$1000/mo: UBI pilot allowed Angelenos to improve health, be better parents

Written by Amy Ta and Danielle Chiriguayo, produced by Jack Ross

“I made sure to get [my son necessities] without thinking about it or saying, ‘Hey, well, if I spend this, I might not have enough money for food or for this bill.’ … It was so many times where I had incidents, where I needed to take care of my car’s maintenance. And things like that would have normally stressed me out, and I just took care of it. I didn't think twice about it,” Ashley Davis says of her experience receiving universal basic income. Credit: Shutterstock.

In 2021, 3200 Angelenos received $1000 per month for a year to spend however they wanted. It was through the program BIG: LEAP (Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot). The participants saved their money, used it to secure better jobs and housing, and some reported that the cash allowed them to leave abusive relationships. All that’s according to a new study from UCLA and the University of Pennsylvania. 

Eligible residents had to be age 18 or older, have at least one child or dependent, be financially or medically impacted by COVID-19, and live below the federal poverty threshold. In total, more than 50,000 Angelenos applied for the program within 10 days of its launch, says Amy Castro, one of the study’s authors and an associate professor of social policy and practice at the University of Pennsylvania. 

Ashley Davis applied to BIG: LEAP on a whim. While working in corporate marketing for a decade, she got pregnant. She later learned her son had special needs and partial hearing loss.

“I just became more focused on making sure he had everything that he needed, and a lot of that was therapy. I didn't realize how much therapy that he would need and how much therapy would go into that, and it essentially became a full-time job for the amount of hours that they were requesting.” 

Davis received her first $1000 around her son’s sixth birthday. She immediately paid off her car registration and took her son to Legoland, which she already planned to do.

“I was able to take him comfortably. That was really the first purchase that I made with the funds. Usually we don't have time to do anything together because it's pretty much me always at work, and then I'm always taking him to therapy. So anything I've ever wanted to do with him, it was tough because I was pretty much juggling an 80-90 [hour] work week.”

The extra cash helped with other expenses like clothes and shoes for her son, and even a new juicer.

“I bought a really good blender because my health was also taking a toll. Basically when COVID started, and I didn't know it was that bad. And I figured, ‘Hey, why not? Health is wealth.’ And if I'm not around, I'm not around to take care of my son.’”

Davis says the money brought ease: “I made sure to get him [necessities] without thinking about it or saying, ‘Hey, well, if I spend this, I might not have enough money for food or for this bill.’ … It was so many times where I had incidents, where I needed to take care of my car’s maintenance. And things like that would have normally stressed me out, and I just took care of it. I didn't think twice about it.”

Castro says Davis’ experience echoes those of other families across the country who participate in UBI programs. 

“What [Davis is] talking about really highlights the ways in which our systems pit parents against the ability to parent. She knows that she needs to take care of her kid. Obviously, she knows that she needs to work, right? But his needs are not being met by the way that the system is set up, and so she was forced into this horrible position — do I take care of my child or do I work?”

She points out that Davis’ juicer/blender may seem like a one-off, random appliance, but it’s an example of UBI recipients experiencing less food insecurity and adopting healthier lifestyles.   

Castro adds that one of the most exciting findings of the BIG: LEAP report is that for the first time, researchers established a drop in domestic violence through an unconditional cash program in North America since the late 1970s. 

She notes that because the cash was provided to individuals rather than households/families, recipients didn’t have to negotiate how it would be spent. 

“Women were able to take that money and go. And in many cases, also pair the guaranteed income with other services in the city and in the county in order to heal from the violence that they'd experienced at home.”

She continues, “We know that domestic violence is one of the key drivers of homelessness for women in the city, and so we have to think about it in terms of downstream effects. … There's a homelessness crisis the city's experiencing, but this really points to some ways in which cash might be leveraged to create stability and safety for families.” 

In retrospect, Davis shares that she didn’t realize how depressed and stressed she was prior to the program. The cash, she says, enabled her to take care of her mental health, and thus have the energy to return to school. 

“I was already considering nursing school. … I think my son was 3 at the time, but at that point, I just didn't think it would be possible. … They made it possible for me to knock all of that out, enter a program … [that] would just be a year for me. They've made the goal much more obtainable for me, and I'm so thankful for that.”

Credits

Guests:

  • Ashley Davis - program participant
  • Amy Castro - associate professor of social policy and practice at the University of Pennsylvania