented throughout are based on the total number of responses received for each item.

Results

The 496 respondents to both surveys resided in all regions of the country, and most were female (70%, N=342) and White (76%, N=366). More than half reported having an associate’s degree or above (54%, N=260). Forty-three percent of respondents reported receiving public benefits (N=206), and 47% (N=228) earned less than $30,000 at the time of the second survey. Respondents were employed in a variety of settings, and about half (N=242) reported 5 or more years of PSS employment. In spring 2020, 32% (N=395) of the initial survey respondents reported current or past NAPS membership.

Among the 496 PSSs who completed both surveys, 7% reported not working or not volunteering in the spring 2020 survey, which reflected significantly less unemployment than in the general population (Table 1). In December 2020, although a similar proportion reported not working or not volunteering (7%), larger proportions than in the spring reported working full-time and volunteering. These shifts in employment status were statistically significant.

TABLE 1. Responses to items from two online surveys (spring and winter 2020) by 496 peer support specialists who completed both surveysa

Pre-COVIDbSurvey 1Survey 2
ItemN%N%N%χ2df
Employment status418.77**9
 Working full-time321673096432966
 Working part-time12726114249820
 Volunteering337235337
 Not working or volunteering0357367
Engaged in new tasks since pandemic beganc47.45**1
 Yes3217636286
 No102246114
Challenges experienced by peer clientsd
 Possibility of job loss237602255754.28**1
 Isolation36592358909.05*1
 Increase in mental health symptoms346873579011.69**1
 Increase in substance use issues265672676758.79**1
 Interpersonal or familial violence149381523855.55**1
 Housing instability246622646736.05**1
 Food shortages or hunger250632466273.66**1
 Other6316581547.90**1
Have there been any benefits resulting from the pandemic?c45.05**1
 Yes3127531175
 No1042510525

aSome respondents did not complete all items, and percentages are based on the total number of responses received for each item.

bPre-COVID employment status was assessed in survey 1. The difference in employment status from pre-COVID to survey 1 was significant (χ2=1,088.67, df=12, p<0.001).

cIn survey 1, items about new tasks and about benefits resulting from the pandemic were open-ended. For ease of administration of survey 2, closed-ended items (i.e., with structured responses) were created from the survey 1 responses.

dRespondents were allowed to select more than one option; categories are not mutually exclusive.

*p<0.05, **p<0.001.

TABLE 1. Responses to items from two online surveys (spring and winter 2020) by 496 peer support specialists who completed both surveysa

Enlarge table

Among the 496 PSSs who completed both surveys, the proportion reporting an inability to pay monthly bills increased significantly, from 22% before the pandemic to 30% at the time of the first survey (see table in online supplement to this report). In the second survey, 152 respondents (32%) reported an inability to pay monthly bills. In addition, the proportion of individuals receiving public benefits increased from the first to the second survey: 493 (39%) of 1,279 respondents in the first survey and 206 (42%) of 496 respondents in the second.

In our query about job tasks, 86% of respondents to the second survey reported performing new tasks as a result of the pandemic, compared with 76% of these respondents in the first survey (p<0.001). Among the 389 respondents who reported performing new tasks in the December survey, such tasks included those related to technology (N=304, 81%); basic resources such as food, housing, and transportation (N=177, 47%); and COVID-19, such as cleaning and personal protective equipment distribution and training (N=212, 55%).

In the first survey, when asked about standard job tasks, respondents reported that the provision of individual peer support and group facilitation declined significantly from prepandemic levels (see online supplement). From the first to the second survey, time spent on these tasks increased significantly but did not rebound to prepandemic levels. From prepandemic through spring 2020, lesser declines were noted in time spent on the tasks of training and of systems advocacy, which appeared to partially rebound by winter 2020. Between the first and second surveys, no significant change in time spent on performance of clerical or administrative tasks was noted (see online supplement).

In both the first and the second surveys, respondents were provided a checklist of possible adverse experiences as a result of the pandemic. Almost all who responded to these questions indicated that the individuals they supported were experiencing high levels of isolation (N=358, 90%) and mental health symptoms (N=357, 90%) during winter 2020 (Table 1). From spring to winter 2020, respondents also reported significantly increased rates of housing instability, substance use, and interpersonal violence among their peer clients.

Among the 496 PSSs who completed both surveys, the threat of job loss continued, although it was down from 30% (N=101) of spring respondents to 25% (N=84) of winter respondents (see online supplement). Rates of reported isolation, communication challenges, lack of training, and lack of protective equipment also dropped modestly but significantly over the course of 2020, although the proportions reporting some challenges, such as isolation and communication challenges, remained high.

We examined shifts over time in respondents’ perceptions of pandemic-related work benefits. In the spring survey, respondents reported benefits such as less time spent commuting and the opportunity to learn new technological skills. Among the 416 respondents in the second survey who answered this question, 312 had responded in the first survey that they perceived pandemic-related benefits. However, by the second survey, 53 of those individuals’ perceptions shifted, and they no longer perceived benefits. In the first survey, 104 of the 416 (25%) respondents reported not perceiving pandemic-related benefits. However, by the second survey, 52 of those 104 (50%) reported perceiving benefits. These shifts in perceptions from first to second survey were statistically significant (χ2=45.05, df=1, p=0.001). Similar patterns of changing perceptions were noted in other responses. Respondents in the second survey reported benefits for the PSSs themselves (N=227, 68%), for individuals supported by PSSs (N=270, 80%), and for the peer support field in general (N=205, 61%). On a Likert scale (1, very satisfied, and 5, very unsatisfied), respondents to the second survey expressed being satisfied (means ranging from 1.85 to 2.19) with the amount and type of support they were receiving since the pandemic began from their organization, their supervisor, and their coworkers (see online supplement). These satisfaction ratings were similar to those in the first survey.

Discussion

In May 2020, a total of 1,279 PSSs in the United States qualified for, consented to, and responded to an online survey about the impact of COVID-19 on various aspects of their work (3). Of those individuals, 496 participated in a follow-up survey implemented in winter 2020. Although all respondents were working or volunteering as PSSs before the pandemic, approximately 7% of respondents in both the first and second surveys reported no longer working or volunteering as PSSs. They also reported increased inability to pay monthly bills and continuing, perhaps cumulative, pandemic-related economic harm.

Results suggest that the work of the PSS continued to adapt to the pandemic as service needs and resources evolved over 2020. Traditional tasks, including individual peer support and group facilitation, partially rebounded from the early part of the pandemic to the third wave—an encouraging trend.

Although respondents in the second survey reported continued personal challenges (especially isolation and communication difficulties), the proportions reporting most challenges decreased over 2020. This decrease was likely related to the relatively stable and high levels of satisfaction PSSs reported regarding social, educational, and material support provided by their organizations, supervisors, and coworkers. Unfortunately, PSSs reported increasing challenges among the individuals they supported; these challenges were related to mental health symptoms, substance use issues, interpersonal violence, and housing instability. Isolation, job loss, and hunger remained high among peer clients.

In both surveys, most respondents reported positive impacts from the pandemic, including impacts they personally experienced, impacts on the broader peer support field, and impacts on those they supported. Many of these positive impacts included the adoption of technologies for the provision of remote and telehealth support (14, 15).

Several limitations of these data should be noted, including sample representativeness. Other limitations of this research were addressed in reporting from the first survey (3). Given the similarity of the demographic characteristics of the first and second samples, we are reasonably confident that these results provide a valid picture of PSS work tasks and challenges over the course of 2020.

Conclusions

This may be the only longitudinal examination of the work tasks and challenges of PSSs employed in mental health settings during the pandemic. From our initial survey, we concluded that PSSs were working creatively to meet the increasing needs of the individuals they served, and we continued to observe this creativity in the second survey. We were encouraged to see that PSSs as a group did not experience high levels of unemployment. PSSs reported somewhat decreasing adverse effects for themselves personally but continued high levels of social isolation, mental health symptoms, and substance use among those they served, an important finding for mental health providers and programs. As job tasks continued to evolve and rely heavily on technology and meeting basic needs of the clients they supported, PSSs continued to innovate in their work to address these effects and needs. PSSs reported substantial positive impacts of the pandemic, without which we assume that coping with the pandemic would have been considerably more difficult. Mental health organizations that employ PSSs should take heart at the high levels of workplace support PSSs reported receiving, which remain critical to serving individuals greatly burdened by this long-lasting pandemic.

Department of Sociology, California State University East Bay, Hayward (Adams); Center for Psychiatric Rehabilitation, Boston University, Boston (Adams, Rogers); Boston Healthcare System, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Boston (Lord); Columbia University School of Social Work, New York City, and National Association of Peer Supporters, Washington D.C. (Edwards); private practice, Norton, Massachusetts (Barbone).
Send correspondence to Dr. Adams ().

Development of this report was supported by grant 90RAREM0001 from the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research (NIDILRR), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). NIDILRR is a center within the HHS Administration for Community Living (ACL).

The authors report no financial relationships with commercial interests.

The contents do not necessarily represent the policy of NIDILRR, HHS, or ACL, and no endorsement by the federal government should be assumed.

References

1 Goldstrom ID, Campbell J, Rogers JA, et al.: National estimates for mental health mutual support groups, self-help organizations, and consumer-operated services. Adm Policy Ment Health 2006; 33:92–103Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

2 Cronise R, Teixeira C, Rogers ES, et al.: The peer support workforce: results of a national survey. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2016; 39:211–221Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

3 Adams WE, Rogers ES, Edwards JP, et al.: Impact of COVID-19 on peer support specialists in the United States: findings from a cross-sectional online survey. Psychiatr Serv 2022; 73:9–17LinkGoogle Scholar

4 Young KP, Kolcz DL, O’Sullivan DM, et al.: Health care workers’ mental health and quality of life during COVID-19: results from a mid-pandemic, national survey. Psychiatr Serv 2021; 72:122–128LinkGoogle Scholar

5 Anxiety and Depression: Household Pulse Survey. Hyattsville, MD, National Center for Health Statistics, 2021. www.cdc.gov/nchs/covid19/pulse/mental-health.htm. Accessed Nov 11, 2021Google Scholar

6 Czeisler M, Lane RI, Wiley JF, et al.: Follow-up survey of US adult reports of mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic, September 2020. JAMA Netw Open 2021; 4:e2037665Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

7 The Employment Situation–October 2021. Washington, DC, US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_11052021.htm. Accessed Nov 11, 2021Google Scholar

8 Czeisler MÉ, Lane RI, Petrosky E, et al.: Mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, June 24–30, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020; 69:1049–1057Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

9 The intersection of COVID-19 and mental health. Lancet Infect Dis 2020; 20:1217Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

10 Jetelina KK, Knell G, Molsberry RJ: Changes in intimate partner violence during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. Inj Prev 2021; 27:93–97Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

11 Magill E, Siegel Z, Pike KM: The mental health of frontline health care providers during pandemics: a rapid review of the literature. Psychiatr Serv 2020; 71:1260–1269LinkGoogle Scholar

12 Parker K, Horowitz JM, Minkin R: How the Coronavirus Outbreak Has—and Hasn’t—Changed the Way Americans Work. Washington, DC, Pew Research Center, 2020. www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/12/09/how-the-coronavirus-outbreak-has-and-hasnt-changed-the-way-americans-work/. Accessed Nov 11, 2021Google Scholar

13 The Impact of COVID-19 on Mental, Neurological and Substance Use Services: Results of a Rapid Assessment. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2020. apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/335838. Accessed Nov 11, 2021Google Scholar

14 Fortuna KL, Naslund JA, LaCroix JM, et al.: Digital peer support mental health interventions for people with a lived experience of a serious mental illness: systematic review. JMIR Ment Heal 2020; 7:e16460Crossref, MedlineGoogle Scholar

15 Guinart D, Marcy P, Hauser M, et al.: Mental health care providers’ attitudes toward telepsychiatry: a systemwide, multisite survey during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatr Serv 2021; 72:704–707LinkGoogle Scholar