Puerto Rico’s longstanding debate over welfare dependency has often rested on the familiar assumption that able-bodied beneficiaries of the Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) are not working and prefer to rely on government aid.
However, a new study released by the Center for Economic Renewal, Growth and Excellence (CRECE) dismantles that narrative with strong evidence showing that most NAP recipients are already working, just not within the formal economy.
The report, Inspiring Work, presented during the annual convention of the Puerto Rico Association of Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) at El Conquistador Resort in Fajardo, reveals that 89% of able-bodied NAP beneficiaries generate income through formal or informal work, and that 70% say they can work in any job.
These findings challenge deeply rooted perceptions and highlight a population that is striving, contributing, and hustling but trapped in a system that punishes upward mobility.
How the study was built
The study’s fieldwork, conducted by Gaither International, combines quantitative interviews with 500 able-bodied NAP beneficiaries aged 18 to 54 and qualitative insights from 115 participants across 16 focus groups in four regions of Puerto Rico.
With more than one million beneficiaries, NAP is the federal block-grant program that replaces SNAP in Puerto Rico. Its structure, particularly its capped funding, has long shaped the island’s welfare landscape.
What the study’s authors say
CRECE’s executive director, Tere Nolla, who unveiled the findings before an audience of business leaders, said the study allows Puerto Rico to “look beyond generalizations and perceptions to identify the factors that truly influence long-term dependency.”
She added that the system has failed to strike a balance between providing help in times of need and protecting “the inherent right people have to be self-sufficient through work.” According to Nolla, the research exposes “system failures that hinder personal initiative.”
Her coauthor, Ciení Rodríguez-Troche, who leads the Inspiring Work program, described the study as “an essential tool to drive change and prepare for a possible transition from NAP to SNAP.” She emphasized that the evidence dispels myths and provides a foundation for policy reforms to reduce dependency, promote self-sufficiency, and increase labor force participation.
The weight of financial vulnerability
One of the report’s most striking findings is the extent of financial vulnerability among NAP households. Nearly 73% of respondents reported household income below what they consider necessary to cover basic expenses, and almost half described their situation as “well below.”
Respondents estimated they need $2,480 per month to meet basic needs, a figure far above Puerto Rico’s median household income. This gap underscores the precariousness of life for many working beneficiaries, who often rely on sporadic jobs and informal commerce to survive.
A dependency rooted deep
The study also reveals the depth of dependency that has developed over generations. When asked what would happen without government assistance, 73% said they would face severe hardship, and 27% said they would not survive.
This reflects a longstanding reliance on welfare programs and highlights the psychological dimension of poverty. As one participant explained, “I’d feel lost,” a sentiment that aligns with theoretical frameworks cited in the report, including Amartya Sen’s Capability Approach and Seligman’s Personal Agency Model.
These frameworks suggest that poverty is not merely a lack of income but a deprivation of opportunities and agency.
The benefits cliff
A central theme of the study is the benefits cliff, the abrupt loss of aid when earnings rise above eligibility thresholds. More than half of respondents fear that accepting a formal job would worsen their financial situation, and 69% prefer a gradual reduction of benefits rather than an abrupt cutoff.
This fear is rational. A modest increase in income can trigger the loss of NAP benefits, childcare assistance, or Medicaid coverage under Plan Vital, which serves 76% of respondents. The cliff creates a powerful disincentive to formal employment and encourages beneficiaries to remain in low-hour or informal work arrangements.
Life in the informal economy
The informal economy plays a dominant role in the lives of NAP beneficiaries. According to the study, 66% of able-bodied respondents engage in informal income-generating activities, including food sales, beauty services, construction, caregiving, and yardwork.
Among households earning less than $10,000 a year, informal work is even more prevalent, with 81% reporting at least one informal job.
CRECE frames this reality as both a sign of resilience and a structural problem. Beneficiaries demonstrate entrepreneurial intent, yet reliance on informal work reduces the tax base, limits workforce participation, and keeps individuals outside the protections and opportunities of the formal labor market.
Young adults, ready to work
One of the most promising findings is the readiness of young adults to work. Among respondents aged 18 to 34, 86% of young men said they were ready to work any job, and young women expressed strong motivation but cited childcare as a primary barrier.
CRECE identifies this group as a high-priority segment for workforce development, arguing that targeted interventions, such as training programs, transportation access, and childcare support, could yield rapid gains in labor participation and long-term economic mobility.
The barriers that hold people back
The study also details the structural barriers that limit upward mobility for NAP recipients. Participants consistently cited low wages, limited job opportunities, high debt burdens, childcare gaps, transportation challenges, and bureaucratic obstacles as persistent barriers to formal employment.
Many fear losing Medicaid-funded health coverage, which provides essential care for the majority of respondents. These barriers form a lattice of constraints that keep beneficiaries in low-hour, low-wage, informal work.
CRECE argues that Puerto Rico’s regulatory environment, including complex licensing rules, excessive bureaucracy, and outdated infrastructure, further suppresses mobility and inadvertently encourages dependency.
The NAP-to-SNAP debate
A significant portion of the report is dedicated to the ongoing debate over transitioning Puerto Rico from NAP to SNAP. The press statement underscores that the study’s findings are intended to help prepare Puerto Rico for this potential transition, which would eliminate structural funding caps and improve program responsiveness.
The USDA estimates that a full transition would take ten years and cost between $341 million and $426 million to implement, with annual benefit costs rising to $4.5 billion. Recent legislative attempts have stalled, but CRECE argues that SNAP would reduce the benefits cliff and provide a more flexible, responsive safety net.
Fifteen recommendations for reform
The study concludes with a call for reform centered on “responsibility through empowerment.” CRECE offers fifteen specific recommendations that can be implemented as Congress and the Puerto Rico government develop a transition plan from NAP to SNAP.
These include transitional benefits to ease the cliff, expanded technical training and financial literacy programs, improved access to transportation and childcare, simplified regulatory processes, strengthened work requirements paired with meaningful support, and entrepreneurship pathways. The emphasis is on building agency rather than enforcing dependency.
A structural problem, not a motivation problem
Ultimately, Inspiring Work reframes the conversation around welfare in Puerto Rico. It challenges the assumption that beneficiaries are unwilling to work and instead reveals a population striving to survive within a system that punishes effort and rewards stagnation.
As the press statement notes, “Nine out of ten able-bodied NAP recipients work, and 66% produce goods and services in the informal economy.” Their contributions, though often invisible, generate economic activity that benefits local businesses and communities. For policymakers, the message is clear: Puerto Rico does not have a motivation problem. It has a structural problem. Fixing that structure may be one of the island’s most urgent economic priorities.
