Research & Evidence
Case studies from UBI pilots
Explore real-world basic income trials and related income-support programs—what was tested, what changed for participants, and what the evidence suggests for policy design.
How to read
What we track in each case
Each case study summarizes the program design and the outcomes most often reported in the literature. We focus on measures that help compare pilots across places and time.
A UBI case study should include location and time period, a clear intervention, measured outcomes. UBI should be randomized, should have control groups and should be statistically significant.
A case study should focus on limitations also as it can also be a major indicator of growth.
We try to make sure that we never trust a single source and try to collect as much data as possible. Our aim to make our case studies become databases in the long run.
Program design
Eligibility, payment size, frequency, duration, and whether the benefit is unconditional or includes requirements.
Implementation
Enrollment, delivery method, take-up, participant support, and how the program was administered and evaluated.
Outcomes
Income stability, employment, health, education, housing, and financial stress—plus any unintended effects.
Equity & context
Who benefits, who is left out, local cost of living, labor market conditions, and complementary services.
Featured case studies
A curated set of pilots and evaluations to start with. We’ll continue adding summaries as new evidence is published.
City pilot: monthly cash transfers
Implementation + outcomes
Rural region: income stability focus
Household security
Youth cohort: transition support
Education + work
Family support: child wellbeing lens
Health + wellbeing
Employment study: labor market effects
Work + earnings
Community-led program evaluation
Equity + governance
Deep dive
Designing a UBI pilot for learning
A practical template for comparing pilots and translating results into policy decisions.
Client
UBI Nexus (example)
Industry
Public policy research
Services
Synthesis, evaluation framing
Year
2026
Challenge
Evidence on basic income is growing, but pilots vary widely in design and reporting. Without a consistent lens, it’s hard to compare results or understand what drove the outcomes.
Approach
We use a consistent case-study structure: program design, implementation details, outcomes, and context. Each summary highlights what was measured, how strong the evaluation is, and what questions remain.
Results
4
core sections per case
10+
outcome areas tracked
1
comparability framework
Case study notes
Quick context to help interpret results across different pilots and evaluations.
Are these all “true UBI” programs?
Not always. Some are unconditional cash pilots; others are guaranteed income or related income-support programs. We label the design clearly so comparisons are transparent.
What makes evidence stronger?
Clear eligibility rules, reliable payment delivery, low attrition, and evaluation methods that can estimate causal effects (for example, randomized or well-matched comparison groups).
Why do results differ across places?
Payment size, duration, local prices, labor markets, and existing safety nets all shape outcomes. Context is part of the finding—not a footnote.
Do cash programs reduce work?
Findings vary by design and population. Many studies show small or mixed effects on employment, with stronger changes in stress, stability, and time use. We summarize what each evaluation measured.
How often are case studies updated?
We update summaries as new reports, peer-reviewed papers, and replication analyses are released.
Can I suggest a pilot to include?
Yes—send us a link to the report or dataset and we’ll review it for inclusion.