Workers were affixing small black-and-white signs to the stone patio outside Zaytinya on Tuesday morning, each one exactly six feet from the next. The signs indicated where customers for one of ThinkFoodGroup’s new community kitchens should stand while waiting for meals outside a restaurant that would be, under normal circumstances, packed with lunchtime diners.

But Zaytinya was closed, one of hundreds of restaurants and bars across the city affected by the D.C. government’s order on Monday to stop all dine-in service. The clampdown is part of a growing movement to curtail public gatherings and “flatten the curve,” the popular shorthand for limiting the spread of coronavirus by dramatically cutting back on social interactions. As the virus has spread, public officials have steadily lowered their recommended numbers for public gatherings: first 1,000, then 250, then 50 and now 10.

José Andrés understands the importance of these recommendations. They can save lives. But he also understands people need to be fed, especially those households that have relied on (now closed) public schools to feed their children or don’t have the means to stockpile their pantries for weeks on end, as the coronavirus strangles a service industry that employs millions of hourly American workers. So Andrés, the face of ThinkFoodGroup and the man who leads a small army of chefs and volunteers in humanitarian efforts around the globe, has decided to forge ahead and do what he always does: Feed the people.

ThinkFoodGroup’s community kitchens are the chef and restaurateur’s latest efforts to keep the food flowing. He and the ThinkFoodGroup team are mobilizing the otherwise-dormant kitchens at Zaytinya, America Eats Tavern, Oyamel and several locations of Jaleo and using them to serve the public a rotating menu of soups, salads, entrees and more from noon to 5 p.m. daily. Andrés is doing this despite critics who say any public gathering, no matter how noble, can contribute to the spread of coronavirus.

“People have to eat,” Andrés said at a news preview of the community kitchens. “Not everybody is going to be able to go to the supermarket. We have areas in America that are food deserts. We have millions of Americans that, if you go to their kitchens, their kitchens are empty. Not everybody has money to fill up for a month. That’s the reality. What are we going to do?”

The food from these community kitchens is not free. The prices range, for example, from $6 for pork-and-hominy soup at Oyamel to $12 for a plate of hanger steak and fried potatoes at Jaleo in Crystal City. But a spokesperson for ThinkFoodGroup said anyone who can’t afford a meal will be given one free; the public can also purchase meals to be donated to others.

In this way, the community kitchens are a ThinkFoodGroup project —staffed with salaried employees who volunteer for the gig — but one steeped in the spirit of Andrés’s other work with World Central Kitchen, his relief nonprofit that feeds people in times of disaster, whether natural or political. World Central Kitchen’s efforts around the world — in Puerto Rico, in the Bahamas, even in Washington during the partial government shutdown — has put Andrés in a unique position to know how to serve food under trying circumstances.

“World Central Kitchen has proven, every time, that we can adapt to every circumstance, from fires to volcanoes to political situations to earthquakes to typhoons to tsunamis to places where that there is nothing left, like the Bahamas,” Andrés said.

Yet the coronavirus presents a different set of challenges, the chef noted. Because of the way the virus spreads, you can’t mobilize relief efforts as you would in disaster zones. You can’t have a line of 200 people making sandwiches ready to pass out to another line of hungry people, each group crowded together in a tight space. Feeding operations have to be small, targeted and operated in a way to keep both workers and the public safe. Independent restaurants are an ideal outlet for this approach, Andrés said. With a small menu and limited hours, they can be run with only a handful of people, and they can organize the line in a way to make sure there is six feet between each person in it. The signs on the ground at Zaytinya are evidence to it.

If the coronavirus gets worse, and parts of the country are forced to go on lockdown, restaurant operations like these could feed a city, Andrés said. “I’ve made it very clear that what I’m doing here is the blueprint for what maybe will have to happen if things get very bad,” he said.

The truth is, Andrés and his two primary workplaces, ThinkFoodGroup and World Central Kitchen, are preparing for the worst. World Central Kitchen is already feeding people in Arkansas and the Bronx, with plans to open sites in Washington. The nonprofit organization is even looking at large-scale operations, perhaps taking over a convention center or stadium and staffing it with chefs who pass a coronavirus test. The chefs would remain on site for a month, with no contact with the outside world, and cook for teams to distribute.

“We need to prepare for the worst and hope for the best,” Andrés said.

Make no mistake, though. Andrés thinks the worst is yet to come. During his news event, he borrowed an ominous phrase from “Game of Thrones,” one of his favorite TV series.

“Tell people ‘winter is coming,’ and we need to be ready for winter,” he said. “If at the end, spring shows up and winter goes away, I’m very happy. But I’m sorry, winter is coming, and what I’m trying to do is make sure that we’re ready to confront that situation.”

An Audacious Plan to Save Small Businesses – All small businesses below 50 employees become tax-exempt as not-for-profits for 10 years.

“The world isn’t getting better, but technology is,” words spoken not by leaders but by an astute 9-year-old. The truth of that is like a thunderclap. Business innovation makes constant advancements, but oftentimes it’s at the sacrifice of humane practices. The very things that improve the quality of life for some come at a high “people” cost for very many others. Business innovation improves while humanity is removed. And that is when things are going relatively well.

The expression “desperate times call for desperate measures” may have sounded overused or laughingly cliche a few months ago, but those words have come to life around the world in just a few short months. The world, as we know it, is changing in front of our very eyes, and the aftermath of crisis will require more change, especially when we see the fractured economic crisis we are left with.

We think of economies and businesses as inanimate entities, but they are born, raised, and die on the backs of living, breathing people. They are inextricably linked, so when businesses go into crisis, so do the people who work for them. Particularly vulnerable during this time are small businesses that cannot afford to give employees extended paid leave and employees who depend on a weekly paycheck. Now is the time for large-scale measures to protect vulnerable businesses and workers, particularly seniors who face greater risks to their health and well-being.

If we continue to think small in terms of solutions, we will be stuck in small and incremental changes will only affect incremental improvements. But circumstances prove that the status quo is not enough. These desperate times, they call for, let’s not say “desperate” measures, but a well-thought-out plan. An audacious plan implemented on a global scale. What would that plan look like?

The Audacious Plan asks for the following 5 Guiding Principles:

1. All small businesses below 50 employees become tax-exempt as not-for-profits for 10 years. Small businesses are the lifeblood of their communities. Aside from selling necessary products or services, they provide social and community cohesion as well as jobs. Times of crisis like these hurt small businesses the most, which in turn harms society on a human level. When bars, restaurants, and other places for recreation suffer, socializing goes down. It should be considered a higher civic duty to make sure small businesses can survive. Countries can figure out ways to make money that don’t put a strain on small businesses. Big box stores in an area often beat up small businesses, and many of those wounds lead to their death. Giving small businesses tax exemption helps balance out the disadvantage, keep and create jobs, and generally give the local economy a much needed shot in the arm.

2. All countries establish standards for online education for a national education program for K-12 education in partnership with global IT firms. In this age of digital and virtual technology, pandemic or other disasters shouldn’t have to grind education to a halt. Citizens pay taxes for public education, but in many cases, it is not paying for alternatives in cases such as these. But even many affluent neighborhoods have schools without the ability to conduct education online, making it not solely an economic issue. The attitudes of educators need to be adjusted to view educated children as their civic duty under any circumstances where it is possible.

3. All public teachers and nurses get tax free benefits and free graduate education like veteran benefits. Teachers and nurses are a new breed of modern-day and all too often unsung heroes that should be given the benefits of such. Teachers are on the front lines trying to keep order, educate, inspire, and protect our children, whether the classroom is online or in real life. They often the first line of defense for children. Nurses help heal, comfort, and care for patients in close contact, putting their own health and well-being on the line daily. They fight a different war but a war; nonetheless, one that requires self-sacrifice. They should have the benefits of someone who serves and sacrifices for their community, including free tuition, tax-exemption, and healthcare benefits.

4. Free internet funded by local governments. Once a novel technological luxury, the internet can be very nearly regarded as a necessity in this era. Like many necessities, not all can afford it. The mindset towards internet access needs to change from being considered a private luxury to a public good. When citizens pay taxes for public services, the internet should be one of them. Internet for all.

5. A Global Small Business Congress to held on June 27 at the United Nations. For any of these guidelines to be enacted, there needs to be a meeting of minds; a summit for the people and by the people—organizations without government affiliation–to meet to discuss these plans. June 27 is the United Nations International Day for Micro-Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (MSMEs Day). The day was proposed by ICSB and presented by Argentina to the UN General Assembly. This day is our meeting point.

We need to move swiftly forward with the Audacious Plan to Save Small Businesses.

Article written by:

Dr. Ayman El Tarabishy
ICSB Executive Director
Deputy Chair and Professor at George Washington University School of Business

 The COVID-19 outbreak has uprooted life as we know it and our public health system is working hard to combat this. We all can feel the impact on our economies and especially on SMEs that is causing us to to innovate and adapt. These changes are huge and will have long term effects that need to be tackled.

The OECD note “COVID-19: SME Policy Responses”  provides detailed information on the effects of the virus on SMEs and an overview on the first measures countries are implementing to foster SME resilience. This note gives excellent insight on these issues and may help us think about the future challenges we are going to experience as a result of this crisis! Read the full note below!

To stop coronavirus we will need to radically change almost everything we do: how we work, exercise, socialize, shop, manage our health, educate our kids, take care of family members.

We all want things to go back to normal quickly. But what most of us have probably not yet realized—yet will soon—is that things won’t go back to normal after a few weeks, or even a few months. Some things never will.

It’s now widely agreed (even by Britain, finally) that every country needs to “flatten the curve”: impose social distancing to slow the spread of the virus so that the number of people sick at once doesn’t cause the health-care system to collapse, as it is threatening to do in Italy right now. That means the pandemic needs to last, at a low level, until either enough people have had Covid-19 to leave most immune (assuming immunity lasts for years, which we don’t know) or there’s a vaccine.

How long would that take, and how draconian do social restrictions need to be? Yesterday President Donald Trump, announcing new guidelines such as a 10-person limit on gatherings, said that “with several weeks of focused action, we can turn the corner and turn it quickly.” In China, six weeks of lockdown are beginning to ease now that new cases have fallen to a trickle.

But it won’t end there. As long as someone in the world has the virus, breakouts can and will keep recurring without stringent controls to contain them. In a report yesterday (pdf), researchers at Imperial College London proposed a way of doing this: impose more extreme social distancing measures every time admissions to intensive care units (ICUs) start to spike, and relax them each time admissions fall. Here’s how that looks in a graph.

The orange line is ICU admissions. Each time they rise above a threshold—say, 100 per week—the country would close all schools and most universities and adopt social distancing. When they drop below 50, those measures would be lifted, but people with symptoms or whose family members have symptoms would still be confined at home.

What counts as “social distancing”? The researchers define it as “All households reduce contact outside household, school or workplace by 75%.” That doesn’t mean you get to go out with your friends once a week instead of four times. It means everyone does everything they can to minimize social contact, and overall, the number of contacts falls by 75%.

Under this model, the researchers conclude, social distancing and school closures would need to be in force some two-thirds of the time—roughly two months on and one month off—until a vaccine is available, which will take at least 18 months (if it works at all). They note that the results are “qualitatively similar for the US.”

Eighteen months!? Surely there must be other solutions. Why not just build more ICUs and treat more people at once, for example?

Well, in the researchers’ model, that didn’t solve the problem. Without social distancing of the whole population, they found, even the best mitigation strategy—which means isolation or quarantine of the sick, the old, and those who have been exposed, plus school closures—would still lead to a surge of critically ill people eight times bigger than the US or UK system can cope with. (That’s the lowest, blue curve in the graph below; the flat red line is the current number of ICU beds.) Even if you set factories to churn out beds and ventilators and all the other facilities and supplies, you’d still need far more nurses and doctors to take care of everyone.

How about imposing restrictions for just one batch of five months or so? No good—once measures are lifted, the pandemic breaks out all over again, only this time it’s in winter, the worst time for overstretched health-care systems.

And what if we decided to be brutal: set the threshold number of ICU admissions for triggering social distancing much higher, accepting that many more patients would die? Turns out it makes little difference. Even in the least restrictive of the Imperial College scenarios, we’re shut in more than half the time.

This isn’t a temporary disruption. It’s the start of a completely different way of life.

In the short term, this will be hugely damaging to businesses that rely on people coming together in large numbers: restaurants, cafes, bars, nightclubs, gyms, hotels, theaters, cinemas, art galleries, shopping malls, craft fairs, museums, musicians and other performers, sporting venues (and sports teams), conference venues (and conference producers), cruise lines, airlines, public transportation, private schools, day-care centers. That’s to say nothing of the stresses on parents thrust into home-schooling their kids, people trying to care for elderly relatives without exposing them to the virus, people trapped in abusive relationships, and anyone without a financial cushion to deal with swings in income.

There’ll be some adaptation, of course: gyms could start selling home equipment and online training sessions, for example. We’ll see an explosion of new services in what’s already been dubbed the “shut-in economy.” One can also wax hopeful about the way some habits might change—less carbon-burning travel, more local supply chains, more walking and biking.

But the disruption to many, many businesses and livelihoods will be impossible to manage. And the shut-in lifestyle just isn’t sustainable for such long periods.

So how can we live in this new world? Part of the answer—hopefully—will be better health-care systems, with pandemic response units that can move quickly to identify and contain outbreaks before they start to spread, and the ability to quickly ramp up production of medical equipment, testing kits, and drugs. Those will be too late to stop Covid-19, but they’ll help with future pandemics.

In the near term, we’ll probably find awkward compromises that allow us to retain some semblance of a social life. Maybe movie theaters will take out half their seats, meetings will be held in larger rooms with spaced-out chairs, and gyms will require you to book workouts ahead of time so they don’t get crowded.

Ultimately, however, I predict that we’ll restore the ability to socialize safely by developing more sophisticated ways to identify who is a disease risk and who isn’t, and discriminating—legally—against those who are.

We can see harbingers of this in the measures some countries are taking today. Israel is going to use the cell-phone location data with which its intelligence services track terrorists to trace people who’ve been in touch with known carriers of the virus. Singapore does exhaustive contact tracing and publishes detailed data on each known case, all but identifying people by name.

We don’t know exactly what this new future looks like, of course. But one can imagine a world in which, to get on a flight, perhaps you’ll have to be signed up to a service that tracks your movements via your phone. The airline wouldn’t be able to see where you’d gone, but it would get an alert if you’d been close to known infected people or disease hot spots. There’d be similar requirements at the entrance to large venues, government buildings, or public transport hubs. There would be temperature scanners everywhere, and your workplace might demand you wear a monitor that tracks your temperature or other vital signs. Where nightclubs ask for proof of age, in future they might ask for proof of immunity—an identity card or some kind of digital verification via your phone, showing you’ve already recovered from or been vaccinated against the latest virus strains.

We’ll adapt to and accept such measures, much as we’ve adapted to increasingly stringent airport security screenings in the wake of terrorist attacks. The intrusive surveillance will be considered a small price to pay for the basic freedom to be with other people.

As usual, however, the true cost will be borne by the poorest and weakest. People with less access to health care, or who live in more disease-prone areas, will now also be more frequently shut out of places and opportunities open to everyone else. Gig workers—from drivers to plumbers to freelance yoga instructors—will see their jobs become even more precarious. Immigrants, refugees, the undocumented, and ex-convicts will face yet another obstacle to gaining a foothold in society.

Moreover, unless there are strict rules on how someone’s risk for disease is assessed, governments or companies could choose any criteria—you’re high-risk if you earn less than $50,000 a year, are in a family of more than six people, and live in certain parts of the country, for example. That creates scope for algorithmic bias and hidden discrimination, as happened last year with an algorithm used by US health insurers that turned out to inadvertently favor white people.

The world has changed many times, and it is changing again. All of us will have to adapt to a new way of living, working, and forging relationships. But as with all change, there will be some who lose more than most, and they will be the ones who have lost far too much already. The best we can hope for is that the depth of this crisis will finally force countries—the US, in particular—to fix the yawning social inequities that make large swaths of their populations so intensely vulnerable.

––contributed by MIT Technology Review