dc.contributor.author	Longo, Barbara A
dc.coverage.spatial	United States	en_US
dc.coverage.temporal	2019-2024	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2025-03-28T15:41:35Z
dc.date.available	2025-03-28T15:41:35Z
dc.date.issued	2024-12-03
dc.identifier.other	3acee3ff-f1b7-4321-8a66-a947ce05b8b8	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	https://hdl.handle.net/10428/7394
dc.description.abstract	This mixed-methods comparative public policy study examined the restrictiveness of the stay-at-home executive orders issued by U.S governors and the effect those restrictions had on COVID-19 health outcomes. The author extracted 2,789 restrictive phrases from 121 executive orders issued by 46 states to develop a novel Restrictive Measure Index (RMI). The RMI, along with other predictive factors, were compared to COVID-19 case and death rates. The study findings indicate that while COVID-19 policy restrictiveness varied among states, the level of restrictiveness did not appear to have a significant influence on COVID-19 case and death rates. Since COVID-19 responses differed across the U.S., this research also included a case study of two divergent states, California and Florida, to examine the practical application of the concepts outlined in the study. Key findings of the case study indicate that California had a statistically significant lower COVID-19 death rate and a lower case rate than Florida. Public health experts typically lead the response during health emergencies, yet many governors took a more active role during the COVID-19 pandemic by issuing numerous health related executive orders, which created challenges for local public health administrators. These administrators faced intense pressure and had to continuously adapt to a rapidly changing environment. The findings of this study contribute to understanding crisis management policies in the U.S. federalist system during public health emergencies and enrich discourse on intergovernmental relations in pandemic response. Future research into the role of public health experts and effective collaboration models during COVID-19 could benefit responses to future health crises.	en_US
dc.format.extent	1 electronic record. PDF/A document, 189 pages, 4376248 bytes.	en_US
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	en_US
dc.rights	This dissertation is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, revised in 1976). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgement. Use of the materials for financial gain with the author's expressed written permissions is not allowed.	en_US
dc.subject	Public administration	en_US
dc.subject	Public health	en_US
dc.subject	Public policy	en_US
dc.subject	Dissertations, Academic--United States	en_US
dc.subject	COVID-19 (Disease)	en_US
dc.subject	Pandemics	en_US
dc.subject	Federal government--United States	en_US
dc.subject	Executive orders	en_US
dc.subject	Emergency management	en_US
dc.subject	Florida	en_US
dc.subject	California	en_US
dc.subject	Mixed methods research	en_US
dc.subject	Quantitative research	en_US
dc.subject	Policy studies	en_US
dc.subject	Comparative studies	en_US
dc.title	Impact of Government Policy Restrictiveness on COVID-19 Case and Death Rates in the United States	en_US
dc.type	Dissertation	en_US
dc.contributor.department	Department of Political Science of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences	en_US
dc.description.advisor	Lee, Keith
dc.description.committee	LaPlant, James
dc.description.committee	Robbins, Joseph
dc.description.degree	D.P.A.	en_US
dc.description.major	Political Science	en_US