Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot (BIG:LEAP)

The goal of this randomized controlled trial is to learn if receipt of a guaranteed income works to reduce financial hardship and improve quality of life. The main questions it aims to answer are:

1. How does GI affect participants' quality of life?
2. What is the relationship between GI and participants' subjective sense of self?
3. How does GI affect participants' income, and through what mechanisms?
4. How does the implementation of GI inform the existing safety net?

Participants will:

Receive an recurring unconditional cash transfer of $1,000 per month every month for 12 months OR receive no unconditional cash transfer Complete surveys at six month intervals during the course of the study Be invited to participate in in-depth interviews

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Stress; Psychological Distress; Family Dynamics; Health; Food Security; Educational Attainment; Housing; Employment; Income; Physical Functioning; Well-being/Quality of Life; Financial Wellbeing
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Unconditional cash transfer

• Study Type: Interventional
• Enrollment (Actual): 8194
• Phase: Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• United States
  • California
    • Los Angeles, California, United States, 90071
      • Community Investment for Families Department - City of Los Angeles

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• 18 years of age or older,
• Resident of Los Angeles, CA,
• At or below 100% of Federal Poverty Level
• Have been negatively impacted by COVID-19
• Have a dependent

Exclusion Criteria:

• less than 18 years of age
• not a resident of Los Angeles, CA
• Above 100% of Federal Poverty Level
• Not negatively impacted by COVID-19
• Do not have a dependent

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Design Details

• Primary Purpose: Other
• Allocation: Randomized
• Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: None (Open Label)

Number of Arms

2

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm	Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: Control; No intervention
Experimental: Guaranteed income; $1,000 of unconditional cash per month for 12 months	Other: Unconditional cash transfer; $1,000 unconditional cash transfer per month for 12 months; Other Names: Basic income; Guaranteed income; Guaranteed basic income; Cash transfer

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Psychological distress (Kessler 10)	Each item is scored from one 'none of the time' to five 'all of the time'. Scores of the 10 items are then summed, yielding a minimum score of 10 and a maximum score of 50. Scores totaling less than 20 indicate that a person is likely to be mentally well; scores between 20-24 suggest a person is likely to have a mild mental health disorder; 25-29 are likely to indicate a moderate mental health disorder; and those scoring 30 or higher are likely to have a severe mental health disorder.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Financial Wellbeing (CFPB Financial Well-Being Scale)	The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's Financial Wellbeing Scale is scored from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate a greater sense of financial well-being.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Physical functioning (SF-36)	Each response is scored as 0 (Yes, limited a lot); 50 (Yes, limited a little); or 100 (No, not limited at all). Averages closer to 100 indicate better physical functioning while averages closer to 0 indicate worse physical functioning.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Food security	4 items to assess past four week food insecurity: 1) worry about not having enough food, 2) inability to eat preferred foods, 3) having to eat foods that they did not want to eat, and 4) eating less because there was not enough food. Items scored as "yes" (1) or "no" (0).	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Household environmental instability (CHAOS)	The Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale (CHAOS) is a 15-item scale that assesses household environmental instability. Each item is scored from 1 to 4. Scores of the items are then summed, with scores ranging from 15 to 60. The higher the score, the higher the level of environmental chaos in the home.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Mattering (Mattering Index)	The Mattering Index is a 24-item self-reported scale to assess an individual's sense of significance within their community and the extent to which they feel valued and recognized by others. The scale measures 3 dimensions of mattering: awareness (how people believe others perceive them), importance (how people believe that others are emotionally invested in them), and reliance (how much individuals feel others can rely on them). Item scoring is from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The awareness dimension accounts for 8 items, with total scores ranging from 8 to 40. The importance dimension accounts for 10 items, with total scores ranging from 10 to 50. The reliance dimension accounts for 6 items, with total scores ranging from 6 to 30. Higher total scores in each domain indicate a greater sense of mattering.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Housing security	Three items to assess 1) housing status (e.g., renter, homeowner, rent-to-own, etc.), 2) past 6 month evictions (yes/no), and 3) past 5 year mortgage default notices (number of times). Evictions and mortgage defaults are scored as "1" if the response is greater than zero, and "0" if the response is zero.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Hope (Adult Hope Scale)	The Adult Hope Scale is a 12-item self-reported scale that assesses one's ability to set goals ("agency" subscale; 4 items) and the confidence to pursue them ("pathways" subscale; 4 items). Item scoring is from 1 (definitely false) to 8 (definitely true) and there are 4 filler items that are not scored. Subscale scores range from 4 to 32; total scores range from 8 to 64. Higher scores indicate higher hope.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Intimate partner violence (Composite Abuse Scale)	The Composite Abuse Scale (CAS R-SF) is a 15-item scale designed to capture a respondent's experience of intimate partner violence (IPV) with a particular emphasis on the frequency of experiences. Respondents are asked whether they have experienced any of the 15 IPV items (e.g., My partner(s) shook, pushed, grabbed, or threw me). If they respond yes, they are asked to indicate how often it happened in the past 12 months (e.g., Not in the past 12 months, Once, A few times, Monthly, Weekly, Daily/Almost Daily), scored as 0 to 5. Total scores, ranging from 0 to 75, are computed by calculating the mean frequency of all abuse items and multiplying this score by 15, where there are responses for at least 11 of the 15 items (~70%). Scores for the psychological abuse (range: 0 to 30), physical abuse (range: 0 to 25), and sexual abuse (range: 0 to 10) subscales are calculated in the same manner. Higher scores indicate increased severity of experiences of intimate partner violence.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Access to recreational opportunities for children	Parent-reported participation by their child in enrichment activities (yes/no). If yes, parent-reported type of enrichment activity in which the child participated.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Neighborhood safety	Subsections of the Neighborhood Environment for Children Rating Scale cover worries about victimization and interactions with neighbors. Each item rated on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being "mostly false" and 10 being "mostly true." The scale score was calculated by adding the score for each of the individual items and dividing that sum by the number of non-missing items for that individual. Scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores on the interaction subsection indicating more positive neighborhood interaction, and higher scores on the victimization subsection indicating more worry about harm to property, self, and others in the neighborhood.	Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: University of Pennsylvania
• Collaborators: The City of Los Angeles
• Investigators: Principal Investigator: Stacia West, PhD, The University of Tennessee; Principal Investigator: Amy Castro, PhD, The University of Pennsylvania; Principal Investigator: Bo-Kyung Elizabeth Kim, PhD, University of California, Los Angeles

Publications and helpful links

Helpful Links

• Related Info

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): December 1, 2021
• Primary Completion (Actual): September 30, 2023
• Study Completion (Actual): August 31, 2024

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: September 9, 2025
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 22, 2025
• First Posted (Estimated): October 1, 2025

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Estimated): October 1, 2025
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: September 22, 2025
• Last Verified: September 1, 2025

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: cash transfer; guaranteed income
• Other Study ID Numbers: 849819

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

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

Drug and device information, study documents

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