STOP COVID-19 CA: Community engagement to address the disparate impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in California

Objective To describe the early activities and lessons of the Share, Trust, Organize, Partner COVID-19 California Alliance (STOP COVID-19 CA), the California awardee of the NIH-funded multi-state Community Engagement Alliance (CEAL) against COVID-19. The Alliance was established to ensure equity in Coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) research, clinical practice, and public health for communities most impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Study setting The STOP COVID-19 CA Alliance network of 11 universities and affiliated partner community-based organizations (CBOs) across California. Study design Mixed methods evaluation consisting of an analysis of activity (August 2020 to December 2021) detailed in reports submitted by community-academic teams and a survey (August 2021) of academic investigators and affiliated community-based organization (CBO) partners. Data collection We summarized activities from the 11 community-academic teams' progress reports and described results from an online survey of academic investigators and CBO partners in the California Alliance. Principal findings A review of progress reports (n = 256) showed that teams fielded surveys to 11,000 Californians, conducted 133 focus groups, partnered with 29 vaccine/therapeutics clinical trials, and led more than 300 town halls and vaccine events that reached Californians from communities disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. Survey responses from academic investigators and CBO partners emphasized the importance of learning from the successes and challenges of the California Alliance teams' COVID-19 initiatives. Both academic and CBO respondents highlighted the need for streamlined federal and institutional administrative policies, and fiscal practices to promote more effective and timely operations of teams in their efforts to address the numerous underlying health and social disparities that predispose their communities to higher rates of, and poor outcomes from, COVID-19. Conclusions STOP COVID-19 CA represents a new and potentially sustainable statewide community engagement model for addressing health disparities in multiethnic/multicultural and geographically dispersed communities.

STOP COVID-19 CA: Community engagement to address the disparate impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic in California.

Objective: To describe the early activities and lessons of the Share, Trust, Organize, Partner COVID-19 California Alliance (STOP COVID-19 CA), the California awardee of the NIH-funded multi-state Community Engagement Alliance (CEAL) against COVID-19. The Alliance was established to ensure equity in Coronavirus-19 disease (COVID-19) research, clinical practice, and public health for communities most impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Study setting: The STOP COVID-19 CA Alliance network of 11 universities and affiliated partner community-based organizations (CBOs) across California. Study design: Mixed methods evaluation consisting of an analysis of activity (August 2020 to December 2021) detailed in reports submitted by community-academic teams and a survey (August 2021) of academic investigators and affiliated community-based organization (CBO) partners. Data collection: We summarized activities from the 11 community-academic teams' progress reports and described results from an online survey of academic investigators and CBO partners in the California Alliance. Principal findings: A review of progress reports (n = 256) showed that teams fielded surveys to 11,000 Californians, conducted 133 focus groups, partnered with 29 vaccine/therapeutics clinical trials, and led more than 300 town halls and vaccine events that reached Californians from communities disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. Survey responses from academic investigators and CBO partners emphasized the importance of learning from the successes and challenges of the California Alliance teams' COVID-19 initiatives. Both academic and CBO respondents highlighted the need for streamlined federal and institutional administrative policies, and fiscal practices to promote more effective and timely operations of teams in their efforts to address the numerous underlying health and social disparities that predispose their communities to higher rates of, and poor outcomes from, COVID-19. Conclusions: STOP COVID-19 CA represents a new and potentially sustainable statewide community engagement model for addressing health disparities in multiethnic/multicultural and geographically dispersed communities.

Exploring Perspectives on Establishing COVID-19 Vaccine Confidence in Black Communities.

Objective: To explore factors influencing COVID-19 vaccine decision-making among Black adults at high-risk for COVID-19 infection. Despite effective treatment and vaccination availability, Black Americans continue to be disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. Design Setting and Participants: Using community-engaged qualitative methods, we conducted virtual, semi-structured focus groups with Black residents in Los Angeles County before widespread vaccine rollout. Recruitment occurred through local community partners. Main Outcome Measures: Themes and subthemes on factors for vaccine confidence and accessibility. Methods: As part of a larger study exploring COVID-19 vaccine decision-making factors among multiethnic groups, two-hour virtual focus groups were conducted between December 15, 2020 and January 27, 2021. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Results: Three focus groups were conducted with 17 Black participants, who were primarily female (n=15), residents of high-poverty zip codes (n=11) and employed full-time (n=6). Black-specific considerations for vaccine confidence and accessibility include: 1) reduced confidence in COVID-19 vaccines due to historical government inaction and racism (existing health inequities and disparities are rooted in racism; historical unethical research practices); 2) misunderstanding of Black communities' vaccine concerns ("vaccine hesitancy" as an inaccurate label to describe vaccine skepticism; ignorance to root causes of vaccine skepticism); and 3) recognizing and building on resources (community agency to address COVID-19 vaccine needs adequately). Conclusions: Vaccination campaigns should improve understanding of underlying vaccination concerns to improve vaccine outreach effectiveness and should partner with, provide resources to, and invest in local, trusted Black community entities to improve COVID-19 vaccination disparities.

A qualitative study of COVID-19 vaccine decision making among urban Native Americans.

Background: Significant disparities in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality exist for Native American (NA) people, the majority of whom live in urban areas. COVID-19 vaccination is a key strategy for mitigating these disparities; however, vaccination disparities affect NA communities. The current study investigated COVID-19 vaccine decision-making before widespread vaccine rollout occurred, among urban NA communities. We aimed to understand vaccine decision-making factors to develop recommendations about COVID-19 vaccine outreach. Methods: We conducted three in-depth virtual focus groups with 17 NA adults living in an urban community (Los Angeles County) between December 2020 and January 2021. Participants were recruited through NA community-based organizations and community stakeholders. Reflexive thematic analysis was conducted using Atlas.ti. Findings: Participants in this study identified two overarching themes with implications for health vaccination campaigns. First, participants described a need for tailored information and outreach, including NA vaccine outreach that addresses misconceptions about vaccine development to calm fears of experimentation and support communication of vaccine evidence specific to NA people. Second, participants suggested strategies to improve public health resources in the urban NA community, such as the need for unified, proactive communication across trusted NA entities, navigation support to improve vaccine accessibility, and adequately resourcing health partnerships with and among trusted NA community agencies for improved reach. Conclusion: In this qualitative study, we found that urban NA participants reported several factors that affected their vaccine decision-making, including a lack of tailored information for their communities. Our findings also underscore the need to work with tribes, tribal leadership, and urban NA serving organizations to coordinate vaccine communication and distribution to urban communities where the majority of NAs now reside. Further, these findings have implications for COVID-19 vaccine outreach among urban NA communities and demonstrate the need for clear and tailored engagement about the COVID-19 vaccine.

"The System Doesn't Let Us in"-A Call for Inclusive COVID-19 Vaccine Outreach Rooted in Los Angeles Latinos' Experience of Pandemic Hardships and Inequities.

OBJECTIVE: Latino adults in Los Angeles have experienced disproportionate cases, deaths, and socioeconomic impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. This qualitative study aimed to explore community perspectives on readiness for COVID-19 vaccination and to identify culturally tailored vaccine outreach strategies. METHODS: We conducted virtual focus groups with Los Angeles County Latino/a residents via Zoom between December 2020 to January 2021, as the first COVID-19 vaccines were receiving Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Focus groups were facilitated in Spanish and English by bilingual members of the research team. Discussions were analyzed via Atlas.ti software using reflexive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Three focus groups (n = 15; four to six people each; two Spanish focus groups; one English) were conducted. Thematic findings centered on Latino COVID-19 vaccine equity: (1) Disproportionate infection risk due to essential worker status and socioeconomic burdens, misinformation, and familial or cultural tensions (2) Concerns for inequitable vaccine access due to immigration fears and limited healthcare access, and (3) A need for community-centered COVID-19 vaccine outreach and access. CONCLUSIONS: Our study on early Latino adult reactions to vaccine roll-out suggests the need for outreach strategies centering on validating community hardships, combating dis-/misinformation through trusted sources, and addressing socio-economic needs impacted by the pandemic.

COVID-19 Vaccine Decision-making Factors in Racial and Ethnic Minority Communities in Los Angeles, California.

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had disproportionate effects on racial and ethnic minority communities, where preexisting clinical and social conditions amplify health and social disparities. Many of these communities report lower vaccine confidence and lower receipt of the COVID-19 vaccine. Understanding factors that influence the multifaceted decision-making process for vaccine uptake is critical for narrowing COVID-19-related disparities. Objective: To examine factors that members of multiethnic communities at high risk for COVID-19 infection and morbidity report as contributing to vaccine decision-making. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used community-engaged methods to conduct virtual focus groups from November 16, 2020, to January 28, 2021, with Los Angeles County residents. Potential participants were recruited through email, video, and telephone outreach to community partner networks. Focus groups were stratified by self-identified race and ethnicity as well as age. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Themes were categorized by contextual, individual, and vaccine-specific influences using the World Health Organization's Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix categories. Results: A total of 13 focus groups were conducted with 70 participants (50 [71.4%] female) who self-identified as American Indian (n = 17 [24.3%]), Black/African American (n = 17 [24.3%]), Filipino/Filipina (n = 11 [15.7%]), Latino/Latina (n = 15 [21.4%]), or Pacific Islander (n = 10 [14.3%]). A total of 39 participants (55.7%) were residents from high-poverty zip codes, and 34 (48.6%) were essential workers. The resulting themes included policy implications for equitable vaccine distribution: contextual influences (unclear and unreliable information, concern for inequitable access or differential treatment, references to mistrust from unethical research studies, accessibility and accommodation barriers, eligibility uncertainty, and fears of politicization or pharmaceutical industry influence); social and group influences (inadequate exposure to trusted messengers or information, altruistic motivations, medical mistrust, and desire for autonomy); and vaccination-specific influences (need for vaccine evidence by subpopulation, misconceptions on vaccine development, allocation ambiguity, vaccination safety preferences, the importance of perceiving vaccine equity, burden of vaccine scheduling, cost uncertainty, and desire for practitioner recommendation). Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, participants reported a number of factors that affected their vaccine decision-making, including concern for inequitable vaccine access. Participants endorsed policy recommendations and strategies to promote vaccine confidence. These results suggest that support of informed deliberation and attainment of vaccine equity will require multifaceted, multilevel policy approaches that improve COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, enhance trust, and address the complex interplay of sociocultural and structural barriers to vaccination.

Reflections on the Importance of Community-Partnered Research Strategies for Health Equity in the Era of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE: In the face of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) physical distancing mandates, community-engaged research (CER) faces new vulnerabilities in the equitable inclusion of communities within research partnerships aiming to address these very inequities. METHODS: We convened a series of virtual meetings with our CER partnership to discuss the current state of activities and to identify considerations for remote community engagement. We outlined and expanded recommendations through iterative, partnered discussions to inform protections against new CER susceptibilities. RESULTS: This article presents CER recommendations in translational COVID-19 research for health equity, including increasing accessibility for remote engagement, promoting opportunities for bi-directional knowledge exchange, committing to a community-centered workforce, and leveraging novel opportunities within community-academic partnerships. CONCLUSION: Researchers conducting CER face an opportunity to reimagine community engagement remotely for partnered resilience to ensure the voices of the most affected are appropriately and inclusively integrated into all aspects of decision-making within the COVID-19 research, practice, and policymaking continuum.

Reflections on the Importance of Community-Partnered Research Strategies for Health Equity in the Era of COVID-19

Objective. In the face of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) physical distancing mandates, community-engaged research (CER) faces new vulnerabilities in the equitable inclusion of communities within research partnerships aiming to address these very inequities. Methods. We convened a series of virtual meetings with our CER partnership to discuss the current state of activities and to identify considerations for remote community engagement. We outlined and expanded recommendations through iterative, partnered discussions to inform protections against new CER susceptibilities. Results. This article presents CER recommendations in translational COVID-19 research for health equity, including increasing accessibility for remote engagement, promoting opportunities for bi-directional knowledge exchange, committing to a community-centered workforce, and leveraging novel opportunities within community-academic partnerships. Conclusion. Researchers conducting CER face an opportunity to reimagine community engagement remotely for partnered resilience to ensure the voices of the most affected are appropriately and inclusively integrated into all aspects of decision-making within the COVID-19 research, practice, and policymaking continuum.