How Guaranteed Income Can Be Used to Invest in Families and Protect Against Child Welfare Involvement, Explained.

By Mahima Golani

When Mayor Michael Tubbs broke ground by announcing the nation’s first city-led guaranteed income pilot in Stockton, Calif. in 2017, shifting cash to families as a broad policy strategy to reduce poverty and inequality was not a new idea. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. called for a guaranteed basic income in 1967. However, welfare reform in 1996 led to a decades-long shift away from meaningful cash assistance. 

Today, in response to persistent poverty that is largely unaddressed by the safety net, more than 150 Guaranteed Income pilot programs have launched nationwide. Unconditional cash is becoming recognized as a promising way to support families during temporary emergencies, during critical stages of life and as part of a larger strategy of repair and reinvestment, particularly for marginalized communities. 

GI is distinct from other forms of cash support, such as public benefits or the Earned Income Tax Credit, in some key ways:

• No work requirements, ‘no strings attached’;
• Time-limited, frequently 12-18 months;
• Recurring, usually monthly or twice a month;
• Targeted to specific groups or populations (such as new mothers, former foster youth, families experiencing housing insecurity, etc.);
• Often layered on top of earned income and public benefits;
• Minimal administrative burdens (simple application and documentation of proof required);
• Grounded in trust and respect, prioritizing flexibility for recipients to meet their needs.

Interest in guaranteed income grew significantly once the pandemic demonstrated the effectiveness of protective and trusting cash policies. 

Research on Guaranteed income (GI) finds that it has shown promise in addressing two major elements of the visions that parents and youth impacted by the child welfare system have shared through the Narrowing the Front Door Workgroup, YouthNPower and Rise:

• Material investment in families and communities;
• Protection from surveillance and harmful interactions with ACS. 

This brief explores:

• What is currently known about the impact of GI as a tool for family investment and a policy strategy to prevent child welfare involvement;
• Current pilots related to family well-being and child welfare;
• Legislative action on GI in New York;
• Open questions about GI that pilots in NY and nationwide are exploring.

FPP’s Cash Matters series examines policy shifts including shifting TANF cash assistance toward unconditional investment in families and investing in Guaranteed Income.

How GI Contributes to Family and Community Well-Being

Growing interest in Guaranteed Income comes as the United States has effectively redesigned the safety net as a system of work support. Welfare reform in 1996, driven by racist stereotypes of ‘welfare queens,’ introduced a 5-year lifetime limit on assistance, work requirements, sanctions and incentives for states to reduce caseloads. By 2020, only 1 in 5 families in poverty nationwide was receiving cash assistance. In New York, 79 out of every 100 families in poverty received TANF cash assistance in 1996, but that halved to 39 out of every 100 families 25 years later. 

Instead of cash to spend as needed, support to most low-income families covers only specific costs, such as SNAP (food stamps) and rental assistance, and is often tied to work, such as child care assistance and the Earned Income Tax Credit. Moreover, these programs are often hard to navigate and leave gaps. The result is that the safety net does not lift families out of poverty, and leaves behind those who are least able to work. Perhaps because of this dwindling safety net, child welfare investigations have grown 30% over that time. 

Against this backdrop, GI offers assistance that is fundamentally different—it targets recurring assistance to those who need it most. With most pilots required to include rigorous assessments, they have been a way to explore the economic and well-being impacts of giving families cash with no strings attached. 

GI pilots are continuing to test:

• How much money and time is required to see a meaningful shift in family well-being outcomes?
• What may be an ideal role of additional voluntary supports (i.e. peer navigators, skill development) in family outcomes? 
• How should GI ideally interact with safety net benefits?
• What are the long-term effects of cash transfer programs on family stability and wellbeing? 
• What impacts do we see when scaling up to cover an entire neighborhood or city? 

Here’s what research to date has found:

Stress Reduction that Enables Participants to Move Beyond ‘Survival Mode’ 

Poverty affects families in the short and long term, affecting physical health, emotional well-being and children’s development. A significant body of research shows that consistent cash transfers reduce poverty and related stress:

• Payments from the Alaska Permanent Fund Dividend, one GI program, have kept an estimated 25% more Alaskans from falling below the poverty line.^[1]
• Across GI programs, like in Stockton, participants who receive cash experience lower income volatility—fluctuations in cash they take home every month—compared to those that do not receive cash, reducing the distressing effects of unpredictable income.

Across numerous studies, parents report that the flexibility of the cash payments enables them to be more present with their children, creating space and time for child enrichment and parent-child bonding. Families in these studies say GI gives them the opportunity to enjoy “moment making,” like reading books and telling stories, getting an ice cream on the way home, or taking their family to the movies on the weekend, rather than wondering how to pay the bills at the end of the month.

“It’s important to think about the whole child… It’s not just about their basic needs, but it’s about giving them experiences and opportunities. It’s also them being able to be raised and loved by a mom that’s not stressed, a dad that’s not stressed. And when we think about poverty, it is stressful” – Danielle Jones, parent speaker at Rochester Child Poverty Town Hall

GI “helps people get out of a bind. Whatever that bind is, it’s gonna help them get out of it…and help their mental health because people die from stress. Some people have so much stress because they don’t know how they’re going to feed their family, pay their rent, and keep the lights on, and all that can kill people. This GI program is gonna help that. It helped me.” – Yolanda, participant enrolled in BIG:LEAP pilot in Los Angeles

“A typical day [during the GI pilot], I can come home and enjoy being with my two daughters. I mean, we can actually laugh and talk and have a conversation with them instead, other than going to the bathroom and standing in the bathroom for an hour, crying, trying to figure out how I’m going to pay this bill. How are we going to eat? Is this my last day having a meal?” – Jade, parent enrolled in the Income Mobility Program for Atlanta Community Transformation (IMPACT) pilot

“I have worked since I was 17 and now I am 40 years old still working hard — this past year I didn’t have to feel like I was just scraping by, I could actually breathe.” – Halima, parent enrolled in IMPACT

Economic Stability that Supports Dreams of and Investment in a Better Future

Though low-income families are more likely to be working than not, available jobs often do not offer a sustainable path out of poverty. Families have identified the “benefits cliffs” problem, where getting a higher paying job cuts off benefits, leaving families further behind or making it harder to achieve stability and long-term goals of more secure, well-paying work. 

Since GI does not come with work requirements, and is most often layered on top of income and benefits, families report that they can spend less time making decisions about how to keep themselves afloat and have more space to focus on their goals. Specifically, participants report that GI enabled them to take concrete steps towards their futures. Across pilot sites in Santa Clara, Calif., Atlanta, Ga., and King County, Wash., participants reported going back to school, gaining more specialized skills or degrees, or pursuing jobs with higher wages and better benefits.

“With that $1000 a month it allowed me to focus more on my education. I just gained my high school diploma and am looking to enroll into college soon. I wouldn’t have been able to put this much attention into my school without this assistance.” – Youth enrolled in Santa Clara County, Calif. pilot

“Due to receiving these payments, I was able to pay for my test to get my Commercial Driver’s License, which is how I provide for my family. These payments have helped me set the foundation for my family.” – Deontrez, parent enrolled in IMPACT 

“My biggest bill is my rent, and this extra money has been a big help, it comes right on time to assist me with that payment. My long-term goals are to improve my credit and purchase a home, receiving these payments has motivated me for homeownership.” – Raya, parent enrolled in IMPACT 

“I have never been able to build credit at all. But now since I have the sort of steady income and I know it’s going to be coming in, I took some of the money out. I put it in a bank account, and I opened up one of those credit cards that they use like with your own money. And I’ve been able to, you know, finally have credit. And it’s going well. I have—you know, my credit is at like 712 I think now…” – Dante, participant enrolled in Paterson, N.J. pilot

Flexibility for Families to Identify the Right Path to Their Own Goals

One key characteristic of guaranteed income programs is the trust afforded to families to decide what is best for themselves. For some, GI improved family well-being by allowing parents to engage in more work and raise their incomes, and for others, it enabled them to spend more time at home. Data from Magnolia’s Mother’s Trust, a program in Jackson, Miss., showed that GI supported working parents’ “exit power”—the ability to leave roles that did not pay enough, or were not flexible enough for their family needs. 

This flexibility is especially significant for mothers, and especially mothers of color, because they are often tasked with the unpaid labor of caregiving. GI is seen as one way to address this gap, offering an opportunity to compensate caregivers for their time and efforts.

“My son, he was really acting out a lot during the time of me working two jobs. Mostly because I just wasn’t around enough. So, he doesn’t do that at all now because he’s getting more attention. So, he’s not trying to seek that from school. He’s getting it at home.” – Ashley, parent enrolled in BIG:LEAP

“I had two jobs, but my kids asked me to quit because they needed me. Because they need me, and it was probably like an additional $500 coming in [from my second job], but it was working me to death…. I’m working on my feet all day…. You don’t know what to do. You don’t want to miss out on your kid’s life. You want to be at every game, every event…[The GI] was getting my kids everything. I ain’t even have to have a part-time job, but I did because kids become expensive…” – Jasmine, parent enrolled in Birmingham, Ala. pilot

Community-Level Ripple Effects that Strengthen Holistic Investment in Families

Though GI programs offer cash at the individual level, findings across some studies, such in Stockton or Los Angeles, Calif. and Richmond, Va., suggest ripple effects for families, social networks, or wider communities. Pilots showed that the $500 “spilled into” extended networks in two ways. First, participants reported being able to give, from sharing food with neighbors or supporting family members with burial costs. Second, participants described being less stressed, therefore having more time and capacity to invest in their extended networks and relationships.

“I’ve been able to help out some of my relatives with money for gas and got a couple more other relatives who were low on food and I was able to help with that. I appreciate what’s happened in my life and I want to give back and I want to share and give hope to other people.” – Murray, participant enrolled in Gainesville, Fla. pilot

“I see [GI] as a benefit, um, but not a benefit to the point that I’m just receiving something to sustain. I see it as a benefit as you are—you’re putting me in a position to help sustain other people.” – Superman, participant enrolled in Richmond, Va. pilot

“The area that I live in, um, is, you know, there’s plenty of people that are struggling financially, and so I often find myself… trying to treat friends to things, make meals for them. If they need help with—if they need a ride somewhere, not taking gas money—things like that. I mean, we kind of look out for each other.” – Leah, participant enrolled in Ulster County, N.Y. pilot

Because investing in family well-being goes beyond cash, many GI programs that have been co-designed with participant advisors include other elements such as mentorship, skill development, or peer support.

In Magnolia’s Mother’s Trust, for example, more than 90% of participants reported that access to voluntary program elements outside of the direct cash were helpful to them, including referrals to social services, connections with other mothers and job search information. Former foster youth enrolled in a Santa Clara County, Calif. GI program experienced increased self-sufficiency and reported that volunteer mentors supported their financial skill development, helping them develop long-term plans.

How GI May Directly Reduce Child Welfare Involvement

Families are much more likely to come into contact with child welfare when they are struggling to meet basic needs, and extensive research shows that policies that concretely target family economic setbacks and hardship can reduce interactions with the child welfare system.

Evidence of Guaranteed Income Reducing Child Maltreatment and Child Welfare Involvement

The strongest evidence to date that GI can have a direct impact on CPS involvement comes from the Alaska Permanent Fund (PFD). Since 1982, all Alaskan residents have received an annual dividend payment from the Alaska Permanent Fund that ranges from roughly $300 to over $2,000 depending on the performance of the fund. An additional $1,000 to families in the first few months of a child’s life reduced the likelihood of referral to CPS by age 3 by 10%. It also reduced the likelihood of child mortality by age 5 by 30%. Researchers suggest that these results are driven by reductions in financial stress, increased housing stability and increased time for parental and/or relative caregiving.

Meeting Basic Needs Prevents Neglect Investigations

The biggest predictors of neglect investigations are indicators that families are struggling to meet basic needs, such as food pantry use, unpaid electricity bills, or an inability to access medical care. 

Spending data from over 8,000 GI participants across over 30 pilots show that families spend cash on their basic needs including transportation, housing, and medical expenses; over 30% of total payments went towards food and groceries. Across four sites—Atlanta, Ga; Birmingham, Ala.; Louisville, Ky.; and Shreveport, La.—all interviewed participants reported that they were better able to provide for their children’s basic needs.

Magnolia Mother’s Trust reported that after one year of program enrollment, participants were more likely to pay all bills on time, have money saved for emergencies, have health insurance and seek professional medical help.

“Now I just make ends meet. I can purchase necessities when I need them. I don’t have to choose between taking a day off for doctor appointments or paying a bill” – Alma, parent enrolled in Alexandria, Va. pilot

“One of the issues with food stamps is it doesn’t buy winter boots. And so you can have all this food, but you don’t have money for winter boots…what I do like about this [GI], is it gives people a little bit more freedom and flexibility with very low, um, administrative costs for them to use the money on what they feel is best” – John, participant enrolled in Saint Paul, Minn. pilot.

“[Before the GI] I wouldn’t have gone to the doctors because—I had always, you know, going back to like the things that I cut out. Like doctor’s appointments. I didn’t even think about doctor’s appointments because I just was like, whatever. You know, I don’t need to get my teeth cleaned” – Leah, participant enrolled in Ulster County, N.Y. pilot

GI Buffers Families Against Economic Setbacks Related to Significant Life Events or Stressors

Economic setbacks, like income loss or housing hardship, have been found to reliably predict child welfare involvement. For example, families facing eviction or homelessness are at a higher risk of child welfare interaction.

Many GI pilots have demonstrated effects of buffering families against destabilizing economic shocks. In Ulster County, N.Y. and St. Paul, Minn., participants reported that GI helped them cover cash-flow emergencies like replacing a stove, repairing their car or transitioning to better quality homes.

“A huge weight off my shoulders. I mean, you know, $500—when you come down into the scheme of things, it’s not a lot of money…but it makes a world of difference in your stress level, not having to worry this month. ‘OK, I got the 500 coming in.’ So I know I could cover more unexpected [expenses], like the car breaking down. And that’s twice I’ve used the money to fix my car.” – Molly, grandmother enrolled in Ulster County, N.Y. pilot

For some, GI has enabled mobility, which can be a lifeline for families facing dangerous conditions like precarious housing or unsafe relationships, conditions that can lead to child welfare involvement. 

In the BIG:LEAP pilot in Los Angeles, where over half the participants reported experiencing intimate partner violence (IPV) in their lifetime, those who received the payments reported reduced severity and frequency of IPV. GI was used to prevent, exit, and/or heal from IPV and homelessness. 

“I stayed in a bad marriage for longer than I should have because I didn’t have the funds or the means to leave.” – Chelsea, parent enrolled in Stockton, Calif. pilot

“When I received [the GI] the first thing I did, I went to buy food for my children… And to leave a golden cage, with a man who, according to him, gave me everything. But it was actually martyrdom to endure that, just to have food. And sometimes I thought, oh, I shouldn’t have left. I should have stayed there, but if I had stayed there, my children would have been left without a mother. And now… Now I think it was the best thing I could have done. To have left that place.” – Lici, parent enrolled in BIG:LEAP

Building Savings to Avoid Future Financial Precarity

Families with a savings cushion of as little as $250 to $750 are less likely to be evicted, miss a housing or utility payment, or receive public benefits after a job loss, health issue, or large income drop—all of which predict child welfare involvement. 

Participants across numerous GI pilots report being able to put money aside for savings. This is especially significant because 4 in 10 Americans don’t have enough savings to cover a $400 emergency expense. In Paterson, N.J., participants who received GI were more likely to save compared to participants who did not receive cash. Findings from a pilot for former foster youth in Santa Clara County showed that youth were more able to cover a $400 unexpected expense (from 74% to 91%) at the end of the program.

“When I did my recertification, they stated that basically due to the funds that I had in my account, they closed [my son’s] Social Security case, which I never had a blow so hard because it wasn’t even about me. It’s about my son. And it’s like, everything in this world, I think it’s like every program is designed to keep you just here, can’t go ahead and you’re not allowed to go backwards.” – Stacy, parent enrolled in Cambridge, Mass. pilot

“I’m not stressing as much as I probably should have, given that I have a $400 cushion. I don’t, you know, as opposed to trying to maybe do a third job like Uber or something, I’m actually able to just, you know, stay home, unwind, you know, not have so much stress where I’m taking it out on the family.” – Lezette, participant enrolled in Paterson, N.J. pilot

Promotes Restorative Economic Justice for Youth and Families Impacted by Child Welfare

In addition to income poverty, families of color face more obstacles securing and maintaining quality housing, work, healthcare and privacy from the state. This is because redlining and racism in neighborhood and community investment have led to deep disparities in access to healthy living conditions for families.

As described in Cash as Care: Healthy Moms. Healthy Families. Healthy Communities, GI has potential as a public health strategy to improve outcomes for families and communities systematically excluded from economic power and privilege. 

GI pilots have been targeted to groups that are more likely to come in contact with the child welfare system:

• New parents, like The Bridge Project and Family Health Project
• Single parents, like Embrace Mothers and Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program
• Former foster youth (including those who are parents), like YouthNPower and Santa Clara Basic Income Pilot
• Black families, like Magnolia Mother’s Trust, In Her Hands, and Columbia Life Improvement Monetary Boost
• Low-income families, like Paterson Guaranteed Income Pilot Program, Rise Up Cambridge, and Alexandria’s Recurring Income for Success and Equity

GI can act as a corrective to punishing policymaking that has functioned to leave Black and Native American families, single parent families and former foster youth, in particular, highly exposed to economic instability and state intervention.

Legislative Progress: GI Expansion for New York Families

Multiple guaranteed income pilots are currently underway in New York City and State that are targeted to youth and families that have been impacted by the child welfare system, or to families facing significant life events or stressors that are linked to higher likelihood of child welfare involvement:

• The Bridge Project – for expectant mothers or mothers of children under 1 in low-income NYC neighborhoods
• Growing Strong – for NYC mothers of children under 2 experiencing housing hardship
• OCFS Direct Cash Transfer – for families in three upstate counties who have had a child welfare “Family Assessment Response” case (called CARES in NYC), which assesses allegations that are not considered high risk
• YouthNPower – for NYC youth aged 18-22 transitioning out of foster care

NY advocates are currently exploring and creating paths to increase unconditional cash programs, especially for families with the lowest incomes. As a result of this advocacy:

• NYC allocated $1.5 million for Guaranteed Income programs in its most recent budget, demonstrating a commitment to exploring and expanding this approach.
• The Mothers and Infants Lasting Change (MILC) initiative, a pilot program that would offer a guaranteed income to 15,000 new mothers and is based on the Bridge Project, was included in both the Assembly and Senate budget bills this year. Though it didn’t pass, its inclusion is a strong indicator of support. The bill will be reintroduced in the next session.

It’s possible to redesign the safety net to one that works to effectively protect and reinvest in families, both by shifting TANF cash assistance to unconditionally invest in families and by expanding guaranteed income across the state and city. 

Additional Resources

For more information on the GI pilots referenced in this explainer, see: Center for Guaranteed Income Research (CGIR), Mayors for a Guaranteed Income, Guaranteed Income Pilots Dashboard, Economic Security Project, and Guaranteed Income Community of Practice.

Back to top