Financial Wellbeing and Employment in the First Year of a Choice-Based Guaranteed Income Model

Abstract

Guaranteed income (GI) programs have expanded rapidly in the United States over the past decade. However, gaps remain in the evidence base regarding program design features that support participant self-determination and longer-term financial stability. This paper presents Year One findings from In Her Hands Phase Two, a 36-month guaranteed income program serving 275 low-income women in historically Black neighborhoods on Atlanta's Westside. Phase Two is distinguished by two design features not previously tested at scale in U.S. GI research: a transfer amount ($36,000 total per recipient) and duration substantially larger than most prior pilots, and a participant choice model that allows recipients to select their own disbursement structure (either an $8,000 lump sum plus $800 per month for the remaining 35 months, or $1,000 per month for 36 months). Using a mixed-methods convergent design that integrates baseline application data, a 12-month follow-up survey (n = 135 treatment, n = 166 control), and two waves of qualitative interviews, we examine financial well-being and employment outcomes after the program’s first year.

At Year One, treatment participants were significantly less likely to report that covering monthly expenses was very difficult (33.0% vs. 49.3%, p < .01), less likely to report utility payment shortfalls (61.8% vs. 74.8%, p < .05), more likely to have any emergency savings (17.8% vs. 7.6%, p < .05), and more likely to have $500 or more in savings (16.8% vs. 4.5%, p < .05). These effects were robust to covariate adjustment and were concentrated among parents and participants with monthly incomes above $1,000. No significant treatment effects on debt or high-cost financial service use were observed, though results were directionally positive. Employment findings provided no evidence of labor market withdrawal: full-time employment rates and weekly hours worked among employed participants were statistically indistinguishable across groups.

Sixty-nine percent of treatment participants selected the lump-sum option. No demographic characteristic significantly predicted the choice of payment structure. At Year One, lump-sum and monthly recipients showed comparable financial well-being outcomes. Qualitative data provided additional context, documenting the individualized reasoning behind payment structure choices and describing GI as creating practical breathing room.

Keywords: guaranteed income, race, poverty, social policy