The county-wide lockdowns that were implemented due to the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in some in-person qualitative research studies needing to be transitioned online using a video conferencing platform. However, evaluating the feasibility of transitioning an ongoing qualitative research study focused on low-income, racial/ethnic minorities had not been performed. Orsmond and Cohn’s feasibility framework was used to evaluate this study in three primary areas: recruitment capability, data collection procedures, and evaluation of relevant resources. Recruitment efforts for the in-person focus groups (January–March 2020) and online focus groups (March–April 2020), along with data collection procedures, were measured through various counts. To gauge the resources needed to transition a study from in-person to online, the administrative capacity, the space, technology, and funds necessary to support the research study were recorded. Sample characteristics were extracted from administrative and survey data. To estimate the differences in the sample characteristics, recruitment efforts and the length of the focus groups before and during the lockdown, independent sample t-tests, or proportion tests were conducted. The sociodemographic characteristics of participants pre-lockdown and during the lockdown were similar between the two groups with most participants identifying as female, Black, single, unemployed. The average number of participants recruited, confirmed, and attended per focus group, along with the total number of contact attempts remained similar before and during the lockdown. The length of the focus groups before and during the lockdown also remained similar. The in-person focus groups did require more financial resources for their successful execution than the online focus groups. It is feasible to sustain a research study focused on low-income, racial/ethnic minorities by transitioning the study from in-person to online using a video conferencing platform. This approach should be considered from the onset of qualitative research studies to increase reach to low-income, racial/ethnic minorities.

This paper describes the reflections of two social work PhD students based on their personal and professional experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic. The students describe their positionality and use that to expound on the impact of the pandemic on their lives. They reflect on the disruptions to their social work education and research priorities including transitioning to online learning and modifications to research agendas. They then discuss ongoing distractions such as worries about getting sick, mental health concerns, and financial constraints. They share their discoveries about glaring disparities in coronavirus infection and death rates, the need to adjust research agendas in response to current events, and the urgency for qualitative research strategies to add meaning to the numbers being reported. In addition, the authors describe shared experiences and intersections they discovered while writing this essay. Finally, recommendations for practice include recommitting to social work values to help surmount the ongoing waves of this pandemic; reimagining social work education so that disparities and injustice intersect with every subject taught and graduates become experts at leading social change; and harnessing the untapped potential of qualitative research to drive real, systemic change.

Despite community college students experiencing food insecurity there has been a dearth of research conducted on the feasibility of providing a program designed to increase access to fruits and vegetables among community colleges. This study used a mixed methods sequential explanatory design to examine the feasibility of delivering an on-campus food distribution program (FDP) to community college students and to examine the association between FDP and food insecurity and dietary intake. The study also explored the student’s experiences related to barriers and facilitators of program utilization. In phase one, the FDP occurred for eight months and students could attend twice per month, receiving up to 60 pounds of food per visit. Online questionnaires were used to collect students’ food security and dietary intake. Among the 1000 students offered the FDP, 495 students enrolled, with 329 students (66.5%) attending ≥ 1. Average attendance = 3.27 (SD = 3.08) [Range = 1–16] distributions. The FDP did not reduce food insecurity nor improve dietary intake. In phase two, a subsample of students (n = 36) discussed their FDP experiences through focus groups revealing three barriers limiting program utilization: program design and organization, personal schedule and transportation, and program abuse by other attendees. Facilitators to greater program utilization included: the type of food distributed and welcoming environment, along with allowing another designated individual to collect food. To maximize program use, it is suggested that reported barriers be addressed, which might positively influence food insecurity and dietary intake.

No abstract