Study Details | Pathways to Work

101006-Study of Shreveport

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a low-attrition randomized controlled trial with no known issues that suggest the findings cannot be attributed to the intervention.

Intervention: Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program

Population and employment barriers:

Parenting (Parents, Single parents), Public Benefits Recipients (Public benefits recipients)

Services provided:

Financial education, Unconditional cash transfers

Setting: Urban only

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

This evaluation used a randomized controlled trial (RCT) design, in which individual applicants were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group. The individual served as both the unit of assignment and the unit of analysis. Recruitment was conducted through an open application process, and eligibility was determined based on residency in Shreveport/Caddo Parish, custodial status as a single parent or guardian of at least one child aged 3-19, and household income at or below 120% of the federal poverty level. The study used weights in their random assignment such that about 50% of participants in each condition lived in one of the 5 poorest zip codes in Caddo Parish and the other 50% of participants in each condition lived in any of the other zip codes of Caddo Parish.

Time period of study:

Program implementation occurred over a 12-month period from March 2022 through February 2023. Data collection occurred over an 18-month period from January 2022 through August 2023.

Primary outcome domains examined:

Increase short-term employment, Decrease short-term benefit receipt

Other outcome domains examined:

Findings reported by the study that are not eligible for review span multiple domains, including financial well-being, psychological distress, physical functioning, food insecurity, housing security and quality, time use and self-care, children's educational and behavioral outcomes, parent and child well-being, agency and hope, community connection and relationships with others, household income, job quality and satisfaction, and educational enrollment and attainment.

Study funded by:

The study was funded by a grant from the organization Mayors for a Guaranteed Income (MGI) and matching funds from Caddo Parish.

Results

View table help Need more context or definitions for the table below? View the table help to get insight into terms, measures, and definitions.

Scroll to the right to view the rest of the table columns

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Intervention group mean	Units	Findings	Sample size
Increase short-term employment	Currently employed	SIx-month follow-up	High	80.00	77.00	percentage points		165
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received any public assistance benefits, follow-up period	SIx-month follow-up	High	72.00	73.00	percentage points		165

Short-term outcomes are those measured 18 months or fewer after participants are first offered services. Long-term outcomes are those measured between 18 months and 5 years after participants are first offered services. Very long-term outcomes are those measured 5 years or more after participants are first offered services.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

The findings quality describe our confidence that a given study’s finding is because of the intervention. We do not display findings that rate low.

Findings key:

A moderate-to-large favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large favorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small favorable finding that might be due to chance
A favorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A favorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A moderate-to-large unfavorable finding that might to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance
A small unfavorable finding that might be due to chance
An unfavorable finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
An unfavorable finding that might be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size
A finding that is unlikely to be due to chance, but we cannot determine the standardized effect size or direction
A finding of no effect that might be due to chance

Favorable findings are impacts in a direction that is socially desirable. Statistical significance indicates the likelihood that a study finding is due to the intervention, rather than due to chance. Findings are described as moderate-to-large if the intervention produced a sufficiently large change in the outcome. An impact receives this designation if the standardized effect size is equal to or greater than 0.25 or equal to or less than -0.25.

Sample characteristics

The sample of program participants at the time of application was 88% female and 33 years old on average. The majority (89%) identified as non-Hispanic Black or African American, followed by non-Hispanic White (8%), multiracial (3%), and Hispanic/Latino (1%). Average household income was $12,434.70. Most (70%) reported being food insecure during the past month. Eighty percent also reported receiving public benefits, such as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The majority of participants reported renting (64%), with others living in public housing (12%), with friends or family (12%), owning a home (8%), experiencing homelessness or living in temporary housing (1%), or in another housing situation (2%).

Age

Mean age

34 years

Participant race and ethnicity

Black or African American	90%
White, not Hispanic	7%
Hispanic or Latino of any race	2%
More than one race	3%

The race and ethnicity categories may sum to more than 100 percent if the authors reported race and ethnicity separately; in these cases, we report the category White, rather than White, not Hispanic.

Family status

Parents	100%
Single parents	100%

Participant employment and public benefit status

Were unemployed	25%
Public benefits recipients	83%

Intervention implementation

Implementing organization:

The City of Shreveport and the United Way of Northwest Louisiana via the Shreveport Financial Empowerment Center.

Program history:

The Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program (SGIP) is the City of Shreveport, Louisiana's guaranteed income (GI) pilot. It was not in existence prior to the start of this study.

Intervention services:

Families assigned to the intervention condition (n = 165) received guaranteed income in the amount of $660/month for 12 months. Any single parent or guardian with one or more children aged 3-20 living with them could apply for the program, provided they had a household income less than or equal to 120 percent of the federal poverty level and resided in Shreveport or Caddo Parish.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

Families assigned to the comparison condition (n = 132) did not receive guaranteed income.

Service receipt duration:

A typical participant receives services as part of the program for one year.

Intervention funding:

The Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program (SGIP) was funded by a grant from the organization Mayors for a Guaranteed Income (MGI) and matching funds from Caddo Parish.

Study publications

Juras, Randall, Anna Jefferson, Haisheng Yang, Hannah Thomas, and Tresa Kappil (2023). Data Analysis Plan: Mayors for a Guaranteed Income Pilot Evaluations. Abt Associates. Available at: https://www.abtglobal.com/files/Projects/PDFs/2023/data-analysis-plan-mayors-for-a-guaranteed-income-pilot-evaluations.pdf

Kappil, Tresa, Sarah Prenovitz, Swati Gayen, Hannah Thomas, Zoe Greenwood, Haisheng Yang, Anna Jefferson, and Randall Juras (2024). Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program: Mayors for a Guaranteed Income Evaluation Final Report [Appendices]. Abt Global. Available at: https://www.abtglobal.com/sites/default/files/files/insights/reports/2024/shreveport-appendices-final-october.pdf

Kappil, Tresa, Sarah Prenovitz, Swati Gayen, Hannah Thomas, Zoe Greenwood, Haisheng Yang, Anna Jefferson, and Randall Juras (2024). Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program: Mayors for a Guaranteed Income Evaluation Final Report. Abt Global. Available at: https://www.abtglobal.com/sites/default/files/files/insights/reports/2024/shreveport-mgi-report_10-30-24.pdf

View the glossary for more information about these and other terms used on this page.

The Pathways Clearinghouse refers to interventions by the names used in study reports or manuscripts. Some intervention names may use language that is not consistent with our style guide, preferences, or the terminology we use to describe populations.

Study of Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program