Plan Jefes y Jefas de Hogar Desocupados

Defining principles

“It addresses the problems of exclusion and poverty by centering on the employment condition of the individual,” the “[integration of] excluded groups,” and countercyclical intervention to reduce the impact of the business cycle (3).

Rationale

The program was implemented in response to a massive unemployment crisis and resultant civil unrest. In May of 2002, the unemployment rate reached 25% (2).

Number of participants

A peak of 2 million participants in the second half of 2002. Nationally 15% of households received the benefit and as many as 40% in some regions (4).

Criteria for participation

Households with an unemployed head of household and A) children who are enrolled in school, B) disabled dependents, or C) pregnant dependents.

Person-days of employment

A work requirement of 20 work hours per week

Pay and benefits

ARP 150 (about 3/4 of the minimum wage) in monthly income support. In addition to their income, transportation discounts and tax refunds were available to recipients (5).

Financing

The program was initially financed by the Treasury Department and beginning in 2003, financed by the World Bank USD 600 million). Program expenditures were equivalent to about one percent of GDP and almost five percent of the federal budget (6).

Implementation

Local governments, non-governmental and grassroots organizations managed the program. Local administration provided the necessary flexibility to effectively address local issues.

Types of work

About sixty percent were employed in community projects like elder care, community kitchens, infrastructure improvements, and recycling. Eight percent were employed in microenterprises. Six percent of participants went back to school and a further four percent received vocational training. Twenty percent were employed in municipal administration and the remaining two percent in the private sector (7).

Notable features

71% of participants were women, about half were under 35, and 60% of participating households had one or two children. More than 90% of participating households were below the poverty line and more than half were indigent. The program was the only income for 20% of participating households (9).