Review: 'How to Prevent the Next Pandemic'

If only I led a government or a nongovernmental organization, then maybe I would be cheering with the same unabashed optimism that Bill Gates reveals in his passionate book about the world’s preparedness—or lack thereof—to prevent the next pandemic. As a private citizen, I am left worried about the world’s ability to move the needle on thwarting the spread of viruses as they arise, especially given the wave after wave of COVID-19 variants, the introduction of monkeypox into our collective viral lexicon, and the resurgence of polio. In short, there is cause for concern.

Indeed, in his 304-page tome, How to Prevent the Next Pandemic, Gates first details how the response to the COVID-19 outbreak was middling at best and could have been exponentially worse. He states matter-of-factly that despite people raising the alarm for decades about novel diseases that could kill millions, the world didn’t respond with sufficient urgency. There wasn’t enough investment in the tools needed to prepare for a pandemic properly, i.e., nations were caught flat-footed, militaries weren’t running large-scale drills, and city, state, and federal governments had no practice outside of natural disasters to combat the spread of a deadly virus like COVID-19....

Read the full book review by Lauren Brathwaite, content editor at Philanthropy News Digest.

 

 

The sustainable nonprofit: Addressing challenges in leadership recruitment and retention

While serving constituents in need has always been challenging, today’s food banks face a new post-pandemic and rapidly shifting socio-economic landscape that is impacting how they recruit and retain leadership. We need to consider fresh strategies that food bank executives can leverage in addressing challenges in leadership recruitment and retention.

The impact of social and economic change

Low-income and at-risk populations—those served by food banks—were disproportionately impacted by the pandemic. This increased pressure on food banks, which saw a55 percent spike in demand in the first year of the pandemic. At the end of 2021, one in six adults still relied on charitable food and, as of this summer, food banks across the country are seeing growing lines as inflation impacts households. Against this backdrop, recruiters must consider specific internal and external obstacles when it comes to finding and retaining leadership....

Read the full column article by Derrick Chubbs and Janet Albert, president and CEO of Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida and a partner and U.S. nonprofit lead at executive search firm Bridge Partners, respectively.

(Photo credit: nico-smit via unsplash)

Recruiting and retaining employees with skills-based volunteering: A commentary by Tessa Vithayathil

The COVID-19 pandemic has spurred an unprecedented shift within the U.S. workforce. No industry or sector has escaped as a record number of people have left their jobs in what’s been called the “Great Resignation.” Perhaps you have witnessed this exodus among your colleagues or been part of it yourself.

According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of “voluntary quits” reached 4.5 million in March 2022, continuing the record highs posted during 2021, which closed out its last two months with an astonishing combined total of almost 9 million workers leaving their jobs. National Economic Council deputy director Bharat Ramamurti has pointed out that people are using this opportunity to change their employment situations for the better. Perhaps the Great Resignation would be better termed the “Great Upgrade.”

One of the top reasons so many people are changing jobs is they’re seeking more purpose and advancement in their careers. Professionals are putting more emphasis on the meaning of their work and pursuing opportunities to further develop their skills....

Read the full commentary by Tessa Vithayathil, the director of programs at Common Impact.

(Photo credit: Getty Images)

Innovate and invest in communities: A commentary by Angela F. Williams

Americans are hurting. More than one million people across our nation have died from COVID-19, a staggering and profound loss. Even as we continue to grieve, the other crises we face—rising costs of living, surging gun violence, and increasing division—can feel like a second pandemic.

The last several years have exposed deep fault lines in our society. As our problems become increasingly complex, so do their solutions. There is no silver bullet that will solve systemic problems like income inequality, hyper-polarization, or poverty. But as CEO of United Way Worldwide, the largest community-based nonprofit in the world, I believe that progress is possible. It starts by reimagining philanthropy to focus on the place where all of our global ills and solutions ultimately begin: community.

Communities are the cornerstone of society. But too often, philanthropies view local investment as a nicety that can be overlooked, instead of a necessary first step in solving global problems. Now more than ever, we cannot afford to abandon the power of local community. We need to innovate and invest in it like never before....

Read the full commentary by Angela F. Williams, CEO of United Way Worldwide.

(Photo credit: Getty Images/kuarmungadd)

Nonprofits cannot be wholly dependent on grants: A commentary by Kisha L. Webster

Like so many in our nation, I am holding space to acknowledge, process and heal from the white supremacist attack at a Buffalo, New York, grocery store and the massacre of 21 young children and adults at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas. I come to this moment understanding that for many people, this is the latest in a string of traumatic experiences, the cumulative effect of each one more devastating than the last. This is a time for grief, but it is also a time for reflection.

Many are asking: Why are mass shootings escalating in frequency and casualty? Why are some elected officials adamantly opposed to reforms that would save lives? Why are we increasingly vulnerable in public spaces? Those questions are top of mind, but we must dig deeper if we want change. There are questions not just people who permit the proliferation of guns but for those of us in proximity to movement building.

Many people who enter the social justice space do so because they want to do good. They want to effect change. They want to ensure that people can live with dignity while having their basic needs met. But to survive in this space, many have had to rely on grants. As the demand on nonprofits increase–and the challenges facing communities intensify–I am realizing that nonprofits cannot be wholly dependent on grants.

Grants do not ensure sustainability but rather trap grantees into an endless cycle of chasing dollars and proving they are deserving of said dollars. Grants create a scarcity mindset, forcing nonprofits to stand out, compete and distinguish themselves to receive a small share of the pie....

Read the full commentary by Kisha L. Webster, co-founder and executive director of the Greenmount West Community Center.

(Photo credit: Getty Images/Donald Gruener)

The path forward in the face of COVID-19 and anti-Asian hate: commentary by Jiny Kim

In bringing another Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month to a close, I am reminded that this is the third one we have celebrated amidst the COVID-19 pandemic.

Twenty-nine months ago, when the first reports of a new highly transmissible virus were emerging from China, the Asian American community held our breaths, fearing not only the virus itself but also the racialized scapegoating it could bring.

Twenty-eight months ago, we started seeing the first reports of COVID-related harassment of Asian Americans, and soon thereafter, Asian American businesses began shuttering, victims of racialized fearmongering, a full month prior to the declaration of a pandemic and mandated shut downs. 

And twenty-seven months ago, alongside nationwide shutdowns came reports of hate-fueled violence targeting our communities. Concurrently, resource-strapped local organizations serving the Asian American community faced capacity constraints to meet growing needs in the face of the dual pandemics of COVID-19 and anti-Asian hate....

Read the full commentary by Jiny Kim, Vice President, Policy and Programs, at Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC.

(Photo credit: Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC)

The mental healthcare system needs a dramatic intervention: A commentary by John MacPhee

The mental healthcare system in the United States needs a dramatic intervention. At best, our system is fragmented, siloed, and plagued by misaligned incentives that only deepen existing problems; at worst, critics might conclude that providing timely, effective mental health care to people in need is not its goal. Structural fixes are desperately needed to ensure equitable access to quality mental health care for everyone who needs it.

This includes our young people, who now face a worsening mental health crisis, exacerbated by a perfect storm of stressors including social unrest, acts of violence, bias and oppression directed at people of color and LBGTQ+ individuals, and the loss, grief, and isolation imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic. This crisis urgently needs to be addressed, even if our mental health system is not designed to help everyone who needs it—which means that we must pursue all viable options. And partnerships with philanthropic organizations will be critical in turning the tide of this crisis.

In this country, almost one in three young adults between the ages of 18 and 25 and one in four teenagers experience a mental health disorder such as depression or anxiety. However, fewer than half of young people who needed mental health care in 2020 received it. Even for those who are brave enough to seek help, it is still heartbreakingly difficult to get the timely, affordable care they need....

Read the full commentary by John MacPhee, CEO of The Jed Foundation.

(Photo credit: Getty Images/FatCamera)

What grassroots activism means: A commentary by Priscilla Enriquez

When the COVID-19 pandemic struck the United States in early March 2020, the James B. McClatchy Foundation was in the midst of hosting roundtables to better understand our community in California’s Central Valley and the organizations serving it. While many foundations engage in this process, we believe these conversations are critical to the impact of our work, as it helps us understand what is happening in our community while building relationships and trust with key partners.

Even as COVID-19 case numbers began to rise and shutdowns were announced, our new chief impact officer, Misty Avila, was deep in the field, hosting meetings with community leaders. As the foundation’s CEO, I felt responsible for her safety in the face of this new public health threat; after a few moments of wrestling with what to do next, I called her and asked her to cancel her appointments and return home.

It soon became clear that this crisis would directly affect our work and our lives. We paused our community roundtables. Rather than just shifting in-person meetings to virtual ones and continuing with our plan, we took a moment to recognize how this global event was impacting the communities we cared about. At the end of March, we convened our community of grassroots leaders and sincerely asked the only question that really mattered: “How are you doing?” I look back at that defining moment as the cornerstone of our work.

At that meeting, one of the leaders shared that by standing in a food line with a client, he was also able to do some census outreach. This act of caring, combined with activism in that same moment, helped me to gain a deeper understanding of what “grassroots” activism means. It means acting on an unselfish drive to seek out opportunities, even in grim conditions, to improve people’s lives, because the future matters. While this leader was helping an elder navigate an unfathomable crisis, he also saw a future in which an accurate census count could help that elder.

And as funders, we need to act in a similar fashion....

Read the full commentary by Priscilla Enriquez, CEO of the James B. McClatchy Foundation.

(Photo credit: Getty Images)

When are we going to show up for working moms?

Women are the center of our economy, care systems, and essential work—yet they aren’t at the center of our policies, programs, and pandemic recovery plans. Over the last two years, millions of women have been driven out of the workforce as COVID-19 lockdowns, homeschooling, and domestic duties including caregiving for children and older adult parents took over. The World Economic Forum reported that the pandemic has undone more than 30 years of progress toward gender parity. There are policy changes and programs that could be implemented to mitigate this impact, yet there isn’t the political will or private-sector leadership commitment to get us there. The nonprofit and care sectors both acknowledge that women and moms are at the center of our work—so we must ask: Why is this so hard to get done?

In her Marshall Plan for Moms and her latest book, Pay Up: The Future of Women and Work, Reshma Saujani has outlined clear recommendations for  investing in women as we move toward recovery. They include providing caregivers with a monthly cash payment, aka guaranteed income, for their often-uncompensated work and advancing policies that support affordable and accessible quality child care, parental leave, and pay equity. Women make up almost 80 percent of the care sector workforce. Saujani’s recommendations would help the women who work in this vital sector by ensuring that they receive quality wages; predictable, flexible schedules; and stable, quality care for their children so they can be fully engaged in professionally caring for others.

Philanthropy can help fund these programs, and many are already doing so. Providing unrestricted operating supports to nonprofits is especially important, as this type of funding allows for investment in the staff who are providing services in the care sector. Foundations can also spread the word about the impact that direct cash has on individuals, especially women, when speaking with lawmakers and other funders. Advocating for policies to enhance cash assistance such as the advanced child tax credit and to provide universal child care is another area where foundations can help.

Even before the pandemic, Americans struggled to cover basic expenses, secure quality child care, access paid leave, and maintain stable housing. During the pandemic, government responses including COVID-19 supplemental sick leave, child tax credits that put extra dollars in parents’ pockets, and eviction moratoria helped alleviate—temporarily—some of the most dire difficulties. Now the recovery is just beginning, and it will be a long one without significant investments in women. Policy makers must put the experiences of working moms front and center in their policy, program, and budget plans, and nonprofits and foundations must continue to advocate for such efforts on women’s behalf.   

I spoke with Reshma earlier this year and asked her to share three things the philanthropic sector can do now to show up for working moms. One was to raise awareness about the challenges women who are caregivers are facing. Women are the primary caregivers for their children and older parents and also are the majority of workers in the care economy. Together, nonprofits and foundations can work to understand how to provide support and funding to help women stay in the workforce. Child care is often the barrier to staying employed. A recent study by the San Diego Foundation, Workforce, Childcare & Change, confirmed that to address these challenges, working parents are seeking innovative benefits including healthcare and childcare subsidies and flexibility.  

Another was for workplaces to shift from programs, like mentoring, to policies, like paid leave, dependent care benefits, flexible work schedules, and paid or subsidized child care. And it’s important to approach this with an equity lens, including being mindful of supporting the non-birth parent’s paid leave and creating stable, predictable, and flexible schedules that still support employees’ ability to be seen, heard, and valued.

We know working moms have said, “Give me predictability and flexibility, and around 80 percent of us will go back to work.” We need moms to come back to work. The longer someone stays out of the workforce, the harder it is to go back. So, America, this is the moment to act.

While we wait and advocate for the rest of America to show up, nonprofits and policy makers must start showing up for moms now! As you know in your roles as leaders, parents, organizers, and humans—they always show up for us.

(Photo credit: Getty Images)

Dana L. Toppel is COO of Jewish Family Service of San Diego and founder of MAKE WORK WORK FOR MOMS.

 

 

Belonging and prosperity: A Q&A with Norman Chen, CEO, The Asian American Foundation

The Asian American Foundation (TAAF) was launched in May 2021—amid a rise in anti-Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) hate and violence—to help solve for the longstanding lack of investment provided to AAPI communities and to build the infrastructure needed to improve AAPI advocacy, power, and representation. That month, TAAF announced that through its AAPI Giving Challenge and donations from its board, it secured nearly $1.1 billion in donations and in-kind commitments from partners—the largest philanthropic commitment in history fully focused on supporting AAPI communities—including $125 million from board members to support AAPI organizations and causes over the next five years. TAAF’s work focuses on several priority areas: anti-hate, data and research, education, narrative change, unlocking resources, and racial solidarity.

Norman Chen has served as CEO of TAAF since November 2021. Before joining TAAF, Chen co-founded Leading Asian Americans to Unite for Change (LAAUNCH) in September 2020 and created the Social Tracking of Asian Americans in the U.S. (STAATUS) Index, a landmark study of American attitudes toward Asian Americans. Prior to his leadership in AAPI advocacy and philanthropy, Chen spent his career as an entrepreneur, investor, and community leader building innovative life sciences companies and supporting nonprofit organizations in both the United States and Asia. 

PND asked Chen about TAAF’s mission to address the historic lack of philanthropic investment in AAPI communities through key initiatives such as the AAPI Giving Challenge, the factors behind the historic underinvestment in AAPI communities, TAAF’s Anti-Hate National Network and AAPI Action Centers, and key findings from the 2022 STAATUS Index.

Philanthropy News Digest: TAAF’s mission is “to serve the community in their pursuit of belonging and prosperity that is free from discrimination, slander, and violence.” The AAPI community is often seen by other Americans as quickly attaining prosperity—i.e., the model minority myth—while continuing to be perceived as foreign, as other, generation after generation. How does the foundation work to address the tension between those two components of its mission?

Norman Chen: Prosperity is a core piece of TAAF’s mission because we are addressing often overlooked social and economic challenges in AAPI communities—one being that we are the most economically divided racial group in the U.S., with the highest median household income and the highest intra-racial group income disparity. Contrary to the model minority myth, which perpetuates a misguided perception about AAPI socioeconomic success, prosperity is not equally accessible across AAPI communities or to AAPI immigrants who come to the U.S. in pursuit of a better life for their families.

Belonging is part and parcel of our work because AAPIs continue to face other harmful stereotypes such as being seen as perpetual foreigners. For example, according to the 2021 STAATUS Index, one in five Americans agreed with the statement that Asian Americans as a group are “more loyal to their countries of origin than to the U.S.”

For these reasons, TAAF has sought to close critical gaps in support and make strategic investments in our communities. We are committed to accelerating prosperity and creating a greater sense of belonging for all AAPIs by bringing to bear more cross-sector support from partners who are also committed to these efforts....

Read the full Q&A with Norman Chen, CEO of the The Asian American Foundation.

Questions to ask before quitting your job: A column article by Molly Brennan

Thinking about joining the Great Resignation? Four questions to consider

If you’re thinking about joining the Great Resignation and quitting your job, you’re in good company. Resignations are at a 20-year high, and depending on what study you’re reading, one-third to one-half of all U.S. workers are considering leaving their jobs right now. This record number of resignations is fueled by a range of factors, from the understanding that better pay and opportunities may be readily available, to a desire to work for an organization that is more values-aligned, to the desire to have more flexibility about when and where work is done. Burnout is also a significant factor that’s driving employees to seek other opportunities.

If you recognize yourself in any of these factors and are considering taking action, you’re likely to find yourself in a good position. The number of open opportunities has created stiff competition for talent, driving up salaries and giving candidates an advantage when it comes to negotiations.

A recent study from Pew Research Center found that many workers who leave their positions actually do find better jobs. At least half of these workers say that compared with their last job, they are now earning more money (56 percent), have more opportunities for advancement (53 percent), have an easier time balancing work and family responsibilities (53 percent), and have more flexibility to choose when they put in their work hours (50 percent). At the same time, that means almost half of those surveyed reported that they are not earning more, and about 22 percent said their current benefits are worse than at their last job.

So it would be a good idea to explore the following questions before quitting your current job....

Read the full column article by Molly Brennan, founding partner at executive search firm Koya Partners.

(Photo credit: Karolina Grabowska via pexels)

A paradigm shift toward investing in public health: A commentary by Adam M. Doyno

Let’s not lose momentum in public health funding

It’s a haunting irony that New Yorkers and the nation have crossed the second anniversary of the COVID-19 lockdowns just as the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) has recommended the PREVENT Pandemics Act to the full Senate—but without a firm commitment to fund it. Can we hope for a bipartisan, sensible outcome that supports a unified response to future crises by funding infectious disease surveillance, forecasting, and preparedness centers?

Indeed, the nearly one million deaths in the United States and six million deaths worldwide to date call for a paradigm shift in which science- and data-driven public health becomes a leading investment focus for government, foundations, and individual donors.

The need for public health funding is as great as it ever has been. Enormous global emergencies are looming—with the spread of COVID-19, polio, and other viruses among Ukrainian refugees as one tragic possibility. There is an urgent need for public health institutions to transform their learnings about COVID-19, Ebola, HIV, and other deadly illnesses into guideposts for preventing or responding to the next pandemic....

Read the full commentary by Adam M. Doyno, executive director of CUNY SPH Foundation.

(Photo credit: Getty Images)

Building more resilient communities: A Q&A with Nicole Taylor, President and CEO, Silicon Valley Community Foundation

Nicole Taylor joined the Silicon Valley Community Foundation (SVCF), the largest community foundation in the United States, as president and CEO in December 2018. She previously served as vice president of the ASU Foundation, as deputy vice president and dean of students at Arizona State University, and as associate vice provost of student affairs and dean of community engagement as well as managing director of the Haas Center for Public Service at Stanford University, where she had earned her bachelor’s degree in human biology and master’s in education. She also has served as president and CEO of Thrive Foundation for Youth, the East Bay Community Foundation, and as CEO of College Track.

Since April 2020, Taylor also has served as co-chair of the Silicon Valley Recovery Roundtable, a group of 59 business and community leaders working to chart a path to “a better normal” in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Taylor discussed SVCF’s efforts to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, center racial equity in its grantmaking, and help address systemic inequities in the region; her experience as a Black woman in the C-Suite and the challenges women of color continue to face in the sector; and the role of donor-advised funds in democratizing philanthropy and the potential impact of currently proposed reform legislation.

Philanthropy News Digest: Can you share some highlights of how the more than $50 million raised in the early months of the pandemic helped address community needs across the region?

Nicole Taylor: In 2020, SVCF raised more than $65 million for pandemic response. This money went toward seven different funds to ensure that we supported the varied individuals and organizations affected by the pandemic and met their unique needs. Through our COVID-19 Regional Response Fund, we granted more than $20 million to core agency partners across the 10-county Bay Area region, which in turn provided relief—food, housing and financial assistance—to low-income individuals and families. We launched additional funds to support local nonprofits, small businesses, education systems, and childcare providers. Nearly $13 million was granted as part of the Regional Nonprofit Emergency Fund, which supported Santa Clara and San Mateo County nonprofits. Over $3 million was granted from the Small Business Relief Fund, which supported small businesses with employees at risk for lost wages.

As the pandemic continues to affect individuals and families, nonprofits, and small businesses, we will continue to serve these communities with just as much urgency, particularly in our own backyard. In 2021 alone, thanks to our donors, we distributed $777 million in grants to Bay Area organizations, a 48 percent increase compared to 2020 and the most distributed in any region. Our hope is that this community-focused giving will provide necessary support while building more resilient communities....

Read the full Q&A with Nicole Taylor, CEO of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation.

A fundamental realignment of power between funders and community: A commentary by Emily Yu, TC Duong, Brittany Giles-Cantrell, and Chris Kabel

In recent years, amid calls for greater social, racial, and health equity, philanthropy has rallied together with communities to dismantle deeply rooted systemic inequities that jeopardize our nation’s safety, health, and prosperity. For many foundations, the pursuit of equity has become a powerful and unifying call to action. Yet supporting communities in the sustainable advancement of equity remains a challenge for the philanthropic sector.

As members of The BUILD Health Challenge®—a funding collaborative launched in 2015 to support partnerships among community-based organizations, health departments, and hospitals/health systems to reduce health disparities—we’ve hosted a series of conversations with community leaders, partners, and peers across the country to ask what their communities needed to advance equity and how philanthropy could be a more effective partner on that journey. The response was clear: There must be a fundamental realignment of power between funders and community—one that reflects and honors both groups' expertise and experience. The conversations surfaced four vital approaches to centering equity: 1) designing with, not for; 2) building equity capacity; 3) changing deeply rooted policy and practice; and 4) sharing power....

Read the full commentary by Emily Yu, executive director of The BUILD Health Challenge, TC Duong, program officer at Blue Shield of California Foundation, Brittany Giles-Cantrell, senior program officer at de Beaumont Foundation, and Chris Kabel, senior fellow in the Kresge Foundation’s Health program.

(Photo credit: GettyImages/akinbostanci)

Child mental health and social risks: A Q&A with Andrea E. Spencer, Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine

A study led by researchers at Boston Medical Center found that the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic saw increased depression, anxiety, and social risks among urban children of color between the ages of 5 and 11. Based on surveys of caregivers of 168 children—of whom 54 percent of identified as “non-Hispanic Black” and 29 percent as “Hispanic” and 22 percent were non-English speaking—rates of emotional and behavioral symptoms rose from 8 percent in September 2019 to 18 percent in January 2021. The children’s families also faced higher social risks during the pandemic, with 50 percent reporting food insecurity mid-pandemic, up from 16 percent; 38 percent having difficulty paying bills, up from 16 percent; 12 percent reporting housing insecurity, up from 3 percent; 10 percent having difficulty with dependent care, up from 1 percent; and 10 percent experiencing unemployment, up from 3 percent.

According to the study, the share of children with depression and anxiety problems increased from 5 percent pre-pandemic to 18 percent mid-pandemic. The study also found that, while mental health symptoms in children were significantly correlated with the number of social risks before the pandemic, this was not the case mid-pandemic; the symptoms were worse due to factors beyond those unmet social needs, such as their caregivers’ anxiety or depression.

The study’s lead author, Andrea E. Spencer, is a child and adolescent psychiatrist, director for pediatric integrated behavioral health care at Boston Medical Center, and assistant professor of psychiatry at the Boston University School of Medicine. PND asked Spencer about the study’s implications for public health, health equity, and public policy.

Philanthropy News Digest: The study, “Changes in psychosocial functioning among urban, school‑age children during the COVID‑19 pandemic,” found that before the pandemic, the children’s emotional and behavioral symptoms were associated with unmet social needs such as food or housing insecurity. How significant was the correlation, and what are the implications?

Andrea E. Spencer: Our clinic screens for mental health symptoms and social needs as part of routine child annual visits to be sure we know when a child and family is struggling with symptoms or needs that we might be able to address at our hospital or via our partnership with community organizations. For the study, we were able to access this information from participants’ medical records to obtain a pre-pandemic baseline.

We saw a significant and moderate correlation between unmet social needs and emotional/behavioral symptoms before the pandemic. This is similar to our findings in another paper published several years ago that also used data from our electronic medical record system. The significance of the finding refers to the probability that random chance generated the data. A small p-value means that the results are very unusual if they were due to chance only. We set our significance level at 0.05, which means that we considered the finding “statistically significant” if there was a 5 percent or lower random chance of getting that result if there really is no correlation. The correlation between unmet social needs and mental health symptoms before the pandemic was in fact highly significant with a p value of less than 0.001—meaning that this finding would have been generated only 0.1 percent of the time if only due to chance. The moderate correlation indicates that as social risks increased, mental health symptoms also increased, but that this relationship is not perfectly linear. This makes sense, because we know there are other factors that relate to child mental health other than social risks. What this doesn’t specifically tell us is the directionality of the association.

PND: The study also found that during the pandemic, by contrast, the children’s symptoms were not significantly correlated with unmet needs, knowing someone with COVID-19, or exposure to COVID-related media. What, then, are the factors that contributed to the jump in children’s mental health issues, especially anxiety and depression?

AES: In our study, the increase in anxiety and depression symptoms during the pandemic were associated with increased screen time, low school engagement, and parent depression symptoms. In addition, families felt that the lack of activities outside of the house, the change in normal routines, social isolation, stress and fear of COVID-19, and lack of physical activity were negatively impacting their child’s well-being....

Read the full Q&A with Andrea E. Spencer, director for pediatric integrated behavioral health care at Boston Medical Center and assistant professor of psychiatry at the Boston University School of Medicine.