LA BOOST: GI Implementation and Decision-Making

• In Event: Guaranteed Income: Understanding Unconditional Cash and Partnerships For Educational Research with Community Colleges

Abstract

While financial assistance is a common practice and studied intervention for incentivizing or enabling postsecondary success, guaranteed and unrestricted cash payments over a sustained period is far less common approach, with few case studies available for review. Guaranteed Income is designed to complement the safety net while avoiding the pitfalls of the “benefits cliff” (Baker et. al, 2020). These programs are time-limited, recurring, and grounded in an ethical proposition: that the social contract should guarantee a basic financial floor for all individuals (Castro & West, 2024). As a result, GI programs typically have no or few requirements for continued receipt of financial resources over the duration of the program. In contrast, most postsecondary aid like grants, scholarships, and paid apprenticeships require some type of conditionality, enrollment or performance metrics for continued participation or resources.
This paper explores the conceptualization, program design and implementation of the LACCD BOOST GI pilot, the largest guaranteed income initiative to date for community college students, from the perspective of the program architects, the Los Angeles Community College District. From exploring the potential of unrestricted cash to bolster community college student success, to finding and negotiating with funders, establishing eligibility criteria and designing the student-facing application process, this paper charts the myriad programmatic considerations program architects made. Specifically exploring how program architects drew from practices in three separate fields– GI, basic needs, and student success–to design a program that ethically addresses the needs of community college students.
Given the challenges faced by community college students such as rising gas prices and basic needs insecurity, which are linked to lower retention and negatively impact student well-being, the potential for a GI program is clear (Becarris-Pescatore et. al, 2023; Wood et al., 2016). Through the documentation of key design decisions, coupled with reflections and early learnings from program staff, this paper assists in cataloging design elements that may impact program outcomes, providing a roadmap for practitioners within educational institutions who seek to apply the GI model within their own settings.

Authors

• Kelly King, Los Angeles Community College District

• Katy Cisneros, Los Angeles Community College District