Huh. Complicated. Personally, I'd just make 'not committing crimes' a condition of ALL benefits.
But on the other hand, not everybody is eligible for $30k worth of benefits per year, and if you're going to take somebody's time up with therapy and stuff, paying them to do so seems reasonable. I know it's weird, but if you can successfully stop somebody from committing any felonies for a year for $9k, it's actually worth it over punishing them after they commit one or more. Yes, things should be structured that this isn't some crazy benefit over those of us who aren't going to commit felonies anyways.
You also have programs like paying kids to go to school and earn acceptable grades. Why? They're so short-sighted that they can't comprehend how the education will benefit them later in life, so don't value it unless they benefit immediately from it. Sometimes the lifestyle of the parent is such that the extra income provides the 'security' necessary to keep the kid in school.
Please note that I'm kind of feeling stuck between a rock and a hard place with this stuff.
No, I don't want to be paying people to 'not commit crimes'. But I also think that we need to be fiscally responsible - and if paying them is the cheapest option, then paying them makes sense. We just have to be careful of slippery slopes.
For example, if you make it so that a baby-momma doesn't get paid unless her offspring are not only in school, but getting good grades, she's going to suddenly be a lot more interested in their school performance.