Study Details | Pathways to Work

101006-Study of Shreveport

Study quality: High

High

Reason for the rating: This study received a high study quality rating because it is a randomized controlled trial with low attrition, suggesting the findings can be attributed to the program.

Program: Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program

Characteristics of study participants:

Parents, Public benefits recipients, Single parents

Services provided:

Financial education, Unconditional cash transfers

Setting: Urban only

Methods and Standards Protocol version used for review: Version 2.0

Learn about our protocol

Study design

Design:

Randomized controlled trial

Study group formation:

Study recruitment was conducted through an open online application process. Applicant eligibility was determined based on residency in Caddo Parish, Louisiana; custodial status as a single parent or guardian of at least one child aged 3-19; and household income at or below 120 percent of the federal poverty level. Eligible applicants were randomly assigned to the Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program (SGIP) program group or to a control group. A total of 297 participants were randomly assigned, with 165 participants assigned to the program group and 132 participants assigned to the control group. The study used weights in random assignment such that 50 percent of participants in each condition lived in one of the 5 poorest ZIP codes in Caddo Parish and the other 50 percent of participants in each condition lived in any of the other ZIP codes of Caddo Parish.

Time period of study:

The study ran from January 2022 to August 2023. Study enrollment occurred in January 2022. The program was delivered over a 12-month period from March 2022 through February 2023. Data collection occurred from January 2022 through August 2023, with outcomes collected at 6-month, 12-month, and 18-month follow-up surveys.

Primary outcome domains examined:

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

Other outcome domains examined:

Financial well-being, psychological distress, physical functioning, food insecurity, housing security and quality, time use and self-care, child educational and behavioral outcomes, parent and child well-being, agency and hope, community connection and relationships with others, household income, job quality and satisfaction, educational enrollment and attainment

Study funded by:

The study was funded by a grant from Mayors for a Guaranteed Income and matching funds from Caddo Parish, Louisiana.

Results

View table definitions

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

Outcome domain	Measure	Timing	Study quality by finding	Comparison group mean	Program group mean	Impact	Units	Findings	Sample size
Increase short-term employment	Currently employed	Month 6	High	80.00	77.00	-3.00	percentage points		165
Decrease short-term benefit receipt	Received any public assistance benefits over the follow-up period	Month 6	High	72.00	73.00	1.00	percentage points		165

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

Means are not displayed when not reported or not aligned with the impact estimates. For example, if the impact estimate is regression-adjusted but only unadjusted means are reported in the study, the unadjusted means are not displayed as they are not aligned with the adjusted impact estimate.

Impact estimates are not shown when the estimate units cannot be converted to natural units.

Findings quality key:

High
Moderate

Study quality terms?

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

Findings key:

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

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

Sample characteristics

Study participants were single parents with household incomes at or below 120 percent of the federal poverty line who were residents of Caddo Parish, Louisiana. Most participants were non-Hispanic Black or African American (89 percent) and female (88 percent). The majority of participants reported receiving public benefits (80 percent) and being food insecure in the past month (70 percent). For housing, the majority of participants were renting (64 percent), with others living with friends or family (12 percent) or in public housing (12 percent). The average participant was 33 years old, and average household income was $12,434.

Age

Mean age

34 years

Race and ethnicity

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

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

Family status

Parents	100%
Single parents	100%

Employment and public benefit status

Were unemployed	25%
Public benefits recipients	83%

Program implementation

Implementing organization:

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

Program history:

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

Program services:

SGIP offered families a guaranteed income of $660 per month for 12 months.

Mandatory services:

None

Comparison services:

Families assigned to the comparison condition were not offered a guaranteed income.

Service receipt duration:

The program provided the guaranteed income for 12 months.

Program funding:

The SGIP was funded by a grant from the organization Mayors for a Guaranteed Income and matching funds from Caddo Parish, Louisiana.

Study publications

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

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

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

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

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

Study of Shreveport Guaranteed Income Program