For-Profit Businesses as Public Health Partners to Promote COVID-19 Vaccination: A Multiple Case Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the actions used by health professionals employed by large, for-profit businesses to promote uptake of COVID-19 vaccines, and factors that facilitated and hindered coordination with local public health leaders. METHODS: In this qualitative multiple case study, we conducted telephone interviews with health professionals from businesses, health department leaders, and others who could provide information about local vaccination efforts (e.g., emergency managers, reporters). RESULTS: Businesses' self-interest (i.e., need to keep employees working), vaccine mandates, and characteristics of the businesses (e.g., ownership, expertise) facilitated leadership in COVID-19 vaccination efforts. Coordination with local health departments was influenced by the resources of the local health department and history of collaboration. CONCLUSIONS: Health professionals employed by large businesses can serve as key public health partners, but their role is shaped by characteristics of the businesses and communities.

Communities with an anchor institution have higher coronavirus vaccination rates.

PURPOSE: Anchor institutions ("anchors") are large employers, rooted in a community by reason of mission, capital, or relationships. Many anchors have encouraged coronavirus vaccination for employees and their families. Our objective was to determine whether the presence of an anchor was associated with a higher county-level vaccination rate. METHODS: A cross-sectional study focused on 745 small- and mid-sized US counties. We used data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Reference USA's US Business Database, Economic Innovation Group's Distressed Communities Index database, 2021 County Health Ratings and Rankings, 2020 US Presidential Election popular vote data, and National Center for Health Statistics urban-rural classification data. We constructed 3 explanatory variables of interest: a binary variable indicating whether the county had an anchor; a continuous variable representing the number of anchors within a county; and the percent of all workers in the county who were employed by an anchor. Multivariable linear regression models were adjusted for race/ethnicity, political party allegiance, rurality, economic distress, and prevalence of smoking and adult obesity. FINDINGS: Counties with an anchor had vaccination rates 2.31 (P<.01) percentage points higher than those without an anchor. The number of anchors in a county was also significantly associated with higher vaccination rates. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts by anchors to encourage vaccination may have been successful, and that anchors may be well positioned to amplify public health messages. However, the influence and efforts of anchors to increase vaccination did not fully mitigate disparities in vaccination rates by race, ethnicity, and political party allegiance.

Closure of Anchor Businesses Reduced COVID-19 Transmission During the Early Months of the Pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between the closure of "anchor businesses" - manufacturing plants and distribution centers employing >1000 workers - and the daily, county-level COVID-19 rate between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020. METHODS: We conducted a comparative, interrupted time series analysis of publicly available county-level data. Our main variable of interest was closure, indicating whether one or more of the anchor businesses within the county experienced a full or partial closure of at least 22 days (main analysis) or at least 1 day (sensitivity analyses). RESULTS: Closure of an anchor business was associated with 142 fewer positive COVID-19 tests per 100,000 population over a 40-day period. Even short-term and partial closures were associated with reduced spread. CONCLUSIONS: Temporary closure of anchor businesses appears to have slowed, but not completely contained, the spread of COVID-19.

The Impact of Shift Work and Long Work Hours on Employers' Health Care Costs.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the additional health care costs incurred by two U.S. manufacturing companies due to their policies related to shift work and long work hours. METHODS: We applied risk ratios from the published literature to data on 2647 workers from Company A and 1346 workers from Company B to estimate the excess cases of several chronic conditions in the worker population due to shift work and long work hours. We estimated the annual health care costs incurred by the companies by applying Medicare cost data. RESULTS: Excess annual health care costs related to shift work totaled $1,394,365 and $300,297 for Companies A and B, respectively. Excess annual costs related to long work hours totaled $231,293 and $107,902 for Companies A and B, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Excess health care costs related to shift work and long work hours is substantial, but may not be large enough to compel companies to alter their work scheduling policies.

Community Health and Employee Work Performance in the American Manufacturing Environment.

Although better community health has long been assumed to be good for local businesses, evidence demonstrating the relationship between community health and employee performance is quite limited. Drawing on human resources data on 6103 employees from four large US manufacturing plants, we found that employees living in counties with poor community health outcomes had considerably higher rates of absenteeism and tardiness (ABT). For example, in one company, employees living in communities with high rates of children on free or reduced lunch had higher rates of ABT compared to other employees [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 2.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.52-3.04], and employees living in communities with high rates of drug overdose deaths had higher rates of ABT (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.29-1.77). In one plant, the annual value of lost wages due to ABT was over $1.3 million per year. Employees reported that poor community health (e.g., poverty, caregiving burdens, family dysfunction, drug use) resulted in "mental stress" leading to distraction, poor job performance, and more rarely, lapses in safety. These findings bolster the case for greater private sector investment in community health.

Corporate Philanthropy Toward Community Health Improvement in Manufacturing Communities.

Virtually all large employers engage in corporate philanthropy, but little is known about the extent to which it is directed toward improving community health. We conducted in-depth interviews with leaders of corporate philanthropy from 13 of the largest manufacturing companies in the US to understand how giving decisions were made, the extent to which funding was directed towards improving community health, and whether companies coordinate with local public health agencies. We found that corporate giving was sizable and directed towards communities in which the manufacturers have a large presence. Giving was aligned with the social determinants of health (i.e., aimed at improving economic stability, the neighborhood and physical environment, education, food security and nutrition, the community and social context, and the health care system). However, improving public health was not often cited as a goal of corporate giving, and coordination with public health agencies was limited. Our results suggest that there may be opportunities for public health agencies to help guide corporate philanthropy, particularly by sharing community-level data and offering their measurement and evaluation expertise.