The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global event that has sent shockwaves through every aspect of the economy. The nonprofit sector has been dealt a double hit—relying on donations in a time of economic hardship while being on the frontlines of the response to increased need. Previous studies have shown that COVID-19 has impacted nonprofits in numerous ways; however, the majority of studies have focused on the financial impact. Using a resilience framework, this study adds to the literature by analyzing how nonprofits have dealt with the loss of services, what it has looked like to pivot and adapt to this new environment, and what impact the loss of volunteers has had on organizations. In this qualitative study of 12 nonprofits in the Southeast United States, we find that while the organizations do talk about financial strain, equally as stressful has been the loss of face-to-face services. Nonprofits are used to being on the frontlines of most emergencies, and in this pandemic, many have struggled to keep their workers safe by following health guidelines while also serving their clients. The inability to meet with clients and the stress of pivoting to an online environment is as great or greater of a burden as the financial impact.

Objective The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) offers free benefits to qualifying individuals, but participation varies greatly from state to state. We explore the impact of SNAP administration policies, political factors, and socio‐demographic characteristics to explain this variation. Method We utilize a policy index that aggregates the effect of 10 SNAP administrative policies to evaluate the effects of policies over time on state SNAP participation rates. Results Less restrictive administrative policies are associated with increases in SNAP participation. Additionally, the unified Democratic control of state government, poverty, and unemployment all increase SNAP participation. Conclusion Differences in SNAP state participation rates are not spurious. More restrictive administrative policies lower participation. Thus, SNAP policies are not purely “administrative” decisions; they can either work to encourage or discourage participation in the program.

Administrative burdens in government programs are common and may exacerbate inequity in government service provision and access. Work requirements represent an onerous administrative burden as they entail substantial effort in complying and documenting compliance. We investigate whether state politics and race influence local Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) work requirement restrictiveness. To measure restrictiveness, we leverage the fact that states can apply for waivers of the SNAP work requirement during times of high unemployment. Using a novel dataset of county waivers from 2005 to 2018, we investigate whether state politics or county racial composition predict the likelihood a county has work requirements waived, conditional on unemployment. We find that counties in Republican‐controlled states and counties with higher percentages of Black populations are less likely to be waived. Counties with higher Black percentages are less likely to be waived if they are located in Republican‐controlled states. These results highlight the need for greater transparency in waiver implementation.