A convergence of crises: how do we move community practice forward?

The COVID-19 pandemic: two years in

As we write this editorial, the COVID-19 pandemic continues, but has shifted to a different phase in which public health mandates, restrictions, and recommendations have lessened, vaccines are available for all ages six-months and older, and tentative conversations about what an endemic stage of the virus looks like have begun. Despite these changes, the virus case and positivity rates continue to fluctuate with the emergence of new variants and seasonal patterns of individuals engaging in travel and gatherings.

Globally, as of early July 2022, there have been 547,901,157 confirmed cases of COVID-19, including 6,339,899 deaths, and over 12 billion vaccine doses have been administered.¹ In the United States as of early July, 86,512,787 COVID-19 cases have been reported, including 1,010,089 deaths, and approximately 66% of the total US population has been fully vaccinated.² Data suggests that more than 40% of US adults have had COVID-19, with 1 in 13 US adults experiencing “long COVID,” symptoms lasting three or more months after contracting the virus (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022). Additionally, the pandemic has amplified mental health concerns. In the first year of the pandemic, the global prevalence of anxiety and depression increased by 25%, with the most severe impact on young people, women, and people with preexisting physical health conditions (World Health Organization, 2022). During the pandemic in the U.S., approximately 4 in 10 adults have reported symptoms of anxiety or depression, up from 1 in 10 the year prior to the pandemic (Panchal et al., 2021). However, as an early pandemic report from the United Nations warned:

The COVID-19 pandemic is far more than a health crisis: it is affecting societies and economies at their core. While the impact of the pandemic will vary from country to country, it will most likely increase poverty and inequalities at a global scale.. (United Nations, 2020, p. 3)

A recent report estimates that COVID-19 and worsening inequality will lead to a global increase of 230 million more people living in extreme poverty during 2022 bringing the total up to 860 million people living in extreme poverty worldwide, reversing two decades of progress (OXFAM International, 2022). Reports from throughout the pandemic have revealed US households dealing with serious financial problems, including depleted savings and difficulty paying bills or affording medical care, with disproportionate impact on Black, Latino, and Native American households and households with children. (NPR, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation & Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 2020, 2021).

Though the pandemic has undoubtedly impacted everyone, the impacts have been disproportionately felt by specific groups. Women have faced reduced economic opportunities and decreased access to reproductive and maternal health care, as well as increased incidence of sexual exploitation and gender-based violence (U.S. Global Leadership Coalition, 2022). Families with children have experienced more economic stress and have faced difficulties arranging for childcare and helping children with remote schooling while adults worked (NPR, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation & Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 2020, 2021; Schaeffer, 2022). Members of racial and ethnic minority groups have experienced disproportionately higher rates of COVID-19 prevalence, severity, and death, as well as higher rates of economic stress and mental health issues (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2022; Magesh et al., 2021; Mude et al., 2021; NPR, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation & Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 2020, 2021; Panchal et al., 2021). Additionally, research has found that COVID-19 related discrimination has been common (Strassle et al., 2022).

As we have tried to navigate these unprecedented circumstances and challenges, actions and innovations have emerged that are making notable changes in our individual lives and in our communities. Inequities in health and other well-being outcomes were amplified because of the pandemic, leading to increased recognition and efforts to address long-standing disparities. Remote work opportunities, while difficult for some because of complications with technology or demands of childcare (Igielnik, 2021; Schaeffer, 2022), provided more flexibility and work life-balance, and led to higher productivity for many (Parker et al., 2022). The increase in telehealth care brings advantages such as cost-effectiveness and increased access to providers in underserved areas and specialized care, especially for those without the ability to travel to offices. Telehealth care has been met with satisfaction by both providers and patients in some research, who felt it was a platform that still allowed for quality care (Campion et al., 2021).

Convergence of crises

Unfortunately, these pandemic effects come at the same time as converging and interrelated crises of racism, gun violence, climate change, and the erosion of civil liberties and rights. Evidence of structural and interpersonal racism continue to emerge in data and stories from our various community systems, including education, justice, and health care. Further, hate crimes have increased during the pandemic (U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2021). This summer, devastating mass shootings have occurred at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, and a parade in Highland Park, Illinois, not to mention the smaller scale incidents in homes and communities that never reach the news, but also contribute to the 35% increase in gun fatalities during the pandemic (Kegler et al., 2022). The recently completed US Supreme Court term was the most conservative in a century with decisions related to abortion, religious liberty, criminal defendants’ rights, voting rights, and free speech. Most notably, the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision overturned Roe v. Wade, the decision from nearly 50 years ago that recognized the federal constitutional right to abortion. As the National Association of Social Workers (NASW) statement explains, “This decision is an unconscionable rollback of fundamental rights for all people in the United States … we should all be able to make the personal health-care decisions that impact our lives, health, and futures” (National Association of Social Workers, 2022). The words from the previous editorial team in their editorial from early in the pandemic still ring true more than two years later, “In the United States and elsewhere, we are confronting a world shaped not only by the politics of pandemics but also by the politics of pandemonium” (Santiago & Smith, 2020, p. 91).

With the collision of these crises, there is uncertainty in what community looks like as we move forward. Our eyes have been opened to so much in the past two years, and we cannot and should not go back to our pre-COVID view of the world and lose those painful lessons learned or those innovations and changes that promote flexibility, accessibility, and equity. What is certain is that as social workers and community practitioners, we have a responsibility to find the best way forward to continue to mobilize, advocate, and act to advance human rights and social justice in the current context of our communities.

Adapting community practice for a new era

So how does community practice shift to ensure we are effective in responding to the current social and political context and meeting the needs of the community within that context? We are in an era where we are going to have to transform how we do community practice and advocacy in order to make real, sustainable change in the current environment. We need to look to the historical lessons of community practice from the past (e.g., Eiler & D’Angelo, 2020; Stuart, 2020, 2021) and integrate that knowledge with the innovative strategies and technologies of today. We have already seen examples of these changes and innovations, particularly related to use of technology, in articles that have been published in this journal during the pandemic (e.g., Bender et al., 2021; Goldkind et al., 2021; Rodriguez et al., 2021; Storer et al., 2021), and the current issue highlights additional examples. There is precedence that community practice can and will adapt as our environment shifts. We just have to listen, be flexible, and stay rooted in our social work values. This is critically important because we are in times when our rights are being threatened, and we need to be equipped to be effective advocates for social justice.

As we shift and adapt our work as community practitioners in this new era, we also must think about how we bring others along with us. It is critically important that we share newly developed knowledge, strategies, and methods so communities can benefit from the widespread dissemination and adoption of effective practices in our social justice work. Publishing in academic venues, such as Journal of Community Practice is critical to the growth of the knowledge base, but dissemination through community-accessible formats, such as blogs, briefs, and reports, is equally important to the health and advancement of practice in communities.

The current issue includes four articles that advance our understanding of how community engagement, organizing, and advocacy continued and changed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, the issue includes two articles that are not focused on the pandemic but help to expand thinking related to the development and use of technology in community practice, especially in marginalized communities.

In “Youth Civic and Community Engagement under Singapore’s COVID-19 Lockdown: Motivations, Online Mobilization, Action and Future Directions,” Kwan (2022) explores civic and community engagement of youth during Singapore’s COVID-19 lockdown by conducting a thematic analysis of public podcast episodes that featured young adults discussing COVID-19 related community initiatives. The study found that youth were motivated to mobilization and action by both the preexisting inequalities they observed as well as the new socio-economic needs that arose from the pandemic. Two distinct approaches to long-term community and civic engagement emerged. One approach identified preexisting needs as a target for initiatives and advocacy. This approach operated under the assumption that the current socio-political and policy structures were inadequate in meeting community needs and must be challenged and changed. The other approach focused on their own initiatives which they saw as filling gaps and needs that the government could not address. The assumption underlying this approach was that the government was providing adequate support but that community organizations and members needed to supplement public support. Regardless of approach, the study demonstrated the ability of youth to quickly mobilize and engage in new ways to address a crisis. These findings are important because these experiences will likely inform how youth interpret and respond to future crises, social injustices, and inequalities.

The article “Mutual Aid Using Digital Technology: A Case Study of Virtual Community Organizing During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” by Wilson, Roskill, and Mahr (2022) provides another example of community members working together to quickly mobilize using digital technology to address socio-economic needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the four key characteristics of mutual aid as an analysis framework (Nelson et al., 1998), this case study from the Boston, Massachusetts area explores the development and evolution of a mutual aid network through qualitative interviews and focus groups with network founders and members. The emergence of the four key characteristics – learning as an ongoing process, supportive relationships, empowerment, and social change – from this case study illustrate how mutual aid can be used as an approach to community organizing and activism in these contemporary times and within the context of community crisis.

In “Crisis and Opportunity: The Impacts of COVID-19 on Water Advocacy in Ontario, Canada,” Case and Eady (2022) explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on water advocacy organizations in southern Ontario, Canada. Based on interviews and focus groups with water activists conducted at two timepoints in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the study verified the destabilizing impact of COVID-19 on grassroots organizations but also highlighted how the disruption of the status quo provided conditions for innovation and new capacities and foci.

Focusing on building community in another way, Pope and Greenfield (2022) study the role that community events play in developing and sustaining age-friendly communities in the article “Community Events as Part of Age-Friendly Community Practice.” Interviews were conducted at multiple time points, including during the COVID-19 pandemic, with core teams from eight grant-funded age-friendly communities (AFC) in New Jersey. Findings emphasized the necessity of inter-organizational context for event planning and implementation, but also the unique role and flexibility that AFC leaders have as compared to other community actors who are housed within specific service sectors. Agile leadership was a theme that emerged particularly related to the pandemic with leaders describing individual and organizational nimbleness as being central to pivoting events to virtual platforms and experimenting with new responses to meet community needs. Overall, the AFC teams saw immediate benefits of events for older adults and local organizational partners as well as longer-term strategic value including deeper engagement of older adults, learning more about community needs, and expanding the initiatives’ community presence. From a community-building framework, these findings highlight the critical role that events can play in building relational capacity which is essential for long term community transformation. Given the multi-layered importance of events, the findings of this study point to the importance of strategic event planning and implementation in age-friendly communities and other community initiatives.

Though not specifically about the COVID-19 pandemic, the other articles in this issue focus on technology and community building and supports, two topics that are relevant to the work that must be done to practice effectively in communities moving forward in the post-COVID pandemic era.

Our From the Field article entitled “Community-Engaged Technology Development for Bridging Service Users and Service Providers: Lessons from the Field,” from Lee, Gross, and Chelmis (2022), shares the experiences of one community project that developed a technology-based solution to improve communication between service users and providers. Located in the Capital District in New York state, this case study summarizes how a team of social workers and engineers engaged the community to ensure collective vision in the development of a mobile app to meet the needs of all stakeholders. The experiences and lessons learned from this community project serve as important insights for others working to develop and launch new technology into community practice realms.

In “Third Spaces and Opioid Use within Black Communities of Dane County: A Qualitative Secondary Data Analysis,” Williams and Francis (2022) study opioid use among Black residents in Dane County, Wisconsin. Based on focus group data, the researchers explore the role of social infrastructure in the opioid crisis as discussed by Black women, men, and youth. Findings suggest that opioid use in Black communities in Dane County is exceptionally complex, reaching beyond community members’ individual choices and behavior to the overall absence of social infrastructure and support and denied access to spaces, specifically Third Spaces for community building and supporting. The findings from this study affirm the need for easily accessible infrastructure, resources, and supports that empower individuals to safely and authentically come together in their local community, especially during times of crisis.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Data retrieved from the World Health Organization Coronavirus (COVID-19) Dashboard (https://covid19.who.int/) on July 5, 2022.

2. Data retrieved from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention COVID Data Tracker (https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home) on July 5, 2022.