Category Archives: Social Distancing

Crisis begins to hit professional and public-sector jobs once considered safe

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Economic Crisis, Economy, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Job, Job Market, Job Search, Job Security, Out of Pocket Expenses, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Quarantine, Social Distancing, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured • Leave a comment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/30/jobless-claims-industry/?utm_campaign=wp_post_most&utm_medium=email&utm_source=newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most

How COVID-19 Is Crashing On The Class Of 2020: Job Offers Already ...

As the novel coronavirus pandemic brought business to a halt, the pain rippled outward, blowing up sector after sector. According to a detailed analysis of unemployment claims, no industry was left untouched.

After that first chaotic week of lockdowns mid-March, as officials scrambled to slow the spread of the deadliest pandemic in more than a century, restaurants and theaters saw job losses slow while losses in other sectors, such as construction and supply-chain work, accelerated. Now, it appears the economic upheaval is hitting professional and public-sector jobs that some once regarded as safe.

The Labor Department doesn’t release jobless claims by industry. So, building on the work of economist Ben Zipperer and his colleagues at the Economic Policy Institute, we analyzed industry-specific new unemployment-benefit claims from 14 states that publish them. (For a full list, see the charts below.)

For that, we need to focus in on the weekly changes in jobless claims to distinguish between industries where claims are falling and those where claims are steady or increasing. The data can also help us estimate how the labor market will change in coming months.

Week 1, March 15 to 21: Full-contact industries

(Highest week-to-week change included: accommodation and food services; arts entertainment and recreation; hairdressers, auto mechanics and laundry workers)

The first week of closures slammed headfirst into industries that require the most face-to-face customer contact — America’s hospitality sector. More than 7 percent of all restaurant, hotel and bar workers filed for unemployment in this first week alone.

For public officials looking to enforce social distancing, bars, hotels and movie theaters were obvious targets: They’re discretionary spending and require significant human interaction. Another category, which the government calls “other services” but is primarily made up of hairdressers, auto mechanics and laundry workers, also suffered swift and significant losses.

The number of newly unemployed filers in all these high-contact industries fell off in subsequent weeks, but they remain the biggest casualties of the crisis. And unemployment claims probably understate the pain of lower-earning Americans. Low-wage workers often don’t qualify for benefits because they haven’t spent enough time on the job, or aren’t being paid enough, Zipperer said.

A survey released Tuesday by Zipperer and his colleague Elise Gould implies unemployment numbers may be significantly worse than government statistics show. For every 10 people who successfully applied for unemployment benefits during the crisis, they show, another three or four couldn’t get through the overloaded system, and two more didn’t even apply because the system is too difficult.

Week 2, March 22 to 28: The producers

(Highest week-to-week change included: manufacturing; construction; retail)

By the second week, the shutdown moved from businesses where the primary danger is interacting with customers to those, like construction and manufacturing, that require in-person interaction with large crews of colleagues.

On March 26, for example, Spokane, Wash.-area custom-cabinet maker Huntwood Industries, laid off around 500 employees, according to Thomas Clouse of the Spokesman-Review. As a manufacturer whose sales depend on the construction industry, it was hit doubly hard by the shutdowns.

“It is a scary time,” Amy Ohms, 37, told Clouse. “It’s kind of unfair. I think construction is essential. There is a lot of uncertainty.”

Manufacturers were among the first publicly traded companies to note travel and supply-chain risks related to the coronavirus outbreak in China in financial filings, according to a separate analysis by Oxford researchers Fabian Stephany and Fabian Braesemann and collaborators in Berlin. By March, manufacturers were noting domestic production issues.

Their analysis also shows that, in the middle of March, concern about the coronavirus and its disease, covid-19, from retail corporations eclipsed that of manufacturers. Indeed, retail struggled mightily in the second week of the crisis. More workers were told to stay home, and folks realized foot traffic was often incompatible with social distancing.

The retail sector wasn’t hit as quickly or as forcefully as food services or entertainment, presumably because the sector includes grocery stores and others who employ workers who were deemed essential.

Week 3, March 29 to April 4: The supply chain

(Highest week-to-week change included: wholesale trade; retail trade; administrative and waste management)

In the third week, the pain worked its way up the supply chain, as wholesale trade — a sector that includes some sales representatives, truck drivers and freight laborers — got slammed.

In theory, the lockdowns created near-perfect trucking conditions: traffic vanished, diesel keeps getting cheaper and the roads are safer than they have been in decades. Only one problem: There’s not much to haul right now.

Don Hayden, president of Louisville trucking firm M&M Cartage, feared he would have to lay off about 70 percent of his 400 employees — drivers, mechanics and office staff — in early April. Orders from his customers in heavy manufacturing evaporated.

But, just in time, he got a Payroll Protection Program loan through his local bank. He was shocked at how rapidly his loan was approved and the money arrived, and he said the Treasury Department had done an outstanding job.

“We’re good through May and into June,” he said. “We have a good workforce. We’re proud of them. We sure would like to retain them.”

At this point in the crisis, the focus shifted from huge, industry-eviscerating swings in jobless numbers to gradual weekly trends that help us guess where the jobless claims will settle in the weeks and months to come.

As industries fall like dominoes, policymakers need to realize the damage isn’t contained to a few specific sectors, said University of Tennessee economist Marianne Wanamaker, a former member of Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers.

She said there may be a temptation to extend benefits for difficult-to-reopen industries such as food service and hospitality, but “it doesn’t comport with the data because the damage is so widespread. It’s not fair to say, ‘Hotel and restaurant workers, you get these really generous packages and everybody else has to go back to work.’ ”

Week 4, April 5 to 11: White-collar workers

(Highest week-to-week change included: management; finance and insurance; public administration)

White-collar industries have been shedding jobs since mid-March, albeit at a much lower rate than lower-income sectors. But as losses in low-income sectors subsided, white-collar jobless claims stayed flat or even intensified. By week four, categories that contain managers, bookkeepers, insurance agents and bank tellers saw some of the worst weekly trends of any sector.

On April 9, the online review site Yelp laid off 1,000 workers and furloughed 1,100 more (about a third of its workforce) as traffic on the site plunged while businesses were locked down.

“The physical distancing measures and shelter-in-place orders, while critical to flatten the curve, have dealt a devastating blow to the local businesses that are core to our mission,” CEO Jeremy Stoppelman wrote at the time.

Jane Oates, president of the employment-focused nonprofit organization WorkingNation, used to oversee the Labor Department wing that coordinates unemployment claims and training. “The big difference between coronavirus and the Great Recession is that this has completely stopped the economy across so many sectors,” she said.

During the Great Recession, she and her team had the luxury of flooding support into areas that were being hit hardest in a particular week or month. They went from state to state and industry to industry, putting out fires as they arose.

The Labor Department can’t address individual problems like that during the coronavirus recession, she said, because everybody’s getting shellacked simultaneously.

Week 5, April 12 to 18: The public sector

(Highest week-to-week change included: oil, gas and mining; utilities; public administration)

In the week ending April 18, the most recent for which we have data, we can no longer avoid one of the most ominous trends in the entire analysis: a rise in public-sector layoffs. Utilities, public administration and education services — all of which have close implicit or explicit ties to state and local government, were among the worst-faring sectors on a weekly basis.

To stem the tide of what could be millions of job losses and furloughs, the National League of Cities is pushing for a $250 billion bailout of cities throughout the country, colleague Tony Romm reports.

In Broomfield, Colo., a Denver-area suburb of about 70,000 residents, 235 city and county employees were furloughed on April 22, according to Jennifer Rios in the Broomfield Enterprise.

“The impact of the COVID-19 coronavirus is more significant than any of us could have ever expected for our well-being, as well as our municipal financial stability,” Rios reports that officials wrote in a letter to furloughed employees.“

State and local governments are typically required to balance their budgets. Now that they’re staring down the barrel of a huge tax-revenue shortfall, “these revenue losses are going to cause government budgets to fall and they’re going to lay people off,” Zipperer said.

“You’re seeing the beginnings of a big contraction in the public sector,” he said. “That’s going to be the next huge thing.”

The public sector used to be the bulwark that kept the economy going while the private sector pulled back during a recession, Zipperer said. “Over the last couple of recessions, the public sector hasn’t played that traditional role,” Zipperer said. “As a result, we’ve seen steeper recessions and slower recoveries.”

 

 

 

 

Jobless claims: Another 3.84 million Americans file for unemployment benefits

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Cash, Cash Reserves, Cash-Flow Improvements, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Economy, Employer-Based Health Insurance, Health Insurance Coverage Adequacy, Job Market, Job Search, Job Security, Out of Pocket Expenses, Pandemic, Paycheck Protection Program, Preexisting Conditions, Public Health, Public Safety, Social Distancing, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured • Leave a comment

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coronavirus-covid-weekly-initial-jobless-claims-april-25-184820691.html

(David Foster/Yahoo Finance)

On the heels of worse-than-anticipated first-quarter GDP data, investors got additional economic data Thursday to reflect the ongoing damage being done to the U.S. economy as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The U.S. Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims figures Thursday morning, and another 3.839 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits during the week ending April 25. Economists were predicting 3.5 million claims for the week, and the prior week’s figure was revised higher to 4.44 million from 4.43 million. In just the previous six weeks, more than 30 million Americans have filed unemployment insurance claims.

Continuing claims, which lags initial jobless claims data by one week, totaled 17.99 million for the week ending April 18. The prior week’s record 15.98 million continuing claims was revised lower to 15.82 million.

“This is the fourth consecutive slowing in the pace of new jobless claims, but it is still horrible and underlines the severe economic consequences of the Covid-19 containment measures,” ING economist James Knightley wrote in a note Thursday.

“The re-opening of some states, including Georgia, Tennessee, South Carolina and Florida, appear to have gone fairly slowly. Consumers remain reluctant to go shopping or visit a restaurant due to lingering COVID-19 fears, while the social distancing restrictions placed on the number of customers allowed in restaurants do not make it economically justifiable for some to open. Evidence so far suggests very little chance of a V-shaped recovery, meaning that unemployment is unlikely to come down anywhere near as quickly as it has been going up,” Knightley added.

Certain states got hit harder than others last week as massive backlogs continued to pile up, and states that implemented shelter-in-place orders later than others saw an increase in claims. For the week ending April 25, Florida saw the highest number of initial jobless claims at an estimated 432,000 on an unadjusted basis, from 507,000 in the prior week. California reported 328,000, down from 528,000 in the previous week. Georgia had an estimated 265,000 and Texas reported 254,000. 

While consensus economists anticipate weekly jobless claims will be in the millions in the near term, a continued steady decline is largely expected going forward.

“We expect initial jobless claims to continue to decline on a weekly basis. Many workers affected by closures of nonessential businesses have likely already filed for benefits at this point,” Nomura economist Lewis Alexander wrote in a note April 27. “In addition, the strong demand for Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans, part of the CARES Act passed on 27 March, suggests some room for labor market stabilization.”

However, Barclays warned that some recent data indicated that the decline in weekly claims could actually be slower than previously estimated.

“NYC 311 calls in the week ending April 24 were running about 30% higher than a week earlier and support our change in forecast,” Barclays economist Blerina Uruci wrote in a note Wednesday. “In particular, we find it concerning that after declining steadily in recent weeks, the number of calls related to unemployment rose again during the week ending April 24.”

The firm increased its estimate for weekly jobless claims to 4 million from the previously estimated 3.25 million for the week ending April 25. Bank of America also boosted its estimate for claims to 4.1 million from the previously forecast 3.5 million claims.

“Scanning through the local news, we were able to locate information about ten states + DC. We found that claims declined only 2.5% week-to-week NSA [not seasonally adjusted],” Bank of America said in a note Wednesday.

COVID-19 cases recently topped 3.2 million worldwide, according to Johns Hopkins University data. There were more than 1 million cases in the U.S. and 60,000 deaths, as of Thursday morning.

 

 

 

Iowa tells workers to return to their jobs or lose unemployment benefits, despite warnings that reopening could lead to a 2nd wave of infections

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Clinical Testing, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economy, Emergency Preparedness, Employee Furlough, Employee Hiring Freeze, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Employee Protections, Essential Businesses, Essential Workers, Health Policy, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Mortality, Pandemic, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Public Health, Public Safety, Quarantine, Social Distancing, Underinsured, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance, Uninsured, Worker Protection, Worker Rights • Leave a comment

https://www.businessinsider.com/iowa-tells-workers-return-to-work-or-lose-unemployment-benefits-2020-4?fbclid=IwAR3OghoKRKsPt9JVz4TIsn_Qv5im_ZPaCmzPenmsEFgJR80YXbFJ2QWrxpE

Iowa tells workers to return to work or lose unemployment benefits ...

  • Iowa is preparing to partially reopen 77 counties on Friday.
  • The state said furloughed employees who refuse to return to work that they would lose their unemployment benefits — and Gov. Kim Reynolds said it could disqualify them from future unemployment benefits.
  • However, a group of experts advised the governor last week not to loosen restrictions and said the state has not reached its peak of infections and deaths.

As Iowa prepares to partially reopen on Friday, the state has told furloughed workers that they will lose their unemployment benefits if they refuse to return to work.

The Des Moines Register reported that businesses like restaurants, bars, retail stores, and fitness centers would be allowed to reopen at half capacity starting on May 1. Gov. Kim Reynolds said the 77 reopening counties either have no cases or are on a downward trend.

Iowa Workforce Development, a state agency that provides employment services for individual workers, said an employee’s refusal return to work out of fear would be considered a “voluntary quit” — which would mean they could no longer receive unemployment benefits. The announcement applies to workers across the state.

Ryan West, the deputy director of Iowa Workforce Development, told Radio Iowa that there were some exceptions, such as workers diagnosed with COVID-19.

The Iowa Workforce Development website prompts employers to fill out what it calls a Job Offer Decline Form for employees who refuse to return to work. The governor has said that opting not to go back to work could disqualify employees from future unemployment benefits.

Business Insider’s Andy Kiersz reported that 232,913 Iowans filed for unemployment between March 15 and April 18, which is 13.5% of the state’s labor force.

Last week, seven epidemiology and biostatistics professors from the University of Iowa advised the governor not to loosen social-distancing restrictions, KWWL reported. They wrote a research paper for the governor after they were commissioned by the Iowa Department of Public Health.

“We observe a huge range of possible outcomes, from relatively low fatalities to catastrophic loss of life,” the paper said.

The scientists said there was still “considerable uncertainty” over how many deaths the state may eventually have; the projections range from 150 to over 10,000 deaths.

“We have found evidence of a slowdown in infection and mortality rates due to social distancing policies, but not that a peak has been reached,” the paper said. The professors said that did not mean measures should be eased: “Therefore, prevention measures should remain in place. Without such measures being continued, a second wave of infections is likely.”

 

 

 

U.S. Coronavirus Cases Passes 1 Million–A Third Of All Cases Globally

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Clinical Testing, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economic Stimulus, Economy, Health Policy, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Mortality, Pandemic, Public Health, Public Safety, Social Distancing • Leave a comment

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattperez/2020/04/28/us-coronavirus-cases-passes-1-million–a-third-of-all-cases-globally/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=dailydozen&cdlcid=5d2c97df953109375e4d8b68#5526ebe370a5

U.S. Coronavirus Cases Passes 1 Million--A Third Of All Cases Globally

TOPLINE

Confirmed cases of the COVID-19 coronavirus passed 1 million in the United States Tuesday, making up a third of all global cases, according to data compiled by Johns Hopkins University.

KEY FACTS

Of the 1,002,498 Americans who have been confirmed to have contracted the disease, 57,266 have died while 112,315 have recovered.

The new milestone comes as some states announce plans for reopening, something President Trump has been adamantly pushing for as 26 million Americans lose their jobs during the pandemic.

New York, the epicenter of the outbreak with 295,106 cases, saw its hospital admittance number drop below 1,000 for the first time in a month on Monday, with Governor Andrew Cuomo detailing a plan to start easing stay-at-home restrictions in parts of the state starting as early as May 15.

Georgia Governor Brian Kemp, however, with the state’s 24,604 cases, has drawn criticism from health officials and even Trump for allowing businesses like restaurants, hair salons and gyms to reopen before seeing a sustained reduction in cases.

Around 5.6 million people, or about 1.7% of the population, have been tested for the coronavirus, but researchers at Harvard Global Health Institute report that the country will need to perform 3.5 million tests per week at minimum before reopening.

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the country’s top infectious disease doctor, warned Tuesday during an interview that “it’s inevitable that we will have a return of the virus,” and that states reopening prematurely could cause “a rebound to get us right back in the same boat that we were in a few weeks ago.”

BIG NUMBER

87%. That’s how many Americans support current social distancing restrictions, or even want stronger measures in place, according to an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research survey conducted from April 16-20.

KEY BACKGROUND

The U.S. reached 500,000 cases on April 10 and 100,000 on March 27. The model prefered by the federal government increased the projected death count from the coronavirus for the second time in a week on Tuesday, now projecting 74,000 total deaths from the virus.

TANGENT

Germany has been a leader in mitigating the spread of the coronavirus, but after easing some lockdown restrictions this past week, the country saw an uptick in infection rate.

 

 

 

 

COVID-19 brings largest quarterly GDP drop since last recession

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Coronavirus, Cost Management, Cost Reduction, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Economy, Employee Furlough, Employee Hiring Freeze, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Health Policy, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Operating Expenses, Operating Income, Operating Margin, Operating Performance, Operating Revenue, Pandemic, Public Health, Public Safety, Recession, Social Distancing, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance • Leave a comment

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/covid-19-brings-largest-quarterly-gdp-drop-since-last-recession.html?utm_medium=email

GDP sinks 4.8% in the first quarter, biggest drop since 2008 and ...

Gross domestic product in the U.S. fell 4.8 percent in the first quarter of 2020, the biggest drop the nation’s economy has seen since the last recession in 2008, according to The Wall Street Journal.

The downturn reflects how shutdowns of businesses and schools and social distancing, which started in the final three weeks of the first quarter, affected the U.S. economy. According to The Journal, many economists believe the U.S. is now in a recession, as layoffs and declines across industries hit unprecedented levels.

With the economy largely shut down in April, economists are expecting a bigger drop-off in economic activity in the second quarter of this year. A few states have started to slowly reopen their economies, but many still have social-distancing restrictions in place that extend through May.

 

 

 

 

US surpasses 1 million COVID-19 cases

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC), Clinical Testing, Contact Tracing, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Emergency Preparedness, Health Policy, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Mortality, Pandemic, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Public Health, Public Safety, Quarantine, Social Distancing • Leave a comment

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/494792-us-surpasses-1-million-covid-19-cases

Did the Trump Administration Overpromise 1 Million COVID-19 ...

More than a million people in the United States have tested positive for the coronavirus, a sobering milestone that experts say represents only the beginning of a months-long battle to end the pandemic.

The United States has now registered about a third of all confirmed cases of COVID-19 around the globe, according to data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University. More than 57,000 people have died in the United States, about a quarter of the known COVID-19 deaths around the globe.

The United States has now registered more confirmed cases than the next five countries suffering the largest outbreaks — Spain, Italy, France, Germany and the United Kingdom — combined.

Those numbers are partly a reflection of population, but there are troubling signs for the United States.

While those countries have reduced the pace of transmission and the growth in the number of new cases they are seeing on a daily basis, the United States has not similarly bent the curve.

Instead, it is stuck at a deadly plateau: In the last week, the U.S. has reported between 24,000 and 41,000 new cases a day, and between 1,200 and 2,600 deaths per day, according to The Covid Tracking Project, a group of researchers who keep tallies of case counts around the country.

Even as some states begin to relax orders that closed retail and service stores, experts warned the country is still at risk of a new rush of cases, and that the downslope of declining case counts will be much longer than the sudden surge the United States saw in April.

“We’re in the opening stages of this,” said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Prevention at the University of Minnesota. States “are not in the mountains, they’re in the foothills. The mountains are still to come.”

More than a quarter million residents of New York have tested positive for the virus, and commuter suburbs in New Jersey and Connecticut have reported tens of thousands of cases. More than 50,000 residents of Massachusetts have tested positive, and California, Illinois and Pennsylvania have all confirmed more than 40,000 cases.

There are growing signs that the virus is shifting into new, more rural territory. States like Arkansas, Kansas, Minnesota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Virginia all recorded substantial growth in the number of new cases they had confirmed in the last few days.

That pattern of viral spread beginning in large urban cores and eventually making its way to rural areas is typical, experts said, given societal connections between urban areas, suburbs and more rural areas.

“Epidemiologists know that this pattern is a very expectable one, that rural areas are going to have lagged waves of cases. So we’ve been bracing for that,” said Nita Bharti, a biologist at the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Penn State University. “What they’re experiencing now is what cities have been seeing. It’s the same, it’s just delayed, and we knew it would happen.”

About six months after the coronavirus outbreak was detected in Wuhan, China, and four months after the first case arrived on American shores, the United States still lags the world in testing capacity. States have bolstered their capacity in recent days, conducting more than 225,000 tests per day over four of the last five days, the capacity needed to ensure the virus can be brought under control lags substantially.

An analysis by Harvard researchers for the scientific publication STAT found more than half of states would have to significantly bolster their testing capacity in order to safely begin easing stay-at-home orders in May. The hardest-hit state, New York, will have to be able to test at least 100,000 more people every day than it is currently able to; New Jersey’s capacity would need to increase by 68,000 a day.

Smaller states and those that have yet to experience thousands of new cases — places like Mississippi, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Arizona and New Mexico — already have the testing capacity they need to identify and squelch any new viral hotspots. Even Washington state, the first state to confirm a positive case, has built its capacity to meet demand.

Public health experts say a robust testing program must be supplemented by armies of contact tracers who can track down those who are at risk of contracting the virus.

Already, Massachusetts has partnered with the nonprofit Partners In Health to deploy about 1,000 contact tracers across the state. Alaska has managed to trace the contacts of each of its 341 positive cases. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said Monday that the city would hire 1,000 contact tracers of its own, and former Mayor Mike Bloomberg has pledged $10 million to kick start a contact tracing program in the tri-state area.

On Monday, a bipartisan group of top public health experts led by President Trump‘s former FDA commissioner Scott Gottlieb and President Obama’s former Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services administrator Andy Slavitt called on Congress to spend $46 billion to expand contact tracing capacity, including $12 billion to hire 180,000 new workers.

It is unclear how the outbreak in the United States compares with outbreaks in authoritarian countries like China, Russia and Iran, which do not report reliable numbers.

But even in the United States, where state and local governments are transparent about the data they collect, the actual number of cases and deaths are higher — likely significantly so. Early antibody tests in places like New York City and Miami show a significant number of people contract the virus without showing symptoms, and as studies show people who died inexplicably over the last several months tested positive for the virus.

 

 

 

COVID-19 vulnerability: A state-by-state analysis

Posted on by • Posted in Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Health Policy, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Pandemic, Public Health, Public Safety, Quarantine, Social Distancing • Leave a comment

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/rankings-and-ratings/covid-19-vulnerability-a-state-by-state-analysis.html?utm_medium=email

To live and die in Dixie - Covid-19 is spreading to America's ...

Every state in the U.S. will be affected by COVID-19, but some are more vulnerable due to limited ability to mitigate and treat the virus, and to reduce its economic and social impacts, according to a COVID-19 vulnerability index created by the Surgo Foundation. 

The Surgo Foundation, a privately funded think tank, created an index that combines indicators specific to COVID-19 with the CDC’s social vulnerability index, which measures the expected negative impact of disasters of any type. The Surgo Foundation’s index takes into account factors that fall into one of several categories, including socioeconomic status, minority status, housing type, epidemiologic factors and health care system factors. Each state and the District of Columbia received a score in each category and an overall score, with a higher score indicating that the state is more vulnerable. Read more about the methodology here.

Here is each state’s ranking and composite score based on the vulnerability index: 

1. Mississippi: 1

2. Louisiana: 0.98

3. Arkansas: 0.96

4. Oklahoma: 0.94

5. Alabama: 0.92

6. West Virginia: 0.9

7. New Mexico: 0.88

8. Nevada: 0.86

9. North Carolina: 0.84

10. South Carolina: 0.82

11. Kentucky: 0.8

12. Hawaii: 0.78

13. Tennessee: 0.76

14. Missouri: 0.74

15. Kansas: 0.72

16. Indiana: 0.7

17. Georgia: 0.68

18. Oregon: 0.66

19. District of Columbia: 0.64

20. New York: 0.62

21. Alaska: 0.6

22. Delaware: 0.58

23. Michigan: 0.56

24. Arizona: 0.54

25. Illinois: 0.52

26. Iowa: 0.5

27. Texas: 0.48

28. New Jersey: 0.46

29. Idaho: 0.44

30. Maryland: 0.42

31. Ohio: 0.4

32. Massachusetts: 0.38

33. Nebraska: 0.36

34. Florida: 0.34

35. Washington: 0.32

36. Connecticut: 0.3

37. Pennsylvania: 0.28

38. Montana: 0.26

39. Rhode Island: 0.24

40. Virginia: 0.22

41. South Dakota: 0.2

42. Utah: 0.18

43. Wyoming: 0.16

44. California: 0.14

45. Minnesota: 0.12

46. Colorado: 0.1

47. Wisconsin: 0.08

48. North Dakota: 0.06

49. Maine: 0.04

50. Vermont: 0.02

51. New Hampshire: 0

 

 

 

Healthcare CFOs weigh-in on the challenges ahead

Posted on by • Posted in Capital Budget, Cash, Cash Reserves, Cash-Flow Improvements, CFO, Change, Change Management, Communication, Contact Tracing, Coronavirus, Cost Management, Cost Reduction, Crisis, Crisis Management, Cybersecurity, Economic Crisis, Economy, Employee Benefits, Employee Furlough, Employee Hiring Freeze, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Employee Protections, Leadership, Leadership Cares, Leadership Flexibility, Mergers & Acquisitions, Net Income, Operating Expenses, Operating Income, Operating Margin, Operating Performance, Operating Revenue, Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), Quarantine, Recession, Remote Work, Sick Leave, Social Distancing, Supply Chain, Telemedicine, Uncertainty, Worker Protection • Leave a comment

https://www.pwc.com/us/en/library/covid-19/pwc-covid-19-cfo-pulse-survey.html

What CFOs think about the economic impact of COVID-19

How finance leaders see a return to work

Business perspectives on what it will take to shift from crisis mode are solidifying. US finance leaders are focused on shoring up financial positions, as US businesses head into a period of even more operational complexity while they orchestrate a safe return to the workplace. Back-to-work playbooks put workforce health first, as companies set course for a phased-in return to the workplace that will not be uniform across the US or internationally, findings from the survey show. Returning employees and customers are going to experience a work environment that will differ in marked ways as a result. Another change likely to endure post-crisis is the strong role corporate leaders have taken within their communities, placing a renewed emphasis on environmental, social and governance (ESG) efforts going forward.

The actions CFOs are taking show how US businesses continue to adjust to very difficult current conditions with an eye toward an evolving post-COVID world. The level of concern related to the crisis is holding steady. It is high but stabilizing, with 72% of respondents reporting that COVID-19 has the potential for “significant impact” to their business operations vs. 74% two weeks ago.

Key findings

Back-to-work playbooks reshape how jobs performed
49% say remote work is here to stay for some roles, as companies plan to alternate crews and reconfigure worksites.

Protecting people top of mind
77% plan to change safety measures like testing, while 50% expect higher demand for enhanced sick leave and other policy protections.

Substantive impacts expected in 2020 results
Half of all respondents (53%) are projecting a decline of at least 10% in company revenue and/or profit this year.

Cost pressures intensify
A third (32%) expect layoffs to occur, as CFOs continue to target costs, while 70% consider deferring or canceling planned investments.

Economic events shaping CFO response last week

This survey, our fourth since emergency lockdowns took effect in the US, reflects the views of 305 US finance leaders during the week of April 20. It was a week when oil futures traded below $0 as energy markets confronted downshifting global demand, Congress replenished emergency funding of $480 billion for small firms and healthcare systems, and everyone heard the call to get ready to go back to work as the US and Europe firmed up plans to ease quarantines.

Post-crisis world taking shape in plans to reboot the workplace

Health and safety are top priorities for leaders as they prepare to bring people back to on-site work. More than three-quarters (77%) are putting new safety measures in place, while others are taking steps to promote physical distancing, such as reconfiguring workspaces (65%). Findings also show where the virus may have longer-lasting impact on ways of working. Half (49%) of companies say they’re planning to make remote work a permanent option for roles that allow. That’s even higher (60%) among financial services organizations.

Takeaways

Among the small percentage of companies that are beginning to bring people back, returning to work will not mean a return to normal. Companies should consider how to help frontline managers lead with empathy, to communicate transparently and make decisions quickly so employees understand where they stand, have access to the resources available to them, and can share feedback to ensure they feel safe and get what they need. Tools such as workforce location tracking and contact tracing can help support employees with suspected or confirmed infections, while also helping to identify the level of risk exposure. Companies looking to make remote work a permanent option will need to enable leaders to manage a blended workforce of on-site and remote workers during the next 12 to 18 months.

Given that many people may be wary of returning to on-site work, there’s an opportunity for companies to create more targeted benefits to help make the transition easier. Paid sick leaves and worker protections, help with childcare, private transportation to and from work, or other benefits could help employees who may need extra flexibility or who want additional support as they prepare to come back.

Forecasting substantive impacts on 2020 performance

A majority of respondents (80%) continue to expect a decline in revenues and/or profits in 2020. Projections by sector vary, with consumer markets likely the hardest hit: one-third (32%) of CFOs expect a 25% or greater decline in revenues and/or profits this year, compared to 24% of respondents in all sectors.

Takeaways

Outlooks for financial results have held relatively steady in the survey over the last month, and are probably indicative of actual impact. Companies have had the time to evaluate the effects. CFO projections for declining revenue and profits coincide with a widening realization that the US economy is in recession. Since mid-March, jobless claims have soared past 26 million, and Congress passed relief packages of $2.5 trillion. CFOs are evaluating a wide range of scenarios that cover the health situation, the shape of the economic recovery, the spillover into the financial markets, and the resulting impacts on their business. This crisis is setting a new benchmark standard for “unknowable.”

Cost pressures intensifying

CFOs are considering additional ways to scale back on planned investment and/or other fixed costs amid volatility in demand. A third (32%) expect layoffs to occur in the next month, up from 26% two weeks ago. Protecting cash and liquidity positions is paramount. Financial impacts of COVID-19, including effects on liquidity and capital resources, remain the top concern of CFOs (71%). Over half (56%) say they are changing company financing plans, up from 46% two weeks ago.

Among other actions, 43% plan to adjust guidance, which is consistent with responses two weeks ago. This figure will likely increase as companies go through the earnings season over the next two to three weeks. Separately, 91% of respondents are planning to include a discussion of COVID-19 in external reporting. Depending on the type of company, this can mean inclusion in financial statements and/or in risk factors and MD&A results of operations, earnings release or MD&A liquidity sections.

Takeaways

Many CFOs have focused on how they can manage their cash pressures to ride out the crisis. Common approaches have included stop-gap measures, such as hiring freezes and tightening controls on discretionary costs to put an end to travel and events, or the use of contractors. Findings show that these types of cost actions are likely to continue, and they remain at the top of the CFO agenda.

Of those who say they’re considering deferring or canceling planned investments, 80% are considering facilities and general capital expenditures. At the same time, investment programs in areas that are considered important to future growth — including digital transformations, customer experience, or cybersecurity and privacy — are less likely to be targeted. CFOs will increasingly look for ways to prioritize costs in these areas, as businesses grow more confident in recovery prospects — even though current demand is subdued.

Priorities to de-risk supply chains

As companies continue to wade through mitigation efforts and start to think about recovery, many are planning changes to make their supply chains more resilient. Findings show CFOs prioritizing specific actions: 56% cite developing alternate options for sourcing, and 54% say better understanding the financial and operational health of their suppliers.

Takeaways

Findings confirm an emphasis on de-risking supply chains, as companies prioritize the health and reliability of their supplier base among changes they’re planning as a result of COVID-19. In particular, there is a focus on managing risk around supply elements, such as reducing structural vulnerability with other sourcing options.

Some companies are starting to invest in creating data-backed profiles of their supplier base so they know where and when to look for second sources. Others are increasing communication with suppliers to better understand financial health. For many, conducting deeper financial and health reviews of suppliers will become a regular part of their business reviews. Physical supply chain relocations will likely happen only as a last resort, given the costs involved. However, automation of certain elements of the supply chain — to eliminate time-consuming manual tracking efforts and check tariff structures, for example — will likely become more common as companies seek better data to make more informed decisions.

Strategies yet to change, but tech likely to drive M&A

The impact of the outbreak on mergers and acquisitions (M&A) strategies remains mixed. While 40% of respondents say their company’s M&A strategy is not being affected by COVID-19, compared with 34% two weeks ago, one in five say it’s too difficult to assess what changes, if any, will need to be made to strategy. CFOs within the technology, media and telecommunications industry stand out in particular. They are less likely to report decreasing appetite for M&A due to COVID-19, compared with peers in other sectors, and 55% say the crisis hasn’t changed their M&A strategy.

Takeaways

These findings highlight the fundamental strengths of the tech sector and suggest it will be among those driving M&A in the months ahead.  Tech giants, in particular, have large cash reserves. Moreover, demand for some tech products and services is strong as businesses return to work — 40% of CFOs say they will accelerate automation and new ways of working as they transition back. Additionally, technologies such as drones, artificial intelligence and robotics, will likely enjoy wider adoption in the post-COVID-19 environment. This leaves tech better-positioned to weather the pandemic’s economic fallout and to execute on inorganic growth strategies. M&A is likely to recover faster than the US economy, with tech among the cash and capital-rich sectors leading the charge. PwC studies show that a combination of factors has been driving a decoupling of deals from the broader economy.

Business recovery timeframes have extended

Organizations are realizing the business recovery from the impacts of the virus will take longer. The March measures of manufacturing and services activities show sharp drops. Demand is not only declining, it’s shifting. Moreover, even as some US states start to reopen, difficulties in setting up testing could keep some states in a holding pattern. As a result, for CFOs, the time required to return to “business as usual” the moment that COVID-19 ends continues to lengthen. Currently, 48% believe it will take at least three months to return to normal, up from 39% two weeks ago.

Takeaways

As reality sets in and companies understand the true impacts to their operations, CFO perceptions of the length of time to business recovery has extended. According to our analysis of how companies gauge their response to the crisis in PwC’s COVID-19 Navigator diagnostic tool, the expected impact of COVID-19 on businesses globally remains high, with consumer markets and manufacturing the most susceptible among industries. Put another way, businesses that are less reliant on a large, complex supply chain to deliver products, or are able to work relatively effectively while remote, are also likely to be among the least exposed.

Consumer-facing companies reconfigure physical sites as shutdowns start to lift

Companies in consumer-facing sectors continue to contend with both sides of the demand equation, as consumers sheltering in place focus single-mindedly on essential products to the exclusion of other offerings. Consumer markets (CM) CFOs are more likely to list a decrease in consumer confidence and spending as a top-three concern than they were two weeks ago (66% vs. 50%). For CM CFOs, consumer confidence trends translate almost directly to revenues, with 32% projecting an adverse impact on revenue and/or profit of at least 25% in 2020, compared with 24% of respondents across all industries.

In response, almost three-quarters of CM CFOs (73%) are considering deferring or canceling planned investments, targeting mostly general capital expenses, such as facilities. They also say technologies that can improve their understanding of changes in customer demand are a top-three priority as they plan changes to their supply chain strategies (41% vs. 30% for all sectors).

CM CFOs are planning workplace safety measures (86% vs. 77% for all sectors) and reconfiguring work sites to promote physical distancing as part of their transition back to on-site work (77% vs. 65% for all sectors). They recognize that consumers want the assurance of a safe physical environment above all else, especially because the majority of CM products and services require a physical component, despite the continuing shift to online.

Takeaways

Consumer-facing companies continue to be among the hardest hit, as the public health crisis keeps the majority of consumers confined to their homes for now. As they grapple with immediate challenges, CM companies are pulling back on capital investments. However, most are still planning to shore up their digital presence in response to accelerated online demand that could last well beyond the recovery period.

Health system pivots to new ways of working

What’s on the mind of financial leaders in the health industry? As they plan to bring more of their workforce back on-site, they are more likely than leaders in other industries to be leaning on technology to help them manage staffing uncertainties. Fifty-four percent of healthcare CFO respondents said they plan to accelerate automation and new ways of working, compared with an average of 40% across all industries.

Healthcare organizations are simultaneously solving two critical issues: uncertainty about demand and protecting their workforce. Health organization CFOs (70%) were more likely than executives from other industries (an average of 50%) to report that they expect higher demand for employee protections in the next month. Meanwhile, consumer anxiety over their own safety is driving up uncertainty about demand for healthcare and medical products. Forty-one percent of healthcare finance leaders listed tools to better understand customer demand as a top-three priority area when considering changes to their supply chain strategies, compared to 30% of financial leaders in all sectors. Fifty-one percent of healthcare finance leaders said they are making staffing changes as a result of slowed demand.

Takeaways

A survey conducted by PwC’s Health Research Institute in early April found that some consumers are delaying care and medications amid the pandemic. In this latest PwC survey of CFOs, healthcare leaders report uncertainty about how much of their business will return as the threat of the pandemic ebbs, making staffing decisions difficult.

As the nation continues to grapple with the pandemic, getting back to work is top of mind for US financial leaders overall, but this is an especially pressing issue for health leaders. They must plan for their own workforces, while dealing with an unfolding financial calamity — 81% expect their company’s revenue and/or profits to decline this year as a result of COVID-19. On par with other industries, they expect this decline, even though their organizations play central roles in addressing the human toll of the pandemic. One strategy is to use telehealth technology to virtually care for patients, thereby protecting patients and caregivers during the pandemic.

Financial firms see fewer layoffs, but slower recovery

Financial services (FS) CFOs are bracing for a longer road back to normal. About a third (35%) now think it could take six months to get back to business as usual, up sharply from 15% just two weeks ago. They’re also more optimistic about the bottom line. More than a quarter (27%) of FS survey respondents expect revenue and/or profits to fall by 10% or less. Across all industries, only 18% felt as confident.

Takeaways

Banks are playing a critical role in helping stabilize the economy, as they work on the front lines to distribute CARES Act provisions. Along with insurers and asset managers, they also rely heavily on workers with specialized technical and institutional knowledge. This may explain why FS CFOs expect fewer layoffs (15% vs. 32% overall) or furloughs (17% vs. 44% overall) over the next month. Now, they’re trying to focus on keeping workers healthy and safe.

Conversations are starting to shift toward when and how to transition back to physical offices. For some employees, work may look very different: More FS CFOs are considering making remote work a permanent option for roles that allow it (60% vs. 49% overall). To better protect their employees, they’re also looking to evaluate new tools to support workforce tracking and contact tracing (32% vs. 22% overall) as part of the return-to-work process.

Deeper insight into health of suppliers is top priority for industrial products

The industrial products (IP) sector is in full-throttle cost-cutting mode. Nearly all IP CFOs (96%) report considering cost containment measures, compared with 87% two weeks ago. Some of this comes in the form of layoffs: 49% of IP CFOs expect layoffs to occur vs. 36% two weeks ago. The longer the crisis lasts, the longer the impact on recovery times for their business. When asked how long it would take for their business to return to business as usual if the COVID-19 crisis were to end today, 15% of IP CFOs said less than one month, down from 25% two weeks ago.

Meanwhile, they’re closely examining challenged supply chains. When asked to list their top-three priority areas when planning changes to supply-chain strategies, 66% of IP CFOs identified understanding the financial and operational health of their suppliers, compared to 54% of CFOs across all industries. A majority (56%) also cited developing additional and alternate sourcing options as a priority. And the extent of the financial damage is sinking in: 65% of IP CFOs estimate 2020 revenues and/or profits will drop at least 10%.

Takeaways

IP CFOs are signaling they’re in the thick of the crisis, as they absorb historical lows in production, with March US industrial output plunging to levels not seen since the end of WWII. Continued cost actions are still in the cards.

IP finance leaders are looking ahead to get back to business, with some already bringing workers back on-site. Some are expecting changes to the workplace. Thirty-nine percent of IP CFOs are considering making remote work a permanent option for roles that allow, and 31% are considering accelerating automation and new ways of working. While these are still early days for US producers in returning to work, bringing millions of workers back into the fold may well usher in more change management than the industry now expects.

Tech, media and telecom well-positioned to power the recovery

Technology, media and telecommunications (TMT) companies are well-positioned for recovery from the initial blow of COVID-19. As they stabilize operations in response to the crisis, the percentage of TMT CFOs anticipating revenue and/or profit declines is down 19 percentage points from two weeks ago to 65%. The data suggest that TMT companies are preparing for a future in which virtual work options gain greater acceptance over traditional office settings. TMT companies are more likely to reduce their real estate footprint as they transition back to on-site work (38% compared to 26% for all sectors), and 55% say they’re planning to make remote work permanent for positions that allow.

Of those who said they’re considering deferring or canceling planned investments, TMT companies are less likely to reduce digital transformation investments (13%) than all sectors (22%). Their increased optimism about digital investment as they strategize for the future is further borne out by the data: Two weeks ago, of those who said they were deferring or canceling planned investment, TMT was on track to reduce digital investments at the same rate as other sectors (25%).

Takeaways

The resilience of TMT companies is evident in their approach to this crisis. Bolstered by robust liquidity, the majority of companies in the sector are looking ahead to a recovery they will power by using both organic growth and M&A. In the wake of a crisis that has accelerated more widespread virtual connectivity, look for new emerging-tech-enabled business models to take shape.

Where to focus next

COVID-19 has put businesses under enormous strain to drive new ways of working. When the pandemic began, many companies put their people’s health and safety at the center of their decision-making, and they appear to be doing the same as they prepare to ramp up business. With most firms expecting to bring people back on-site in phases, leaders will need to help employees adjust to a changed environment while still managing the well-being, engagement and productivity of all workers. Purpose-led communication will continue to be critical to keep people informed, and leaders should demonstrate empathy while helping employees adjust to what will likely be an extended transition period. 

 

 

The only way to get back to normal this summer is to test everyone in the United States, Nobel Prize-winning economist says

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Clinical Testing, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Economic Crisis, Employee Furlough, Employee Layoffs, Employee Pay Cuts, Health Policy, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Pandemic, Public Health, Public Safety, Social Distancing, Unemployment, Unemployment Insurance • Leave a comment

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/04/27/economy-coronavirus-romer-reopen/?fbclid=IwAR0AI-Cmf34bjZwphHNREngiy6CoKIbYHU2zb1QlnBg_jm7MXgWObMTVjZ4&utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook

Coronavirus tests should be as cheap as a 'morning latte' to ...

Paul Romer estimates that testing every American would cost $100 billion, a hefty sum but less than the $2 trillion Congress has spent so far.

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Romer says a return to nearly normal life is possible this summer if the United States does wide-scale testing for the coronavirus.

Romer is calling on the U.S. government to test everyone in the nation once every two weeks and isolate people who test positive for the deadly coronavirus. He estimates that doing so would cost $100 billion, a hefty sum but far less than the $2 trillion Congress has spent so far and less than the cost of keeping the economy partly closed for months to come.

“I’m on the optimistic end of how quickly we can scale testing up,” said Romer, who won the 2018 Nobel Prize for economics. “I do think there’s a way most people could feel safe returning to what feels like normal life this summer if we do this wide-scale testing.”

So far, the nation has tested about 5 million people — or less than 2 percent of the population. Last week, Congress approved an additional $25 billion for testing as part of the latest funding bill, which Romer calls a good start but not enough.

Restarting the U.S. economy isn’t just about government officials clearing certain businesses to reopen. People have to feel safe enough to venture out. Romer says that will happen only when nearly everyone in the country is getting tested on a regular basis and people who are sick are being quarantined.

“It’s totally in our control to fix this,” Romer said in a phone interview. “We should be spending $100 billion on the testing. We should just get it going. It’s just not that hard.”

He advises starting with screening all health-care and front-line workers in the next month and then scaling up the testing to the rest of the nation this summer by using university labs to process tests.

Romer says massive testing is the only viable option for the nation. Otherwise, the economy will limp along, leaving millions of people unemployed and forcing small businesses to shut forever. It could take years to recover from that kind of pain. On the flip side, reopening much of the nation too soon could cause deaths to skyrocket again.

Top White House officials voiced support for more testing over the weekend. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Fox News Sunday that the Trump administration would “balance” reopening the economy with “more testing” to “monitor this very, very carefully.”

Deborah Birx, the White House’s coronavirus task force coordinator, said Sunday that more testing would be needed and that “social distancing will be with us through the summer.“

As Congress and the White House debate another round of economic relief, it’s unclear how much more money will be allocated for testing. Evidence from China and Germany, which have begun to reopen much of their economies, shows that people remain reluctant to go out and spend again. Subways in China remain half full, big public spaces such as casinos remain nearly empty and economic activity is still way off from normal.

Although some have balked at the cost of testing every American, Romer points out that the United States is losing at least $500 billion a month from the Great Lockdown. His estimate is more modest than some other economists such as St. Louis Federal Reserve President Jim Bullard, who says the nation is losing $25 billion a day right now. Bullard has also endorsed universal testing as the only way to fix the nation’s health — and economic — problems.

“Every month of delay makes the recovery slower — and take longer,” Romer said.

Romer won the Nobel Prize for modeling the U.S. and global economies. A former chief economist at the World Bank, he has built a career thinking through big international problems and what to do about them. But the coronavirus fight is also personal for him. He has a daughter who is an intensive care physician in Philadelphia.

 

 

 

“Immunity passports” in the context of COVID-19

Posted on by • Posted in Antibodies, Clinical Research, Coronavirus, Crisis, Crisis Management, Health Policy, Immunity, Infection Control, Infectious Virus, Pandemic, Public Health, Public Safety, Social Distancing, World Health Organization (WHO) • Leave a comment

https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/immunity-passports-in-the-context-of-covid-19

Charu Kaushic (@CKaushic) | Twitter

Scientific Brief

WHO has published guidance on adjusting public health and social measures for the next phase of the COVID-19 response.1 Some governments have suggested that the detection of antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, could serve as the basis for an “immunity passport” or “risk-free certificate” that would enable individuals to travel or to return to work assuming that they are protected against re-infection. There is currently no evidence that people who have recovered from COVID-19 and have antibodies are protected from a second infection.

 

The measurement of antibodies specific to COVID-19

The development of immunity to a pathogen through natural infection is a multi-step process that typically takes place over 1-2 weeks. The body responds to a viral infection immediately with a non-specific innate response in which macrophages, neutrophils, and dendritic cells slow the progress of virus and may even prevent it from causing symptoms. This non-specific response is followed by an adaptive response where the body makes antibodies that specifically bind to the virus. These antibodies are proteins called immunoglobulins. The body also makes T-cells that recognize and eliminate other cells infected with the virus. This is called cellular immunity. This combined adaptive response may clear the virus from the body, and if the response is strong enough, may prevent progression to severe illness or re-infection by the same virus. This process is often measured by the presence of antibodies in blood.

WHO continues to review the evidence on antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection.2-17 Most of these studies show that people who have recovered from infection have antibodies to the virus. However, some of these people have very low levels of neutralizing antibodies in their blood,4 suggesting that cellular immunity may also be critical for recovery. As of 24 April 2020, no study has evaluated whether the presence of antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 confers immunity to subsequent infection by this virus in humans.

Laboratory tests that detect antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 in people, including rapid immunodiagnostic tests, need further validation to determine their accuracy and reliability. Inaccurate immunodiagnostic tests may falsely categorize people in two ways. The first is that they may falsely label people who have been infected as negative, and the second is that people who have not been infected are falsely labelled as positive. Both errors have serious consequences and will affect control efforts. These tests also need to accurately distinguish between past infections from SARS-CoV-2 and those caused by the known set of six human coronaviruses. Four of these viruses cause the common cold and circulate widely. The remaining two are the viruses that cause Middle East Respiratory Syndrome and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. People infected by any one of these viruses may produce antibodies that cross-react with antibodies produced in response to infection with SARS-CoV-2.

Many countries are now testing for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies at the population level or in specific groups, such as health workers, close contacts of known cases, or within households.21 WHO supports these studies, as they are critical for understanding the extent of – and risk factors associated with – infection.  These studies will provide data on the percentage of people with detectable COVID-19 antibodies, but most are not designed to determine whether those people are immune to secondary infections.

 

Other considerations

At this point in the pandemic, there is not enough evidence about the effectiveness of antibody-mediated immunity to guarantee the accuracy of an “immunity passport” or “risk-free certificate.” People who assume that they are immune to a second infection because they have received a positive test result may ignore public health advice. The use of such certificates may therefore increase the risks of continued transmission. As new evidence becomes available, WHO will update this scientific brief.