National Secretariat for Social Assistance (SNAS) of the Ministry of Social Development and Assistance, Family and Fight against Hunger – MDS (which during 2019-2022 was designated Ministry of Citizenship – MC), by means of an inter-federative SUAS management structure. Funding is co-participatory between the three levels of government: municipal, state and federal.

Social assistance units referenced to the Social Assistance management body in the municipal government (all SUAS units, such as CRAS, CREAS, Day Centers and POP Centers, Shelter Units, in addition to civil society organizations registered with SUAS).

The Service was instituted and regulated from the Brazilian Typification of Social Assistance Services, published on November 11, 2009, by resolution of the Brazilian Council of Social Assistance, and reissued in 2014¹.

Currently in operation.

Provision of temporary accommodation for homeless people and families. It includes attention and material provisions, according to the needs detected. It provides for coordination and participation in joint actions of an intersectoral nature to minimize the damage caused and provide for the needs that have arisen.

N/A

People and families affected by disasters and emergencies.

Access to the initiative occurs through the identification of people and families affected by disasters and emergencies, especially those displaced because of the situation. The identification of beneficiaries is carried out in partnership with the Civil Defense.

The coverage of the service varies depending on the given emergency situation.

Provision of temporary accommodation, attention and material provisions, according to the needs detected. Coordination and participation in joint actions of an intersectoral nature to minimize the damage caused and provide for the needs that have arisen.

In most cases, it consists of offering shelter in a public place adapted to deal with the most immediate effects of the disaster or emergency. The offer of other benefits (including referral to other services) tends to occur in these same spaces, based on identified needs.

SUAS funding is shared by the three levels of government (Federal Government, states, the Federal District and municipalities). Federal resources are allocated in financing blocks and minimums, which have some flexibility to finance the various SUAS initiatives (see Policy Brief  on SUAS financing). At the federal level, the Service of Protection in Disaster Situations and Emergencies has its own funding regulated by MDS Ordinance No. 90 of 2013. In this regulation, criteria are provided for other entities (states, the Federal District and municipalities) to request and access federal resources, which are transferred directly from the National Social Assistance Fund to municipal and state social assistance funds, through the High Complexity Variable Minimum – PVAC. The resources transferred vary each year, depending on the situations of disaster and emergency experienced. Since 2023, the Ministry has made the criteria and deadlines for sending documentation more flexible, to speed up the procedures and the transfer of funds. The following is a history of the amounts transferred by the MDS to offer the Service, through the PVAC. 

Federal resources transferred to states, the Federal District and municipalities through the High Complexity Variable Minimum for the provision of the Protection Service in Disasters and Emergencies (2013 to May 22, 2024[1]
 

A quasi-experimental academic study points out that the implementation of SUAS generated expansion and improvement in the provision of services, as well as improvement of administrative capacity at the municipal level, even controlling for more specific political factors². 

IPEA's quantitative analysis evaluated that, by controlling territorial inequalities, the most efficient CRAS are, respectively, those in the North, Midwest, South, Southeast and Northeast regions³. 

A nationwide mixed-study commissioned by the Ministry of Citizenship found that, despite criticism of salary levels, CRAS social assistance teams experience minimal turnover. The study also revealed a positive user perception, with 81.4% reporting wait times of under 15 minutes and 70.9% describing staff as attentive, dedicated, and qualified. CRAS received a better evaluation than other public policies, and 90.1% of beneficiaries classified CRAS as being very important in their lives⁴.

However, we did not identify robust studies on the impacts of SCE in a more specific way. It is worth noting, however, that studies carried out by UNICEF and CONGEMAS[i] on SUAS's response capacity to disasters and emergencies indicate that it is important that services, including SCE, are supported by social-assistance management and surveillance actions specifically aimed at monitoring, preventing and reacting to emergencies and disasters. Alarmingly, however, the study suggests that only 52% of municipalities have planned resources in their regular budgets to deal with the situations that have arisen. Still, most of these resources are intended for the payment of Occasional Benefits which, although complementing SCE, is a distinct initiative. The study also indicates that only 50% of municipalities implement organized actions to prevent emergencies in an integrated manner with SUAS.

Specific arrangements vary according to each response, which follows the peculiarities of each municipality and disasters or emergency situation.

Specific arrangements vary according to each response, which follows the peculiarities of each municipality and disasters or emergency situation.

There are interactions with the Civil Defense, which is the one that declares and recognizes situations of emergency and disasters at the federal level as well as, with other sectors such as health and civil society organizations, in addition to the other units of the social assistance network.

Due to its nature, the SCE is responsive to emergencies and disasters, varying significantly in each context, as seen during Covid. However, it is worth highlighting a set of more structuring actions with an effect on SUAS in general, such as:

• Several municipal teams developed voluntary joint efforts to support the application for Emergency Aid (AE, acronym in Portuguese) via application, although SUAS was not directly involved in AE.

• The Federal Government maintained the IGD-Aid payments even with the temporary suspension of SUAS responsibilities in support of the program (and the PBF program itself) in 2020 and much of 2021.

• The Federal Government generated instructional material with guidelines and protocols for

meeting the challenge of avoiding agglomeration and ensuring continuity of service in the Unified Social Assistance System.

• Through Ordinance MC No. 369, of April 29, 2020, the Federal Government distributed R$ 2.4 billion to SUAS as extraordinary credit distributed as follows among the municipalities with the highest prevalence of elderly, PwD, migrants and homeless people:

  • R$ 9.1 million was transferred to the interiorization of Venezuelan migrants and refugees;

  • R$ 158.1 million were allocated to the purchase of PPE for SUAS professionals working on the front line, serving, for example, sheltered elderly, homeless people and victims of rights violations;

  • R$ 185.6 million were transferred to the purchase of food from the elderly and people with disabilities served in the SUAS network;

  • R$ 577.7 million for the co-financing of social assistance actions, according to the needs of each location considering the pandemic.

• Through Ordinances MC No. 378, of May 7, 2020, and MC No. 468, of August 13, 2020, R$ 1.5 billion were also transferred to: (a) the reorganization of activities in SUAS units; (b) the purchase of other items necessary to deal with the emergency; or (c) the expansion of social assistance offers during the pandemic. Of these:

  • R$ 1 billion was specifically intended to reinforce basic social protection actions;

  • R$ 437.2 million were specifically intended to reinforce Specialized Social Protection actions^5,6,7. 

In addition to the transfer of funds, several technical guidance notes on work in the context of the pandemic were released by the MDS.

1.  GoB, Min. Desenvolvimento Social. 2009. Tipificação Nacional de Serviços Socioassistenciais - Texto da RESOLUÇÃO No. 109, DE 11 DE NOVEMBRO DE  2009. https://www.prattein.com.br/home/images/stories/PDFs/Tipificacao_AS.pdf.
   GoB, Min. Desenvolvimento Social. 2014. Tipificação Nacional de Serviços Socioassistenciais. https://central.to.gov.br/download/231761.

2. Silva, Ângelo Henrique Lopes da, Melchior Sawaya Neto, e Fábio Henrique Granja e Barros. 2015. Avaliação de eficiência dos Centros de Rerferência de Assistência Social no Brasil.

3. Cavalcante, Pedro, e Beatriz Bernarde Ribeiro. 2012. O Sistema Único de Assistência Social: resultados da implementação da política nos municípios brasileiros. Rev. Adm. Pública 46 (dezembro). https://www.scielo.br/j/rap/a/bwPZgHkvMbPcWCcYcgKHtPb/?lang=pt#.

4. GoB, Min. Desenvolvimento social. 2009. “Sumário Executivo. Estudos quali-quantitativos sobre o Programa de Atenção Integral à Família”. https://fpabramo.org.br/acervosocial/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2017/08/046.pdf. 

5. GoB, Min. Cidadania. 2022. “Atuação da Proteção Social Especial do SUAS durante a pandemia da COVID-19”. https://aplicacoes.mds.gov.br/sagi/pesquisas/documentos/relatorio/relatorio_226.pdf

6. GoB, IPEA. 2022. “Boletim de Políticas Sociais -  acompanhamento e análise N. 29, 2022.” https://portalantigo.ipea.gov.br/portal/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=39098&Itemid=9.

7. IPEA. 2021. “Boletim de Políticas Sociais: Acompanhamento e análise. Assistência Social”, Políticas Sociais: acompanhamento e análise, 27. http://dx.doi.org/10.38116/bps28/assistenciasocial.