Primary Outcomes (explanation)
We hypothesize that the intervention will produce detectable reductions in income volatility and unsecured debt. Income volatility data will be measured monthly through self-reporting and calculated by the coefficient of variation, similar to the method used by the U.S. Financial Diaries study. To determine the coefficient of variation, we will divide the standard deviation of monthly income by the mean of monthly income (Morduch ll & Siwicki, 2017). Monthly income volatility will be measured at nine observation points across the study using retrospective questioning in the online survey to produce 24 data points. Income volatility data will also be triangulated through text-based responses at key time points. Use of the coefficient of variation will allow for comparisons of volatility of both higher and lower income households. In the literature on low income households, the coefficient of variation for income volatility typically ranges from .31 to .41, with a mean of .36 and standard deviation of .50.
We chose debt reduction due to descriptive evidence suggesting that when provided a cash transfer in the form of a one-time lump amount such as the EITC, a matched savings disbursement, or the Alaska Permanent Fund dividend, individuals use that money to pay down debt (Harstad, 2017; Shaefer, Song, ll & Shanks, 2013; Halpern-Meekin, Edin, Tach, ll & Sykes, 2015). Debt reduction will be measured through selected questions from the Survey of Consumer Finances (2016) related to unsecured debt, including debt from credit cards, education loans, and medical bills.
The health indicators of physical functioning and psychological distress will be collected quantitatively via the SF-36 and the Kessler 10 (RAND Corporation, 2018; Kessler, et al., 2002) within a longitudinal survey and through in-depth qualitative interviews. This outcome was chosen because of empirical evidence that involuntary job loss, inadequate or insecure employment, and other proxies of income volatility are related to greater risk and severity of depressive symptoms (Catalano, et al., 2010; Rohde, Tang, Osber, ll & Rao, 2016) as well as qualitative evidence indicating some association of income volatility proxies to accounts of substantial anxiety (Morduch & Schneider, 2017; Halpern-Meekin, Edin, Tach, & Sykes, 2015).