# Chapter 3. Lessons from adult training programmes before PRONATEC

This chapter briefly reviews past government initiatives to promote adult training. It describes adult training programmes that predeceased PRONATEC (“Programa Nacional de Acesso ao Ensino Técnico e Emprego”), the Federal Government’s latest adult learning intervention. The chapter provides an historical context for the development of PRONATEC and highlights some of the issues related to the implementation of previous programmes.

Skills imbalances are costly for individuals and for the society as a whole. Therefore, tackling skill mismatch and skill shortages is a major challenge for countries affected by rapid and substantial changes in skill needs, such as Brazil.

Different types of policies can steer demand for and supply of particular skills. Investment in the general and vocational education system, for instance, is needed to meet the increasing and specific demand for skilled workers that comes with technological change, globalisation and demographic changes. Targeted financial incentives can promote access to training for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds or in situations of vulnerability. Providing high-quality information, advice and career guidance also promotes the development of skills needed in the labour market. Second chance education, recognition of prior learning, access and availability of lifelong learning opportunities, re-training the unemployed, are other examples of education and training policies that promote resiliency in the face of structural changes in the world of work.

Given the low educational attainment and the lack of a well-developed public vocational education system in Brazil, as well as the sub-optimal investment of Brazilian firms in on-the-job training (see Section 1.1.), government-led programmes that facilitate the participation of adults in training have the potential to play an important role in boosting the supply of the right skills and reducing skill imbalances. In fact, adult training courses equipping workers with skills needed for occupations in high-demand, can be particularly adequate in the Brazilian context, where unskilled workers and the unemployed are unlikely to get back to the formal education system to up-skill or re-skill.

Setting up an adult learning system that is responsive to changing skill needs is key to protect individuals from the negative consequences of the changes ahead and to ensure that they make the most of the opportunities they provide. High quality adult training is seen as a major policy tool to ensure the labour force’s adaptability in light of the changes expected to affect the quantity and quality of jobs that are available, as well as the skill-sets they require. As adult training courses tend to be of short duration and target the current generation of workers, adult learning is also a policy tool that allows for faster intervention and materialisation of results.

During the last decades, several large-scale national programmes have been developed and implemented in Brazil to increase the offer of vocational and technical education, as well as to boost participation in free-form short training courses that do not necessarily articulate with the education system. Significant efforts have been made by successive governments to make access to adult training more inclusive, raise the earnings and the employability of lower-income segments of the population.

## 3.1. “Programa de Reciclagem Profissional” (1994-96)

In 1994, the Ministry of Labour (MTb) introduced a programme called “Programa de Reciclagem Profissional” with the purpose of re-training unemployed workers. The programme was one of the lines of actions of the Public Employment Services (SINE, “Sistema Nacional de Emprego”) and its objective was twofold. First, it aimed at providing training to unemployed workers so as to increase their chance of re-integrating the labour market and reduce their unemployment duration. Second, the programme also specifically aimed at equipping individuals with the skills and qualifications required by employers in local labour markets. Funding for the programme came from the “Fundo de Amparo ao Trabalhador” (FAT1), the financial public fund managed by the Ministry of Labour and used to finance unemployment subsidies, among other initiatives. “Programa de Reciclagem Profissional” was the first Government-led initiative to provide free adult training courses of a short duration.

Given that the programme targeted individuals who benefited from unemployment insurance, training courses offered under “Programa de Reciclagem Profissional” were limited to a maximum duration of three months. Three types of modalities were offered within the programme, each with a distinct target population and a training content adapted accordingly (Gutierrez Alves and dos Santos Vieira, 1995). The first modality targeted unemployed workers with no education or who had not completed primary education. These unemployed workers were offered training for 240 hours in total. The 240 hours were split into 180 hours focused on basic oral and written communication skills, as well as basic numeracy skills, and the remaining 60 hours focused on general knowledge. The second modality targeted unemployed workers who had at least completed primary education, but without a clearly defined occupational profile. The third modality, finally, targeted unemployed workers who had already received vocational training but who could benefit from further specialisation in their occupation. Training for the second and third modalities lasted between 60 and 240 hours and the content was balanced between general and occupational-specific skills.

The design and implementation of this programme was still under discussion when a more ambitious programme, contemplating unemployed as well as employed workers, was proposed and pushed forward. At the time, the introduction of new hardware and software in the Brazilian industry had started to threaten jobs, putting low-skilled workers at risk of job loss and exclusion from the labour market. In this context, extending adult training provision to those already at work became a priority (Pinto Bulhões, 2004).

## 3.2. Planfor – “Plano Nacional de Qualificação do Trabalhador” (1996-2002)

PLANFOR (“Plano Nacional de Qualificação do Trabalhador” or National Plan for Professional Qualification), a programme under the direction of the Ministry of Labour (MTb), was implemented in all regions of the country from 1996 to 2002. This ambitious programme aimed at ensuring that all Brazilian citizens had access to training, with a particular focus on those excluded or on the verge of exclusion from the labour market. PLANFOR came to respond to the need for up- and re-skilling of workers at risk of losing their jobs with the introduction of new technologies in the industrial sector, in particular, the development and adoption of new software and hardware.

The programme’s main line of action was to tackle financial barriers in access to adult training by providing, at no cost for the participants, free-form adult training courses of a short duration and vocational nature. The Federal government at the time established a specific quantitative target for PLANFOR: starting from 1999, at least 20% of the economically active population should receive training each year (Pinto Bulhões, 2004). This corresponded to approximately 15 millions of people aged more than 16 years old (according to official documentation from the Ministry of Labour in 2003).

Funding for the programme also came from the FAT public fund and almost all of the financial resources allocated to the programme were transferred to lower administrative levels, namely state governments and municipalities (more specially, to the “secretarias estaduais e municipais de trabalho”, i.e. the state and municipal departments of work). State governments and municipalities were free to use such funds to develop and implement decentralised initiatives and partnerships with local stockholders and members of the civil society, i.e. non-governmental groups and associations (churches, community groups, youth associations, interest groups, academic organisations, etc.). States and municipalities could manage their training programmes and partnerships independently and autonomously, as well as hire training providers of their choice directly.

To identify training needs at the local level and match training offer to skills in demand by local employers, a specific governance structure involving states and municipalities was implemented. Each state would nominate a person responsible for the implementation of PLANFOR and for liaising with municipalities. Each municipality was responsible for analysing their local labour market and collecting information on specific training needs. Based on that information, municipalities would then request training courses to the state manager of PLANFOR. The State programme’s manager would liaise with technical schools and other stakeholders to organise training provision. While the principle was good, in practice, this governance structure to identify training needs at the local level did not function very well (see Box 3.1).

Box 3.1. The implementation of PLANFOR in the state of Rio Grande do Sul

In the state of Rio Grande do Sul and until 1999, the state government had not provided any formal guidance to municipalities on how to identify their training needs and elaborate their training requests (Pinto Bulhões, 2004),. Despite the provision of such guidance in 2000 and 2001, there was no indication that municipalities were actually using or implementing such guidance. As a result, from 1996 to 2001, more than 50% of the documents with training requests from the municipalities of Rio Grande do Sul did not include any diagnostic of local skill needs.

Among municipalities that implemented the state directives and included some diagnostic, there was significant heterogeneity across municipalities in their effectiveness to identify skill needs. For instance, municipalities from metropolitan areas provided more information about local trends in the labour market than municipalities in the rural areas of the state.

Most municipalities would organise open meetings to consult with different local stakeholders about local skill needs. While involvement of all relevant entities was commendable, the large number of participating stakeholders often made it difficult to reach a consensus. Furthermore, not all parties involved in the meetings were equally informed about local labour market trends. Consequently, not all the information shared in these meetings was equally reliable.

Another major criticism in the implementation of PLANFOR in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, relates to the content of the training courses provided. Most of the course load was spent on the acquisition of general and basic skills, rather than the accumulation of specific skills. Many of the students surveyed after completing PLANFOR training courses pointed out that there was very little time invested in practical activities. Additionally, the majority of the students surveyed considered that courses were too short. Professors involved in PLANFOR training courses, on the other hand, highlighted the heterogeneous profile of students in terms of previous education and professional experience, which made it particularly difficult to teach beyond general and basic notions.

Another challenge was the varying quality of courses, particularly those provided by private institutions. In Rio Grande do Sul, a significant share of PLANFOR training courses were provided by NGOs, religious communities and other civic associations, workers’ unions, along with universities, schools from the state and municipal network, and “Sistema S” technical schools (see Box 1.1). One of the consequences was that it was difficult for the state manager of PLANFOR to monitor and evaluate the quality of all the training courses provided.

Despite all the above-mentioned challenges, some outcomes of PLANFOR in Rio Grande do Sul were promising. For instance, it was successful in involving the most vulnerable and making access to adult training more inclusive. In Rio Grande do Sul, vulnerable workers – the unemployed, workers with very low income, women, young workers between 16 and 24 years old, and non-white Brazilian workers – were over-represented among training participants in relation to their share in the economically active population.

The coverage of PLANFOR fell well below the established target. In 2000, for example, only 5.2% of the economically active population (EAP) participated in a free training course funded via PLANFOR (Severnini and Fernandez Orellano, 2010).

Table 3.1. Coverage of PLANFOR from 1995 to 2000

Year

No. individuals trained (in millions of Reais R$) % EAP Investment (in millions of Reais R$)

1995

0.1

0.18

28

1996

1.2

2.08

220

1997

2

3.38

348

1998

2.3

3.79

409

1999

2.7

4.35

354

2000

3.3

5.2

437

Total

11.6

3.23

1796

Source: Data provided by the Ministry of Labour in 2003 to Severnini and Fernandez Orellano (2010)

According to official documentation from the Ministry of Labour (MTb), the overall budget allocated to PLANFOR fell significantly between 2002 and 2003, from BRL 302 million to BRL 186 million (budget for 2003 as approved by the government leaving office in 2002). One of the reasons for the fall in public investment on PLANFOR after 2002 was political and related to the change in government after the elections.

PLANFOR was the first large-scale federal programme offering short adult training courses for free in Brazil. For the first time, low-income and vulnerable workers were also given the opportunity to enrol in continuous and lifelong learning. Investments made in a programme such as PLANFOR contributed to spread the idea that lifelong learning and adult training should also be considered a line of action to promote employment, well-being and inclusiveness.

Box 3.2. Impact evaluations of PLANFOR

Some studies in the literature have attempted to quantitatively assess the impact of PLANFOR. One study uses propensity score matching to evaluate the impact of adult training on labour earnings, the probability of employment and the probability of formal employment (Reis, 2012). The author uses data from the Monthly Employment Survey (“Pesquisa Mensal de Emprego” - PME), a longitudinal survey representative of the six main metropolitan areas in Brazil – Belo Horizonte, Porto Alegre, Recife, Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo and Salvador - conducted by the Brazilian Census Bureau (“Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística” - IBGE). Every month, the IBGE collects information about 100 000 individuals aged 10 years old or more. In each interview, the survey collects information regarding attendance and completion of training. The author uses data starting from March 2002.

Results from this study suggest that training increases the employment probability of the unemployed workers by six percentage points, increases labour earnings by up to 45% and increases the probability of formal employment by at least three percentage points. Results are very heterogeneous across demographic and skill groups. The effects appear to be more pronounced for less educated individuals and prime-age workers. However, the information collected in the survey is not sufficient to understand whether the reported training corresponds to a programme associated with PLANFOR or any other training programme. Therefore, the results from this study cannot be directly attributed to PLANFOR.

Another study exploited a randomized experiment conducted in the metropolitan area of Belo Horizonte, between June 1996 and December 2000, to assess the impact of PLANFOR in the state of Minas Gerais, called “Plano Estadual de Qualificação Profissional” (Hermeto Camilo de Oliveira and Gonçalves Rios-Neto, 2007). For the purpose of the study, candidates for training were randomly selected to register for courses subsidised by PLANFOR (a lottery determined who were the candidates selected for free training provision). Treatment and control groups were surveyed four times: once at the beginning of the training programme in December 1996 and three times afterwards – June 1997, March 1998 and December 2000. Logistic regressions were used to test for the quality of the randomisation and none of the covariates seemed to explain selection into treatment. The authors conclude that in the metropolitan area of Belo Horizonte, participation in PLANFOR training courses reduced the number and duration of unemployment episodes for individuals who were not unemployed at the time of training. For individuals who were unemployed when starting the training programme, the effect of attending a training course subsidised by PLANFOR is not statistically significant.

Since PLANFOR was highly decentralised and its implementation varied greatly from one state to the other, and even between different municipalities within states, it is difficult to extrapolate the results from this randomised control trial to other regions of Brazil. Nevertheless, this small scale local experiment suggests that the free provision of short technical training can have a positive impact on labour market outcomes.

## 3.3. PNQ – Plano Nacional de Qualificação (2003-12)

The “Plano Nacional de Qualificação” or PNQ was developed in 2003, by the new government elected in 2002, but only became fully implemented during the course of 2004. PNQ came to replace PLANFOR. It was tied to the Brazilian Public Employment Services (SINE), funded by FAT resources, and under the responsibility of the Ministry of Labour.

PNQ maintained the governance structure of PLANFOR, where municipalities and states were key players in defining the training courses to be offered, in close consultation with local governmental and non-governmental organisations. State governments remained responsible for the choice and hiring of training providers, who could be private schools, public institutions, schools from “Sistema S”, or even NGOs. Courses being subsidised via PNQ were also free-form short technical courses. One study provides an example of how the collaboration between different administrative levels was organised in the municipality of Piracicaba, in the state of São Paulo (Ferraz and Ribeiro de Oliveira, 2018; Box 3.3).

Box 3.3. The implementation of PNQ in Piracicaba, state of São Paulo

In 2011, a Federal agreement was signed between the Ministry of Labour (MTb), the “Secretaria Municipal do Trabalho e Renda” (SEMTRE, the municipal department for work of Piracicaba) and the City Hall of Piracicaba. Under this agreement, SEMTRE was responsible for organising free-form training courses in Piracicaba. The course offer was defined together with the Municipal Employment Commission of Piracicaba, based on studies and analyses of the local labour market. The Ministry of Labour transferred public funds to SEMTRE so as to support the initiative.

SEMTRE was also responsible for selecting participants for these training courses. Candidates would need to be unemployed and priority was given to low income individuals or individuals with low level of schooling. Additionally, 30% of the total number of places available for training was reserved for individuals above 30 years old and 10% for individuals with disabilities. For candidates who would meet all the criteria, places were allocated on a first-come first-served basis.

SEMTRE signed three contracts for training provision with technical schools from “Sistema S”: BRL 52 320 were invested for the creation of 120 places in training courses related to manufacturing and sales (60 places in each area) and BRL 26 160 were invested to create 30 places in training courses related to services more generally. Overall, the total investment per student was BRL 872 and BRL 4.36 per student/hour of training.

However, according to the study that describes the programme in detail, these numbers were higher in Piracicaba than in the rest of the country (Ferraz and Ribeiro de Oliveira, 2018). In fact, just as for PLANFOR, the decentralised implementation of PNQ meant that investments made, training offer, candidates selection and training quality, may have differed substantially across municipalities within states, and across states.

Most of the strategic guidelines from PLANFOR were also maintained for PNQ. The target population was more clearly defined and specifically included: workers with low income, low-educated workers, long-term unemployed, African-Brazilians, Indigenous-Brazilians, women, youth, disabled workers, workers above 40 years old, rural workers, family farmers and other domestic workers, autonomous workers, self-employed workers without employees, workers from cooperatives or associations, and individuals considered to be in precarious work.

Nevertheless, before 2008, information regarding the free provision of training courses in the context of PNQ was mostly disseminated through the agencies of the Public Employment Services throughout the country, reaching primarily the unemployed. Job seekers were referred to the training courses being offered in the state or municipality by the Public Employment Services. One of the major criticism to this approach was that workers in the informal labour market, and long-term unemployed who no longer received unemployment insurance (and therefore, had little connexion to the Public Employment Services), would not have access to the information.

From 2008 onwards, new channels of dissemination were developed in collaboration with the Ministry of Social Development (“Ministério do Desenvolvimento Social”, MDS) via “Bolsa Família”, a social welfare programme under the responsibility of MDS. “Bolsa Familía” is an on-going conditional cash transfer programme, dating back to 2003, through which poor families receive financial aid, as long as their children remain enrolled at school and vaccinated. Adults from households who received the “Bolsa Família” financial aid also started to be referred to PNQ training courses. This collaboration between MTb and MDS, to widen the coverage of adult training courses and reach new segments of the target population, was one of the main novelties of PNQ, as compared to PLANFOR.

The “Departamento Intersindical de Estatística e Estudos Socioeconômicos” (DIEESE), a research centre affiliated to workers’ unions, and “Unitrabalho”, a network of universities and research institutions, conducted some analyses of the programme’s effectiveness in reaching the most vulnerable segments of the population. First of all, according to these studies, 100 000 workers, on average, attended a PNQ training course each year (Lessa, 2011). This number falls well below the target of the programme, which was to provide training to 20% of the economically active population each year, just as PLANFOR. Women made up the majority of participants. In 2011, for example, 67% of the workers who attended a PNQ training course were women (DIEESE, 2011), who may be more vulnerable in the labour market. In terms of ethnic origin, however, 25.6% were of mixed-race (individuals usually referred to as “pardo”) and only 10% were Black, revealing that the programme was not particularly successful in reaching these segments of the population. Finally, regarding educational attainment, the average schooling level of individuals who attended PNQ training courses (completed upper secondary school) was much higher than the average schooling level of the Brazilian population (incomplete lower secondary school). Consequently, the programme did not fully reach the lowest educated workers, who are those most likely to be excluded from the labour market and further formal education. This under-representation of low-skilled workers could be explained by the existence of pre-requisites to enrol in training courses subsidised by PNQ (Lessa, 2011). In fact, these pre-requisites often included basic knowledge normally acquired in upper-secondary school.

The average number of hours of training for PNQ courses was 200 hours, although some courses offered a lower workload (DIEESE, 2011). Differences in workload varied substantially across course provider. For instance, while courses provided by universities and “Sistema S” lasted approximately 200 hours (204.7 and 198.7 hours, respectively) NGOs, community centres and other associations, offered significantly shorter PNQ training courses of, on average, 185.8, 169.4 and 140.6 hours, respectively. This variation in the length of training courses suggests that courses may also vary on other aspects including content and quality.

In terms of public investment, PNQ represented less than 1% of the budget of the Public Employment Services, ranking second to last in terms of investment across all PES initiatives2 (Lessa, 2011). Investment in the programme decreased over time between 2003 and 2012, despite the increasing costs of training provision and reflecting the low priority still attributed to adult training at the time.

With the new government in 2011, PNQ would be replaced by a new adult training programme called “Programa Nacional de Acesso ao Ensino Técnico e Emprego” or PRONATEC. Investments in PRONATEC were much more significant than the investments in PLANFOR and PNQ, and the governance of the programme also changed quite significantly. The next chapters will describe and assess the PRONATEC adult training programme.

## 3.4. From PLANFOR and PNQ to PRONATEC

Several lessons can be taken away from the adult training programmes that predeceased PRONATEC. First of all, it became quickly evident to the Brazilian government that adult training programmes should extend beyond unemployed workers who maintain a link with the Public Employment Services. Adult training programme have the potential of up- and re-skilling employed workers at risk of losing their job due to structural changes in the economy and changing skill needs in the labour market. However, both PLANFOR and PNQ were mostly perceived as policies to improve inclusiveness, reduce poverty and prevent social exclusion. PLANFOR and PNQ were not sufficiently well articulated with the national strategy for productivity and competitiveness. The governance structure of PRONATEC, discussed in detail in the following chapter, has address this issue by involving several ministries (health, defence, tourism, industry, etc.) in the implementation of the programme.

Second, training provision should be limited to certified technical schools or institutions. As both programmes, PLANFOR and PNQ, allowed training courses to be offered by NGOs, religious communities, civic associations, or workers’ unions, for example, controlling the quality of training was too difficult. Courses offered by different type of institutions could be quite different in content, infra-structures, and even hours of training provided. Similarly, even if training provision is limited to a restricted number of accredited institutions, training courses should follow a minimum standard regarding number of hours of training, content, etc. Otherwise, there will be a lot of heterogeneity in training quality across institutions in the same region and across regions. The effects of changes in the industry structure, such as those triggered by falling employment in the manufacturing sector and a stronger integration into the global economy, can affect regions asymmetrically if the response of training policies is not equally effective in all areas of the country. With PRONATEC, as will become clear in the next chapter, significant steps were taken to limit differences in training practices across the country, although there is still scope for improvement.

Third, for the training course offer to be aligned with local labour market needs, it is insufficient to delegate the responsibility to states and municipalities of identifying skill needs and aligning their initiatives accordingly, if there is not a formal Skill Assessment and Anticipation (SAA) system in place that they can rely on to obtain good-quality information, learn how to implement rigorous methods, benefit from pre-established platforms to disseminate information, etc. At the very least, if the responsibility of identifying skill needs is fully delegated to states and municipalities, there should be clear guidelines on how to proceed, uniformly applied in all regions of the country, accompanied with campaigns to raise awareness for the importance of such exercises, or even training workshops to teach state government and municipalities staff about SAA methods they could implement. Systematic local SAA initiatives should then be encouraged, enforced and monitored by the government. Without such formal SAA structure in place and rigorous controls, decentralised initiatives from higher administrative levels (Federal government) to lower administrative levels (state governments and municipalities) may lead to the inefficient use of public funds. This is an area where little improvements were made with PRONATEC and where further attention is needed.

Fourth, both PLANFOR and PNQ were short-lived adult training programmes. Consequently, there is insufficient time to assess the programmes’ merit, revise and reform them, as well as for significant results to materialise. This makes it particularly difficult for the several stakeholders involved to learn from their experience and to be held accountable for their decisions. Successful programmes take time. It takes time to carefully design and implement adult training programmes and it may take several years before results are visible and quantifiable.

Fifth, the development and implementation of both PLANFOR and PNQ saw very little involvement from the Ministry of Education (MEC). Adult training programmes in Brazil, before PRONATEC, were structured completely at the margin of the official education system. PRONATEC, on the other hand, has been mostly managed and developed by MEC. However, involvement from both Ministry of Education and Ministry of Labour is key for the development of a successful adult training programme.

The Ministry of Labour has access to information from the Public Employment Services agencies across the country and statistical data on labour market trends. Together with its connection to social partners, this makes MTb a fundamental stakeholder for the development of a sound SAA system that should influence the course offer of any adult training programme. Additionally, MTb has the possibility to follow training programme participants so as to monitor their integration into the labour market and evaluate the effectiveness of the training programme. Finally, MTb can articulate adult training with active labour market policies and other employment policies. The Ministry of Education, on the other hand, is well placed to control the quality and certify training providers. MEC has the necessary know-how to develop a framework for the recognition of prior learning and reduce barriers in the access to adult training when entry requirements are imposed. Finally, MEC can award certifications to training participants, recognise training modules and articulate free-form short training courses with the vocational education system, so as to create incentives for training participants to proceed with further education.

On the positive side, PNQ opened the door to inter-ministerial collaboration in adult training programmes, with the successful partnership between MTb and MDS in disseminating information about training courses to a wider public. Inter-ministerial collaboration is now at the heart of the governance structure of PRONATEC.

Finally, one last consideration is worth mentioning. Despite the existence of a public network of technical schools, financed by Federal, state and municipal funds, both PLANFOR and PNQ were mostly implemented by private institutions. In this regard, the strategy followed by the Brazilian government to develop its adult learning system has been to transfer resources from the public to the private sector for the execution of a public policy. As will be discussed in the next chapter, PRONATEC mostly follows the same strategy by relying significantly on training provision from S-system technical schools. This strategy can offer several advantages, namely that adult training programmes benefit from already established high-quality infra-structures at little cost.

## References

Ferraz, D. and F.C. Ribeiro de Oliveira (2018), Impaco of the national professional qualification program (PNQ) on income: an econometric analysis in Piracicaba/SP-Brazil, Pesquisa & Debate, ISSN 1806-9029, Pontifíca Universidade Católica de São Paulo, São Paulo. https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/171454.html.

Gutierrez Alves, E. L. and C.A. dos Santos Vieira (1995), Qualificação profissional: uma proposta de política pública, Planejamento e políticas públicas no. 12. http://www.ipea.gov.br/ppp/index.php/PPP/article/view/143.

Hermeto Camilo de Oliveira, A. M. and E. L. Luiz Goncalves Rios-Neto, E. L. (2007), “Uma avaliação experimental dos impactos da política de qualificação profissional no Brasil”, Revista Brasileira de Economia, Rio de Janeiro, v. 61, n. 3, pp. 353-378. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-71402007000300004.

Lessa, S. E. (2011), A formação via PNQ e inserção productiva dos CRAS: a reposição empobrecida e emergencial da qualificação de trabalhadores, Serv. Soc., São Paulo, n. 106, pp. 284-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0101-66282011000200006.

MNISTERIO DO TRABALHO E DO EMPREGO (2003), Plano Nacional de Qualificação – PNQ, 2003-2007, Brasília: MTE, SPPE, pp. 56. https://www.oei.es/historico/etp/plano_nacional_qualificacao_brasil.pdf.

Pinto Bulhoes, M. (2004), Plano Nacional de Qualificação do Trabalhador – PLANFOR: acertos, limites e desafios vistos do extremo sul, São Paulo em perspectiva, 18(4), pp. 39-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-88392004000400006.

Reis, M. (2012), Vocational training and labour market outcomes in Brazil, REAP – Rede de Economia Aplicada, Working Paper 045, Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada (IPEA), Brasília. https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/bejeap/v15y2015i1p29n3.html.

Severini E. R. and V. I. Fernandez Orellano, V. I. (2010), O efeito do ensino profissionalizante sobre a probabilidade de inserção no mercado de trabalho e sobre a renda no período pré-PLANFOR, Escola de Economia de São Paulo, Textos para discussão 268, FGV. http://hdl.handle.net/10438/6960.

## Notes

← 1. FAT funding comes from different sources: contributions from firms with 0.65% of their gross sales, contributions from non-profit organisations with 1% of their total wage bill and contributions from firms and retailers with 1.65% of the value of all imported goods and services. FAT funds are meant for the unemployment insurance programme, the minimum salary allowance programme, and programmes for economic development, such as programmes for adult training.

← 2. SINE carries several activities and initiatives to match job seekers to employers, to promote employment creation by local firms, to help individuals setting-up their own business and to monitor the unemployment insurance programme.

End of the section – Back to iLibrary publication page