Parental decision-making on summer program enrollment: A mixed methods Covid-19 impact study.

BACKGROUND: The closure of childcare organizations (e.g. schools, childcare centers, afterschool programs, summer camps) during the Covid-19 pandemic impacted the health and wellbeing of families. Despite their reopening, parents may be reluctant to enroll their children in summer programming. Knowledge of the beliefs that underlie parental concerns will inform best practices for organizations that serve children. METHODS: Parents (n = 17) participated in qualitative interviews (October 2020) to discuss Covid-19 risk perceptions and summer program enrollment intentions. Based on interview responses to perceived Covid-19 risk, two groups emerged for analysis- "Elevated Risk (ER)" and "Conditional Risk (CR)". Themes were identified utilizing independent coding and constant-comparison analysis. Follow-up interviews (n = 12) in the Spring of 2021 evaluated the impact of vaccine availability on parent risk perceptions. Additionally, parents (n = 17) completed the Covid-19 Impact survey to assess perceived exposure (Range: 0-25) and household impact (Range: 2-60) of the pandemic. Scores were summed and averaged for the sample and by risk classification group. RESULTS: Parents overwhelmingly supported the operation of summer programming during the pandemic due to perceived child benefits. Parent willingness to enroll their children in summer programming evolved with time and was contingent upon the successful implementation of safety precautions (e.g. outdoor activities, increased handwashing/sanitizing of surfaces). Interestingly, parents indicated low exposure (ER: Avg. 6.3 ± 3.1 Range [2-12], CR: Avg. 7.5 ± 3.6 Range [1-14]) and moderate family impact (ER: Avg. 27.1 ± 6.9 Range [20-36], CR: Avg. 33.7 ± 11.4 Range [9-48]) on the impact survey. CONCLUSION: Childcare organizations should mandate and evaluate the implementation of desired Covid-19 safety precautions for their patrons.

Impact of Virtual vs. In-Person School on Children Meeting the 24-h Movement Guidelines during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The pandemic mitigation strategy of closing schools, while necessary, may have unintentionally impacted children's moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA), sleep, and time spent watching screens. In some locations, schools used hybrid attendance models, with some days during the week requiring in-person and others virtual attendance. This scenario offers an opportunity to evaluate the impact of attending in-person school on meeting the 24-h movement guidelines. Children (N = 690, 50% girls, K-5th) wore wrist-placed accelerometers for 14 days during October/November 2020. Parents completed daily reports on child time spent on screens and time spent on screens for school. The schools' schedule was learning for 2 days/week in-person and 3 days/week virtually. Using only weekdays (M-F), the 24-h movement behaviors were classified, and the probability of meeting all three was compared between in-person vs. virtual learning and across grades. Data for 4956 weekdays (avg. 7 d/child) were collected. In-person school was associated with a greater proportion (OR = 1.70, 95% CI: 1.33-2.18) of days that children were meeting the 24-h movement guidelines compared to virtual school across all grades. Students were more likely to meet the screen time (OR = 9.14, 95% CI: 7.05-11.83) and MVPA (OR = 1.50, 95% CI: 1.25-1.80) guidelines and less likely to meet the sleep (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.62-0.86) guidelines on the in-person compared to the virtual school days. Structured environments, such as school, have a protective effect on children's movement behaviors, especially physical activity and screen time.