Taxpayer-funded ‘guaranteed income’ programs that hand struggling families up to $36,000 with no strings attached are being rolled out across the country, DailyMail.com analysis reveals.

The schemes, whose total value exceeds $125 million, have surged in popularity since the pandemic as progressive leaders embrace cash handouts to support Americans below the poverty line.

But the radical projects have been criticized after it emerged one mother-of-three in Washington DC spent more than half of a $10,800 lump sum payment on a luxury holiday to Miami, along with a new wardrobe for her children and a ‘glow up’ for herself.

Canethia Miller, 27, spent $6,000 on the vacation for herself, her partner and their three children, purchased 15 new outfits for the children and spent $180 on a haircut. She was given the money through the first project in the country to offer money as a lump sum rather than monthly payments.

Similar programs in cities from Los Angeles to New York offer payments of up to $1,000 per month for three years with no conditions on how the cash is spent.

A map of some of the country’s largest guaranteed income projects shows participants are given up to $1,000 monthly for three years

Canethia Miller, 27, spent more than half of a $10,800 lump sum payment on a luxury holiday to Miami, along with a new wardrobe for her children and a ‘glow up’ for herself

Erika James, 34, who also took part in the DC scheme, opted for monthly payments of $900 and said she put the money into a savings account for her oldest child, De’Vire

The eligibility criteria for many of the program is based on the federal poverty level, a sliding scale based on income. For a single person, the poverty guideline is $15,060 or less, while for a family of four it is $31,200 or less.

Advocates and program leaders claim guaranteed income projects are proven to lift people out of poverty by helping them achieve financial stability and goals including moving out of federally-subsidized housing. Recipients have said the cash has transformed their lives and even brought some out of homelessness.

But critics say the schemes ‘destroy fundamental elements of the social contract and create the wrong incentives for people’. They claim cases like Miller’s prove that offering money with no conditions on how it is spent is not a solution to inequality.

Ongoing projects will deliver more than $125 million to nearly 10,000 Americans nationwide across more than 30 programs that last up to three years, according to data published on the Guaranteed Income Pilots Dashboard.

Separate data from Stanford University’s Basic Income Lab revealed at least 153 projects have taken place in America, including 68 which are ‘active’. But the data does not include schemes including the one in DC which cost around $1.5 million.

Most of the guaranteed income schemes are funded with taxpayers’ money.

The largest, and costliest, guaranteed income scheme is the Big Leap program in Los Angeles which provides 3,200 participants with $1,000 per month for one year.

The $36 million project was announced in October 2021 and is open to adult residents of the city who have at least one child, or are pregnant, and have an income below the federal poverty level.

Like most other projects across the country, Big Leap is billed as a ‘pilot’ which aims to study the impact of guaranteed, no-strings income and qualifying applicants are selected at random.

Los Angeles is also the location of the second largest scheme, which pays $1,000 per month to 1,000 eligible residents of LA County for three years. That is funded by around $36 million of taxpayers’ money.

The third largest, in New York City, provides 600 participants with between $500 and $1,000 per month for three years.

Washington DC’s project is run by Martha’s Table which delivers the handouts through its Strong Families, Strong Futures initiative. The office of DC Mayor Muriel Bowser has recently committed a further $1 million to run the scheme for a second year.

The DC program was funded by Democrat Mayor Muriel Bowser and is the only one in the US to offer cash as a lump sum 

Miller was one of 132 new or pregnant mothers with low incomes who could choose either 12 monthly payments of $900 or a one-off payment of $10,800.

She opted for the lump sum. Following the one-year program, she said: ‘I wanted to blow it. I wanted to have fun.’

The five-day vacation to Miami included a boat tour which Miller said was an opportunity to show her children the city’s multimillion dollar waterside properties. The family also visited museums, took a swamp wildlife tour and ate out together during the trip.

‘[My kids] got to experience something I would never have been able to do if I didn’t have that money,’ she told the Washington Post, which spoke with several participants of the program.

Miller said she spent $4,000 on bills and a used car, and opened a bank account which she aims to keep at least $50 in.

The scheme, like others around the country, also offered financial literacy courses, although these were not compulsory. 

Miller acknowledged that many communities in her area ‘don’t know the financial gain of credit, saving for your kids; that’s why we’re broke, that’s why we don’t have nothing to pass down or no house to give down’.

Other mothers who who took part also spoke about the importance of financial literacy.

Stacie Adams, a mother-of-four who also received the lump sum, said: ‘[The courses weren’t] mandatory, but maybe it should have been. A lot of people haven’t seen $10,000 and might have spent it right away — even me, I have issues with finances as well.’

LA County’s BREATHE program – which provides $1,000 per month for three years – has shared promotional material from participants who spoke about the positive impact it had on their lives.

Darien, a single mom-of-five from Long Beach, was tearful as she said: ‘For the next couple of years that I get it. I’m able to save up and hopefully do things with my kids that I’ve always wanted to do.’

‘I don’t get a lot of help,’ added Darien, whose surname was not given. She said she was separated from her ex-husband and had been single for around three years.

‘When I got picked, you don’t know how happy I was. I was shocked. And then, [my kids asked] ‘why are you crying?’ I was like, I think from this day on our life is going to change. It’s going to be different, you know.

‘I told them god answered our prayers and we’re going to get the help we need.’

Another mother, Jacqueline, also from Long Beach, said she was living with her ten-year-old daughter in her car when she was accepted to the BREATHE scheme.

‘We were living or sleeping in my car. There was not a hope for us and I was just trying to survive,’ she said.

Jacqueline, a participant in LA County’s BREATHE program – which provides $1,000 per month for three years – said the scheme lifted her and her daughter out of homelessness

Darien, a single mom-of-five from Long Beach who is also on the BREATHE scheme, was tearful as she said: ‘I’m able to save up and hopefully do things with my kids that I’ve always wanted to do’

‘When I got that call it was literally a month after I became homeless and we were already on the streets. It gave me hope and it just gave me something to look forward to.’

Jacqueline said the money was an ‘opportunity’ and that she plans to go back to school and then find work in the medical field, along with ensuring her daughter remains in her current school.

‘This program has given me the opportunity to live again. Be a mom and kind of get back to normal, little by little.’

Many of the programs have shared the uplifting stories of families whose lives have been changed by the projects. Schemes are often specifically targeted at mothers and young families, while others are open to any adult who lives below the poverty threshold.

But critics say that cash handouts are a blunt tool which do not address the underlying causes of poverty.

Oren Cass, executive director of the conservative American Compass thinktank, said: ‘A permanent and society-wide system to provide for everyone would destroy fundamental elements of the social contract and create the wrong incentives for people as they make choices about their life’s course.’

Joel Griffith, an economic research fellow at The Heritage Foundation, added: ‘Quite often these handouts actually trap people in a cycle of poverty. This is not helping people build long-term wealth and to have long-term economic prosperity.’