Joel Lazarus, Sarath Davala, Maria Franchi, Neil Howard, Nick Langridge, Santosh Malviya, Vibhor Mathur
{"title":"Evaluating a 'UBI Plus' Intervention: A Needs-based Analysis of WorkFREE.","authors":"Joel Lazarus, Sarath Davala, Maria Franchi, Neil Howard, Nick Langridge, Santosh Malviya, Vibhor Mathur","doi":"10.1007/s11205-026-03806-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":21943,"journal":{"name":"Social Indicators Research","volume":"182 1","pages":"16"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12975856/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Indicators Research","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-026-03806-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
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.
期刊介绍:
Since its foundation in 1974, Social Indicators Research has become the leading journal on problems related to the measurement of all aspects of the quality of life. The journal continues to publish results of research on all aspects of the quality of life and includes studies that reflect developments in the field. It devotes special attention to studies on such topics as sustainability of quality of life, sustainable development, and the relationship between quality of life and sustainability. The topics represented in the journal cover and involve a variety of segmentations, such as social groups, spatial and temporal coordinates, population composition, and life domains. The journal presents empirical, philosophical and methodological studies that cover the entire spectrum of society and are devoted to giving evidences through indicators. It considers indicators in their different typologies, and gives special attention to indicators that are able to meet the need of understanding social realities and phenomena that are increasingly more complex, interrelated, interacted and dynamical. In addition, it presents studies aimed at defining new approaches in constructing indicators.