Navigating the planning, administrative, and advocacy role in the city’s guaranteed income pilot program
Author: Nicole Rothstein
What would happen if we trusted young parents living in poverty with money that they could spend however they saw fit for their families?
This question inspired the Baltimore Mayor’s Office of Children and Family Success to launch a guaranteed income (GI) pilot project – the Baltimore Young Families Success Fund (BYFSF). The pilot project was administered by The CASH Campaign of Maryland (CASH), with technical assistance provided by Mayors for a Guaranteed Income.
This is CASH’s story that explores administrative experience – including planning, processes, successes, challenges, and outcomes – with Baltimore’s GI pilot program.
When the CASH Campaign of Maryland (CASH) was approached by the Baltimore Mayor’s Office of Children and Family Success about serving as the administrator for its guaranteed income (GI) pilot program, nobody could have predicted the impact it would have on the organization, its team members, and the community.
In 2020, Baltimore Mayor Brandon M. Scott joined the Mayors for a Guaranteed Income coalition – a network of nearly 170 mayors advocating for a federal GI to provide an income floor for all Americans. This step set in motion plans to bring a GI program to the City of Baltimore.
Robin McKinney, CASH Co-founder and CEO, says that supporting a GI program – on top of the organization’s other direct services, research, and advocacy work – was not originally on their radar screen. That didn’t stop CASH’s small but mighty four-person policy team. For the past five years, they have devoted endless time, hard work, and compassion to the Baltimore Young Families Success Fund (BYFSF).
Planning process: Steering committee structures program design
The intention behind Baltimore’s GI program was to address income inequality and the economic fallout from the pandemic for some of the city’s hardest-hit residents. In April of 2021, a steering committee was formed with leaders from the Baltimore area, including CASH’s Director of Policy Tonaeya Moore.
“Baltimore is unique as far as GI programs go,” says Tonaeya. “There aren’t many other pilots that set up a steering committee, but Mayor Scott wanted to make sure everyone was coming together to have this conversation.”
One of the steering committee’s first big tasks was creating the blueprints for Baltimore’s GI program, including how much money would be distributed and over what period of time, how disbursement would work, goals and projected outcomes, and other program details.
To help in this process, the steering committee reviewed other GI programs nationwide. Programs such as Stockton Economic Empowerment Demonstration (SEED) in Stockton, California, and The Magnolia Mother’s Trust in Jackson, Mississippi, were a guiding light in the program planning process.
“We were able to look at these programs and say, what are some of their achievements that we can leverage, what challenges can we learn from, what can we add or take away or build upon to make the program a success,” Tonaeya explains.
The committee met monthly for 18 months and held focus groups in the community to cast a wide net around all of the necessary factors and considerations to weigh during the planning process.
It was determined that the City of Baltimore would provide $4.8 million in funding that would go directly to 200 young families, who would receive $1,000 per month over the course of 24 months. Applicants must be parents ages 18-24 residing in the Baltimore City limits and living at or below 300% of the federal poverty line.
A defining characteristic of Baltimore’s GI program was that the money was unconditional. No limitations, expectations, or restrictions were placed around the funds; participants could decide how best to use that income for themselves and their families.
Research design: Storytelling vs. treatment groups
As noted above, the program included 200 participants, each receiving $1,000 in monthly payments over 24 months. Of these, 130 were part of the treatment group, while 70 participated in a storytelling cohort. What set the storytelling cohort apart was the opportunity for members to share their experiences publicly and with the media, highlighting the impact of guaranteed income on their lives. To support this group, CASH organized several optional events, such as family fun days and other gatherings requested by participants.
Selecting Steady: Forming a framework for disbursement of funds
One of the most significant responsibilities of the steering committee was creating a process for how the money would be distributed to Baltimore’s GI participants. With input from outside experts, the steering committee members worked together to create a framework for choosing a disbursement partner. With CASH’s financial expertise, they provided significant value around this conversation.
“It was important to us to find an option that wouldn’t charge fees,” Tonaeya recalls. “Other pilots were finding that banks charged a lot of fees and we said early on that we didn’t want that.”
Other requirements included that participants would have access to a virtual and physical card and that the chosen company would provide ongoing customer support. After speaking with several vendors, they selected Steady – a company that CASH had previously partnered with to create a noncustodial youth account for a credit union.
“We landed on Steady because they didn’t charge fees to our participants and they had a team of six people dedicated to customer support,” Tonaeya explains. “It was helpful that we were able to have regular check-ins to address what we were hearing from participants.”
Steady also offered training in both English and Spanish and provided prepaid debit cards to approximately 30 program participants who preferred to receive the money that way instead of via direct deposit.
“We wanted to make sure the vendor we landed on had the same interests and values that we do for un- and underbanked people so that they could feel comfortable trusting banks and opening accounts for themselves and their families,” Tonaeya explains.
Choosing an administrator: CASH takes the reins
The steering committee was also tasked with addressing who would oversee the program and how it would be managed. It was decided that the best option was to bring in an outside group to serve as project administrator.
“One of the smartest decisions was that the city wanted to use a third-party administrator,” Robin says. “Other cities did it all in-house. From early on, the city knew it had to be outsourced.”
A total of three groups were considered for the job.
“Through a number of conversations and key moments, it became clear that CASH’s expertise would play a valuable role in the program’s success,” Robin recalls. “We proved our value around disbursement, and we were already doing things like benefits counseling. It was a natural fit.”
While many of the elements involved in running a GI program are within CASH’s wheelhouse, the organization’s financial capabilities and connections would be especially integral to launching Baltimore’s GI program. CASH took over the reins as project administrator in April of 2022.
Additional support: Expanding program possibilities with flexible funds
When the program was first handed over to the CASH team, very few details were provided – and very little additional financial support. Their first step? Writing funding proposals.
“Between myself and the Mayor’s office, we hit the pavement finding funders,” Robin explains. “We were able to bring many new people to the table in addition to the people who already knew us and were willing to make a grant.”
CASH had previous relationships with nearly every group that promised financial support to the program. Robin notes that because CASH was already in many of their financial systems, money was able to move faster and that the process ran smoothly overall.
In addition to the City of Baltimore’s contribution, groups like The Annie E. Casey Foundation, The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation, The Kresge Foundation, and Hoffberger Family Philanthropies rounded out the budget with an additional $600,000 in general operating funds.
“What was helpful in the sell was that we already had the money that was going directly to participants,” Robin recalls. “This allowed us to raise funds for additional things like research and implementation. Some groups had restrictions around funding and so they were happy to give to our general operating costs.”
Robin says general operating funds were critical in maximizing the program’s impact – especially in offsetting any negative consequence the program might have on participants’ eligibility for other public assistance. Thanks to the flexibility of these funds, the program established $80,000 in hold harmless money to help participants at risk of losing other public benefits or government assistance.
“When we wanted to shift things around, we could do that in a way that was responsive, helpful, and flexible, but still rigorous,” Robin explains, adding that they didn’t have to give any hold harmless money out until the second year of the program.
Another contributing factor that Robin points to as making this an “easy sell” is the evidence behind the need for such a program.
“This wasn’t just us coming to them with an idea,” she explains. “It really was truly listening to people and understanding what the target population needs. It was about looking at what was already happening in other areas and how we could add to that. This program wasn’t the result of funders saying we had to do it – we had the information to support it.”
Application and orientation: Onboarding 200 families
The call for applications was open for one week in May 2022, during which time approximately 7,000 applications were received. While the application was online, the program established several sites around the city that served as hubs for people without access to the internet or a computer. Anyone who needed assistance with the application could either visit these hubs or the CASH offices.
Ultimately, 200 families were selected to participate, and within two months the CASH team had everyone onboarded.
During orientation, CASH worked with participants on signing consent forms, providing proof of Baltimore residence, setting up a bank account, and creating an email account. CASH Senior Policy Associate Lonia Muckle played a key role in the onboarding process, which occurred between June and July of 2022.
“It surprised me how many people didn’t have email addresses,” Lonia comments. “Since our population was 18- to 24-year-olds, I assumed they would have had email and bank accounts. A lot of them still used their parents’ accounts or accounts their parents set up for them, which still had their parents’ names on them.”
Lonia reports that they helped around 50 people set up email addresses or bank accounts. Through a list of safe and affordable bank accounts provided to them by CASH’s own BankOn Maryland representative, the team worked closely with participants to select an option best for them.
Benefits counseling: Protecting public assistance
CASH offered benefits counseling to participants during the onboarding process, as well as throughout the duration of the program. This process helped participants determine which public benefits they might risk losing because of their involvement in the program. As the program was intended to supplement – not replace – other public benefits, it was important that participants did not lose any additional assistance.
Out of the 200 participants, 169 people chose to go through benefits counseling. According to Lonia, some people either didn’t have any public benefits or didn’t think they were eligible to receive public benefits, so they opted out of benefits counseling.
At this point in the program, the only public benefits waiver available to participants was a housing waiver. It was determined that 20 people received housing vouchers and therefore were eligible for the housing waiver.
The CASH team estimated that approximately $25,000 in total benefits could be lost due to the program not having access to other public benefit waivers. The majority of this total number ($15,000) came from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Out of the 100 people who received SNAP, it was estimated that 17 people could be at risk of losing those benefits.
“This was helpful for us in the following year when we talked to DHS [Department of Human Services],” Lonia explains. “We had the data to show them the exact number and impact on our participants, which enabled us to get the waiver for all programs covered under DHS.”
CASH sent regular communications offering assistance to any participant whose benefits might have been lowered or were in jeopardy.
Comprehensive outreach: Maximizing impact with added services and connections
On August 15, 2022, the 200 participants received their first $1,000 payment. As previously mentioned, this was a no-strings-attached income. Participants were not limited to using the money for specific expenses or required to attend any programming classes or events. However, the program offered many optional outreach services and other resources throughout the two years of the program.
“It was really important to us and to the program that we went above just the $1,000 payments to actually provide education and information and make personal connections,” says Jordan Holden, Policy Associate for CASH.
CASH’s emphasis on personal connections and outreach services led to Jordan joining as an intern in November 2022 and becoming a full-time team member in August 2023.
“We were really focused on relationship building and we knew we needed another person on the GI staff to help out with that,” Tonaeya recalls. “That’s when we brought in Jordan to be the point of contact and make those connections.”
Some of the additional opportunities offered to a segment of the participants included Family Days, Book Club, financial education, banking assistance, childcare support, eviction-prevention resources, and mental health support – among other things.
Tonaeya says that participants were initially hesitant to take advantage of these offerings, as many people were still skeptical about the program.
“Once they started to get to know the team and we were able to build that trust, they started taking part in those extra activities,” Tonaeya says.
With Jordan on board, the CASH team had greater bandwidth for establishing connections and building meaningful relationships with the participants. She says that being in that target population herself helped her build trust and a rapport with them.
Jordan recalls many program participants reaching out to her for advice, assistance, or just a listening ear – often resulting in long phone conversations, FaceTiming, and even home visits.
“That’s what sets us apart from other programs,” Jordan says. “They don’t necessarily take that extra step or think about all of those layers.”
When asked what her favorite part of the program is, Jordan eagerly discusses Book Club.
After discovering that many of the moms in the program enjoyed reading, CASH established a book club for all who wanted to join. They read Michelle J. Johnson’s book “Planted in Good Soil” – a journey through young motherhood and parenting children with special needs.
What ended up being a surprise to participants – and even to program administrators – was that each of the moms who joined Book Club also had children with disabilities or who were on the autism spectrum. Book Club became a place where the moms could connect and support each other through what they believed was a unique and isolating experience.
“In one of the last sessions, everyone brought their mom or mom figure,” Jordan recalls. “We had an open discussion about how we were raised, what we were like, how our moms were raised. As a mother, it was really transformative.”
By leveraging those relationships and additional outreach services, participants could maximize the positive impact the program had on their lives, their families, and their futures.
Offboarding: Tailored support to fill specific needs
After hearing that other GI programs needed more time for offboarding than anticipated, the CASH team began the process six months before the last payment was received. Because of the importance of participant feedback, CASH incentivized people to attend one of three offboarding information sessions by entering their names into drawings for gift cards.
The offboarding process also included one-on-one time with Jordan. During these meetings, she would help individual participants fill in the specific needs-gaps they were still experiencing. She says a lot of this time was spent coming up with a plan to replace the program payments with additional income, distributing hold harmless funds, and providing direct resource connections such as eviction prevention information and childcare assistance. Participants were also offered two months of financial education classes on topics such as how to build credit or how to buy a car.
“They still needed our help in dealing with things like housing and workforce development,“ Tonaeya says. “Jordan really made sure she was tailoring support to their specific needs.”
As a final part of the offboarding process, participants signed a form acknowledging that the program was ending and that the last payment would be received in July 2024.
Evaluation and feedback: A toolbox for sustaining stability
Each member of the CASH team can attest to the success of the program through their personal connections and interactions with participants, funders, and city leaders. Because of the close relationships they established, they have received individual feedback and appreciation for their work and commitment throughout the two years of the program.
“People have said we’ve given them a toolbox for sustaining themselves and their families,” Jordan says. “They now have the resources to be advocates for themselves, make positive changes, and establish the footing they need for the future.”
In the spring and summer of 2023, CASH surveyed a segment of the cohort on their impressions of the program. The survey revealed that out of the 49 individuals who completed the 45 survey questions, 42 people used the funds to pay bills, 32 people were able to prioritize self-care as a result of the program, and 41 individuals reported having a plan for the future – among other positive feedback.
The survey report showed that participant families were examining how to maintain stability and consistency and save money. Half of those surveyed expressed interest in CASH’s other financial education and stability resources.
Survey participants also reported that a better-paying job, more affordable childcare, and a better understanding of budgeting and saving would make the transition out of the program easier.
Thanks to our partnership with Abt Associates, the interim report shows that the families are progressing more than the control group families one year into the pilot. Researchers identified notable differences in income, education, housing, and employment. For more details on the report and upcoming data, visit here.
The CASH team is satisfied with the time, resources, and effort they gave to ensure the program was a success – and are pleased that participants’ lives were positively impacted as a result of the experience.
Jordan says there were times that the work they put in was unconventional – out of the scope of GI-related tasks and their positions with CASH – but that it was what they felt participants needed.
“We knew that’s what we needed to do to take this walk with them,” she explains. “We are all very committed to the work that we do; we put our hearts into it. We sacrificed time with our own families and children to pour into these families. I feel like any participant would tell you that our program went way beyond the $1,000 payments.”
Policy connection: Advocating the benefits of GI programs
The CASH team would ultimately like to see GI efforts like Baltimore’s GI program progress from a pilot program to a public policy staple. Now that the program has ended, they have been working to educate legislators on the benefits of GI programs and the variety of options for improving income security in communities. CASH continues to support state programs, as well as push for federal policies around GI.
While the program was designed to help young parents, other GI programs nationwide focus on different demographics or areas of financial uncertainty. Lonia says that when meeting with legislators, they highlight what other states are doing in this policy area, what successes and challenges they have experienced, and what policy points are important to consider and promote.
Their outlook is that GI programs should not replace other social services or policies created to narrow the income gap – such as tax credits and Baby Bonds, which are government-funded programs providing children with start-up money at birth to help prepare them for adulthood. Instead, by working hand-in-hand they can maximize the impact on the communities’ most vulnerable populations.
“Our goal around connecting that policy is to say that all of these programs can work together to help propel people in their lives,” Lonia explains. “You don’t have to choose whether you want to do one or the other. All of the programs target different aspects of financial instability so they should all be funded to give a person the best chance to become financially independent in the future.”
CASH asked participants from the pilot program if they would consider assisting in future advocacy efforts. Out of the 18 people who expressed an interest in doing so, several are undergoing advocacy training as they prepare to share their stories with legislators and the community.
Program challenges: Turning obstacles into opportunities
Like with every pilot program, there were challenges associated with the program that the team has been able to transform into learning opportunities.
It was important to the steering committee and administration team that unhoused applicants were eligible for the program, and therefore the application was intentionally worded to include them. However, it was discovered that the application required an address for proof of Baltimore residency – a roadblock for unhoused individuals. Some of these applicants would submit the address of a friend or family member who doesn’t reside within the city limits. Through the application process, those individuals were flagged and the team helped address the issue so that their applications could be included.
As previously mentioned, not having a waiver to cover possible loss of other public assistance had the potential to – but fortunately did not – cause participants to lose benefits. Through this experience, the CASH team learned the importance of a waiver that protects participants from losing public assistance benefits.
Over the course of the orientation process, two unexpected situations arose where the CASH team was unsure how to proceed in terms of accessing funds. During this time, one participant passed away and another person had just been released from the criminal justice system – bringing up the question of if and how their program funds would be accessed.
Family members of the deceased individual were not able to access the program funds and CASH had to go back to the applicant process to select another participant. That’s when the team – in an effort to ensure the family could access those funds in similar situations moving forward – incorporated a next-of-kin form into the onboarding process.
After meeting with the advisory committee, it was determined that the previously incarcerated individual would still have access to program funds. CASH then took the necessary steps to ensure that standard applied across the board for program participants in a similar situation.
One final obstacle that came as a surprise to some of the CASH team members was the negativity aimed at the program from opponents of the program. Tonaeya says she is still receiving messages from people who don’t value the program’s structure and impact.
“It’s the ugliness that I think we didn’t anticipate,” she explains. “It’s interesting to me that some people think $1,000 is enough money for people to quit their jobs. The things we’ve heard are surprising from the people who didn’t understand why we needed to do this program.”
To address this negativity, Tonaeya says they’ve focused on having conversations with constituents and educating opponents.
“One thing that’s important is getting on the same page as stakeholders,” she explains. “We’ve had to break it down and explain how these areas are connected; how not having enough money to support your family is connected to your housing situation or your transportation. It’s about breaking down the impact we see and continuing to have those behind-the-scenes conversations even when they are pretty tough.”
Program partnerships: Enhancing relationships with key players in economic empowerment
In addition to the City of Baltimore, the Mayor’s Office of Children and Family Success, Maryland Department of Human Services, Mayor’s for a Guaranteed Income, Steady, Abt Associates, and the long list of funders, the CASH team points to many other partnerships that played a role in the program’s success.
The Arc Maryland – a nonprofit organization committed to advancing the rights and quality of life of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD) and their families – is a key player in the continued impact of the Book Club’s success. The organization provided resources to Book Club participants with particular emphasis on navigating the Individualized Education Plan process for their children living with IDD.
The program provided another opportunity to deepen CASH’s collaboration with partners across the state. By addressing areas such as housing, childcare, workforce development, and food security, CASH leveraged existing relationships and built new ones to support participants in overcoming challenges.
“During regular check-ins with participants we continuously remind them about the work our partners are doing and the opportunities they can take advantage of,” says Tonaeya. “The partnerships we developed through the program and continue to strengthen are one of the most significant outcomes for us and the work we do.”
Keeping the conversation going: Continued support for financial wellbeing
The CASH team operates under the belief that money alone cannot fix all of the challenges in Baltimore. This is why the program’s design incorporated additional educational opportunities and resources, made direct-service connections, and established close relationships with participants.
CASH continues to provide many of these opportunities to participants even though the program has ended. They remain committed to advocating for Baltimore’s underserved populations to close the wealth gap and promote income security for all residents.
“We continue to check in with participants; they still have our numbers and still reach out to us for help with different issues,” Tonaeya says. “We make sure they understand that when we said we would be there for them, it wouldn’t just be for the 24 months. We are still keeping the conversation going and still finding ways to support families.”
Visit the CASH Campaign of Maryland blog to read additional stories about Baltimore’s Guaranteed Income Pilot Program.