Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-2lccl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:29:14.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Stemming the Shadow Pandemic: Integrating Sociolegal Services in Contact Tracing and Beyond

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2023

Medha D. Makhlouf*
Affiliation:
PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, DICKINSON SCHOOL OF LAW, CARLISLE, PA, USA
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on the challenges of complying with public health guidance to isolate or quarantine without access to adequate income, housing, food, and other resources. When people cannot safely isolate or quarantine during an outbreak of infectious disease, a critical public health strategy fails. This article proposes integrating sociolegal needs screening and services into contact tracing as a way to mitigate public health harms and pandemic-related health inequities.

Type
Symposium Articles
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023

Significant reductions in COVID-19 cases, hospitalizations, and deaths in the United States since the pandemic began have allowed many of us to imagine its end.Reference Achenbach and Pietsch1 However, the emergence of new variants means that traditional public health measures — including vaccination, testing, contact tracing, masking, quarantine, and isolation — remain an important component of the battle against COVID-19.Reference Kucharski2 Although the Omicron variants, which are highly transmissible and currently dominant, appear to cause relatively mild illness in most cases in the United States, it is possible that future variants will be just as transmissible but more deadly.Reference Rajan3 Therefore, it is wise to review the measures that successfully mitigated public health harms during acute phases of the pandemic and create systems to support rapid implementation of those measures in the future.

This Commentary discusses lessons learned from contact tracing protocols during the COVID-19 pandemic. In general, these protocols rely on people’s ability to isolate or quarantine without direct support such as housing, income replacement, and food. However, many people in the United States are in financially precarious situations, owing both to acute changes caused by the pandemic (loss of employment) and to deep-rooted structural factors (discrimination, poverty). If they cannot afford to isolate or quarantine, this critical public health strategy to defeat the pandemic fails. I argue that integrating sociolegal needs screening and services into contact tracing is a promising strategy for mitigating public health harms and pandemic-related health inequities because it provides people with the resources they need to safely isolate or quarantine and builds trust in the public health system. This evidence supports broader integration of health care, public health, and human and legal services as preparation for the next COVID variant or viral pandemic.

I. U.S. Public Health Authorities Rely on People to Comply with Isolation and Quarantine Instructions

Contact tracing is the chief public health measure for containing outbreaks of emerging, directly transmitted infectious disease.4 The standard formulation of the strategy for breaking the chain of transmission during such outbreaks is “test, trace, isolate.”Reference Grantz5 Recent evidence suggests that of the three steps in the “test, trace, isolate,” process, isolation is the most important for interrupting the spread of the virus.Reference Rajan6 When a person tests positive for COVID-19, contact tracers from a public health agency reach out to them to advise them to isolate and to determine their contacts who may be at risk of exposure.7 In the COVID-19 context, “close contacts” are then notified of the possible exposure and provided information about symptoms, testing resources, and quarantine guidelines.8 Symptomatic close contacts are advised to get tested and isolate.9 Before vaccines had been developed and were widely available, asymptomatic close contacts were advised to quarantine for 14 days from their last exposure.10 Under the most recently updated guidance issued by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), issued in March 2022, close contacts who are not up to date on COVID-19 vaccines are advised to quarantine for five days, while those who are up to date or who had confirmed COVID-19 within the last 90 days are not required to quarantine.11 Compared with other infectious diseases, contact tracing for COVID-19 is especially important and challenging because the virus is easily transmitted (through aerosol particles and respiratory droplets) by pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic people who have been infected.12

The success of efforts to improve the U.S. contact tracing system, such as those described in this commentary, depends on the existence of a system that is functioning effectively. Reforms not only can but should occur alongside efforts to improve implementation of the existing model.

Ensuring that people can safely isolate or quarantine is crucial to the success of contact tracing.13 In order to safely quarantine or isolate, people typically need safe and secure housing, a private bedroom and bathroom, access to sufficient amounts of nutritious food and clean water, uninterrupted electricity and gas utilities, access to laundry services, reliable telephone service, affordable health insurance with a reasonable actuarial value, a relationship with a primary care provider, over-the-counter medication, personal protective equipment (PPE), and cleaning supplies. Some may also need access to private transportation, childcare, the ability to continue earning income or wage replacement, and protection from termination from employment.

Although contact tracing seems simple in theory, it is quite complex and requires adequate resources to succeed.Reference Rajan14 Results from studies of the effectiveness of contact tracing during the COVID-19 pandemic are limited due to the unavailability of data, and vary significantly.Reference Silberner15 Notably, several East Asian countries — including South Korea, Vietnam, Japan, and Taiwan — successfully mounted contact tracing efforts early in the pandemic that helped to contain outbreaks.Reference Lewis16 The reasons that so many countries, including the United States, failed to do so are “complex and systemic” but generally come down to underinvestment in public health and a lack of receptiveness to contact tracing due to distrust of public health authorities.Reference Clark17 Although the CDC no longer recommends universal contact tracing for COVID-19, contact tracing remains an important part of the toolkit for protecting people in high-risk settings and may be adopted more broadly in response to future variants.Reference Lash18 Therefore, it is premature to dismiss the potential utility of strengthening U.S. infrastructure for contact tracing as part of the strategy to mitigate harm during the COVID-19 pandemic or future epidemics.19 The success of efforts to improve the U.S. contact tracing system, such as those described in this article, depends on a the existence of a system that is functioning effectively. Reforms not only can but should occur alongside efforts to improve implementation of the existing model.20

II. Failing to Address Resource Barriers to Isolation and Quarantine Undermines a Critical Public Health Strategy

When it is unsafe or impossible for people to safely isolate or quarantine, they have two bad options: (1) Disregard the instructions, which undermines a critical public health strategy, increasing the spread of disease and prolonging the pandemic; or (2) Comply with the instructions at great personal expense, possibly creating health risks for themselves or their household members, and exacerbating financial security. These harms will disproportionately fall on people who are already socioeconomically vulnerable and likely to be affected by health inequities.

The COVID-19 pandemic has shed light on the structural inequities creating financial and legal insecurity for many people living in the United States. Socioeconomic factors are having an outsized impact on morbidity and mortality from all causes during the pandemic.Reference Polyakova21 During every disaster, it is inevitably the communities that were marginalized and vulnerable prior to the disaster that suffer the most from it.22 Health care administrators have referred to the underlying social conditions that have influenced health outcomes during the pandemic as a “shadow pandemic.”Reference Clapp23 The shadow pandemic is related to the social determinants of health, “the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age, and the wider set of forces and systems shaping the conditions of daily life.”24 Poor conditions shape health outcomes over time, sometimes through “long and complex pathways.”25 During disasters, however, the pathways connecting socioeconomic factors and health outcomes “become short and direct.”26 Structural inequities across several areas — including income, housing, food, and education — not only increase the risk of exposure for socioeconomically vulnerable groups, they also complicate their ability to safely isolate or quarantine when they or their close contacts test positive for COVID-19.27

These structural inequities have manifested as alarming racial and ethnic disparities in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. Minoritized groups and households with the fewest resources are “disproportionately likely to hold jobs that require them to work outside the home; to lack stable, safe homes in which to shelter; to have limited access to affordable care; and to be affected by diseases of poverty such as chronic respiratory illnesses and diabetes that also increase risk for severe COVID-19 disease.”Reference Fichtenberg and Gottlieb28 For Black and Latinx people, discrimination in health care adds to the risk.29 Altogether, unmet social and legal needs have contributed to the disparate impact of COVID-19 on minoritized communities during this global health emergency.

III. Integrating Sociolegal Needs Screening and Services with Contact Tracing Helps to Ensure its Success

Integrating sociolegal needs screening and services into contact tracing is a promising strategy for mitigating public health harms and pandemic-related health disparities because it provides people with the resources they need to safely isolate or quarantine. Uniform integration of public health, health care, and human and legal services in contact tracing can help set the stage for more wide-reaching cross-sector collaborations in the interest of health justice. Addressing problems rooted in health inequity is the best preparation for the next COVID variant or viral pandemic.

From the earliest days of the COVID-19 pandemic, scholars have urged health care systems to maintain and even expand efforts to address the unmet social needs of all patients they encounter.30 Such efforts are driven by the understanding that structural inequities are the root causes of health inequities.31 Legal and policy advocacy can play an important role in addressing unmet social needs on the individual, institutional, and structural levels.Reference Kerkhoff32 Therefore, screening for and addressing unmet sociolegal needs could make a difference in the success of contact tracing efforts and help ameliorate the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on racial and ethnic minorities.Reference Benfer33

Integrating resource screening and supports in contact tracing is not a new idea, but it is not universally done.Reference Bebinger34 One model potentially worthy of emulation is Massachusetts’ state-funded Community Tracing Collaborative (CTC), which was established in April 2020 and aimed to provide all people who tested positive and their close contacts with the resources they need to isolate or quarantine.35 In July 2020, the CTC estimated that between 10-15% of people contacted requested assistance with meeting basic needs, including, most commonly, food, medicine, masks, cleaning supplies, and income support due to ineligibility for unemployment or rental assistance.36

Another program, the Test-to-Care Model, provided support to low-income Latinx residents of the Mission District in San Francisco who tested positive for COVID-19 in order to enable them to safely isolate.37 The Test-to-Care Model was a three-week demonstration project backed by university research funding.38 To address barriers relating to “environmental context and resources” during the isolation period, Community Health Workers (CHWs) delivered two weeks’ worth of groceries, PPE, cleaning supplies, hygiene products, over-the-counter medication, and information about enrolling in health insurance and establishing a relationship with a primary care provider.39 Upon completion of the isolation period, participants received an “exit package” consisting of face masks, vouchers to purchase groceries, and information about community resources, such as free testing sites.40 One of the key features of the program was that it provided ongoing screening, resource/service provision, and emotional support to participants during the isolation period.41 The results of this study were a catalyst for policy change that increased resources for people in San Francisco who tested positive for COVID-19: a low-barrier, city-funded “Right to Recover Program,” which provides wage replacement during the isolation and quarantine periods.42

Even in jurisdictions that have integrated social needs screening into contact tracing protocols, it is less common to see the integration of legal needs screening and legal services. Screening for legal needs and providing legal services to those with unmet needs can play an important role in permitting people to safely quarantine or isolate safely by, for example, advising people of their eligibility for health-supporting public benefits and other legal protections, such as eviction and utility shutoff moratoria, and appealing denials, terminations, or reductions of benefits. Lawyers can also help efforts to advocate for public investment in new forms of social assistance to meet emerging needs — such as income supports separate from unemployment, disability, and other cash assistance programs — and new legal protections. These are legal strategies for leveraging the law to improve the health and wellbeing of people with few resources. Although it is unclear if the Massachusetts CTC included a legal needs screening, news coverage of the program described how skilled resource coordinators identified unmet legal needs through responses to questions about “social assistance needs.”43 For example, Luisa Schaeffer, a Patient Navigator at the Brockton Neighborhood Health Center with “deep roots in the community,” was able to restore a COVID-positive patient’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly Food stamps) benefits in just one day by texting a local bureaucrat at the welfare agency.44 Importantly, the model provided resource coordinators access to the CTC’s attorney when legal issues were unable to be resolved through informal advocacy.45

Medical-Legal Partnership (MLP) is a model for integrating legal services in health care settings that has proven useful in benefitting communities during the pandemic.46 Most MLPs draw on a variety of funding sources including their health care organization partners, philanthropy, and government grants.Reference Trott47 Sources of public investment in MLPs have increased in recent years, with more states adopting innovative Medicaid financing models that include funding for legal services48 and Congressmembers introducing legislation to support MLPs through a new grant program administered by states.49 In addition, academic MLPs — those housed in or affiliated with academic institutions — offer unique contributions for advancing health justice, such as catalyzing interprofessional collaborations to benefit communities, advance research, and train learners.50 For example, the COVID Equity Response Collaborative Loyola (CERCL) is “a multi-disciplinary collaborative network of academic, community, public, and institutional partners” established by Loyola University Chicago faculty and staff to respond to the health, social, and legal needs of minority communities living in the Chicago suburb of Maywood.51 CERCL includes MLPs at the Health Justice Project of Loyola University Chicago School of Law and Legal Aid Chicago.Reference Kate Mitchell52 CERCL has adopted an anti-racist mission of “minimize[ing] the negative impact from COVID-19 in Black and Latinx communities.”53 Initially supported by the university exclusively, CERCL obtained a private grant and funding from the Cook County Department of Public Health to expand its work.54 Another example of MLPs being integrated into contact tracing programs is the COVID-19 Workers’ Rights Helpline developed by the MLP at California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA), a legal services organization that primarily serves rural farmworkers.55 Legal services organizations are common MLP legal partners that are often funded through a patchwork of grant funding, including from the Legal Services Corporation, Interest on Lawyer’s Trust Accounts Funds, state and local appropriations, foundation grants, cy pres awards, and philanthropic donations.56 The Monterey County Health Department, which helps to fund the MLP at CRLA, referred COVID-positive farmworkers to the Helpline to address unmet social and legal needs.

Integrating sociolegal needs screening and service provision into well-functioning contact tracing systems during the COVID-19 pandemic may yield lessons that can apply to future surges of the virus and future pandemics, mitigating their impact on population health and health care costs.Reference Petchel57 By analyzing risk factors for exposure to COVID-19 and barriers to isolation and quarantine that are collected by contact tracers, organizations can more effectively design prevention and mitigation efforts for socioeconomically vulnerable populations.58

Although integrating sociolegal needs screening and service provision into contact tracing would provide tangible benefits to communities facing the greatest health risks, it is, by no means, a panacea for the racial, ethnic, and poverty-related health disparities that plague the nation.Reference Lyttle59 Rather, it could be a stopgap to address an urgent need during the COVID-19 pandemic and future outbreaks. It does not provide a sustainable path for addressing the deeper structural inequities that precipitated the crisis.60

While scaling up interventions to address unmet social and legal needs for people affected by the COVID-19 pandemic is wise, the best interventions pre-existed the pandemic and will outlast it. For example, New York City Health + Hospitals, the largest public health care system in the country, had a program in place before the COVID-19 pandemic to address needs relating to food insecurity, housing, income support, and legal resources, which could provide a model for integrating them into contact tracing efforts.61 Because it had already invested in this system, it responded nimbly to increased patient needs during the pandemic.62 In addition, the health system’s administrators have already observed that screening tools, trainings, and resource lists developed to serve COVID-19 patients about to be discharged from the hospital will be valuable for designing holistic services to a broader group of patients after the pandemic.63 Most health systems will need to expand their efforts to collect data about patients’ unmet sociolegal needs in order to mitigate negative population health consequences and excessive costs during the next surge or pandemic.64

Beyond integrating health care, public health, and human and legal services at the level of the individual patient, the COVID-19 pandemic should inspire joint advocacy and investments at the population level.65 Scholars have identified the fragmented structure of the health care, public health, and human services systems in the United States as a barrier to addressing the root causes of poor health.66 Health care providers can help public interest advocacy organizations make a compelling case for increased public investment in social services, including “paid sick leave; eviction and utility shut-off moratoriums; temporary housing for homeless individuals and exposed low-income individuals who otherwise may not be able to protect their families; expanded unemployment insurance; economic support for undocumented immigrants; and protections for jail and prison inmates.”67 In addition, health care providers who understand the connections between unmet legal needs and poor health can be powerful advocates for increased funding for civil legal aid organizations, particularly those with whom they partner through an MLP.68 Existing public investments in civil legal aid, recent innovations in the use of Medicaid dollars to support MLPs, and the urgent need to strengthen our public health infrastructure may allow health justice advocates to imagine a horizon in which legal services are integrated into government-led public health responses, despite the barriers yet to overcome. The results of successful advocacy on these issues will outlast the current pandemic and may help to prevent or curtail the next one.

Conclusion

Integrating sociolegal needs screening and service provision into contact tracing protocols during an outbreak of infectious disease can help to mitigate negative public health consequences, conserve health care resources, and alleviate outbreak-related health disparities. Although enhancing contact tracing in this way during the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics will not address the structural inequities that underly the racial, ethnic, and poverty-related disparities in morbidity and mortality, it may help to herald a more sustainable integration of health care, public health, and human and legal services, which has the potential to have a greater impact.

Note

The author has no conflicts of interest to disclose.

References

See Achenbach, J. and Pietsch, B., “U.S. No Longer in ‘Full-Blown’ Pandemic Phase, Fauci Says,” Washington Post, Apr. 27, 2022.Google Scholar
See CDC Updates and Shortens Recommended Isolation and Quarantine Period for General Population, CDC Newsroom, available at <https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s1227-isolation-quarantine-guidance.html> (last visited May 3, 2022); Kucharski, A.J. et al., “Effectiveness of Isolation, Testing, Contact Tracing, and Physical Distancing on Reducing Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in Different Settings: A Mathematical Modelling Study,” Lancet Infectious Diseases 20, no. 10 (2020): 11511160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rajan, S. et al., “What Have European Countries Done to Prevent the Spread of COVID-19? Lessons from the COVID-19 Health System Response Monitor,” Health Policy 126, no. 5 (2022): 355361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kucharski et al., supra note 2.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Grantz, K.H. et al., “Maximizing and Evaluating the Impact of Test-Trace-Isolate Programs: A Modeling Study,” PLoS Medicine 18, no. 4 (2021): e1003585.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rajan, S. et al., “What Do Countries Need to do to Implement ‘Find, Test, Trace, Isolate and Support’ Systems,” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 113, no. 7 (2020): 245250; S. Chung et al., “Lessons from Countries Implementing Find, Test, Trace, Isolation and Support Policies in the Rapid Response of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review,” 11 BMJ Open 11 (2021): e047832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scientific Brief: SARS-CoV-2 Transmission, CDC, available at <https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/sars-cov-2-transmission.html> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
See Rajan et al., supra note 3. In addition to having the resources to safely quarantine or isolate, people must trust and respect public health authorities enough to follow their instructions. A detailed discussion of this critical topic is beyond the scope of this Commentary.Google Scholar
See Rajan, S. et al., “What Do Countries Need to do to Implement ‘Find, Test, Trace, Isolate and Support’ Systems,” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 113, no. 7 (2020): 245250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
See, e.g., Silberner, J., “Now Isn’t the Time to Abandon Contact Tracing,” Wired, Aug. 26, 2021, available at <https://www.wired.com/story/contact-tracing-delta-variant/> (last visited Oct. 31, 2022).+(last+visited+Oct.+31,+2022).>Google Scholar
Lewis, D., “Why Many Countries Failed at COVID Contact-Tracing — But Some Got It Right,” Nature 588 (2020): 384388. Strategies that contributed to their success included “tracing multiple layers of contacts, investigating outbreak clusters, and providing people who are advise to quarantine with safe places to do so and with financial compensation.” Id. Scholars note that these countries had already invested in public health infrastructure, including technology to aid contact tracers’ efforts, which were informed by their relatively recent experience with prior epidemics. See, e.g., T. Shelby et al., “Lessons Learned From COVID-19 Contact Tracing During a Public Health Emergency: A Prospective Implementation Study,” Frontiers in Public Health 9 (2021): 1-10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewis, supra note 16, at 384. See also Clark, E. et al., “Why Contact Tracing Efforts Have Failed to Curb Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Transmission in Much of the United States,” Clinical Infectious Diseases 72, no. 9 (2021): e415e419, at e417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
See A. Hassan, “The C.D.C. No Longer Recommends Universal Contact Tracing,” New York Times, March 2, 2022, available at https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/03/02/world/covid-19-tests-cases-vaccine#cdc-contact-tracing. See also Shelby et al., supra note 16; Lash, R. et al., “COVID-19 Case Investigation and Contact Tracing in the US, 2020,” JAMA Network Open 4, no. 6 (2021): 112, at 9 (“To end the epidemic, multiple strategies, including contact tracing, universal masking, physical distancing, and COVID-19 vaccination, should be harmonized to reduce global incidence of this disease.”).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hassan, supra note 18 (quoting Dr. Crystal Watson on the need to maintain the infrastructure to rapidly assemble a large contact tracing workforce).Google Scholar
See Silberner, supra note 15 (quoting former CDC head Tom Frieden on the need for contact tracing to evolve as the pandemic evolves and highlighting the importance of providing “Covid support services” to help people quarantine and isolate safely).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Polyakova, M. et al., “Racial Disparities In Excess All-Cause Mortality During the Early COVID-19 Pandemic Varied Substantially Across States,” Health Affairs 40, no. 2 (2021): 307316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
See R. Manchanda, Three Workforce Strategies To Help COVID Affected Communities (May 9, 2020), Health Affairs Blog, available at <https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200507.525599/full/> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
Clapp, J. et al.The COVID-19 Shadow Pandemic: Meeting Social Needs For A City In Lockdown,” Health Affairs 39, no. 9 (2020): 15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Social Determinants of Health, World Health Org., available at <https://www.who.int/health-topics/social-determinants-of-health#tab=tab_1> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
Clapp et al., supra note 23, at 1.Google Scholar
Fichtenberg, C. and Gottlieb, L.M., Health And Social Services Integration Is Mission-Critical in the Coronavirus Response, Health Affairs Blog, Apr. 16, 2020, available at <https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/forefront.20200414.50259/> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
See, e.g., Kerkhoff, A.D. et al., “Evaluation of a Novel Community-Based COVID-19 ‘Test-to-Care’ Model for Low-Income Populations,” PLoS ONE 15, no. 10 (2020): e0239400.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
See Benfer, E. et al., “Setting the Health Justice Agenda: Addressing Health Inequity and Injustice in the Post-Pandemic Clinic,” Clinical Law Review 28, no. 1 (2021): 4584 (describing the role of medical-legal partnerships in pursuing health justice).Google Scholar
See, e.g., Bebinger, M., Why COVID-19 Contact Tracers In Mass. Will Send You Milk (July 2, 2020), WBUR, available at <https://www.wbur.org/commonhealth/2020/07/02/massachusetts-care-resource-coordinator-coronavirus> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
Learn about the Community Tracing Collaborative, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, available at <https://www.mass.gov/info-details/learn-about-the-community-tracing-collaborative#community-tracing-collaborative-overview> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
Bebinger, supra note 34.Google Scholar
Kerkhoff et al., supra note 32.Google Scholar
Bebinger, supra note 34.Google Scholar
Id. (describing how the CTC’s attorney, at the request of a resource coordinator, reached out to a COVID-positive person’s employer regarding the person’s legal right to paid sick leave).Google Scholar
Benfer et al., supra note 33.Google Scholar
Trott, J. et al., Financing Medical-Legal Partnerships: View From the Field (Apr. 2019): at 3-5, available at <https://medical-legalpartnership.org/mlp-resources/financing/> (last visited July 20, 2022).+(last+visited+July+20,+2022).>Google Scholar
Id. See also Manatt Health Strategies, Tapping into Medicaid Financing Streams: Strategies for MLPs (May 2019), available at <https://medical-legalpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/NCMLP-and-Manatt-MLP-Financing-Strategies-Webinar.pdf> (last visited July 20, 2022) (describing in detail the pathways for MLPs to access funding through Medicaid).+(last+visited+July+20,+2022)+(describing+in+detail+the+pathways+for+MLPs+to+access+funding+through+Medicaid).>Google Scholar
See E. Rock and J. Bhandary-Alexander, Congress Should Act to Fund Medical-Legal Partnerships (Sept. 30, 2021), Bill of Health, available at <https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2021/09/30/congress-should-act-to-fund-medical-legal-partnerships/> (last visited July 20, 2022).+(last+visited+July+20,+2022).>Google Scholar
See Benfer et al., supra note 33.Google Scholar
COVID Equity Response Collaborative, Parkinson School of Health Sciences and Public Health — Loyola University Chicago, available at <https://www.luc.edu/parkinson/cercl/> (last visited July 21, 2022).+(last+visited+July+21,+2022).>Google Scholar
See Kate Mitchell, L. et al., “An Interprofessional Antiracist Curriculum Is Paramount to Addressing Racial Health Inequities,” Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics 50, no. 1 (2022): 109116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loyola University Chicago Receives $1.09M Grant to Support COVID-19 Community Outreach, Research, Parkinson School of Health Sciences and Public Health — Loyola University Chicago (Oct. 15, 2020), available at <https://www.luc.edu/parkinson/about/news/archive/walderfoundation.shtml> (last visited July 21, 2022).+(last+visited+July+21,+2022).>Google Scholar
California Access to Justice Commission, Health Equity and Rural Attorney Deserts (Mar. 2021): at 10-11, available at <https://www.calatj.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/2021-Health-Equity-and-Rural-Attorney-Deserts.pdf> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
See Civil Legal Aid Funding, American Bar Association, available at <https://www.americanbar.org/groups/legal_aid_indigent_defense/resource_center_for_access_to_justice/resourcre---information-on-civil-legal-aid-funding/> (last visited July 21, 2022).+(last+visited+July+21,+2022).>Google Scholar
Petchel, S., COVID-19 Makes Funding for Health and Social Services Integration Even More Crucial, Health Affairs Blog, Apr. 14, 2020, available at <https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200413.886531/full/> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
See, e.g., Fichtenberg and Gottlieb, supra note 28.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Lyttle, C., Connecting Systems to Build Health Equity During COVID-19, RWJF Culture of Health Blog, July 13, 2020, available at <https://www.rwjf.org/en/blog/2020/07/connecting-systems-to-build-health-equity-during-covid-19.html> (last visited May 3, 2022).+(last+visited+May+3,+2022).>Google Scholar
Clapp et al., supra note 23, at 4.Google Scholar
Id. At 2. Legal services are provided by New York Legal Assistance Group (NYLAG), a legal services organization, through its MLP, called LegalHealth. See National Center for Medical-Legal Partnership & America’s Essential Hospitals, A System-Level Approach to Addressing Health-Harming Legal and Social Needs: A Case Study of the NYC Health + Hospitals and LegalHealth Medical-Legal Partnership (Apr. 2019), available at <https://medical-legalpartnership.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/A-System-Level-Approach.pdf > (last visited July 21, 2022). The health system contributes about 60 percent of the MLP’s operating costs; other funding streams include foundations, in-kind support from NYLAG, and a Medicaid Delivery System Reform Incentive Payment (DSRIP) program. Id.+(last+visited+July+21,+2022).+The+health+system+contributes+about+60+percent+of+the+MLP’s+operating+costs;+other+funding+streams+include+foundations,+in-kind+support+from+NYLAG,+and+a+Medicaid+Delivery+System+Reform+Incentive+Payment+(DSRIP)+program.+Id.>Google Scholar
Petchel, supra note 57.Google Scholar
Fichtenberg and Gottlieb, supra note 28.Google Scholar
Lyttle, supra note 59.Google Scholar
Fichtenberg and Gottlieb, supra note 28.Google Scholar
See, e.g., Sandel, M. et al., “Medical-Legal Partnerships: Transforming Primary Care by Addressing the Legal Needs of Vulnerable Populations,” Health Affairs 29, no. 9 (2010): 16971705 (making the case, from the perspective of primary care providers, for increasing funding for civil legal aid).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed