This story was originally published by City Bureau.

Five hundred dollars, no strings attached. That’s what the Chicago Resilient Communities Pilot—one of the largest guaranteed income programs in the United States—plans to deliver to 5,000 low-income Chicagoans every month for a whole year. More than half of participants are already receiving the cash infusion.

Despite unemployment decreasing from last year and the Chicago minimum wage increasing to $15.40 per hour for some workers, advocates of the program say it is necessary because many Chicagoans are still struggling to make ends meet. At the same time, inflation has hit a four-decade high and the spike in the cost of goods has experts worrying poverty will rise, further increasing income inequality.

One solution? Cash assistance. The concept gained momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially after the federal government issued stimulus checks and Child Tax Credit payments to help Americans cope with the steep rise in unemployment and financial hardship. Experts say those payments, especially those for families, helped ease child poverty while they were in place.

Still, some economists worry guaranteed income programs will make inflation worse, further increasing the costs for food, gas, and other essential items. Other economists dismiss that concern, arguing that current inflation is primarily driven by factors such as the war in Ukraine, supply chain disruptions, and staggering corporate profits.

Chicago isn’t the only local government experimenting with cash assistance. The growing list also includes Minneapolis, Saint Paul, and Philadelphia. Cook County, which is running one of the largest publicly funded guaranteed income pilots in the country, has already committed to a permanent program after the pilot ends. The size of Chicago’s and Cook County’s programs could give researchers more of the evidence they need to determine if guaranteed income could work at the state and federal levels.

While it’s still too early to draw conclusions from Chicago’s program, here’s what we know now:

Who applied?

The Department of Family and Support Services (DFSS) received applications from all 77 community areas during a three-week application process. In total, the city received more than 35 applications for each of the available spots in the program.

The median income of applicants was $14,000, according to DFSS. Women were the overwhelming majority of applicants, as were Black Chicagoans, who made up 68 percent of applicants. The majority of applicants said they were caregivers.

To Audra Wilson, president and CEO of the Shriver Center on Poverty Law, this was unsurprising, given that Black women are often the last to recover from economic recessions and “are more likely to face higher unemployment rates, disproportionate amounts of child care and domestic work and other economic inequities that were made worse by the pandemic.”

According to a City Bureau analysis of applicant data, the majority of applications came from communities in the south and west sides, with the highest concentration of applicants—about 5 percent—in the Auburn Gresham area. Most applicants cited reduced hours of work, unemployment, and leaving jobs for caregiving duties as reasons for applying for the program. More than 16,000 applicants said they were experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.

City Bureau’s analysis found that among those applicants, Black Chicagoans were disproportionately impacted. Of those who said they were homeless, more than 80 percent identified as Black. Separately, 83 percent of the people who cited housing insecurity, meaning they moved frequently or have no stable home, identified as Black.

How is Chicago’s program administered?

DFSS and the Mayor’s Office selected two nonprofits to administer the program. GiveDirectly—an international nonprofit primarily operating in East Africa—is the program’s administrator. AidKit, a technology platform, is helping GiveDirectly deliver cash to residents.

DFSS began distributing payments to residents the last week of June. Recipients could choose to receive the money either through a bank deposit or a prepaid debit card, and this income will not be taxed.

How were participants chosen?

To be eligible, applicants had to report experiencing economic hardship from the pandemic and have a household income under $70,000 for a family of four. Applicants selected to participate in the pilot were chosen through a computer-generated randomization system. DFSS Commissioner Brandie Knazze said the system was designed so that low-income people living in areas most impacted by COVID-19 had a higher probability of being selected.

Harish Patel, director of Economic Security for Illinois and a manager of the Chicago Resilient Families Initiative Task Force that studied the scope of a guaranteed income pilot, said there are several benefits to choosing recipients randomly. A lottery system minimizes bias and corruption— two issues that could hurt trust in the program and damage long-term support. Randomization also allows researchers to draw conclusions about how the program affects low-income people from diverse backgrounds.

Who was chosen to participate?

Knazze, the DFSS commissioner, said most selected participants were women and identified as parents or caregivers, closely mirroring the pool of applicants. More than half of the 5,000 participants are Black (67 percent) with nearly a quarter of participants identifying as Latinx (23 percent). White Chicagoans make up 16 percent of participants and Asian Chicagoans are the smallest racial category at 3 percent of participants.

In early July, DFSS distributed its first payments to 3,500 Chicagoans via direct deposits and prepaid debit cards. Others have received the money since then on a rolling basis. As of last week, DFSS was still working on enrolling a few hundred participants.

What do advocates for guaranteed income say?

So far, Chicago gets high marks from advocates for creating a program with few hoops to jump through. Administrative burdens, they argue, often shut some people from the aid. The application was available online in six languages and took around 30 minutes to complete. Applicants were not asked about their immigration status or criminal record. The application asked about household size, demographics, education, and other public benefits received. It also required proof of identity, income, and residency through a mix of documents.

With the cost of living increasing and wages lagging behind inflation, some local experts believe that $500 per month will make a difference in the lives of Chicagoans experiencing deep poverty. While guaranteed income allows recipients to decide how and what to spend extra money on, experts say it is not the only solution—a broad social safety net and economic policies that help families make ends meet is also critical.

“This pilot, as important as it is, is not the only tool to be able to solve poverty—it is one of a series of actions that need to be taken to really alleviate poverty,” said Wilson, the Shriver Center’s president and CEO.

While advocates interviewed agree that $500 per month is limited, especially as prices rise, it still has the potential to help Chicagoans experiencing poverty.

“We hope that the pilot will allow people to catch their breath,” Commissioner Knazze said. “We want to be able to allow them to have economic stability and mobility, to see financial gains, either through saving or achieving a personal goal, maybe an educational goal or savings.”

Could the pilot become permanent?

It’s unclear if the city has long-term plans to implement a permanent guaranteed income program and how that would be funded. When asked, the Mayor’s Office said they are committed to partnering with the City Council to support residents using direct cash assistance in a future budget cycle. And DFSS Commissioner Knazze said results from the pilot will inform how the city runs its programs in the future.

About 3,000 of the 5,000 pilot recipients will participate in an optional study led by the University of Chicago’s Inclusive Economy Lab, according to Carmelo Barbaro, the lab’s executive director, which will evaluate the impact of the program on participants’ financial health and general well-being. Researchers plan to use the results to provide recommendations for future programs.

Patel said he hopes the pilot sheds light on the need for guaranteed income programs as an addition—not a replacement—of the social safety net. But, he added, the city and county could use the format of the cash-assistance program to make their existing network of programs better, simpler, with less paperwork, and with fewer barriers for people.

The city expects to have some preliminary results in late 2023 or early 2024.

Longtime guaranteed-income advocate Ameya Pawar believes that the Chicago pilot program will demonstrate the necessity and feasibility of a national program—something local advocates of guaranteed income agree on. His hope, he said, is that the Chicago demonstration along with the other demonstrations across the country will lead to a federal policy change.

Sky Patterson is a 2022 Summer Civic Reporting Fellow, along with Francisco Saúl Ramírez Pinedo, who contributed to this report. Sarah Conway, City Bureau’s senior reporter covering jobs and the economy of survival in Chicago, also contributed. You can reach her with tips at [email protected].

Read More

This story was originally published by City Bureau.

Five hundred dollars, no strings attached. That’s what the Chicago Resilient Communities Pilot—one of the largest guaranteed income programs in the United States—plans to deliver to 5,000 low-income Chicagoans every month for a whole year. More than half of participants are already receiving the cash infusion.

Despite unemployment decreasing from last year and the Chicago minimum wage increasing to $15.40 per hour for some workers, advocates of the program say it is necessary because many Chicagoans are still struggling to make ends meet. At the same time, inflation has hit a four-decade high and the spike in the cost of goods has experts worrying poverty will rise, further increasing income inequality.

One solution? Cash assistance. The concept gained momentum during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially after the federal government issued stimulus checks and Child Tax Credit payments to help Americans cope with the steep rise in unemployment and financial hardship. Experts say those payments, especially those for families, helped ease child poverty while they were in place.

Still, some economists worry guaranteed income programs will make inflation worse, further increasing the costs for food, gas, and other essential items. Other economists dismiss that concern, arguing that current inflation is primarily driven by factors such as the war in Ukraine, supply chain disruptions, and staggering corporate profits.

Chicago isn’t the only local government experimenting with cash assistance. The growing list also includes Minneapolis, Saint Paul, and Philadelphia. Cook County, which is running one of the largest publicly funded guaranteed income pilots in the country, has already committed to a permanent program after the pilot ends. The size of Chicago’s and Cook County’s programs could give researchers more of the evidence they need to determine if guaranteed income could work at the state and federal levels.

While it’s still too early to draw conclusions from Chicago’s program, here’s what we know now:

Who applied?

The Department of Family and Support Services (DFSS) received applications from all 77 community areas during a three-week application process. In total, the city received more than 35 applications for each of the available spots in the program.

The median income of applicants was $14,000, according to DFSS. Women were the overwhelming majority of applicants, as were Black Chicagoans, who made up 68 percent of applicants. The majority of applicants said they were caregivers.

To Audra Wilson, president and CEO of the Shriver Center on Poverty Law, this was unsurprising, given that Black women are often the last to recover from economic recessions and “are more likely to face higher unemployment rates, disproportionate amounts of child care and domestic work and other economic inequities that were made worse by the pandemic.”

According to a City Bureau analysis of applicant data, the majority of applications came from communities in the south and west sides, with the highest concentration of applicants—about 5 percent—in the Auburn Gresham area. Most applicants cited reduced hours of work, unemployment, and leaving jobs for caregiving duties as reasons for applying for the program. More than 16,000 applicants said they were experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.

City Bureau’s analysis found that among those applicants, Black Chicagoans were disproportionately impacted. Of those who said they were homeless, more than 80 percent identified as Black. Separately, 83 percent of the people who cited housing insecurity, meaning they moved frequently or have no stable home, identified as Black.

How is Chicago’s program administered?

DFSS and the Mayor’s Office selected two nonprofits to administer the program. GiveDirectly—an international nonprofit primarily operating in East Africa—is the program’s administrator. AidKit, a technology platform, is helping GiveDirectly deliver cash to residents.

DFSS began distributing payments to residents the last week of June. Recipients could choose to receive the money either through a bank deposit or a prepaid debit card, and this income will not be taxed.

How were participants chosen?

To be eligible, applicants had to report experiencing economic hardship from the pandemic and have a household income under $70,000 for a family of four. Applicants selected to participate in the pilot were chosen through a computer-generated randomization system. DFSS Commissioner Brandie Knazze said the system was designed so that low-income people living in areas most impacted by COVID-19 had a higher probability of being selected.

Harish Patel, director of Economic Security for Illinois and a manager of the Chicago Resilient Families Initiative Task Force that studied the scope of a guaranteed income pilot, said there are several benefits to choosing recipients randomly. A lottery system minimizes bias and corruption— two issues that could hurt trust in the program and damage long-term support. Randomization also allows researchers to draw conclusions about how the program affects low-income people from diverse backgrounds.

Who was chosen to participate?

Knazze, the DFSS commissioner, said most selected participants were women and identified as parents or caregivers, closely mirroring the pool of applicants. More than half of the 5,000 participants are Black (67 percent) with nearly a quarter of participants identifying as Latinx (23 percent). White Chicagoans make up 16 percent of participants and Asian Chicagoans are the smallest racial category at 3 percent of participants.

In early July, DFSS distributed its first payments to 3,500 Chicagoans via direct deposits and prepaid debit cards. Others have received the money since then on a rolling basis. As of last week, DFSS was still working on enrolling a few hundred participants.

What do advocates for guaranteed income say?

So far, Chicago gets high marks from advocates for creating a program with few hoops to jump through. Administrative burdens, they argue, often shut some people from the aid. The application was available online in six languages and took around 30 minutes to complete. Applicants were not asked about their immigration status or criminal record. The application asked about household size, demographics, education, and other public benefits received. It also required proof of identity, income, and residency through a mix of documents.

With the cost of living increasing and wages lagging behind inflation, some local experts believe that $500 per month will make a difference in the lives of Chicagoans experiencing deep poverty. While guaranteed income allows recipients to decide how and what to spend extra money on, experts say it is not the only solution—a broad social safety net and economic policies that help families make ends meet is also critical.

“This pilot, as important as it is, is not the only tool to be able to solve poverty—it is one of a series of actions that need to be taken to really alleviate poverty,” said Wilson, the Shriver Center’s president and CEO.

While advocates interviewed agree that $500 per month is limited, especially as prices rise, it still has the potential to help Chicagoans experiencing poverty.

“We hope that the pilot will allow people to catch their breath,” Commissioner Knazze said. “We want to be able to allow them to have economic stability and mobility, to see financial gains, either through saving or achieving a personal goal, maybe an educational goal or savings.”

Could the pilot become permanent?

It’s unclear if the city has long-term plans to implement a permanent guaranteed income program and how that would be funded. When asked, the Mayor’s Office said they are committed to partnering with the City Council to support residents using direct cash assistance in a future budget cycle. And DFSS Commissioner Knazze said results from the pilot will inform how the city runs its programs in the future.

About 3,000 of the 5,000 pilot recipients will participate in an optional study led by the University of Chicago’s Inclusive Economy Lab, according to Carmelo Barbaro, the lab’s executive director, which will evaluate the impact of the program on participants’ financial health and general well-being. Researchers plan to use the results to provide recommendations for future programs.

Patel said he hopes the pilot sheds light on the need for guaranteed income programs as an addition—not a replacement—of the social safety net. But, he added, the city and county could use the format of the cash-assistance program to make their existing network of programs better, simpler, with less paperwork, and with fewer barriers for people.

The city expects to have some preliminary results in late 2023 or early 2024.

Longtime guaranteed-income advocate Ameya Pawar believes that the Chicago pilot program will demonstrate the necessity and feasibility of a national program—something local advocates of guaranteed income agree on. His hope, he said, is that the Chicago demonstration along with the other demonstrations across the country will lead to a federal policy change.

Sky Patterson is a 2022 Summer Civic Reporting Fellow, along with Francisco Saúl Ramírez Pinedo, who contributed to this report. Sarah Conway, City Bureau’s senior reporter covering jobs and the economy of survival in Chicago, also contributed. You can reach her with tips at [email protected].

Read More

The Chicago Bears are almost always surrounded by negativity. They haven’t been a legit Super Bowl threat in a long time but it would be nice to even see them make the playoffs in consecutive years. A new regime is in place in hopes to help get them there.

So far, so good in 2022. The practices are clearly different for the better and they seem like a much more disciplined team through the first two preseason games of the year. Obviously, it isn’t like regular season football but it is better than seeing the opposite in these moments.

There are always going to be players that come out of nowhere in camp and preseason that make an impression. It doesn’t always work out for those people but the Bears are hoping it works out for Jack Sanborn who is making a name for himself during the exhibition season.

Sanborn is an undrafted free agent that signed with the Bears after nobody selected him in the 2022 NFL Draft. He played his college football at the University of Wisconsin. He is an Illinois native trying to live out his dream of playing for his hometown NFL team’s defense.

Jack Sanborn has made a very nice impression in this Chicago Bears preseason.

He made a very impressive preseason debut against the Kansas City Chiefs in the first week of the exhibition season. In the second week against the Seattle Seahawks, he knew he had to keep it going in order to have a chance at making the team.

In addition to being a beast on special teams, he had three tackles and two assists on defense. After a game like this where the Seahawks weren’t able to do much when he was on the field, it is becoming more and more clear that he deserves to make the squad out of camp.

He is certainly not someone that is going to start on defense right away when the real games begin. However, if starters start to go down with injury regularly, he might start to see the field in these situations.

When playing the linebacker position, he has trouble with running backs on passing downs and tight ends that have elite speed. Those are problems that can only be masked by the ability to read a play which is something that he might be able to do well based on what we’ve seen.

On special teams, he can make a difference right away which is something the Bears need right now. They aren’t going to be the most explosive team in the league and need people to step in during these situations.

If he does in fact make the team, look for him to be noticeable on these special teams units. For an undrafted guy, he has certainly been noticeable out there early in the preseason and he now has one more game to do it again. As a local underdog story, he is easy to root for.

Read More

In the Chicago Bears‘ second preseason game against the Seattle Seahawks, fans saw the offense take a step forward.

Following a season where the Bears’ offense finished in the bottom five of the league in most major categories, it was refreshing to see some hints at what the new scheme looks like under Luke Getsy.

Even though it is just preseason, the scheme matters. The play-calling might be vanilla, but that’s for a reason — and even through Getsy’s non-game-planning, fans saw a much different offense on Thursday night.

It was most noticeable when watching the quarterbacks, and that was a pleasant sight to behold.

Justin Fields and the Chicago Bears quarterbacks put Luke Getsy’s offense on display, showing fans a different feel.

Fields played just one series in the game, leading the Bears down for a field goal. He went 5-for-7 on that drive, for 39 yards and did not take a sack.

Getsy rolled Fields out multiple times on that first drive and Fields looked extremely comfortable doing so, firing a couple rockets rolling out to his left. One of those rollouts saw Fields rifle a pass to Cole Kmet for a long gain.

Kmet caught two passes from Fields, for 31 yards, and had 20 yards after the catch. He and Fields looked like they were on the same page from the get-go, and that could be a sign of what’s to come this season.

It wasn’t just Fields, though, as backup quarterback Trevor Siemian was used on play action and even rolled out on occasion. It was extremely refreshing to see a Bears offense utilizing movement by their quarterbacks, because it’s something that Matt Nagy failed to do regularly. Even Nathan Peterman was used in the same way — which was interesting to see Peterman look decent at times.

One thing Getsy is doing, both because he has to and because it’s part of his scheme, is moving his quarterbacks around. The offensive line is not in great shape, right now, and a mobile quarterback is going to help disguise that issue to some extent. That factored into many plays on Thursday night, where the offensive line may not have held up but the quarterback was also moving out of the pocket.

In addition to the quarterbacks moving, the Bears looked strong on the ground. This might be one of the deepest running back rooms in all of football, and David Montgomery didn’t even play. Khalil Herbert only played on that first series, too. So, it was Trestan Ebner and Darrynton Evans getting some run, and both of them ran very hard.

The effort was there from the Bears’ running backs, and even their wideouts. The type of practices that Eberflus runs is paying dividends, because his guys play hard and tough. The attitude of this offense has completely changed. The skill players look to be the aggressors, which is a nice change of pace for once.

All in all, fans should be encouraged by the offense after this one. The Bears may not have the necessary weapons or a stud offensive line, but the scheme is working for Getsy’s quarterbacks, and at least fans have that positive trend to look at.

Read More

Kehlani’s second album, 2020’s It Was Good Until It Wasn’t (Atlantic), features the brooding, moody, left-of-center R&B that’s become their signature. The singer’s new LP, Blue Water Road (released this spring on Atlantic), is still left-of-center, but its musical palette is significantly lighter and more eclectic, with tinges of folk and orchestral pop. To that end, its cover art—a photo of Kehlani standing on a beach with their hair whipping in the wind—feels like a statement of purpose. Opener “Little Story” sets the record’s breezy atmosphere with strummed guitar, then slides into sweeping strings like a small sailboat pushing off into the ocean. The groove of “Up at Night” feels so relaxed you can almost forgive its somewhat uninspired Justin Bieber cameo. Kehlani gets better the more they stray from a conventional pop-radio sound. The gently hiccupping “Tangerine” manages to be both sublimely spaced-out and awkward; not many singers could deliver the line “Pollinate my love with yours” with a touch that makes you giggle as well as shiver. Kehlani’s music feels pleasingly lightweight before it pulls you into surprising depths, and on Blue Water Road they’ve come into their own.

Kehlani Fri 8/26, 7 PM, Aragon Ballroom, 1106 W. Lawrence, $79.50, all ages

Read More

Kehlani’s second album, 2020’s It Was Good Until It Wasn’t (Atlantic), features the brooding, moody, left-of-center R&B that’s become their signature. The singer’s new LP, Blue Water Road (released this spring on Atlantic), is still left-of-center, but its musical palette is significantly lighter and more eclectic, with tinges of folk and orchestral pop. To that end, its cover art—a photo of Kehlani standing on a beach with their hair whipping in the wind—feels like a statement of purpose. Opener “Little Story” sets the record’s breezy atmosphere with strummed guitar, then slides into sweeping strings like a small sailboat pushing off into the ocean. The groove of “Up at Night” feels so relaxed you can almost forgive its somewhat uninspired Justin Bieber cameo. Kehlani gets better the more they stray from a conventional pop-radio sound. The gently hiccupping “Tangerine” manages to be both sublimely spaced-out and awkward; not many singers could deliver the line “Pollinate my love with yours” with a touch that makes you giggle as well as shiver. Kehlani’s music feels pleasingly lightweight before it pulls you into surprising depths, and on Blue Water Road they’ve come into their own.

Kehlani Fri 8/26, 7 PM, Aragon Ballroom, 1106 W. Lawrence, $79.50, all ages

Read More

Read More