Which Children Use School-Based Health Services as a Primary Source of Care?

Chronic Health Condition Management and School-Based Health Centers in New York: Findings From the 2020 School Health Profiles Survey

School-based health centers (SBHCs) are associated with numerous positive aspects of student health services. Many schools in the United States (US) do not have transparent policies on chronic health condition (CHC) management. Of particular concern is the underreporting of the delivery of health services in U.S. schools concerning CHC management and its relationship with the presence or absence of a SBHC. Data from the 2020 School Health Profiles (SHP) Survey were examined in New York public secondary schools. Specific health services were reviewed, together with the presence or absence of a SBHC, including daily medication administration, stock rescue medication, case management services, community partners, chronic disease-specific education, and assurance that students with CHCs were enrolled in an insurance program. A significantly greater proportion of schools with a SBHC compared with schools without a SBHC provided: (1) daily medication administration (92.9% vs. 86.5%; p < .001), (2) stock or rescue medication (84.9% vs. 77.4%; p < .001), (3) case management services (83.1% vs. 67.2%; p < .001), (4) disease-specific education for families (63.1% vs. 57.2%; p = .022), (5) student and family connection to community health services (84.2% vs. 76.5%; p < .001), and (6) ensured that a protocol existed whereby students with a CHC were enrolled in an insurance plan if eligible (79.6% vs. 66.8%; p < .001). Findings suggest that data on a national scale include essential facts for states to consider concerning school health policies and practices. Additional research should examine the intricacy of elements connected with school-based health care to understand better the care provided to children with CHCs.

Insurance and Health Care Outcomes in Regions Where Undocumented Children Are Medicaid-Eligible

OBJECTIVES

Expansion of insurance eligibility is associated with positive health outcomes. We compared uninsurance and health care utilization for (1) all children, and (2) children in immigrant families (CIF) and non-CIF who resided inside and outside of the seven US states/territories offering public health insurance to children regardless of documentation status ("extended-eligibility states/territories").

METHODS

Using the cross-sectional, nationally representative National Survey of Children's Health-2019, we used survey-weighted, multivariable Poisson regression to assess the association of residence in nonextended- versus extended-eligibility states/territories with uninsurance and with health care utilization measures for (1) all children, and (2) CIF versus non-CIF, adjusting for demographic covariates.

RESULTS

Of the 29 433 respondents, the 4035 (weighted 27.2%) children in extended- versus nonextended-eligibility states/territories were more likely to be CIF (27.4% vs 20.5%, P < .001), 12 to 17 years old (37.2% vs 33.2%, P = .048), non-White (60.1% vs 45.9%, P < .001), and have a non-English primary language (20.6% vs 11.1%, P < .001).The relative risk of uninsurance for children in nonextended- versus extended-eligibility states/territories was 2.0 (95% confidence interval 1.4-3.0), after adjusting for covariates. Fewer children in extended- versus nonextended-eligibility states/territories were uninsured (adjusted prevalence 3.7% vs 7.5%, P < .001), had forgone medical (2.2% vs 3.1%, P = .07) or dental care (17.1% vs 20.5%, P = .02), and had no preventive visit (14.3% vs 17.0%, P = .04). More CIF than non-CIF were uninsured, regardless of residence in nonextended- versus extended-eligibility states/territories: CIF 11.2% vs 5.7%, P < .001; non-CIF 6.1% vs 3.1% P < .001.

CONCLUSIONS

Residence in nonextended-eligibility states/territories, compared with in extended-eligibility states/territories, was associated with higher uninsurance and less preventive health care utilization.

A Mixed Method Study of Teachers' Appraisals of Student Wellness Services and Supports During COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Understanding teachers' appraisals of student wellness services and supports during COVID-19 is essential to strengthening services and improving student health outcomes. This mixed-method study aimed to examine US PK-12 teachers' appraisals of student wellness services and supports during COVID-19.

METHODS

This study focuses on qualitative data from 291 teachers' open-ended responses to the question: "What do you wish your school leaders knew about this (wellness support) aspect of your work?" and whose responses described wellness services and supports. A qualitative content analysis was conducted by an interdisciplinary research team using open- and axial coding.

RESULTS

Three main themes emerged. (1) insufficient access to mental health professionals and programming at schools, (2) concern about the quality of available services, and (3) a need for teacher professional development and support on student wellness. Statistically significant differences in teacher appraisals of insufficient access to mental health professionals and programming were found based on grade level taught and percentage of immigrant students in the school.

CONCLUSION

With amplified student wellness needs, school personnel, including school leaders, must consider ways to allocate additional resources/staffing, assess the quality of services and supports, and design professional development opportunities to support teachers' involvement in supporting student wellness needs.

Mobilizing and Delivering Essential Meals to Children and Families Affected by School Closures During COVID-19 and Beyond

BACKGROUND

The closure of schools in response to COVID-19 compromised access to essential meals for many students. The Emergency Meals-to-You program, a public/private partnership, was set up to address this challenge. More than 38.7 million meals were delivered between April and August 2020. This study explores lessons learned and identifies strategies for strengthening food access and security at schools and beyond.

METHODS

Qualitative research methods were used. This included interviews and focus groups with participants involved in setting up and delivering the Emergency Meals-to-You program. Data were thematically analyzed using key phrases, ideas, and concepts, and interpreted.

RESULTS

The program leveraged a multisectoral approach. Components relied on each other and included: schools, public/private partnership, eligibility, relationships, experience, centralized communication, food quality and branding, logistics, and transport. Strategies identified to strengthen food access focused on integration with emergency management structures, understanding food needs at the school level, building a fully procurable menu, and allowing distribution to be rapidly scaled.

CONCLUSIONS

The lessons identified and strategies recommended provide a framework for working across the emergency management spectrum (school to national level) to strengthen food access and availability for students and their families affected by a pandemic, disaster, or crisis situation.