Search

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated economic crisis have placed millions of US households at risk of eviction. Evictions may accelerate COVID-19 transmission by decreasing individuals' ability to socially distance. We leveraged variation in the expiration of eviction moratoriums in US states to test for associations between evictions and COVID-19 incidence and mortality. The study included 44 US states that instituted eviction moratoriums, followed from March 13 to September 3, 2020. We modeled associations using a difference-in-difference approach with an event-study specification. Negative binomial regression models of cases and deaths included fixed effects for state and week and controlled for time-varying indicators of testing, stay-at-home orders, school closures, and mask mandates. COVID-19 incidence and mortality increased steadily in states after eviction moratoriums expired, and expiration was associated with a doubling of COVID-19 incidence (incidence rate ratio = 2.1; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1, 3.9) and a 5-fold increase in COVID-19 mortality (mortality rate ratio = 5.4; CI: 3.1, 9.3) 16 weeks after moratoriums lapsed. These results imply an estimated 433,700 excess cases (CI: 365,200, 502,200) and 10,700 excess deaths (CI: 8,900, 12,500) nationally by September 3, 2020. The expiration of eviction moratoriums was associated with increased COVID-19 incidence and mortality, supporting the public-health rationale for eviction prevention to limit COVID-19 cases and deaths., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.)

Importance: Although evictions have been associated with adverse mental health outcomes, it remains unclear which stages of the eviction process are associated with mental distress among renters. Variation in COVID-19 pandemic eviction protections across US states enables identification of intervention targets within the eviction process to improve renters' mental health., Objective: To measure the association between the strength of eviction protections (ie, stages blocked by eviction moratoriums) and mental distress among renters during the COVID-19 pandemic., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used individual-level, nationally representative data from the Understanding Coronavirus in America Survey to measure associations between state eviction moratorium protections and mental distress. The sample of 2317 respondents included renters with annual household incomes less than $75 000 who reported a state of residence and completed surveys between March 10 and September 3, 2020, prior to the federal eviction moratorium order by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention., Exposures: Time-varying strength of state moratorium protections as a categorical variable: none, weak (blocking court hearings, judgments, or enforcement without blocking notice or filing), or strong (blocking all stages of the eviction process beginning with notice and filing)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Moderate to severe mental distress was measured using the 4-item Patient Health Questionnaire. Linear regression models were adjusted for time-varying state COVID-19 incidence and mortality, public health restrictions, and unemployment rates. Models included individual and time fixed effects as well as clustered standard errors., Results: The sample consisted of 2317 individuals (20 853 total observations) composed largely (1788 [78%] weighted) of middle-aged adults (25-64 years of age) and women (1538 [60%]); 640 respondents (23%) self-reported as Hispanic or Latinx, 314 respondents (20%) as non-Hispanic Black, and 1071 respondents (48%) as non-Hispanic White race and ethnicity. Relative to no state-level eviction moratorium protections, strong protections were associated with a 12.6% relative reduction (risk ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76-0.99) in the probability of mental distress, whereas weak protections were not associated with a statistically significant reduction (risk ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86-1.06)., Conclusions and Relevance: This analysis of the Understanding Coronavirus in America Survey data found that strong eviction moratoriums were associated with protection against mental distress, suggesting that distress begins early in the eviction process with notice and filing. This finding is consistent with the idea that to reduce mental distress among renters, policy makers should focus on primary prevention of evictions.

Importance: More than 50 million US residents have lost work during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, and food insecurity has increased., Objective: To evaluate the association between receipt of unemployment insurance, including a $600/wk federal supplement between April and July, and food insecurity among people who lost their jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic., Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used difference-in-differences analysis of longitudinal data from a nationally representative sample of US adults residing in low- and middle-income households (ie, <$75 000 annual income) who lost work during the COVID-19 pandemic. Data were from 15 waves of the Understanding Coronavirus in America study (conducted April 1 to November 11, 2020)., Exposure: Receipt of unemployment insurance benefits., Main Outcomes and Measures: Food insecurity and eating less due to financial constraints, assessed every 2 weeks by self-report., Results: Of 2319 adults living in households earning less than $75 000 annually and employed in February 2020, 1119 (48.3%) experienced unemployment during the COVID-19 pandemic and made up our main sample (588 [53.6%] White individuals; mean [SD] age 45 [15] years; 732 [65.4%] women). Of those who lost employment, 415 (37.1%) reported food insecurity and 437 (39.1%) reported eating less due to financial constraints in 1 or more waves of the study. Among people who lost work, receipt of unemployment insurance was associated with a 4.3 (95% CI, 1.8-6.9) percentage point decrease in food insecurity (a 35.0% relative reduction) and a 5.7 (95% CI, 3.0-8.4) percentage point decrease in eating less due to financial constraints (a 47.8% relative reduction). Decreases in food insecurity were larger with the $600/wk supplement and for individuals who were receiving larger amounts of unemployment insurance., Conclusions and Relevance: In this US national cohort study, receiving unemployment insurance was associated with large reductions in food insecurity among people who lost employment during the COVID-19 pandemic. The $600/wk federal supplement and larger amounts of unemployment insurance were associated with larger reductions in food insecurity.

State "shelter-in-place" (SIP) orders limited the spread of COVID-19 in the U.S. However, impacts may have varied by state, creating opportunities to learn from states where SIPs have been effective. Using a novel dataset of state-level SIP order enactment and county-level mobility data form Google, we use a stratified regression discontinuity study design to examine the effect of SIPs in all states that implemented them. We find that SIP orders reduced mobility nationally by 12 percentage points (95% CI: -13.1 to -10.9), however the effects varied substantially across states, from -35 percentage points to +11 percentage points. Larger reductions were observed in states with higher incomes, higher population density, lower Black resident share, and lower 2016 vote shares for Donald J. Trump. This suggests that optimal public policies during a pandemic will vary by state and there is unlikely to be a "one-size fits all" approach that works best., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.