Policy- A Seattle basic income pilot gave low-income residents $500 a month, nearly doubling employment rates.
- Some participants reported getting new housing, while others saw their employment incomes rise.
A Seattle-area guaranteed basic income pilot gave low-income residents $500 a month to help reduce poverty. Employment in the group nearly doubled, and numerous unhoused residents secured housing.
The Workforce Development Council of Seattle-King County launched a 10-month guaranteed basic income pilot program with 102 participants in fall 2022. New findings by research firm Applied Inference reveal that the $5,000 total payments improved participants' quality of life, housing, and employment outcomes.
"These results showcase the power of community investment and the necessity of equitable solutions to address persistent barriers," said Marie Kurose, CEO of the WDC, in a statement. "The WDC will continue to use these insights to amplify our impact and drive transformative change in our region."
Though they have various characteristics and qualifications, guaranteed basic income programs offer direct cash payments to selected participants for a set amount of time. Some programs require participants to report what they use the monthly cash on, while others offer funds with no strings attached.
In the Seattle-area pilot program, public and private partners — such as King County, the Employment Security Department, and Chase Bank — provided funding to the participants, about 88% of whom were people of color. King County is a mostly white, wealthy county, according to Census data.
Employment among the participants almost doubled from 37% before the program to 66% post-pilot. Participants also reported getting higher-paying jobs with additional benefits. Participants' average incomes increased from $2,995 a month to $3,405.
The percentage of participants whose jobs provided a retirement plan nearly tripled, while life insurance doubled. Over a quarter of participants reported acquiring disability insurance in their new jobs, which none of them had in their previous jobs.
Participants also reported being more financially stable, meaning they could pay off bills and debts while building up more savings for the future. For instance, the percent of participants with savings increased from 24% to 35% — for families with children, this increased from 0% to 42%. The percentage of those able to consistently pay their bills doubled from 19% to 38%. The percentage of those behind on all debts stayed stagnant.
The payments contributed to less anxiety and fatigue and more freedom to travel and spend on non-essentials. Likely due to increased ability to seek treatment, some also reported reduced physical pain, allowing them to go about their days more easily and complete educational or professional goals.
Parents reported using the payments mainly for their children's needs, though many said they couldn't significantly strengthen their own financial position. Parents were less likely to have started short-term professional training compared to non-parents.
Many participants said they wanted the program to continue for a full year rather than 10 months, while others suggested higher monthly payments as high as $1,000.
The results are on trend with those of similar pilot programs nationwide, which have seen massive success. Participants in universal and guaranteed basic income programs have widely reported that the funds helped them pay off debts, as well as afford groceries, childcare, and housing.
Even so, conservative lawmakers nationwide have loudly advocated against the programs, claiming that they discourage work and cost taxpayers. However, many of the pilot programs are funded privately by philanthropy or by federal relief funds. Republicans in several state legislatures have pushed efforts to ban basic income programs in their states.