2001年-世界发展银行全球_Brazil___Assessment_of_the_Bolsa_Escola_Programs_67页_4mb

Summary of the Report: An Assessment of the Bolsa Escola Programs in Brazil

Core Content

The report assesses the Bolsa Escola programs, which are poverty-targeted social assistance initiatives in Brazil that provide cash transfers to poor families with school-age children (7-14 years old) in exchange for ensuring their children attend school a minimum number of days per month. These programs began in 1995 in Campinas and the Federal District (DF) and expanded to 60 municipal programs by 1999. In 2000, two major federal programs—FGRM (Fundo de Garantia da Renda Minima) and PETI (Programa de Erradicação do Trabalho Infantil)—were introduced, and by 2000, PETI had reached nearly 400,000 children, while FGRM covered about 2 million households. The Brazilian government later integrated these programs under the Alvorada Program, aiming to expand them to all municipalities with the worst human development indicators by 2002.

The main objectives of the Bolsa Escola programs are:

• To increase educational attainment among current school-age children, thereby reducing future poverty.
• To reduce short-term poverty by targeting currently poor families.
• To reduce child labor by requiring school attendance.
• To act as a partial safety net, providing income support to prevent families from falling further into poverty during adverse economic shocks.

Main Viewpoints

1. Program Design and Implementation

• The programs are well-designed and effectively administered, with clear targeting mechanisms and conditional cash transfers.
• They target the poorest localities first within municipalities and use a score system that considers multiple indicators of family living standards, not just income.
• There are two types of non-covered populations:
  • Poor families with pre-school or adolescent children.
  • Poor families who do not meet residency requirements.
• The residency requirement can exclude the poorest families, raising equity concerns. The report suggests reducing the residency requirement to one year to address this.

2. Preliminary Evidence of Impact

• Targeting is effective, with low leakage rates and high under-coverage rates in poorer municipalities due to limited financial capacity.
• School attendance is higher among beneficiaries, and dropout rates are lower.
• Educational attainment is improved for beneficiaries, with a reduction in the income gap between beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries.
• Child labor reduction is inconclusive, as the evaluation was conducted in Brasília, where child labor is relatively low.

3. Program Expansion and Sustainability

• The fiscal sustainability of the programs is a concern, especially in poorer municipalities with low local revenues.
• The report suggests that federal funding should be used to top up local deficits, while also ensuring local cost-sharing to maintain local accountability and efficiency.
• The programs should complement rather than replace school quality investments, as poor educational outcomes are due to both demand-side constraints (poverty) and supply-side constraints (low-quality education).

4. Fiscal Affordability and Equity

• The fiscal affordability of the programs is a major issue, as the poorest municipalities are the ones that need them the most but have the least capacity to fund them.
• The cash transfer level needs to be carefully determined, and there are three key considerations:
  • Whether the transfer is meant to compensate for lost wages or pull families up to the poverty line.
  • The need to tailor transfers based on age and number of children in the family.
  • The risk of reducing incentives for participation if transfers are not adjusted per child.

5. Safety Net Function

• These programs serve as a partial safety net, protecting structurally poor families during economic crises.
• They equip the next generation with human capital that can reduce future vulnerability to economic shocks.
• However, they do not cover the transitory poor, who may fall into poverty due to unexpected shocks. Therefore, complementary programs are needed to address this group.

Key Information

• Currency: Real (R$), with US$1 = R$1.87.
• Fiscal Year: January 1 – December 31.
• Program Coverage: As of 1999, 60 municipal programs were operational. By 2000, PETI had reached 400,000 children, and FGRM had reached 2 million households.
• Targeting Mechanism: Uses a score system based on family income and other living conditions.
• Residency Requirement: Can exclude the poorest families, suggesting a need for reform.
• Program Expansion: The Alvorada Program integrates Bolsa Escola and PETI, aiming to reach the most vulnerable municipalities.
• Recommendations:
  • Reduce the residency requirement to one year.
  • Expand the targeting to include pre-school and adolescent children.
  • Tailor cash transfers based on child age and family size.
  • Ensure federal support for under-coverage in poorer municipalities.
  • Conduct a systematic evaluation using control and experimental groups to assess effectiveness.

Conclusion

The Bolsa Escola programs are well-designed and well-administered, with broad support from both government and civil society. They are effective in reducing poverty and improving education outcomes. However, their expansion and sustainability require careful consideration of fiscal affordability, equity, and complementarity with other social assistance and education programs. A formal evaluation with scientific rigor is needed to fully determine the impact and effectiveness of the program.