Finances and social protection
Canada
Two ways to move beyond generic promises: estimate a proposal's cost and test whether an intervention improves people's lives.
How much does the promise cost?
A vague proposal can conceal the population served, the timeframe and the bill that will have to be paid later.
The Parliamentary Budget Officer (PBO), Parliament's budget analysis body, provides independent, non-partisan financial estimates of election proposals in response to eligible requests. The scope requires a sufficiently detailed, feasible proposal within federal jurisdiction. [1]
Set out the proposal in detail
Estimate its financial effect
Examine cost, assumptions and limitations
What the evidence shows
The mandate does not include certifying an entire election platform: the body costs proposals, but does not advise on their design or certify calculations prepared by other organisations. Costing is not a voting recommendation. [1]
Costs and delivery
The function requires an analytical team, data and time. The mandate page consulted does not provide the body's full operating cost. A Brazilian application would need to define who funds the analysis and safeguards its independence. [1]
Limits of the comparison
Having an estimate does not guarantee implementation, social benefit or agreement on priorities. Assumptions, the time horizon and uncertainty remain relevant.
Does housing with support make life more stable?
Housing instability and support needs must be examined together, without reducing a person to a cost or a clinical condition.
The experiment combined permanent housing, rent assistance and support tailored to people's needs. More than 2 thousand people experiencing homelessness and mental disorders participated across five cities, with two years of follow-up. The comparison with usual services used randomly assigned groups. [2]
Provide housing and support
Follow the groups for two years
Compare housing stability and other outcomes
What the evidence shows
The result below measures time in stable housing, not the percentage of people who have permanently left homelessness. Recruitment began in 2009 and the final interview took place in 2013; the report dates from 2014. [2]
- Housing with support
- 73%
- Usual services
- 32%
Percentage of time during the two-year follow-up. This is not a current picture of all of Canada. [2]
Costs and delivery
The study received a contribution from Health Canada. The intervention involved housing and staffing costs; offsets from reduced use of other services varied according to participants' needs. It did not uniformly pay for itself. [2]
Limits of the comparison
The effect does not justify concluding that any offer of housing will produce the same result. Housing availability, the quality of support and continuity must be considered.
OpenGov3's interpretation
What it can teach Brazil
The shared lesson is to specify and evaluate. In housing, define the target population, provision and support; in costing, make the alternative, time horizon and source of funding explicit. A significant social benefit can justify financing without fully paying for itself in the budget.
What to monitor when adapting it
- Initial and recurring cost of the proposal
- Difference between forecasts and implementation
- Housing stability and quality of support
- Distribution of benefits and costs across agencies
These are criteria for analysis, not commitments already made or estimated outcomes for Brazil. A well-documented practice is not, by itself, causal proof of an entire country's success.
Sources consulted
Consulted on 10/21/2026. Each result retains its observed period; institutional descriptions and impact evaluations have different scopes.
- PBO: mandate for costing election proposals (opens in a new tab)
Who can request analyses, which proposals are eligible and what the body does not certify.
- At Home/Chez Soi: final national report, 2014 (opens in a new tab)
Randomised trial in five cities. Pages 5, 17 and 36: intervention, outcomes and period. PDF in English.