Evaluating a ‘UBI Plus’ Intervention: A Needs-based Analysis of WorkFREE

TL;DR

This study evaluates a UBI Plus pilot called WorkFREE, showing how combining cash transfers with needs-focused meetings helps people meet material, psychological, and relational needs.

Contribution

The paper introduces a needs-based evaluation framework using Max-Neef's model to assess UBI Plus interventions.

Findings

UBI Plus supports participants in meeting material, psychological, and relational needs more effectively.

Needs-based approaches reveal synergies between cash transfers and social interventions.

The model has limitations in addressing social and gendered differences.

Abstract

As pilots in Universal Basic Income (UBI) pilots proliferate, there is increasing recognition that cash alone may not be enough to support envisioned transformation. Consequently, recent years have seen pilots in ‘UBI Plus’ - combinations of unconditional cash transfers with other social interventions. In this article, we present a mixed-methods needs-based evaluation of WorkFREE, a major UBI Plus pilot. Between 2020 and 2024, WorkFREE brought together UK and Indian researchers, a local NGO, and over 1,400 slum residents (295 households) in city name, India. WorkFREE participants received monthly unconditional cash transfers for eighteen months whilst participating in regular needs-focused ‘Plus meetings’. This article’s authors oversaw the design, implementation, and evaluation of WorkFREE both as a research project and pilot intervention. Locating human needs at an essential layer of existence and experience, we conducted all stages and aspects of our work using a needs-based approach. In this article, we use Manfred Max-Neef’s (1991) framework of fundamental human needs to evaluate WorkFREE’s UBI Plus pilot through a combination of quantitative data from three household surveys conducted over eighteen months and qualitative data conducted with participants over two years. We find compelling evidence that points to the synergic power of UBI Plus in supporting participants to more effectively and extensively meet not just their material, but also their psychological and relational needs. We recognise limits to our model and implementation - particularly with regard to responding to social, especially gendered, difference - but see enough evidence to advocate for UBI Plus and for needs-based approaches to research and social interventions.

Figures