Financial WellbeingBIG:LEAPNCT07200648
Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot
A study testing Unconditional cash transfer in people with Financial Wellbeing and Psychological Distress, run by University of Pennsylvania at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The goal of this randomized controlled trial is to learn if receipt of a guaranteed income works to reduce financial hardship and improve quality of life. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. How does GI affect participants' quality of life? 2. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Financial Wellbeing, Psychological Distress, Physical Functioning
- What is being tested?
- Unconditional cash transfer
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 8,194 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Dec 2021to 31 Aug 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 or older,
- Resident of Los Angeles, CA,
- At or below 100% of Federal Poverty Level
- Have been negatively impacted by COVID-19
- Have a dependent
Who cannot join
- less than 18 years of age
- not a resident of Los Angeles, CA
- Above 100% of Federal Poverty Level
- Not negatively impacted by COVID-19
- Do not have a dependent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Community Investment for Families Department - City of Los Angeles
Los Angeles, California, 90071
About this study
The goal of this randomized controlled trial is to learn if receipt of a guaranteed income works to reduce financial hardship and improve quality of life. The main questions it aims to answer are:
- How does GI affect participants' quality of life?
- What is the relationship between GI and participants' subjective sense of self?
- How does GI affect participants' income, and through what mechanisms?
- How does the implementation of GI inform the existing safety net?
Read more
Participants will:
Receive an recurring unconditional cash transfer of $1,000 per month every month for 12 months OR receive no unconditional cash transfer Complete surveys at six month intervals during the course of the study Be invited to participate in in-depth interviews
- Conditions
- Financial Wellbeing, Psychological Distress, Physical Functioning, Housing, Food Security, Income
- Being tested
- Unconditional cash transfer
- Keywords
- guaranteed income, cash transfer
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Unconditional cash transferOther
Also called Guaranteed income, Basic income, Guaranteed basic income, Cash transfer
$1,000 unconditional cash transfer per month for 12 months
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Guaranteed income | Experimental | $1,000 of unconditional cash per month for 12 months Receives: Other: Unconditional cash transfer |
| Control | No intervention | No intervention |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Psychological distress (Kessler 10)
Each item is scored from one 'none of the time' to five 'all of the time'. Scores of the 10 items are then summed, yielding a minimum score of 10 and a maximum score of 50. Scores totaling less than 20 indicate that a person is likely to be mentally well; scores between 20-24 suggest a person is likely to have a mild mental health disorder; 25-29 are likely to indicate a moderate mental health disorder; and those scoring 30 or higher are likely to have a severe mental health disorder.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Financial Wellbeing (CFPB Financial Well-Being Scale)
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's Financial Wellbeing Scale is scored from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate a greater sense of financial well-being.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Physical functioning (SF-36)
Each response is scored as 0 (Yes, limited a lot); 50 (Yes, limited a little); or 100 (No, not limited at all). Averages closer to 100 indicate better physical functioning while averages closer to 0 indicate worse physical functioning.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Food security
4 items to assess past four week food insecurity: 1) worry about not having enough food, 2) inability to eat preferred foods, 3) having to eat foods that they did not want to eat, and 4) eating less because there was not enough food. Items scored as "yes" (1) or "no" (0).
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Household environmental instability (CHAOS)
The Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale (CHAOS) is a 15-item scale that assesses household environmental instability. Each item is scored from 1 to 4. Scores of the items are then summed, with scores ranging from 15 to 60. The higher the score, the higher the level of environmental chaos in the home.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Mattering (Mattering Index)
The Mattering Index is a 24-item self-reported scale to assess an individual's sense of significance within their community and the extent to which they feel valued and recognized by others. The scale measures 3 dimensions of mattering: awareness (how people believe others perceive them), importance (how people believe that others are emotionally invested in them), and reliance (how much individuals feel others can rely on them). Item scoring is from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The awareness dimension accounts for 8 items, with total scores ranging from 8 to 40. The importance dimension accounts for 10 items, with total scores ranging from 10 to 50. The reliance dimension accounts for 6 items, with total scores ranging from 6 to 30. Higher total scores in each domain indicate a greater sense of mattering.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Housing security
Three items to assess 1) housing status (e.g., renter, homeowner, rent-to-own, etc.), 2) past 6 month evictions (yes/no), and 3) past 5 year mortgage default notices (number of times). Evictions and mortgage defaults are scored as "1" if the response is greater than zero, and "0" if the response is zero.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Hope (Adult Hope Scale)
The Adult Hope Scale is a 12-item self-reported scale that assesses one's ability to set goals ("agency" subscale; 4 items) and the confidence to pursue them ("pathways" subscale; 4 items). Item scoring is from 1 (definitely false) to 8 (definitely true) and there are 4 filler items that are not scored. Subscale scores range from 4 to 32; total scores range from 8 to 64. Higher scores indicate higher hope.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Secondary outcomes (3)
Intimate partner violence (Composite Abuse Scale)
The Composite Abuse Scale (CAS R-SF) is a 15-item scale designed to capture a respondent's experience of intimate partner violence (IPV) with a particular emphasis on the frequency of experiences. Respondents are asked whether they have experienced any of the 15 IPV items (e.g., My partner(s) shook, pushed, grabbed, or threw me). If they respond yes, they are asked to indicate how often it happened in the past 12 months (e.g., Not in the past 12 months, Once, A few times, Monthly, Weekly, Daily/Almost Daily), scored as 0 to 5. Total scores, ranging from 0 to 75, are computed by calculating the mean frequency of all abuse items and multiplying this score by 15, where there are responses for at least 11 of the 15 items (~70%). Scores for the psychological abuse (range: 0 to 30), physical abuse (range: 0 to 25), and sexual abuse (range: 0 to 10) subscales are calculated in the same manner. Higher scores indicate increased severity of experiences of intimate partner violence.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Access to recreational opportunities for children
Parent-reported participation by their child in enrichment activities (yes/no). If yes, parent-reported type of enrichment activity in which the child participated.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Neighborhood safety
Subsections of the Neighborhood Environment for Children Rating Scale cover worries about victimization and interactions with neighbors. Each item rated on a scale from 1 to 10, with 1 being "mostly false" and 10 being "mostly true." The scale score was calculated by adding the score for each of the individual items and dividing that sum by the number of non-missing items for that individual. Scores ranged from 0 to 10, with higher scores on the interaction subsection indicating more positive neighborhood interaction, and higher scores on the victimization subsection indicating more worry about harm to property, self, and others in the neighborhood.
Measured: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Oct 2025
- Study start1 Dec 2021
- Primary completion30 Sep 2023
- Study completion31 Aug 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Financial WellbeingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of PennsylvaniaThe 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 8,194 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Pennsylvania
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The City of Los Angeles
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Stacia West, PhD, Principal investigator, The University of TennesseeAmy Castro, PhD, Principal investigator, The University of PennsylvaniaBo-Kyung Elizabeth Kim, PhD, Principal investigator, University of California, Los Angeles
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07200648
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 849819
- Acronym
- BIG:LEAP
- Status last verified
- Sep 2025
- First submitted
- 9 Sep 2025
- Last updated
- 1 Oct 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 1 Oct 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Basic Income Guaranteed: Los Angeles Economic Assistance Pilot
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07200648
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- BIG:LEAP / 849819
- Conditions
- Financial Wellbeing, Psychological Distress, Physical Functioning, Housing, Food Security, Income
- Keywords
- guaranteed income, cash transfer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 8,194 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of PennsylvaniaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The City of Los Angeles
- Study start
- 1 Dec 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Oct 2025 (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 randomized controlled trial is to learn if receipt of a guaranteed income works to reduce financial hardship and improve quality of life. The main questions it aims to answer are:
- How does GI affect participants' quality of life?
- What is the relationship between GI and participants' subjective sense of self?
- How does GI affect participants' income, and through what mechanisms?
- How does the implementation of GI inform the existing safety net?
Participants will:
Receive an recurring unconditional cash transfer of $1,000 per month every month for 12 months OR receive no unconditional cash transfer Complete surveys at six month intervals during the course of the study Be invited to participate in in-depth interviews
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Guaranteed income | Experimental | Other: Unconditional cash transfer$1,000 of unconditional cash per month for 12 months |
| Control | No intervention | –No intervention |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- 18 years of age or older,
- Resident of Los Angeles, CA,
- At or below 100% of Federal Poverty Level
- Have been negatively impacted by COVID-19
- Have a dependent
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- less than 18 years of age
- not a resident of Los Angeles, CA
- Above 100% of Federal Poverty Level
- Not negatively impacted by COVID-19
- Do not have a dependent
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Unconditional cash transferAlso: Guaranteed income, Basic income, Guaranteed basic income, Cash transfer$1,000 unconditional cash transfer per month for 12 months | Other | Guaranteed income |
Primary outcome
Psychological distress (Kessler 10)
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Each item is scored from one 'none of the time' to five 'all of the time'. Scores of the 10 items are then summed, yielding a minimum score of 10 and a maximum score of 50. Scores totaling less than 20 indicate that a person is likely to be mentally well; scores between 20-24 suggest a person is likely to have a mild mental health disorder; 25-29 are likely to indicate a moderate mental health disorder; and those scoring 30 or higher are likely to have a severe mental health disorder.
Financial Wellbeing (CFPB Financial Well-Being Scale)
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's Financial Wellbeing Scale is scored from 0 to 100, where higher scores indicate a greater sense of financial well-being.
Physical functioning (SF-36)
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Each response is scored as 0 (Yes, limited a lot); 50 (Yes, limited a little); or 100 (No, not limited at all). Averages closer to 100 indicate better physical functioning while averages closer to 0 indicate worse physical functioning.
Food security
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
4 items to assess past four week food insecurity: 1) worry about not having enough food, 2) inability to eat preferred foods, 3) having to eat foods that they did not want to eat, and 4) eating less because there was not enough food. Items scored as "yes" (1) or "no" (0).
Household environmental instability (CHAOS)
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
The Confusion, Hubbub, and Order Scale (CHAOS) is a 15-item scale that assesses household environmental instability. Each item is scored from 1 to 4. Scores of the items are then summed, with scores ranging from 15 to 60. The higher the score, the higher the level of environmental chaos in the home.
Mattering (Mattering Index)
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
The Mattering Index is a 24-item self-reported scale to assess an individual's sense of significance within their community and the extent to which they feel valued and recognized by others. The scale measures 3 dimensions of mattering: awareness (how people believe others perceive them), importance (how people believe that others are emotionally invested in them), and reliance (how much individuals feel others can rely on them). Item scoring is from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). The awareness dimension accounts for 8 items, with total scores ranging from 8 to 40. The importance dimension accounts for 10 items, with total scores ranging from 10 to 50. The reliance dimension accounts for 6 items, with total scores ranging from 6 to 30. Higher total scores in each domain indicate a greater sense of mattering.
Housing security
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Three items to assess 1) housing status (e.g., renter, homeowner, rent-to-own, etc.), 2) past 6 month evictions (yes/no), and 3) past 5 year mortgage default notices (number of times). Evictions and mortgage defaults are scored as "1" if the response is greater than zero, and "0" if the response is zero.
Hope (Adult Hope Scale)
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
The Adult Hope Scale is a 12-item self-reported scale that assesses one's ability to set goals ("agency" subscale; 4 items) and the confidence to pursue them ("pathways" subscale; 4 items). Item scoring is from 1 (definitely false) to 8 (definitely true) and there are 4 filler items that are not scored. Subscale scores range from 4 to 32; total scores range from 8 to 64. Higher scores indicate higher hope.
3 secondary outcomes
Intimate partner violence (Composite Abuse Scale)
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Access to recreational opportunities for children
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Neighborhood safety
Time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 1 Oct 2025.
- Related InfoLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Financial Wellbeing
Recruiting
Case Management Dyad
HIV, Pre-exposure Prophylaxis
Not yet recruiting
Virtual Testis Cancer Lay Support and Survivorship Aim 2
Testicular Cancer, Testis Cancer
Enrolling by invitationPhase 2
Impact of a Medical-Financial Partnership Intervention on Parent Mental Health, Perinatal Outcomes, and Child Developmental Risk
Child Development, Mental Health
Recruiting
Financial Counseling for Dementia Family Caregivers in Early and Middle Adulthood
Family Caregivers, Dementia
Active, not recruiting
Recovery Finance: Financial Health and Mental Health After Incarceration
Financial Hardship, Mental Health Issue
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. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Stacia West, PhD principal investigator
The University of Tennessee
Amy Castro, PhD principal investigator
The University of Pennsylvania
Bo-Kyung Elizabeth Kim, PhD principal investigator
University of California, Los Angeles
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Unconditional cash transfer in people with Financial Wellbeing and Psychological Distress, run by University of Pennsylvania at 1 site 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 5 inclusion and 5 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 1 Oct 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Psychological distress (Kessler 10) (time frame: Prior to baseline and at 6 month intervals until 6 months post-treatment). The study lists 8 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 1 Oct 2025.