Victoria Bowden , Research Associate
Urvi Patel, Policy Analyst and Intern Coordinator
Everyone should have an affordable place to live.
In the face of the persistent housing affordability crisis, rising eviction rates in many parts of the country, and ongoing threats against unhoused communities, including the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in City of Grants Pass, Oregon v. Johnson, some states and localities — often working with philanthropic partners — are taking innovative approaches to provide unconditional cash to people experiencing housing instability or homelessness through guaranteed income pilot programs.
It’s more important than ever that state and local leaders choose strategies that help people with low incomes meet their housing needs with dignity, rather than punishing people experiencing homelessness through fining and, in some cases, arresting and incarcerating them for sleeping outside when they have nowhere safe to go, which evidence shows are ineffective, costly, and racially discriminatory strategies.
Guaranteed income (GI) is emerging as one strategy for helping people afford housing and other expenses like food, clothing, and transportation. Unlike universal basic income, which proposes giving a standard periodic cash payment to all individuals, guaranteed income provides cash assistance to people based on a determined need — such as experiencing housing instability or having income below a certain level — with assistance typically ranging between $500 and $1000 a month. Over 150 programs across the country have begun providing direct cash assistance, with several localities and states having one or more programs that prioritize people and families who are unhoused or at risk of homelessness. Promising findings from individual pilot programs support broader research demonstrating that GI programs can be a mechanism for helping people meet their needs. Ongoing research is helping us understand the ways that unrestricted cash supports can be designed to be most beneficial to the people who need them, including those experiencing housing insecurity and homelessness.
Today’s wave of the guaranteed income movement isn’t new. In the 1960s and 70s, leaders within the National Welfare Rights Organization, racial justice advocates in the Civil Rights and Black Power movements, and feminist thought leaders within the Wages for Housework Movement began advancing GI in response to historical inequities rooted in enslavement, discrimination, and exclusionary policy choices. While GI initiatives alone don’t address the root causes of these inequities, they provide more possibilities for repairing harms caused by deep-seated prejudice in our institutions.
GI is a compelling step forward as policymakers look for innovative ways to:
- ensure that people can make decisions about how to best meet their needs;
- improve accessibility and reduce administrative burdens in existing economic security programs;
- reduce the discrimination people can face when they participate in assistance programs, which is often rooted in racism and stigma against people with low incomes; and
- guarantee that everyone who needs assistance receives it.
The rise of GI programs responds to the reality that many people don’t have enough money, even with work or public benefits, to afford basic needs due to reasons not entirely within their control. For example, systemic and structural racism embedded in the housing market and criminal legal system result in people of color, particularly Black, Indigenous, and Latine communities, being disproportionately harmed by a cycle of homelessness and incarceration. The same is true for the labor market, in which people of color are overrepresented in jobs with the lowest pay because of racism in hiring practices and frequent government underinvestment in communities of color — which leads to low-performing schools, chronic health conditions, and other negative outcomes that hurt employment opportunities. The impacts of low pay are also felt disproportionately by other communities that face discrimination, such as people with disabilities and LGBTQ+ people.
A Sample of Guaranteed Income Programs Prioritizing People Experiencing or At Risk of Homelessness in the United States Copy link
Hover over blue states for a list of programs Copy link
(embedded graphic on the page; click on the “Copy link”s to see. There are quite a few.)
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities | cbpp.org
Several GI pilots were implemented in 2024. In California, a five-year pilot called It All Adds Up provides 225 families that recently experienced homelessness and are exiting rapid re-housing programs with $1,000 a month for one year. In Massachusetts, through the Somerville GI Pilot, 200 families that are struggling with high housing costs receive $750 a month for a year. And a New York City program supports 100 families that are living in shelters through monthly cash payments of $1,400 for two years to help them meet their needs.
Federal and state policymakers can take the lessons of GI pilot programs and apply them to other economic security policies. For example, reforming cash assistance programs like TANF and SSI to be more accessible and provide higher benefit levels would go a long way in helping older adults, people with disabilities, and low-income families with children meet their needs. Similarly, expanding access to tenant-based rental assistance, which rigorous research has shown can greatly reduce homelessness and housing insecurity, and testing new ways to deliver it — like through direct rental assistance, which is provided directly to tenants instead of landlords — can make it easier for families to find a place to live.
Expanding cash income supports, increasing access to rental assistance, and making these kinds of assistance simpler to access through processes that respect people’s dignity are the right path forward to improve well-being, promote racial equity, and help people stay stably housed.
Scottie's Playtime 