  Controlling the spread of COVID-19 - even after a licensed vaccine is
available - requires the effective use of non-pharmaceutical interventions:
physical distancing, limits on group sizes, mask wearing, etc. To date, such
interventions have neither been uniformly nor systematically implemented in
most countries. For example, even when under strict stay-at-home orders,
numerous jurisdictions granted exceptions and/or were in close proximity to
locations with entirely different regulations in place. Here, we investigate
the impact of such geographic inconsistencies in epidemic control policies by
coupling search and mobility data to a simple mathematical model of SARS-COV2
transmission. Our results show that while stay-at-home orders decrease contacts
in most areas of the US, some specific activities and venues often see an
increase in attendance. Indeed, over the month of March 2020, between 10 and
30% of churches in the US saw increases in attendance; even as the total number
of visits to churches declined nationally. This heterogeneity, where certain
venues see substantial increases in attendance while others close, suggests
that closure can cause individuals to find an open venue, even if that requires
longer-distance travel. And, indeed, the average distance travelled to churches
in the US rose by 13% over the same period. Strikingly, our model reveals that
across a broad range of model parameters, partial measures can often be worse
than none at all where individuals not complying with policies by traveling to
neighboring areas can create epidemics when the outbreak would otherwise have
been controlled. Taken together, our data analysis and modelling results
highlight the potential unintended consequences of inconsistent epidemic
control policies and stress the importance of balancing the societal needs of a
population with the risk of an outbreak growing into a large epidemic.
