![[ Visit Client Website ]](images/banner.gif)
Social work challenges itself to alleviate poverty and reduce income inequality. Guaranteed income programs (GI) are gaining increased public attention, as more and more pilot programs spring up. The Stanford Basic Income Lab and University of Pennsylvania, Center for Guaranteed Income Research currently track over 30 pilot programs that are giving participants unrestricted monthly cash payments.
We are the evaluation and research partner for the United Way California Capital Region (UWCCR) for two ongoing guaranteed income program (GIP) cohorts, with plans to expand to three. We hypothesize that providing monthly cash assistance will not only directly benefit participant households but also lead to broader positive impacts on their financial stability, emotional well-being, psychological distress, physical health, sense of agency over their future, and community engagement. We initiated our first cohort survey in May 2023 during the application process, and the post-program survey data collection is scheduled to begin on June 1, 2024.
With the round 1 survey data, we are currently exploring who our respondents are and how applicant characteristics compare to other known California data sources of low-income residents. One question we have assessed is: How does a history of homelessness affect food security, mental distress, and perceptions of physical health? By the time of the conference, we will also report findings of pre- and post-intervention participants.
Methods: We have collected over 12,100 initial surveys from GI applicants living in Sacramento County, CA. Our survey collects general demographic information and measures health and well-being, financial and housing stability, food security, and social engagement using validated scales common to other social research (e.g., Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K10), University of Wisconsin-Madison Financial Capability Scale, USDA 6-item Food Security Module). Current analysis strategies include descriptive and comparative quantitative analysis, bivariate association, and ANOVA. Once our second wave is complete, we will conduct multi-variate analysis to assess impact.
Results: (on food security) Among applicants, 23% were food secure, 26% had low food security, and 50% had very low food security. These numbers are higher than national averages where 36% of respondents at or below the poverty line had food insecurity. Our high numbers seem due to the high number of individuals with a history of homelessness (41%). Of our applicants, 41% reported ever having been homeless and 15% reported having been homeless in the last year. This connection follows results from a study of formerly homeless individuals that found 67% had low or very low food security. By the conference, we will have additional results.
Conclusions and Implications: Our findings provide further detail of the lived experiences of GIP applicants. It will help program planners explore what levels of cash stipends are needed to induce substantial impacts and better anticipate other service needs that could be addressed alongside cash programs. Moreover, such research is also beneficial for sharing the story of people’s lives with stakeholders. Our research provides evidence for strategies to meet Social Work’s Grand Challenges.