Introduction

According to the indicators commonly used at the European level, the period in which the economic crisis was at its peak in Europe was between 2012 and 2013. In Italy, this is especially true in terms of child poverty but also in terms of absolute poverty for different types of households.

In a situation of extreme difficulty, economic resources available for the welfare system in order to protect the most vulnerable showed a reducing trend, making the situation even more complicated to manage for the social services at local level.

With a view to turn the tide and reopen the debate on the need for a minimum income scheme in Italy, between 2013 and 2015 the Italian Ministry of Labour and Social Policies implemented an experimental measure to fight poverty in 12 metropolitan cities.

Therefore, it could be argued that, triggered by the economic crisis and the lack of a national measure to fight poverty, poverty became a prominent subject on the policy agenda (Kingdon, 1984; Beland & Howlett, 2016).

The intervention provided economic support and a personalised social and employment inclusion project for families with children living in conditions of economic hardship (or families with a disabled child or a pregnant woman) and low work intensity. This personalised project was a contract between the family and the local service system, involving co-responsibility in its implementation: the integrated services system committed to provide one or more services and the beneficiary, the family, committed to act on the basis of the personalised project.

The measure, the so-called Carta Acquisti Sperimentale (CAS; experimental social card or new social card in English) was designed as an experimental measure in view of the implementation of the national measure to fight poverty, called Sostegno per l’Inclusione Attiva (SIA, support for active inclusion) recently changed to Reddito di Inclusione (REI, inclusion income).

According to a mixed evaluation approach (Bamberger, 2012), complementary to the counterfactual one,3 a qualitative evaluation of the measure's implementation process was developed in order to analyse and understand the different stakeholders’ perspectives (White & Day, 2016).