Guaranteed Income Works: Data from RICHMOND, VA

Contrary to mainstream narratives about those living paycheck-to-paycheck, guaranteed income recipients expressed pre-existing desires to save but lacked the financial stability to do so. Over the course of the pilot, quantitative data suggests that monthly savings increased more than 100%, from a mean of $147 at baseline to $305 at 24 months.

At baseline, 59% of participants could not cover a $400 emergency, despite working full-time. At 24 months, that number had dropped to 20%—indicating that many more people were financially better off.

Just two generations ago, Richmond was a center of Black homeownership, business ownership, and political organization. Yet the increase of investor-purchased homes, rising rents and higher property tax bills have led to a greater level of resident displacement in Richmond than in comparable cities. Many pilot recipients shared that they were putting money aside towards repairing their credit and saving for a home, and one recipient was able to purchase a home.

“A lot of stuff changed [with the guaranteed income]. I went from apartment to a house. Uh, at first I did not have a car... I have a car now. So with me getting it, it was—it, like I said, kept me afloat…” - Angela, Richmond, VA

Participant narratives underline how guaranteed income can subsidize short-term career risks for long-term gains and point towards people’s capacity to act on long-held goals when scarcity is dampened. With the monthly cash payments, participants could trade part-time work for education while continuing working full time, thereby reallocating the hours in their day off of a path marked by survival mode and onto one of possibility. Guaranteed income offered a financial buffer while they pursued certifications and further education, which in turn equipped participants to seek better-paid, more stable employment.

For some, guaranteed income helped mitigate low wages and subsidize reliable transportation, including gas and insurance. A 2017 report suggested that nearly 90% of jobs in the Richmond area were accessible by car within a 40-minute commute, but only 2% by public transit. Being able to afford a car and the associated costs—gas, insurance, lease payments—was therefore a critical part of household economies.

Participants wanted to make a better life for their children, frequently working to provide their children with access to opportunities that they themselves did not have. Guaranteed income eased the balance between paid and unpaid work to some extent, allowing recipients to scale back on extra gig work and spend more time with their children.

Temporarily freed from the constraints of economic and time scarcity, recipients were able to make deliberate parenting choices, key for healthy child development.

Though not a permanent fix, guaranteed income seemed to produce temporary ontological security and stability—mitigating cognitive burden and allowing people to provide for their families.