Silicon Valley Guaranteed Income Project (SVGIP)

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn about how unconditional cash payments equivalent to $1,000 for 24 months (also called 'guaranteed income') might help families experiencing homelessness and/or unstable housing in Santa Clara County, California.

The main questions it aims to answer are:

1. What is the impact of guaranteed income on homelessness and housing stability among families experiencing homelessness or housing instability?
2. What is the impact of guaranteed income on the health and well-being of families experiencing homelessness or housing instability?
3. In terms of size and frequency of cash payments, do families prefer monthly recurrent payments ($1,000/month) vs a larger up front amount followed by smaller monthly payments ($6,500/month, then $500/month)? Is one payment strategy more helpful than the other in terms of achieving improved housing stability, health, or other measures of well-being?

Study Overview

• Status: Recruiting
• Conditions: Families Experiencing Homelessness and/or Housing Instability
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Public Benefits Information Session; Other: Guaranteed Income

Detailed Description

Study design and overall objective: This is a mixed-methods randomized controlled trial (RCT) to assess the effectiveness of guaranteed income on improving housing stability, health, economic and overall well-being among 300 families experiencing homelessness in Santa Clara County.

The specific aims are:

Aim 1. Assess the effect of guaranteed income on housing stability and homelessness. The investigators will randomly select 150 households experiencing homelessness to receive guaranteed income equivalent to $1000 per month for 24 months in addition to usual care, with the remaining 150 households receiving usual care only (control group). The investigators will assess and compare measures of housing stability, housing services use and emergency shelter use at baseline, 6, 12, 18, 24, 27, 30, and 36 months after randomization. Hypothesis: Guaranteed income will improve housing stability and reduce the risk of continuing homelessness.

Aim 2. Assess the effect of guaranteed income on the health and well-being of families experiencing homelessness and their social networks. The investigators will assess and compare self-reported physical and mental health and well-being, health and social service use, employment and income volatility, financial assets and spending, food insecurity, agency, and network strain and support at baseline and then at 6, 12, 18, 24, 27, 30, and 36 months after randomization. The investigators will use a mixed methods approach, employing both validated survey instruments and qualitative interviews to assess measures of interest. Hypothesis: Families receiving guaranteed income will have improved health and well-being, and multiplier effects will accrue to their social networks.

Aim 3. Assess the effect of monthly vs a hybrid payment strategy (larger up-front lump sum plus a smaller monthly sum) on housing stability, health, and well-being. Individuals in the guaranteed income group (intervention group) will self-select whether they prefer to receive payments in a a) monthly ($1,000/month x 12 months) vs b) hybrid payment schedule ($6,500 x 1 month, then $500 x 11 month), with the option to change payment schedules after the first 12 months. Hypothesis: Individuals receiving a hybrid model of payments will obtain and sustain positive changes in stable housing and well-being more successfully over time compared to monthly payments.

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Anticipated): 300
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

• Study Contact: Name: Oanh K Nguyen, MD, MAS; Phone Number: 628-206-3755; Email: oanh.nguyen@ucsf.edu
• Study Contact Backup: Name: Celeste Enriquez; Phone Number: 415-697-9021; Email: celeste.enriquez@ucsf.edu

Study Locations

• United States
  • California
    • San Jose, California, United States, 95116
      • Recruiting
      • ¡Sí Se Puede! Collective
      • Contact: Gabriel Hernandez; Email: gabriel@sspcmayfair.org
      • Contact: Stephanie Jayne; Email: sjayne@amigosdeguadalupe.org
    • San Jose, California, United States, 95131
      • Not yet recruiting
      • Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing
      • Contact: Jazmine Wong; Email: jazmine.wong@hhs.sccgov.org
      • Contact: Ingrid Granados; Email: ingrid@destinationhomesv.org

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No
• Genders Eligible for Study: All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

1. ≥18 years of age at baseline visit/assessment

2. Experiencing homelessness, as defined by:

   1. The HEARTH Act; or
   2. Living in a public or private space intended for temporary (≤6 month) residence, such as residing in a hotel/motel;
   3. Residing in a space without a legal right to the space and therefore being at threat of being asked to leave at any time (i.e., no lease); and/or
   4. Being in a shared living situation intended to be temporary (i.e., being 'doubled up' due to lack of available and/or affordable housing).

3. Vulnerability-Index Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI-SPDAT) score within the eligibility range for referral to rapid rehousing assistance programs in Santa Clara County (score of 4-8 for households), if available at the time of study entry.

   - The VI-SPDAT score is commonly used by housing assistance service providers to prioritize households for housing assistance programs, where households with scores of 0-3 are lower priority for referral to programs, and households with scores of 9+ are recommended for referral to more intensive housing services such as permanent supportive housing (which combine affordable housing assistance with voluntary support services including health and mental health care, case management and other social supportive services). Households with a score of 4-8 are considered most appropriate for referral to housing assistance programs that may not offer additional supportive services.

4. Living in a household with ≥1 dependent children (i.e., ≤17 years of age at the time of study entry)
5. Written informed consent (and assent when applicable) obtained from participant or participant's legal representative and ability for participant to comply with the requirements of the study.

Exclusion Criteria:

1. Substantial to severe level of problematic substance use as defined by the validated Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST-10) (score of 6-8 or 9-10, respectively).
2. Hazardous or harmful alcohol consumption, or active and severe alcohol use disorder as defined by the validated Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) (score of 8-14 and ≥15, respectively).

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Other
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Double

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: Usual Care; Participants in the active comparator control group will receive usual care, which includes usual public benefit, assistance and social service programs that are available at the local, county, state, and federal levels to all residents of Santa Clara County. They will also be offered the option to attend a Public Benefits Information Session.	Other: Public Benefits Information Session; All participants (both the control and intervention groups) will be offered the option of attending a Public Benefits Information Session during which they will receive a comprehensive resource directory of public benefit, assistance, and social service programs available to residents of Santa Clara County, have the opportunity to ask questions about enrolling in those programs, and also have the opportunity to seek additional benefits navigation assistance from our community partner, Sacred Heart Community Service. This session is intended to be optional, with the decision to attend and participant to be left to the discretion of each study participant. Attendance is not required for study participation.
Experimental: Guaranteed Income; Participants in the intervention group will receive guaranteed income gift payments equivalent to $1,000/month for a total of 24 months in addition to usual care. They will also have the option to attend the same Public Benefits Information Session being offered to the control group as above.	Other: Public Benefits Information Session; All participants (both the control and intervention groups) will be offered the option of attending a Public Benefits Information Session during which they will receive a comprehensive resource directory of public benefit, assistance, and social service programs available to residents of Santa Clara County, have the opportunity to ask questions about enrolling in those programs, and also have the opportunity to seek additional benefits navigation assistance from our community partner, Sacred Heart Community Service. This session is intended to be optional, with the decision to attend and participant to be left to the discretion of each study participant. Attendance is not required for study participation.; Other: Guaranteed Income; Guaranteed income payments will be disbursed monthly for a total of 24 months to participants who are randomized to the guaranteed income intervention group. Participants will be given the choice to select from one of two different payment strategies (equal monthly payments of $1,000/month vs hybrid payment schedule with initial amount of $6,500 the first month followed by $500/month x 11 months); payment strategy preferences will be re-assessed after 12 months. The choice of payment strategy will be strictly left to participants to specify.; Other Names: Unconditional cash transfer; Unconditional cash assistance; Cash assistance; Basic income; Universal income; Universal basic income; UBI

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Number of days experiencing homelessness	'Experiencing homelessness' will be defined as: 1) per the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act (HEARTH) Defining Homeless Final Rule published in the Federal Register in 2011; and/or 2) living in a public or private space intended for temporary (≤6 month) residence, such as residing in a hotel/motel; 3) residing in a space without a legal right to the space and therefore being at threat of being asked to leave at any time (i.e., no lease); and/or 4) being in a shared living situation intended to be temporary (i.e., being 'doubled up' due to lack of available and/or affordable housing).	At 24 months after randomization

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Number of days experiencing homelessness	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 6 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 12 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 18 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 27 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 30 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 36 months after randomization
Time to stable housing from randomization	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	Up to 24 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 6 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 12 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 18 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 24 months after randomization
Proportion of families who retain stable housing after the end of the 24-month intervention period	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 27 months after randomization
Proportion of families who retain stable housing after the end of the 24-month intervention period	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 30 months after randomization
Proportion of families who retain stable housing after the end of the 24-month intervention period	'Stable housing' will be defined as any form of housing that does not meet the definition of 'experiencing homelessness' as above	At 36 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	At baseline
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	At 6 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	At 12 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	At 18 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	At 24 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	At 30 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	At 36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Number of days spent living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily in an institution	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	Baseline
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	6 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	12 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	18 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	24 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	30 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Number of days spent residing in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	Baseline
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	6 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	12 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	18 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	24 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	27 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	30 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of proportion of families who are unleased	Will assess change in proportion of families who are unleased over time (i.e, residing in a space without a lease)	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in proportion of families who are unleased at baseline vs 24 months	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in proportion of families who are unleased at baseline vs 36 months	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in proportion of families who are unleased at 24 vs 36 months	Residing in a space without any legal right to the space (i.e., residing in a space without a lease)	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	Baseline
Days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	6 months after randomization
Days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	12 months after randomization
Days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	18 months after randomization
Days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	24 months after randomization
Days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	30 months after randomization
Days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of days doubled up in previous 6 months	Number of days spent in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing)	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Total proportion of families experiencing any homelessness	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	24 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	Baseline
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	6 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	12 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	18 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	24 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	30 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Total proportion of families ever experiencing unsheltered homelessness	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	At 24 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	Baseline
Proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	6 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	12 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	18 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	24 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	30 months after randomization
Proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of proportion of families experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a homeless shelter, in a place not typically used for sleeping, such as on the street, in a car, in an abandoned building, or in a bus or train station, or temporarily, in an institution for ≥1 night during study period	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Total proportion of families ever residing in a hotel or motel	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	At 24 months after randomization; and changes between baseline and 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months after randomization; and changes between 24 and 36 months after randomization
Proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	Baseline
Proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	6 months after randomization
Proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	12 months after randomization
Proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	18 months after randomization
Proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	24 months after randomization
Proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	30 months after randomization
Proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of proportion of families residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months	Proportion of families living in a hotel or motel as a form of temporary housing for ≥1 night during study period	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	Baseline
Proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	6 months after randomization
Proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	12 months after randomization
Proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	18 months after randomization
Proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	24 months after randomization
Proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	30 months after randomization
Proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of proportion of families doubled up in previous 6 months	Proportion of families in a shared living situation intended to be temporary ('doubled up' with a friend or relative due to being unable to find or afford own housing) ≥1 night during study period	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Total proportion of families returning to a homeless shelter	Proportion of families with any return to a homeless shelter at any time between randomization and the end of the 24-month study period. Assessed only in the subgroup of families who reported living in a shelter at baseline.	24 months after randomization
Total proportion of families returning to a homeless shelter	Proportion of families with any return to a homeless shelter at any time between 24 months and 36 months after randomization. Assessed only in the subgroup of families who reported living in a shelter at baseline.Assessed only in the subgroup of families who reported living in a shelter at baseline.	36 months after randomization
Total proportion of families living in a homeless shelter	Proportion of families who report any stay in a homeless shelter at baseline	Baseline
Total proportion of families living in a homeless shelter	Proportion of families who report any stay in a homeless shelter after randomization and before the end of the 24-month intervention period	24 months after randomization
Total proportion of families living in a homeless shelter	Proportion of families who report any stay in a homeless shelter at the end of the 36-month data collection period	36 months after randomization
Change in total proportion of families living in a homeless shelter from baseline to 24 months	Proportion of families who report any stay in a homeless shelter at baseline vs 24 months	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months
Change in total proportion of families living in a homeless shelter from baseline to 36 months	Proportion of families who report any stay in a homeless shelter at baseline vs 36 months	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months
Change in total proportion of families living in a homeless shelter from 24 to 36 months	Proportion of families who report any stay in a homeless shelter at 24 vs 36 months	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	Baseline
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	6 months after randomization
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	12 months after randomization
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	18 months after randomization
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	24 months after randomization
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	27 months after randomization
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	30 months after randomization
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses at baseline vs 24 months (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses at baseline vs 36 months (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses at 24 vs 36 months (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)	Housing affordability	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	Baseline
Number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	6 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	12 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	18 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	24 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	30 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of number of moves in prior 6 months	Housing stability	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months	Housing stability	6 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months	Housing stability	12 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months	Housing stability	18 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months	Housing stability	24 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months	Housing stability	30 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months	Housing stability	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months	Housing stability	Times series will include measurements at 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Monthly household expenditures	Proportion/amount of monthly expenses on key household expenditure categories, assessed through selected questions adapted from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditures Survey	Baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	Baseline
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	6 months after randomization
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	12 months after randomization
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	18 months after randomization
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	24 months after randomization
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	27 months after randomization
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	30 months after randomization
Physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of physical well-being	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in physical well-being at baseline vs 24 months	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in physical well-being at baseline vs 36 months	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in physical well-being at 24 vs 36 months	Measured through the Short-Form 12 v2 (SF12v2). The SF12v2 data calculate two summary component scores, Physical Component Summary Score (PCS) and Mental Health Component Summary Score (MCS) with eight sub-domains. Scores range from 0 to 100, where a zero score indicates the lowest level of health and 100 indicates the highest level of health.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	Baseline
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	6 months after randomization
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	12 months after randomization
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	18 months after randomization
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	24 months after randomization
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	27 months after randomization
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	30 months after randomization
Psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of psychological well-being	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in psychological well-being at baseline vs 24 months	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in psychological well-being at baseline vs 36 months	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in psychological well-being at 24 vs 36 months	Measured through the Kessler 6 (K6) scale. Each of the six items of the K6 is scored using a 5-level response scale, ranging from 0 to 4 (0 = none of the time, 1 = a little of the time, 2 = some of the time, 3 = most of the time, 4 = all of the time). The six items are summed to yield a total score with a range between zero and 24 with higher scores indicating higher psychological distress.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	Baseline
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	6 months after randomization
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	12 months after randomization
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	18 months after randomization
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	24 months after randomization
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	27 months after randomization
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	30 months after randomization
Overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of overcrowding	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in overcrowding at baseline vs 24 months	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in overcrowding at baseline vs 36 months	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in overcrowding at 24 vs 36 months	People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	Baseline
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	6 months after randomization
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	12 months after randomization
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	18 months after randomization
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	24 months after randomization
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	27 months after randomization
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	30 months after randomization
Housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of housing quality	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in housing quality from baseline to 24 months	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	Will include measurements from baseline and 24 months
Change in housing quality from baseline to 36 months	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	Will include measurements from baseline and 36 months
Change in housing quality from 24 to 36 months	Measured through proportion of households describing overall housing condition as 'excellent' or 'good'. Measured only in the subset of households who respond that they are currently living in a house, apartment/condo, garage, or basement.	Will include measurements from 24 and 36 months
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Baseline
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	6 months after randomization
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	12 months after randomization
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	18 months after randomization
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	24 months after randomization
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	27 months after randomization
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	30 months after randomization
Housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of housing quality: infrastructure and appliances	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in housing quality: infrastructure and appliances from baseline to 24 months	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Will include measurements from baseline and at 24 months
Change in housing quality: infrastructure and appliances from baseline to 36 months	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Will include measurements from baseline and at 36 months
Change in housing quality: infrastructure and appliances from 24 to 36 months	Composite score assessing presence of a working stove/cooktop, refrigerator, kitchen sink, hot and cold water, bathroom sink with running water, toilet, and bathtub/shower. Range of total items present is 0-7, with higher score suggesting higher housing quality in terms of infrastructure and appliances. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Will include measurements from 24 months and at 36 months
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Baseline
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	6 months after randomization
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	12 months after randomization
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	18 months after randomization
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	24 months after randomization
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	27 months after randomization
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	30 months after randomization
Housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of housing quality: safety issues	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in housing quality: safety issues from baseline to 24 months	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Will include measurements at baseline and at 24 months
Change in housing quality: safety issues from baseline to 36 months	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Will include measurements at baseline and at 36 months
Change in housing quality: safety issues from 24 to 36 months	Composite score assessing presence of exposed electrical wiring (or lack thereof), mildew/water damage, flooring problems, holes/cracks, bad odors, bathroom plumbing problems, nonfunctioning toilet, electrical outages, lack of heating, rodents, cockroaches. Range of potential safety problems present is 0-11, with higher score suggesting worse housing safety. Adapted from composite measures of material hardship from the Survey of Income and Program Participation.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	Baseline
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	6 months after randomization
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	12 months after randomization
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	18 months after randomization
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	24 months after randomization
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	27 months after randomization
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	30 months after randomization
Financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of financial well-being	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being from baseline to 24 months	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being from baseline to 36 months	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being from 24 to 36 months	Measured through the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Financial Well-Being survey. The ten items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale with each answer scored 0-4. A raw score is calculated from the sum of the ten items (range 0-40); the raw score is converted to a financial well-being score with adjustments for age and mode of survey administration. The range of financial well-being scores in adults 18 and older is 16-91 with higher scores corresponding to higher financial well-being.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	Baseline
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	6 months after randomization
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	12 months after randomization
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	18 months after randomization
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	24 months after randomization
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	27 months after randomization
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	30 months after randomization
Financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of financial well-being (emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (emergency expenses) at baseline vs 24 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (emergency expenses) at baseline vs 36 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (emergency expenses) at 24 vs 36 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $400 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED).	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	Baseline
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	6 months after randomization
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	12 months after randomization
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	18 months after randomization
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	24 months after randomization
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	27 months after randomization
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	30 months after randomization
Financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of financial well-being (larger emergency expenses)	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (larger emergency expenses) at baseline vs 24 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (larger emergency expenses) at baseline vs 36 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (larger emergency expenses) at 24 vs 36 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they are 'somewhat' or 'very confident' they could handle a $2000 emergency expense in the next month. Adapted from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking (or SHED) and Urban Institute Survey of Well-Being and Basic Needs. This question is asked only of the subset of households who respond they are 'somewhat' or 'very' confident they could handle a $400 expense in the next month.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	Baseline
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	6 months after randomization
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	12 months after randomization
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	18 months after randomization
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	24 months after randomization
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	27 months after randomization
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	30 months after randomization
Financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of financial well-being (monthly finances)	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (monthly finances) at baseline vs 24 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (monthly finances) at baseline vs 36 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in financial well-being (monthly finances) at 24 vs 36 months	Measured through proportion of families responding they have 'just enough money to make ends meet' or 'some money left over' at the end of each month, as an indicator of stable monthly finances. Adapted from the Family Options Study.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	Baseline
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	6 months after randomization
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	12 months after randomization
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	18 months after randomization
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	24 months after randomization
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	27 months after randomization
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	30 months after randomization
Material hardship	Composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of material hardship	Change over time in composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in material hardship from baseline to 24 months	Change in composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in material hardship from baseline to 36 months	Change in composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in material hardship from 24 to 36 months	Change in composite score assessing the presence of: use of payday loan, overdrawn checking account, missed credit card payment, missed loan payment, contacted by a debt collection agency, late gas/electric bill payment, gas/electricity turned off due to non-payment, late phone bill payment, phone service turned off due to non-payment, difficulty paying medical bills, late rent/mortgage payment, and partial rent/mortgage payment. Range of material hardship domains is 0-11 with higher score associated with material hardship. Individual items are adapted from questions from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and the Urban Institute Well-Being and Basic Needs Survey.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	Baseline
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	6 months after randomization
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	12 months after randomization
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	18 months after randomization
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	24 months after randomization
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	27 months after randomization
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	30 months after randomization
Total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of total debt to monthly income ratio	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in total debt to monthly income ratio at baseline vs 24 months	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in total debt to monthly income ratio at baseline vs 36 months	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in total debt to monthly income ratio at 24 vs 36 months	Sum of total debt (composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage) divided by reported average monthly income. A higher ratio indicates a higher burden of debt relative to monthly income.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	Baseline
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	6 months
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	12 months
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	18 months
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	24 months
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	27 months
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	30 months
Total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	36 months
Time series analysis of total debt	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in total debt at baseline vs 24 months	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in total debt at baseline vs 36 months	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in total debt at 24 vs 36 months	Total self-reported debt (dollar amount, composite of balance of loans/credit card debt, balance for overdue bills, and balance for overdue rent/mortgage). A higher amount indicates a higher burden of debt.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	Baseline
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	6 months after randomization
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	12 months after randomization
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	18 months after randomization
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	24 months after randomization
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	27 months after randomization
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	30 months after randomization
Household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of household food security	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in household food security from baseline to 24 months	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in household food security from baseline to 36 months	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in household food security from 24 to 36 months	The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) U.S. Household Food Security Survey Module: Six-Item Short Form. Responses to each of the six items are coded as 'affirmative' or 'negative', with each affirmative response assigned a score of 1. Scores are summed across the six items to yield a total score ranging from 0 to 6, with higher scores indicating lower household food security.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	Baseline
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	6 months after randomization
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	12 months after randomization
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	18 months after randomization
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	24 months after randomization
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	27 months after randomization
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	30 months after randomization
Self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of self-efficacy	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in self-efficacy at baseline vs 24 months	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in self-efficacy at baseline vs 36 months	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in self-efficacy at 24 vs 36 months	General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE). Items are scored on a 4-point Likert scale; the total score is calculated by finding the sum of all items (range 6-24) with a higher score indicating greater self-efficacy	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	Baseline
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	6 months after randomization
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	12 months after randomization
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	18 months after randomization
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	24 months after randomization
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	27 months after randomization
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	30 months after randomization
Resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of resilience	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in resilience from baseline vs 24 months	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in resilience from baseline vs 36 months	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in resilience from 24 vs 36 months	Brief Resilience Scale (BRS). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items divided by 6 (range 1-5). Higher scores indicate more resilience.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	Baseline
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	6 months after randomization
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	12 months after randomization
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	18 months after randomization
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	24 months after randomization
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	27 months after randomization
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	30 months after randomization
Perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of perceived stress	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in perceived stress at baseline vs 24 months	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in perceived stress at baseline vs 36 months	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in perceived stress at 24 vs 36 months	Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-4). Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 0-16), with higher scores correlating to more stress	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	Baseline
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	6 months after randomization
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	12 months after randomization
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	18 months after randomization
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	24 months after randomization
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	27 months after randomization
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	30 months after randomization
Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS)	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS) at baseline vs 24 months	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS) at baseline vs 36 months	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in Chaos, Hubbub and Order Scale (CHAOS) at 24 vs 36 months	Validated measure of household environment. Items are scored on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6-30) with higher scores corresponding to higher household chaos.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	Baseline
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	6 months after randomization
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	12 months after randomization
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	18 months after randomization
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	24 months after randomization
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	27 months after randomization
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	30 months after randomization
Agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of agency	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	Times series will include measurements at baseline, 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, 24 months, 27 months, 30 months, 36 months after randomization
Change in agency at baseline vs 24 months	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Change in agency at baseline vs 36 months	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	Will include measurements at baseline and 36 months after randomization
Change in agency at 24 vs 36 months	Adult State Hope Scale (modified from the Future Scale). Items are scored from 1-8. The total hope score is calculated from the sum of all items (range 6 to 48) with higher scores representing higher hope levels. The agency sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 2, 4, 6 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of agency thinking. The pathways sub scale score is calculated from the sum of items 1, 3, and 5 (range 3 to 24) with higher scores indicating higher levels of pathways thinking.	Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: University of California, San Francisco
• Collaborators: Destination: Home SV; Sí Se Puede Collective; Sacred Heart Community Service; County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Oanh K Nguyen, MD, MAS, University of California, San Francisco

Publications and helpful links

General Publications

• Gibson M, Hearty W, Craig P. The public health effects of interventions similar to basic income: a scoping review. Lancet Public Health. 2020 Mar;5(3):e165-e176. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30005-0.
• Bastagli F., Hagen-Zanker J., Harman L., Barca V., Sturge G., Schmidt T. (2019). The Impact of Cash Transfers: A Review of the Evidence from Low- and Middle-income Countries. Journal of Social Policy, 48(3), 569-594. doi:10.1017/S0047279418000715
• Aubry T, Bloch G, Brcic V, Saad A, Magwood O, Abdalla T, Alkhateeb Q, Xie E, Mathew C, Hannigan T, Costello C, Thavorn K, Stergiopoulos V, Tugwell P, Pottie K. Effectiveness of permanent supportive housing and income assistance interventions for homeless individuals in high-income countries: a systematic review. Lancet Public Health. 2020 Jun;5(6):e342-e360. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30055-4.
• Pinto AD, Perri M, Pedersen CL, Aratangy T, Hapsari AP, Hwang SW. Exploring different methods to evaluate the impact of basic income interventions: a systematic review. Int J Equity Health. 2021 Jun 16;20(1):142. doi: 10.1186/s12939-021-01479-2.
• Gubits D, Shinn M, Wood M, Brown SR, Dastrup SR, Bell SH. What Interventions Work Best for Families Who Experience Homelessness? Impact Estimates from the Family Options Study. J Policy Anal Manage. 2018;37(4):735-66.
• Forchuk C, MacClure SK, Van Beers M, Smith C, Csiernik R, Hoch J, Jensen E. Developing and testing an intervention to prevent homelessness among individuals discharged from psychiatric wards to shelters and 'No Fixed Address'. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2008 Sep;15(7):569-75. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2850.2008.01266.x.
• Forget E.L. The town with no poverty: The health effects of a Canadian guaranteed annual income field experiment. Canadian Public Policy. 2011;37(3):283-305.
• Morton, M. H., Chavez, R., Kull, M. A., Carreon, E. D., Bishop, J., Daferede, S., Wood, E., Cohen, L., & Barreyro, P. (2020). Developing a direct cash transfer program for youth experiencing homelessness: Results of a mixed methods, multistakeholder design process. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago.

Helpful Links

• Pre-Analysis Plan: Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration. Martin-West S, Castro Baker A, Balakrishnan S, Rao K, Tan GY. December 2018.
• Protecting Benefits in Guaranteed Income Pilots: Lessons Learned From the Abundant Birth Project. San Francisco Office of Financial Empowerment. December 2021.

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): December 10, 2022
• Primary Completion (Anticipated): June 1, 2026
• Study Completion (Anticipated): December 1, 2026

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: December 27, 2022
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: January 13, 2023
• First Posted (Estimate): January 26, 2023

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Estimate): January 26, 2023
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: January 13, 2023
• Last Verified: January 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Homelessness; Homeless persons
• Other Study ID Numbers: 21-35573

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: No

Study Data/Documents

1. CDSS Waiver Request Approval Letter
   Information comments: California Department of Social Services (CDSS) approval letter in response to Silicon Valley Guaranteed Income Project (SVGIP) waiver request to exclude SVGIP guaranteed income payments from CalWORKS and CalFresh eligibility determination, re-determination, and benefit amount

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No