Families Experiencing Homelessness and/or Housing InstabilitySVGIPNCT05698498
Silicon Valley Guaranteed Income Project
A study testing Guaranteed Income and Public Benefits Information Session in people with Families Experiencing Homelessness and/or Housing Instability and Housing Stability, run by University of California, San Francisco at 2 sites in United States.
Trial summary
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. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Families Experiencing Homelessness and/or Housing Instability, Housing Stability
- What is being tested?
- Guaranteed Income and Public Benefits Information Session
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 300 participants
- Where
- 2 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 10 Dec 2022to Dec 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- ≥18 years of age at baseline visit/assessment
- Experiencing homelessness, as defined by:
- The HEARTH Act; or
- Living in a public or private space intended for temporary (≤6 month) residence, such as residing in a hotel/motel;
- 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
- Being in a shared living situation intended to be temporary (i.e., being 'doubled up' due to lack of available and/or affordable housing).
Show all 10Show fewer
- 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.
- Living in a household with ≥1 dependent children (i.e., ≤17 years of age at the time of study entry)
- 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.
Who cannot join
- 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).
- 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).
Trial locations and contacts
2 sites in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
United States2 sites
¡Sí Se Puede! Collective
San Jose, California, 95116
Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing
San Jose, California, 95131
About this study
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:
- What is the impact of guaranteed income on homelessness and housing stability among families experiencing homelessness or housing instability?
- What is the impact of guaranteed income on the health and well-being of families experiencing homelessness or housing instability?
- 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?
Read the 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.
- Being tested
- Guaranteed Income, Public Benefits Information Session
- Keywords
- Homelessness, Homeless persons, guaranteed income, economic support
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Guaranteed IncomeOther
Also called Unconditional cash transfer, Unconditional cash assistance, Cash assistance, Basic 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.
Public Benefits Information SessionOther
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.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | Active comparator | 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. Receives: Other: Public Benefits Information Session |
| Guaranteed Income | Experimental | 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. Receives: Other: Guaranteed Income; Other: Public Benefits Information Session |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
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).
Measured: At 24 months after randomization
Secondary outcomes (349)
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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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)
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: Baseline
Proportion of families experiencing any homelessness in previous 6 months
Proportion of of families experiencing homelessness for ≥1 night during study period
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: Baseline
Proportion of monthly income spent on housing-related expenses (composite of expenses for rent, mortgage, other shelter, and/or hotel/motel)
Housing affordability
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: Baseline
Number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 6 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 12 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 18 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 24 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 30 months after randomization
Number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of number of moves in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 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
Measured: 6 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 12 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 18 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 24 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 30 months after randomization
Number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of number of moves out of Santa Clara County in prior 6 months
Housing stability
Measured: 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
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: Baseline
Overcrowding
People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.
Measured: 6 months after randomization
Overcrowding
People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.
Measured: 12 months after randomization
Overcrowding
People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.
Measured: 18 months after randomization
Overcrowding
People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.
Measured: 24 months after randomization
Overcrowding
People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.
Measured: 27 months after randomization
Overcrowding
People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.
Measured: 30 months after randomization
Overcrowding
People per room excluding bathrooms and kitchens. A higher number of people per room is associated with increased overcrowding.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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).
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: 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.
Measured: Will include measurements at 24 and 36 months after randomization
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Jan 2023
- Study start10 Dec 2022
- Primary completionJun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Families Experiencing Homelessness and/or Housing InstabilityStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of California, San FranciscoThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San Francisco
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Destination: Home SV, Sí Se Puede Collective, Sacred Heart Community Service, County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Oanh K Nguyen, MD, MAS, Principal investigator, University of California, San Francisco
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05698498
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 21-35573
- Acronym
- SVGIP
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 27 Dec 2022
- Last updated
- 10 Feb 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
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.
PubMed 32113520Bastagli 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.
PubMed 32504587Pinto 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.
PubMed 34134715Gubits 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.
PubMed 30272428Forchuk 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.
PubMed 18768009Forget 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.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Feb 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Silicon Valley Guaranteed Income Project
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05698498
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SVGIP / 21-35573
- Keywords
- Homelessness, Homeless persons, guaranteed income, economic support
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Enrolling by invitation
- Enrolment
- 300 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San FranciscoUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Destination: Home SV, Sí Se Puede Collective, Sacred Heart Community Service, County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing
- Study start
- 10 Dec 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jun 2026 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 26 Jan 2023 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
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:
- What is the impact of guaranteed income on homelessness and housing stability among families experiencing homelessness or housing instability?
- What is the impact of guaranteed income on the health and well-being of families experiencing homelessness or housing instability?
- 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?
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 design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Usual Care | Active comparator | Other: Public Benefits Information SessionParticipants 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. |
| Guaranteed Income | Experimental | Other: Guaranteed Income, Other: Public Benefits Information SessionParticipants 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. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (10 listed)
- ≥18 years of age at baseline visit/assessment
- Experiencing homelessness, as defined by:
- 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.
- Living in a household with ≥1 dependent children (i.e., ≤17 years of age at the time of study entry)
- 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.
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- 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).
- 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).
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Guaranteed IncomeAlso: Unconditional cash transfer, Unconditional cash assistance, Cash assistance, Basic incomeGuaranteed 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 | Guaranteed Income |
| Public Benefits Information SessionAll 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, Usual Care |
Primary outcome
Number of days experiencing homelessness
Time frame: At 24 months after randomization
'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).
349 secondary outcomes
Number of days experiencing homelessness
Time frame: At 6 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness
Time frame: At 12 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness
Time frame: At 18 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness
Time frame: At 27 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness
Time frame: At 30 months after randomization
Number of days experiencing homelessness
Time frame: At 36 months after randomization
Time to stable housing from randomization
Time frame: Up to 24 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing
Time frame: At 6 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing
Time frame: At 12 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing
Time frame: At 18 months after randomization
Proportion of families who obtain stable housing
Time frame: At 24 months after randomization
Proportion of families who retain stable housing after the end of the 24-month intervention period
Time frame: At 27 months after randomization
Proportion of families who retain stable housing after the end of the 24-month intervention period
Time frame: At 30 months after randomization
Proportion of families who retain stable housing after the end of the 24-month intervention period
Time frame: At 36 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: At baseline
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: At 6 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: At 12 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: At 18 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: At 24 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: At 30 months after randomization
Days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: At 36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of days experiencing unsheltered homelessness in previous 6 months
Time frame: 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
Time frame: Baseline
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months
Time frame: 12 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months
Time frame: 18 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months
Time frame: 24 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months
Time frame: 30 months after randomization
Days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months
Time frame: 36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of days residing in a hotel or motel in previous 6 months
Time frame: 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
Time frame: Baseline
Proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 12 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 18 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 24 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 27 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 30 months after randomization
Proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 36 months after randomization
Time series analysis of proportion of families who are unleased
Time frame: 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
Time frame: Will include measurements at baseline and 24 months after randomization
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Feb 2026.
- Background: PubMed 32113520Gibson 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.
- BackgroundBastagli 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
- Background: PubMed 32504587Aubry 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.
- Background: PubMed 34134715Pinto 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.
- Background: PubMed 30272428Gubits 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.
- Background: PubMed 18768009Forchuk 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.
- BackgroundForget 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.
- BackgroundMorton, 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.
- Pre-Analysis Plan: Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration. Martin-West S, Castro Baker A, Balakrishnan S, Rao K, Tan GY. December 2018.Link provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part.
Oanh K Nguyen, MD, MAS principal investigator
University of California, San Francisco
2 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Guaranteed Income and Public Benefits Information Session in people with Families Experiencing Homelessness and/or Housing Instability and Housing Stability, run by University of California, San Francisco at 2 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 10 inclusion and 2 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: enrolling by invitation, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Feb 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 2 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Number of days experiencing homelessness (time frame: At 24 months after randomization). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT05698498, which also lists 8 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 10 Feb 2026.