On March 19, 2021, this report was posted as an MMWR Early Release on the MMWR website (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr).School closures affected more than 55 million students across the United States when implemented as a strategy to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1). Reopening schools requires balancing the risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection to students and staff members against the benefits of in-person learning (2). During December 3, 2020-January 31, 2021, CDC investigated SARS-CoV-2 transmission in 20 elementary schools (kindergarten through grade 6) that had reopened in Salt Lake County, Utah. The 7-day cumulative number of new COVID-19 cases in Salt Lake County during this time ranged from 290 to 670 cases per 100,000 persons. † Susceptible § school contacts ¶ (students and staff members exposed to SARS-CoV-2 in school) of 51 index patients** (40 students and 11 staff members) were offered SARS-CoV-2 reverse transcriptionpolymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) testing. Among 1,041 susceptible school contacts, 735 (70.6%) were tested, and five of 12 cases identified were classified as school-associated; the secondary attack rate among tested susceptible school contacts was 0.7%. Mask use among students was high (86%), and the median distance between students' seats in classrooms was 3 ft. Despite high community incidence and an inability to maintain ≥6 ft of distance between students at all times, SARS-CoV-2 transmission was low in these elementary schools.

In-person learning benefits children and communities (1). Understanding the context in which transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), occurs in schools is critical to improving the safety of inperson learning.

Background To inform prevention strategies, we assessed the extent of SARS-CoV-2 transmission and settings in which transmission occurred in a Georgia public school district. Methods During December 1, 2020–January 22, 2021, SARS-CoV-2–infected index cases and their close contacts in schools were identified by school and public health officials. For in-school contacts, we assessed symptoms and offered SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR testing; performed epidemiologic investigations and whole-genome sequencing to identify in-school transmission; and calculated secondary attack rate (SAR) by school setting (e.g., sports, elementary school classroom), index case role (i.e., staff, student), and index case symptomatic status. Results We identified 86 index cases and 1,119 contacts, 688 (63.1%) of whom received testing. Fifty-nine (8.7%) of 679 contacts tested positive; 15 (17.4%) of 86 index cases resulted in ≥2 positive contacts. Among 55 persons testing positive with available symptom data, 31 (56.4%) were asymptomatic. Highest SAR were in indoor, high-contact sports settings (23.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.7, 33.3), staff meetings/lunches (18.2%, CI 4.5–31.8), and elementary school classrooms (9.5%, CI 6.5–12.5). SAR was higher for staff (13.1%, CI 9.0–17.2) versus student index cases (5.8%, CI 3.6–8.0) and for symptomatic (10.9%, CI 8.1–13.9) versus asymptomatic index cases (3.0%, CI 1.0–5.5). Conclusions Indoor sports may pose a risk to the safe operation of in-person learning. Preventing infection in staff members, through measures that include COVID-19 vaccination, is critical to reducing in-school transmission. Because many positive contacts were asymptomatic, contact tracing should be paired with testing, regardless of symptoms.

Objectives To identify factors contributing to disproportionate rates of COVID-19 among Hispanic or Latino persons in Prince William Health District, Virginia, and to identify measures to better engage Hispanic and Latino communities in COVID-19 mitigation. Methods Data collection proceeded via three methods in June 2020: a quantitative survey of Hispanic or Latino residents, key informant interviews with local leaders familiar with this population, and focus group discussions with Hispanic or Latino community members. Results Those who worked outside the home, lived in larger households, or lived with someone who had tested positive were more likely to report testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 (unadjusted odds ratios of 2.5, 1.2, and 12.9, respectively). Difficulty implementing COVID-19 prevention practices (reported by 46% of survey respondents), immigration-related fears (repeatedly identified in qualitative data), and limited awareness of local COVID-19 resources (57% of survey respondents spoke little or no English) were identified. Survey respondents also reported declines in their food security (25%) and mental health (25%). Conclusions Specific attention to the needs of Hispanic or Latino communities could help reduce the burden of COVID-19. The investigation methods can also be used by other jurisdictions to evaluate the needs of and services provided to diverse underserved populations.

the CDC COVID-19 Response Team 1We evaluated the performance of self-collected anterior nasal swab (ANS) and saliva samples compared with healthcare worker-collected nasopharyngeal swab specimens used to test for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). We used the same PCR diagnostic panel to test all self-collected and healthcare worker-collected samples from participants at a public hospital in Atlanta, Georgia, USA. Among 1,076 participants, 51.9% were men, 57.1% were >50 years of age, 81.2% were Black (non-Hispanic), and 74.9% reported >1 chronic medical condition. In total, 8.0% tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Compared with nasopharyngeal swab samples, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 59% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 68%. Among participants tested 3-7 days after symptom onset, ANS samples had a sensitivity of 80% and saliva samples a sensitivity of 85%. Sensitivity varied by specimen type and patient characteristics. These fi ndings can help physicians interpret PCR results for SARS-CoV-2. 1 Members are listed at the end of this article.