Extreme heat is the deadliest weather and climate-related hazard in the United States, and the threat it poses to urban residents is rising. City planners increasingly recognize these risks and are taking action to mitigate them. However, the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted many plans. Building on a previous survey which queried city planners from across the United States about how concerned they were about extreme heat, and their heat management efforts. This thesis examines how these perceptions and efforts have changed in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. In general, it was found that public spaces which would typically have been used to shelter individuals from extreme heat conditions were closed to mitigate close-contact and to encourage social distancing. Furthermore, priorities were changed as the presence of the virus became commonplace, with plans being altered, delayed, or shelved to diverge more time and effort towards the crisis at hand. Working environments and conditions also changed, which in several cases led to technological shortcomings, resulting in further delays. Finally, most planners had attained a surface-level understanding of which socio-economic groups were most impacted by both COVID-19 and extreme heat, in congruence with the current literature written on the topic. Generally, it appears that planners feel that the impact of COVID-19 on heat planning efforts has been limited.

For our project, we explored the growth of the ASU BioDesign Clinical Testing Laboratory (ABCTL) from a standard university research lab to a COVID-19 testing facility through a business lens. The lab has pioneered the saliva-test in the Western United States. This thesis analyzes the laboratory from various business concepts and aspects. The business agility of the lab and it’s quickness to innovation has allowed the lab to enjoy great success. Looking into the future, the laboratory has a promising future and will need to answer many questions to remain the premier COVID-19 testing institution in Arizona.

Since the start of the COVID 19 pandemic there has undoubtedly been an increase in social distancing orders, isolation, and overall general stress. The current outbreak has been proven to have a heavy impact on issues involving mental health. Social distancing mandates contributed to isolation, which in turn caused a surge in psychiatric disorders, either newly onset or exacerbating preexisting conditions (Torales, et al, 2020). Due to significant alterations in daily life, an increase in physical inactivity has already been proven to lead to deterioration of cardiovascular health (Pecanha et al, 2020). Stay at home orders have prevented otherwise healthy people from keeping up their daily exercise and eating habits, contributing to a heightened amount of mental health and hypertensive related issues.<br/>In addition to these health concerns, the pandemic has put stress upon pharmaceutical management practices. Drug utilization surges have led to an impact on patient care and management which requires careful measures to be taken to reduce the inflow of sick patients (Badreldin and Atallah, 2020). A global drug shortage has been a result of these drug utilizations. Understanding the alterations in the usage of specific medications such as prescription psychotropics, antihypertensive drugs, and antidiabetic agents can aid in population management and drug shortages.

As the return to normality in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic enters its early stages, the necessity for accurate, quick, and community-wide surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 has been emphasized. Wastewater-based epidemiology (WBE) has been used across the world as a tool for monitoring the pandemic, but studies of its efficacy in comparison to the best-known method for surveillance, randomly selected COVID-19 testing, has limited research. This study evaluated the trends and correlations present between SARS-CoV-2 in the effluent wastewater of a large university campus and random COVID-19 testing results published by the university. A moderately strong positive correlation was found between the random testing and WBE surveillance methods (r = 0.63), and this correlation was strengthened when accommodating for lost samples during the experiment (r = 0.74).

The mental health of ASU students has been negatively affected by the pandemic. Our research looks to prove that COVID-19 has caused an increase in stress levels while uncovering other relationships to stress. We obtained our data by conducting a survey through Google Forms that was exclusively accessible to ASU students. Stress levels were measured with the use of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). We find that the stress of ASU students from before the pandemic to during rises from 15 to 22 points, a 50% increase (n = 228). We discovered that women are more stressed than men before and during the pandemic. We also discovered that there is no difference between stresses among different races. We notice that there is a parabolic relationship between enrollment time and stress levels with the peak occurring during semesters 2-6. We also conclude that students who attended more than 5 events during the pandemic had lower stress scores, and those who had their videos on for at least 3 events had lower stress scores. Furthermore, students who utilized campus resources to manage their stress had higher stress levels than those who did not.

The mental health of ASU students has been negatively affected by the pandemic. Our research looks to prove that COVID-19 has caused an increase in stress levels while uncovering other relationships to stress. We obtained our data by conducting a survey through Google Forms that was exclusively accessible to ASU students. Stress levels were measured with the use of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). We find that the stress of ASU students from before the pandemic to during rises from 15 to 22 points, a 50% increase (n = 228). We discovered that women are more stressed than men before and during the pandemic. We also discovered that there is no difference between stresses among different races. We notice that there is a parabolic relationship between enrollment time and stress levels with the peak occurring during semesters 2-6. We also conclude that students who attended more than 5 events during the pandemic had lower stress scores, and those who had their videos on for at least 3 events had lower stress scores. Furthermore, students who utilized campus resources to manage their stress had higher stress levels than those who did not.

The mental health of ASU students has been negatively affected by the pandemic. Our research looks to prove that COVID-19 has caused an increase in stress levels while uncovering other relationships to stress. We obtained our data by conducting a survey through Google Forms that was exclusively accessible to ASU students. Stress levels were measured with the use of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). We find that the stress of ASU students from before the pandemic to during rises from 15 to 22 points, a 50% increase (n = 228). We discovered that women are more stressed than men before and during the pandemic. We also discovered that there is no difference between stresses among different races. We notice that there is a parabolic relationship between enrollment time and stress levels with the peak occurring during semesters 2-6. We also conclude that students who attended more than 5 events during the pandemic had lower stress scores, and those who had their videos on for at least 3 events had lower stress scores. Furthermore, students who utilized campus resources to manage their stress had higher stress levels than those who did not.

This paper conducts an exploration of the election policy reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic within the United States. While living through and voting during the real-time events which took place during the COVID-19 Pandemic of 2020, it soon became evident that there was not enough experience from earlier election emergencies to properly ensure against voter disenfranchisement. Given the scope of the global pandemic and the speed with which policymakers had to act, there was very little time to properly prepare. There was also great contention regarding the legitimacy of election methods proposed to alleviate in-person election concerns, such as mail-in voting. The political battle between those who believed COVID-19 to be a grave concern against those who did not consider COVID-19 to be a legitimate threat towards their livelihoods also affected policymaking decisions. Policymakers were forced into a corner, as they experienced criticism for not enough government action, as well as disapproval on the actual regulation that came to pass. This paper therefore aims to understand what factors led to the decisions which shaped the election policy which occurred as a reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic during the election year of 2020. This analysis is conducted by considering the following: prior election emergency policy; the development of reactive election policy in March, proactive policy established for the August and November elections; and a review of voter disenfranchisement which occurred due to COVID-19.

The ongoing Global Coronavirus Pandemic has been upheaving social norms for over a<br/>year at this point. For countless people, our lives look very different at this point in time<br/>then they did before the pandemic began. Quarantine, Shelter in Place, Work from<br/>Home, and Online classes have led global populations to become less active leading to<br/>an increase in sedentary lifestyles. The final impact of this consequence is unknown,<br/>but emerging studies have led to concrete evidence of decreased physical and mental<br/>wellbeing, particularly in children. VirusFreeSports was the brainchild of three ASU<br/>Honors students who sought to remedy these devastating consequences by creating<br/>environments where children can participate in sports and exercise safely, free of the<br/>threat COVID-19 or other transmissible illnesses. The ultimate goal for the project team<br/>was to build traction for their idea, which culminated in a video pitch sent to potential<br/>investors. Although largely created as an exercise and we did not create a full<br/>certification course, merely a prototype through a website with sample questions to<br/>gauge interest, the project was a success as a large target market for this product was<br/>identified that showed great promise. Our team believes that early entrance to the<br/>market, as well as the lack of any other competitors would give the team a tremendous<br/>advantage in creating an impactful and influential service.

As 2020 unfolded, a new headline began taking over front pages: “COVID-19”. In the months that followed, waves of fear, sorrow, isolation, and grief gripped the population in the viruses’ wake. We have all heard it, we have all felt it, indeed because we were all there. Trailing a few months behind those initial headlines, more followed that only served to breed misinformation and ludicrous theories. Even with study after study, quality, scientific data about this new virus could not come fast enough. There was somehow both too much information and also not enough. We were scrambling to process the abundance of raw numbers into some semblance of an explanation. After those first few months of the pandemic, patterns in the research are beginning to emerge. These horrific patterns tell much more than just the pathology of COVID-19. As the number of sick, surviving, and deceased patients began to accumulate, it became clear that some populations were left devastated, while others seemed unscathed. The reasons for these patterns were present long before the COVID-19 Pandemic. Disparities in health care were highlighted by the pandemic – not caused by it. The roots of these disparities lie in the five Social Determinants of Health (SDOH): (1) economic stability, (2) neighborhood and built environment, (3) education, (4) social and community context, and (5) health and health care. Minority populations, namely Black Americans, Hispanic Americans, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders consistently have higher diagnosis rates and poorer patient outcomes compared to their White American and Asian American counterparts. This is partly because minority populations tend to have jobs that pay lower, increase exposure risk, and provide little healthcare. When unemployment increased in the wake of the pandemic, minorities were the first to lose their jobs and their health insurance. In addition, these populations tend to live in densely populated neighborhoods, where social isolation is harder. Higher poverty rates encourage work DISPROPORTIONATE EFFECTS OF COVID-19 ON MINORITY POPULATIONS 3 rather than education, often perpetuating the cycle. The recent racial history and current aggressions towards minority people might produce a social attitude against healthcare Health care itself can be expensive, hard to find, and/or tied to employment, leading to poorly controlled comorbidities, which exacerbate poor patient outcomes in the case of COVID-19 infection. The healthcare delivery system plays little part in the SDOH, instead, public policy must be called to reform in order to fix these issues.