Study Characteristics and Contextual Tags

Residents of Chelsea, MA, with a family income below 30% of the median income for the Boston metropolitan area, who applied via lottery to the Chelsea Eats program.

Chelsea Eats: An unconditional cash transfer program providing direct payments to Chelsea residents with low incomes starting in November 2020 and continuing for nine months. Most households received $400 per month, but one and two-person households received $200 and $300 respectively. Cards could be spent anywhere that Visa was accepted.

Randomized Trial. N=1,746 treatment group.

Healthcare Cost, Utilization & Value: Reduced emergency department visits compared with the control group (217.1 vs 317.5 emergency department visits per 1000 persons; adjusted difference, −87.0 per 1000 persons [95% Confidence Interval {CI}: −160.2-−13.8]), including emergency department visits related to behavioral health (−21.6 visits per 1000 persons [95% CI: −40.2-−3.1]) and substance use (−12.8 visits per 1000 persons [95% CI: −25.0-−0.6]) as well as those that resulted in a hospitalization (−27.3 visits per 1000 persons [95% CI: −53.6-−1.1]). No statistically significant effect on total outpatient visits, visits to primary care, or outpatient behavioral health. Outpatient visits to other subspecialties were higher in the cash benefit group compared with the control group (303.1 visits per 1000 persons [95% CI: 32.9-573.2]), particularly for individuals without a car.

Single caregivers with low incomes in Cambridge, MA, randomly selected from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) caseload.

Cambridge RISE: $500 per month for 18 months provided unconditionally to 130 randomly selected single caregivers.

Randomized controlled trial. N=130 recipients and a matched comparison group (N=156), evaluated as part of the American Guaranteed Income Studies (AGIS) by the Center for Guaranteed Income Research at the University of Pennsylvania.

Social: Full-time employment increased 40% among recipients compared to 28% in the control group. By six months in the program, the percentage of treatment participants who could handle a $400 emergency expense increased by 8% and by the conclusion 21% of the treatment group had more than $500 in savings (compared to 11% of control). Enhanced food security was also found with 13% of the treatment group reporting very low food security compared to 29% in the control. Children in cash-assisted families showed better academic outcomes, and parents reported higher expectations for educational achievement.

Mothers and children in households with low incomes

recruited between May 2018 and June 2019 from postpartum wards in 12 hospitals in four cities: Omaha, Nebraska; Minneapolis/St Paul, Minnesota; New Orleans, Louisiana; and New York, New York. The mean [standard deviation (SD)] maternal age was 27.0 [5.8] years.

‍

In the Baby’s First Years Project, mothers were randomly assigned to receive either a high-cash gift ($333 per month) or a low-cash gift ($20 per month) on debit cards. The cash gifts continued for the first six years of their children’s lives. However, data analyzed here were collected after four years of monthly transfers.

‍

Randomized control trial. N=1000 mother-infant pairs. Among those mothers, 400 were randomly assigned to receive the $333 high-cash gift, and 600 received the $20 low-cash gift on debit cards. Data were collected from 891 mother-child dyads (109 dyads excluded due to inability to reach, declined to participate, incarceration, and maternal or child death).

Health: There were no statistically detectable group differences in child body mass index (BMI) percentile (Effect Size [ES]: −0.03; 95% CI: −0.17-0.12; p = 0.73) or overall child health (ES: 0.08; 95% CI: −0.07-0.22; p = 0.30).

No statistically detectable group differences were found in maternal depressive symptoms (ES: 0.04; 95% CI: −0.08-0.17; p =0 .51), anxiety (ES: 0.12; 95% CI: −0.02-0.25; p =0 .09), or BMI (ES: −0.06; 95% CI: −0.21-0.09; p =0 .42).

Pregnant women with a singleton birth and low incomes in Manitoba, Canada between 2003 and 2019. 

The mean [SD] age at first birth was 19.52 [3.53] years for recipients, and the mean [SD] age at first birth for non-recipients was 19.38 [3.43] years.

‍

The Healthy Baby Prenatal Benefit, an unconditional cash benefit (maximum CAD $81.41/month) provided to pregnant women with low income during the second and third trimesters of pregnancy.

Observational study with comparison group. N=17,970 recipients and N=8301 non-recipients.

Health: The Healthy Baby Prenatal Benefit was associated with improved birth and child development outcomes in 2003, including reduced risk of low birth weight, preterm birth, and developmental vulnerability in kindergarten. By 2019, these protective effects had largely disappeared, with risk ratios approaching 1.0 across most outcomes. The authors suggest this decline may reflect the benefit losing value relative to inflation over time.

Mothers who gave birth at Hurley Medical Center (HMC), a large public hospital in Genesee County, Flint, Michigan between July 1, 2023, and June 30, 2024.

Rx Kids, a community-wide and unconditional prenatal and infant cash transfer program. All expectant mothers residing in the City of Flint received a one-time transfer of $1500 during mid-pregnancy, and $500 per month for 12 months after giving birth.

Observational study with comparison group. N=1,037 mothers who completed the survey after consenting.

Health: Relative to comparisons, mothers exposed to Rx Kids saw improvements in mental health, and well-being; notably, a 14.0-percentage-point reduction in screening positive for postpartum depression (p<0 .05). 

Social: Relative to comparisons, mothers exposed to Rx Kids saw improvements in hardship and well-being; notably, a 4.2-percentage-point reduction in the risk of eviction ( p<0 .05). Program exposure was associated with increased trust in institutions and feeling loved, hopeful, respected, and valued.

Households with low incomes who had applied for COVID-19 relief funds across 45 states and the District of Columbia; half were under the FPL in 2019.

A one-time $1,000 unconditional cash transfer.

Randomized controlled trial. N=60,000 individuals who were assigned in equal proportions to treatment or control groups.

Social: There were no identified effects of the cash transfer on any of the prespecified or other exploratory outcomes.

Individuals in poverty in the US.

A one-time UCT of $2,000 (two months’ worth of total household income for the median participant), $500 (half a month’s income), or nothing.

Randomized controlled trial. N=5243.

Health: The authors found no evidence that (more) cash had positive impacts on pre-specified survey outcomes including physical health.

Social: While bank data show that UCTs increased expenditures, the authors found no evidence that more cash had positive impacts on pre-specified survey outcomes including financial well-being, psychological well-being, and cognitive capacity.

Mothers with low income and living with the biological father of their infant prior to the intervention.

‍

The Baby’s First Years project, which provided ongoing unconditional cash transfers to mothers. The high cash group received $333/month (relative to $20/month in a control group) for six years.

‍

Randomized controlled trial. N=275 in the low-cash group and N=168 in the high-cash group.

Social: Randomization into the higher cash group was not associated with relationship quality at Year 1 (b=-0.02, p=0.792) or Year 2 (b=-0.02, p=0.613). Likewise, there were no significant direct effects of cash assistance on relationship status at Year 1 (Odds Ratio [OR]=0.94, 95% CI: 0.62-1.42) or Year 2 (OR=0.79, 95% CI: 0.52-1.20). There was minimal evidence that effects were significant for a subset of mothers, and there were no significant indirect effects to the relational outcomes through individual or economic factors. Results of this study indicate that additional resources are likely needed to alleviate low-income couples’ financial strain and improve intimate bonds.

Households with children in Dallas and Chicago.

Participants were eligible for the program if they lived in eligible counties, were aged 21 to 40 at the time of recruitment and had total (self-reported) household income in the prior calendar year not exceeding 300% of the FPL. 

People were excluded if they were receiving disability benefits, living in public housing or using a housing choice voucher, or living in a household with a Supplemental Security Income (SSI) recipient.

‍

A large cash transfer intervention where participants either received $50 or $1,000 per month for three years if randomized into the program.

Randomized controlled trial. N=3000 participants.

Social: Parents who were randomly selected to receive an unconditional cash transfer of $1,000 per month spent more on their children each month and reported better parenting behaviors (such as supervising their children more closely) compared to those randomized to receive $50 per month over the same period. However, possibly due to this closer monitoring, parents in the treatment group also reported that their child was experiencing more developmental difficulties and stress.

Parents with the lowest incomes at baseline experienced the largest improvements in parenting. Among these parents, the transfer also increased the use and quality of non-parental childcare. 

The transfer did not have a meaningful effect on most educational outcomes measured in school administrative records, nor did it affect characteristics of the home environment, child food security, exposure to homelessness, or parental satisfaction.

Although treated families were more likely to move, there were no detected changes in most measures of neighborhood quality, though proximity to child-focused amenities such as daycares appeared to increase in the treatment group relative to the control group. The transfer did not affect childbearing, pregnancy, or outcomes related to contraception. While the transfer reduced parents' stress and mental distress in the first year of the program, these effects were short-lived and dissipated by the second year of the transfer, analogous to what was documented previously in the full population of participants.

Residents of New York with low incomes, who were affected by COVID-19. Survey participants were predominantly Latinx (87%) and women (65%). 

An unconditional cash transfer program for New Yorkers with low income affected by COVID-19. The $1000 cash transfers were designed to help people meet their most immediate health and social needs and were incorporated into healthcare delivery and contact tracing workflows as a response to the public health emergency.

Descriptive analysis and qualitative interviews. N=150 survey participants and 20 qualitative interviewees.

Health: The majority of survey participants reported that receiving the cash assistance somewhat or greatly improved their physical health (83%) and mental health (89%).

Social: The most commonly reported uses of the $1000 were food and rent. Most participants (79%) reported that without the $1000 cash transfer, they would have had difficulty paying for basic expenses or making ends meet, with specific positive effects reported related to food, housing, and the ability to work.

Households with low incomes in Chelsea, Massachusetts, who participated in a program called Chelsea Eats in Chelsea, MA during the COVID1-9 pandemic.

Chelsea Eats: An unconditional cash transfer program providing direct payments to low-income Chelsea residents starting in November 2020 and continuing for nine months. Most households received $400 per month, but one and two-person households received $200 and $300 respectively. Cards could be spent anywhere that Visa was accepted.

Randomized trial with low attrition. N=2,213. Survey data was paired with administrative health records from approximately 2,200 households.

Social: Statistically significant reduction in food insecurity (p=0.000) with treatment group participants scoring 10 points lower than control group participants on self reported household food security measures. No evidence that cash reduced labor force participation.

Female breast and gynecological cancer survivors who experienced food insecurity. Seventy percent had an annual household income of less than $30, 000, and 50% had a bachelor’s degree or higher level of education. Six (43%) participants reported working at least part-time. No participants receiving the cash transfer reported having a disability, compared to 67% of participants in the usual care arm.

An UCT which provided $100 per month.

Randomized controlled trial brief. N=14 participants, of which N=5 received the unconditional cash transfer and N=9 received usual care.

Healthcare Cost, Utilization & Value: The UCT was associated with a lower likelihood of forgoing medical care compared to those who received usual care, 40% and 56% respectively.

Health: The UCT was associated with a 4.4 point higher physical health score (SD=5.0). No differences in mental health were observed.

Social: The UCT was associated with fewer indicators of food insecurity and better diet quality, compared to those who received usual care. Eighty percent of patients in the UTC arm reported consuming at least 2.5 cups of fruits and vegetables daily compared with just 22% in the control group.

Households with low-to-moderate incomes in Dallas, TX and nine counties in Northern, IL. Participants were aged 21-40 with household incomes not exceeding 300% of the FPL and were not receiving SSI or living in public housing.

OpenResearch Unconditional Cash Study: Beginning in November 2022, participants received either $1,000 per month (treatment) or $50 per month (control) for three years.

Randomized controlled trial. N=1,000 in the treatment group. N=2,000 in the control group.

Healthcare Cost, Utilization & Value: The cash transfer resulted in greater use of hospital and emergency department care and increased medical spending in the treatment relative to the control group. The authors note that the use of other office-based care, particularly dental care, may also have increased as a result of the transfer. Children in treatment group households were more likely to be up to date on their vaccinations.

Social: Early improvements in stress reduction and food security were observed but faded over time.

Families with low incomes in the U.S.

The expansion of the CTC increased the benefit values, removed the earnings requirement, made the benefit fully refundable, and shifted the distribution schedule from an annual payment to monthly payments. The changes to CTC include making it available to almost all children, including those in families with the lowest incomes. The maximum annual credit amount was increased to $3,000 for children ages 6-17 and $3,600 for children under age six. The credit was delivered in monthly installments of up to $250 per older child or up to $300 per younger child, for a period of six months.

‍

Observational study with comparison group. N=411,613 respondents

Social: Payments were found to reduce food insufficiency: the initial payments led to a 7.5 percentage point (pp) (25%) decline in food insufficiency among households with low income and children. Secondly, the effects on food insufficiency were concentrated among families with 2019 pre-tax incomes below $35,000, and the CTC strongly reduced food insufficiency among Black, Latino, and White families with low income. Thirdly, increasing the CTC coverage rate would be required for material hardship to be reduced further. Self-reports suggest the households with the lowest-incomes were less likely than households with higher-incomes to receive the first CTC payments.

Families with low incomes in 12 US states. The families were receiving, or had recently received SNAP benefits. Individuals were required to have lived in one of 15 states identified by Give Directly as being particularly hard hit by COVID-19, and to not have been receiving supplemental disability insurance.

‍

Project 100+, a one-time unconditional cash transfer of $1000 to families with low incomes who were struggling to make ends meet during the COVID-19 pandemic in 12 US states.

Randomized controlled trial. N=7915 in the treatment group and N=5777 in the control at baseline.

Social: The authors found no statistically significant effects of the cash transfer on any outcomes for the full sample. However, there were significant reductions in material hardship (-0.17 SD) among families with less than $500 of earnings in the previous month, meaning those in the bottom 50% of the sample according to monthly earnings.

Families with children.

The sample included US adults (mean [SD] age, 41.0 [13.0] years; 7234 [21.7%] Hispanic, 321 [0.9%] non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaska Native, 2205 [5.7%] non-Hispanic Asian, 5113 [13.7%] non-Hispanic Black, and 23,704 [55.8%] White individuals). Respondents were predominantly female (21,511 [52.4%]), employed (33,035 [86.7%]), and married (19,838 [55.7%]). 

‍

The 2021 Expanded CTC provided monthly payments to families with children from July 2021 to December 2021.

Observational study with comparison group. N=39,479 respondents.

Social: Before disbursement of Expanded CTC monthly payments, 7633 Expanded CTC-eligible adults (60.1%) reported excellent or very good health, and 10,950 (87.8%) reported having food security. Among Expanded CTC-ineligible adults, 10,778 (54.9%) reported excellent or very good health and 17,839 (89.1%) reported food security. Following the disbursement of monthly payments, Expanded CTC-eligible adults experienced a 3.0 percentage point (pp) greater adjusted increase (95% CI: 0.2-5.7) in the probability of reporting excellent or very good health compared with ineligible adults. 

Additionally, eligible adults experienced a 1.9 pp greater adjusted increase (95% CI: 0.1-3.7) in the probability of food security than ineligible adults. In income-stratified analyses, the association between Expanded CTC eligibility and overall health was concentrated among middle-income and upper-income households (3.7-pp increase in excellent or very good health; 95% CI: 0.5-6.9). Conversely, the association between Expanded CTC eligibility and food security was concentrated among low-income adults (3.9-pp increase in food security; 95% CI: 0-7.9).

Children experiencing poverty from mother-infant dyads in 12 hospitals in four US cities: New York, New York; Omaha, Nebraska; New Orleans, Louisiana; and Minneapolis/St Paul, Minnesota. Eligibility criteria included an annual income less than the FPL, legal age for consent, English or Spanish speaking, residing in the state of recruitment, and an infant admitted to the well-baby nursery who will be discharged to the mother’s custody. Participants were majority Black (42%) and Hispanic (41%); 857 mothers participated in all three waves of data collection.

Baby’s First Years is a monthly unconditional cash transfer. Mothers were randomly assigned to receive either a high-cash gift ($333/month, or $3996/year) or a low-cash gift ($20/month, or $240/year) for the first three years of their child’s life.

‍

Randomized controlled trial. N=1000 mother-infant dyads. 400 were randomized to the high-cash gift group and 600 to the low-cash gift group. 857 mothers completed all waves of data collection.

Healthcare Cost, Utilization & Value: There were no statistically detectable differences between the high-cash and low-cash gift groups in maternal assessments of children’s health care utilization (ES range, 0.01-0.11; Standard Error [SE] range, 0.03-0.07). 

Health: There were no statistically detectable differences between the high-cash and low-cash gift groups in maternal assessments of children’s health (ES range, 0.01-0.08; SE range, 0.02-0.07).

Social: There were no statistically detectable differences between the high-cash and low-cash gift groups in maternal assessments of children’s sleep (ES range, 0.01-0.10; SE range, 0.07).

Mothers in the high-cash gift group reported higher child consumption of fresh produce at child age two, the only time point at which it was measured (ES range, 0.17; SE range, 0.07; p =0 .03).

Mothers with incomes below the FPL who gave birth at 12 hospitals in four metropolitan areas (New York City, the greater New Orleans metropolitan area, the greater Omaha metropolitan area, Minnesota’s Twin Cities). To participate, mothers had to be at least 18 years old, speak either English or Spanish, have newborns not requiring intensive care, who would be discharged into their custody.

Baby’s First Years is a monthly unconditional cash transfer program. Mothers were randomly assigned to receive either a substantial ($333) or a nominal ($20) monthly cash gift during the the first three years of a child’s life.

Randomized controlled trial. N=1000, with N=400 in the high-cash gift group and N=600 in the low-cash gift group.

Social: The cash gift difference of $313 per month had small and statistically nonsignificant impacts on group differences in maternal reports of substance use and household expenditures on alcohol or cigarettes.