Nearly half of black children in Mississippi are in families living below the poverty line, compared with just 17 percent of white children. Yet only 8 percent of families living in poverty participate in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.

For six years, Springboard to Opportunities has run a range of programs, like after-school tutoring for children and job-readiness support for their parents. “Our two-generation approach has been measurably successful,” said Aisha Nyandoro, the executive director. Indeed, 76 percent of adults who went through the program went back to school or found a job. “But they also consistently told me, ‘What we really need in order to reach our goals is cash,’” Ms. Nyandoro said.

Ms. Nyandoro had heard about guaranteed income at a conference and realized it might be a way of responding to their call. She teamed up with the Economic Security Project, network devoted to furthering the conversation on guaranteed income. The leadership team there, including the philanthropist Chris Hughes, who has become one of guaranteed income’s most vocal proponents, supported a task force of mothers in thinking about the best structure for the Magnolia Mother’s Trust.

The broader conversation about guaranteed income often focuses on the rise of artificial intelligence and the inevitable loss of jobs that will follow. That is the hook for many in the tech world. But another set of champions isn’t looking forward as much as back. The Movement for Black Lives, a network that includes Black Lives Matter, has endorsed a guaranteed-income proposal called Universal PLUS Basic Income. It would provide a modest income to everyone, funded by divestment from the prison system, with a prorated additional amount for African-Americans.

In other words, guaranteed income could be a plausible policy akin to reparations. But if the cash is intended to heal, those who design its distribution need to reduce the possibility of unintended side effects. Annie Lowery points out in her 2018 book “Give People Money” that the idea of guaranteed income may be bipartisan, but the implementation is certainly not. She wrote, “The ends and means would never end up pleasing both sides of the aisle.”

The average annual income of the people whom Springboard to Opportunities works with is $11,030. All of them receive government benefits, so they were understandably concerned: Would a cash transfer of this nature reduce those benefits? And if so, by how much? Springboard worked with an economist to run the most likely scenarios, which is how they landed on $1,000 a month, but there were still plenty of unknowns. Ms. Nyandoro told interested residents: “You know better than anybody what additional income does to your benefits. You make an informed decision about whether this is the right thing for your family.”