Public Health funding in the Brazilian National Health System (SUS): an analysis of parliamentary amendments in Brazil from 2017 to 2022Abstract
This study is a descriptive analysis of the funding resources of parliamentary amendments in the actions of Temporary Increase in the Cost of Primary Health Care Services Floor (PCF) and the Temporary Increase in the Medium and High Complexity Ceiling (MHC), between 2017 and 2022. Descriptive statistics were applied regarding the type of parliamentary amendment and the amount paid, totaling 114,032 amendment indications and the value of R$47,286 billion. The results indicate that: I) the Northeast and Southeast Regions were the ones allocated with the most resources in parliamentary amendments; and II) a significant increase in reporting amendments corresponded to 27.32% of the general total paid for amendments throughout the period. It is worth mentioning that, when analyzing 2021 and 2022, there was an increase of 789% and 729%, respectively, when compared with 2020.
Keywords
Financial accountability in health; Brazilian National Health System; Health care rationing
Resumo
Este estudo trata de uma análise descritiva dos recursos de custeio de emendas parlamentares nas ações de incremento temporário ao Custeio dos Serviços de Atenção Primária à Saúde e do Teto da Média e Alta Complexidade entre 2017 e 2022. Foram aplicadas estatísticas descritivas relativas ao tipo de emenda parlamentar e ao montante pago, totalizando 114.032 indicações de emendas e o valor de R$ 47.286 bilhões. Os resultados apontam que: I) as regiões Nordeste e Sudeste foram as que mais receberam recursos de emendas parlamentares; e II) o aumento significativo das emendas de relatoria correspondeu a 27,32% do total geral pago por emendas em todo o período. Vale ressaltar que, ao analisar 2021 e 2022, verificou-se o aumento do valor total pago de emendas de relatoria de 789% e 729%, respectivamente, em relação a 2020.
Palavras-chave
Prestação de contas financeiras em saúde; Sistema Único de Saúde; Alocação de recursos para a atenção à saúde
Resumen
Este estudio trata de un análisis descriptivo de los recursos de costeo de enmiendas parlamentarias en las acciones de aumento temporal al Costeo de los Servicios de Atención Primaria de la Salud (PAP) y del Techo de Media y Alta Complejidad (MAC) entre 2017 y 2022. Se aplicaron estadísticas descriptivas relativas al tipo de enmienda parlamentaria y al monto pagado, totalizando 114.032 indicaciones de enmiendas y el valor de R$ 47.286 mil millones. Los resultados muestran que: I) las Regiones Nordeste y Sudeste fueron las que más recibieron recursos de enmiendas parlamentarias; y II) el aumento significativo de la enmiendas de relatoría correspondió al 27,32% del total general pagado por enmiendas en todo el período. Debemos subrayar que, al analizar 2021 y 2022, se verificó un aumento del 789% y del 729%, respectivamente, con relación a 2020.
Palabras clave
Rendición de cuentas financieras en salud; Sistema Brasileño de Salud; Asignación de recursos para la atención de la salud
Introduction
The Brazilian National Health System (SUS) is a public model guided by the principles of universal health coverage and equitable access. However, the challenge of ensuring its effectiveness persists, particularly given the insufficiency and instability of investments, which compromise the availability of resources and impact service delivery in municipalities1.
The enactment of Constitutional Amendment No. 86/20152, under which parliamentary amendments (PA) become “mandatory” — that is, the Executive Branch is obligated to implement them and their allocation cannot be used as a tool for political negotiation3 — is an example of the challenges faced by the SUS.
PA amendments consist of budgetary resources allocated at the discretion of federal legislators and may be used for operating expenses or investments. They are classified into four categories: individual, caucus, committee, and rapporteur amendments. To gain a deeper understanding of this phenomenon, this study aims to analyze PA funding resources for temporary increases to the Primary Health Care Floor (PCF) and the Medium and High Complexity Ceiling (MHC) from 2017 to 2022.
The option to analyze PA in temporary increase of funding measures related to the PCF and MHC stems from the fact that increases in the Ministry of Health (MoH) budget carry significant weight in health funding allocations, highlighting the political significance of proposing these amendments4.
SUS funding mechanisms
SUS funding is provided by federal, state, and municipal resources, supplemented by specific contributions and taxes. These funds are distributed among the levels of government and used to cover the costs of health actions and services, ensuring access for the population.
Starting in 2007, the SUS adopted the funding block model, seeking to increase flexibility in resource allocation and promote greater integration, with the aim of strengthening management and enhancing the system’s effectiveness. Prior to this change, funding was provided primarily through federal transfers linked to specific programs5,6. The implementation of funding blocks aims to expand the autonomy of local managers in the use of resources, fostering integration and regional planning, as well as promoting the decentralization and regionalization of services, geared towards improving the quality and efficiency of healthcare.
Two important public health policies in Brazil are the Basic Care Floor (BCF) and the Medium and High Complexity Care (MHC).
The BCF was a Ministry of Health (MS) funding mechanism that allocated resources from the National Health Fund (FNS) directly to cover the costs of primary health care services in Brazilian municipalities. It was established by Ordinance No. 1,882/GM, dated December 18, 1997. The BCF was divided into two components: fixed BCF and variable BCF. Financial resources are transferred after the production of health facilities is calculated and recorded by their respective managers in the Outpatient Information System (SIA) and Hospital Information System (SIH)7.
PAs constitute a complementary source of health financing, allowing for the allocation of resources to specific projects and initiatives in regions linked to lawmakers’ electoral constituencies. However, such sources distort the equitable allocation of resources, increasing inequality among Brazilian municipalities3. Currently, PAs play a crucial role in the financing and improvement of the SUS. They are instruments used by legislators to propose amendments to the federal budget, directing resources toward the implementation of services, the acquisition of equipment, and the improvement of health infrastructure in different regions of the country. According to Piola and Vieira4, amendments can contribute to reducing inequalities, but they can also disregard redistributive allocation criteria, becoming yet another instrument for mediating relations among the branches of government. Therefore, due to the importance of PA in fostering the strengthening the SUS, it is essential to have rigorous monitoring and public participation in the allocation and execution of these resources, ensuring that they effectively meet the needs of the population and are aligned with the principles and guidelines of the SUS.
Data from the Transparency Portal8 indicate the different types of PA that can be allocated to SUS funding: individual amendments, state caucus amendments, committee amendments, and rapporteur amendments (see Chart 1). Individual amendments are mandatory, and the amount allocated to them is determined based on the government’s net revenue. State caucus amendments, on the other hand, are also mandatory, being presented by deputies and senators from the same state, and the amount is distributed among them in proportion to the size of the caucus6. Committee amendments, in turn, are not mandatory. They are proposed by thematic committees in Congress, in both the Chamber of Deputies and the Senate, and aim to allocate funds to specific areas aligned with the country’s priorities and needs.
In recent years, rapporteur-proposed amendments have drawn attention due to their lack of transparency, as they are proposed by the general rapporteur for the federal budget. The main issue with this type of resource allocation is the possibility that strictly political criteria may be used instead of allocating funds to a region in need of resources to finance public health8.
The “secret budget” is a term that has recently gained prominence in the Brazilian political landscape. It refers to a mechanism for the allocation of resources by the federal government through PA. These amendments are directed at specific actions and projects, often without transparency and without proper disclosure to the public9. This mechanism has raised concerns regarding the lack of transparency and the possibility of favoring certain regions or political interests. The lack of transparency in the allocation and execution of resources limits social and institutional oversight, raising doubts about the effectiveness of the funded initiatives. In this article, we will analyze the PAs allocated to the Primary Care Floor (PCF) and the MHC from 2017 to 2022, extracted from the National Health Fund Information Panel in December 2023 (see Table 1).
The temporary BCF supplement was renamed in 2022, becoming the temporary PCF supplement. Between 2017 and 2022, out of the 114,000 amendments analyzed, it was found that the municipalities of Fernando de Noronha/PE, Guaíra/SP, Ibirubá/RS, Inajá/PR, Orocó/PE, Passabém/MG, and São João do Carú/MA did not receive PA funding for PCF and MHC initiatives.
The criteria for PA transfers are published annually and aim to define the rules that will be used for the transfer of federal health funds to state, municipal, and district funds, in accordance with the Health Legislation System10.
These ordinances define the execution of funds in accordance with budgetary and financial legislation, specifically: a) the funding blocks, as provided for in Article 3 of Consolidation Ordinance GM/MS No. 6, of September 28, 20177; and b) the prohibition on using funds from individual amendments to pay for personnel expenses and social charges related to active and retired employees, pensioners, and debt service charges, as provided for in § 1 of Article 166-A of the Federal Constitution11.
Thus, transparency and accountability regarding the allocation of any public funds are essential, especially in the health sector, to ensure they are used effectively for the benefit of the population, contributing to the promotion of equity and the strengthening of the SUS.
Control, oversight, and accountability
Control over SUS resources involves various bodies, with the National Audit Department of the Brazilian National Health System (DenaSUS) responsible for internal auditing, conducting independent assessments of the implementation of public health policies and the use of federal funds.
The Federal Court of Accounts (TCU), on the other hand, exercises external control over federal actions and resources allocated to health, aiming to improve the quality of public health services and strengthen the SUS, in accordance with Articles 33, §2; 70, 71, and 72, §1; 74, §2, and 161, sole paragraph, of the 1988 Constitution11. The TCU also assists governance bodies in strengthening the SUS by implementing improvements in the areas of legality, economy, efficiency, efficacy, and effectiveness12.
In addition to these, there is also the National Health Council (CNS), whose mission is to oversee, track, and monitor public health policies across a wide range of areas. Among its main responsibilities, the CNS is responsible for organizing conferences and forums for social participation, as well as approving the health budget and monitoring its execution, evaluating the National Health Plan every four years13.
Lastly, the Ministry of Health’s finalistic Secretariats are responsible for the primary and finalistic control of health actions and services paid to the states, the Federal District, and the municipalities. They are also responsible for investigating any irregularities, notifying the health manager or service provider to present justifications, as well as taking measures to rectify the irregularity. In the absence of justification, the Ministry of Health will refer the matter to the Federal Court of Accounts for the initiation of a Special Audit, as provided for in Ministry of Health Ordinance No. 885, dated May 4, 202114.
In 2015, following a constitutional amendment that made the payment of individual budget amendments mandatory, deputies and senators gained the right to allocate health funds to municipalities of their choice. The lack of transparency in this process hinders oversight and control over the allocation of resources, opening the door to potential misappropriation and undue favoritism15.
Accountability and the clear disclosure of the criteria and justifications for the allocation of resources are fundamental measures to ensure the proper application of the budget for the benefit of public health16. Thus, the role of oversight and inspection bodies must be strengthened to ensure the legality and effectiveness of fund transfers, preventing potential misappropriation and ensuring that resources are effectively directed toward improving the health system and serving the population. The continuous improvement of control systems is essential to prevent and curb misappropriation of SUS funds, enabling actions ranging from the suspension of construction projects and services to the adoption of administrative and judicial measures. Additionally, it is worth noting that the training of public managers, through health education initiatives, enables more efficient use of resources. Managers gain knowledge about the system and understand the importance of consistent funding for the continuity of programs; they are also aware that one-time funds allocated via parliamentary amendments are not guaranteed to be available every year.
Methods
To maintain quality care in public health, it is imperative that the SUS have continuous funding focused on the needs of the population. In this sense, PA, when correctly applied in the public interest and not merely for political gain, are important sources of complementary funding for the SUS, which can be allocated for both operating expenses and investments.
As described previously, the objective of this study is to evaluate the PA funding allocated to temporary increases in the funding of PCF and MHC services from 2017 to 2022 in all Brazilian municipalities, through a public consultation of the FNS(e) website, specifically the Parliamentary Amendments Panel.
This is a descriptive research through which it is possible to gather information on the distribution of variables and relationships between different phenomena, as well as to identify patterns or trends that may be present in the analyzed context. According to Gil17, descriptive research aims to conduct a detailed and thorough analysis of a specific phenomenon, seeking to describe its characteristics and relevant aspects.
In the descriptive research conducted, various techniques were employed to collect and analyze relevant information. In addition to traditional methods, analyses of documents, databases, ordinances, laws, and decrees pertinent to the topic under study were utilized. Scientific articles and widely circulated newspapers also served as data sources to support the research conclusions. The documents consulted are publicly accessible and available in the Health Legislation System; the criteria for transfers of PAs are published annually and aim to define the rules that will be used for the transfer of federal health funds to state, municipal, and Federal District funds, in accordance with regulatory ordinances available in the Health Legislation System10 and listed in Chart 2.
Data collection
To obtain the necessary data, a carefully designed sample was used to adequately represent the diversity of regional contexts. The data was collected in December 2023 from the National Health Fund Information Panel.
The information collected includes relevant variables, such as MHC and BCF/PCF proposals, year of allocation, geographical location (Federation unit and municipality), proposal number, type of resource, proposal value, committed value, paid value, proposal status and amendment number. Next, data was added on population, area, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita and the Municipal Human Development Index (MHDI), data referring to the Census carried out in 2022 (total population of 203,080,756 people), as shown in Chart 3.
Data analysis
This study consists of a detailed analysis of the BCF/PCF and MHC temporary increment appropriations over six years, from 2017 to 2022. In total, 114,032 amendments were identified, totaling R$ 47,286,954,785.59. The research uses the type of amendment and the regions of Brazil as the main parameters for analyzing the allocation of resources, seeking to understand the dynamics of the allocation and execution of government investments. The data shows the allocation of PA resources from the BCF/PCF and MHC temporary
increment funds by type of amendment. This variety of sources and the comprehensive time frame allow for a broader and deeper understanding of the phenomenon in question.
Results and discussion
From the information extracted from the SUS Information Panel in December 2023, we can see the significant number of proposed amendments, with an average of nineteen thousand proposals sent to the Ministry of Health each year and an average total annual amount committed of around R$7.9 billion.
Analysis by level of care
In Table 2, we analyze the amounts and values paid for the primary level, through the BCF/PCF increment amendments, and for the secondary and tertiary levels, through the MHC increment amendments.
It can be seen that transfers of rapporteur amendments increase in election years. This increase, as highlighted by Pereira et al.15 raises concerns about potential misuse and favoritism. Ulinski et al.28 investigated whether the increase in federal transfers by PA favored a reduction in the allocation of municipalities' own resources to finance public health and PHC actions and services, as well as discussing the meaning and consequences of the budgetary changes observed for the SUS. In short, the importance of the TCU's role in evaluating the effectiveness and transparency of public policies and the need for robust control mechanisms and transparency in the allocation of public resources is once again noted.
Analysis by macro-region
Based on the information collected, we can see that, in the first year in office, the distribution of the BCF/PCF and MHC increases by PAs does not occur in such a way as to include a greater number of municipalities, unlike what happens in election years (see Table 3).
When analyzing the transfers by year, region and percentage, we see that the Northeast and Southeast are the Brazilian administrative regions that received the most PE resources (see Figure 1). According to Piola and Vieira4, "equity parameters are mandatory in health, so that regional inequalities can be reduced" (p. 43). Silva et al.3, in turn, observed a more pronounced distribution of per capita values and total transfers, reinforcing the idea of unequal distribution of resources in the territory. This can be understood as a result of the greater population concentration in the Southeast, which leads to greater demands for care and, consequently, larger budgets. On the other hand, the Northeast, in addition to having a significant portion of the Brazilian population, is historically underserved, with high social demands for care, and requires large public investments in infrastructure, human and material resources in order to reach acceptable average levels of care.
The data in Table 4 suggests that although the Northeast receives most of the resources in absolute terms, the per capita distribution shows a more equitable allocation in other regions, such as the North. Equity parameters are mandatory in health, so that regional inequalities can be reduced, making it essential to consider not only the absolute value of the resources allocated, but also their per capita distribution and their potential impact on the quality of life and socio-economic development of each region. Added to this analysis is the dimension of the frequency of transfers to municipalities, which can vary significantly from one year to the next, generating instability in the budget and financing of health actions and services3.
Analysis by type of amendment
When analyzing the percentage of the number of proposals and the type of amendment, in the last two years there has been a significant increase in rapporteur amendments, which account for 27.32% of the overall total paid out in amendments over the entire period analyzed (see Table 5).
The data corroborates the questions raised by the increase in the allocation of reporting PAs in recent years3. There has been an increase in the budget ceiling for parliamentarians to send funds in the inflated amount and the municipality receives a higher amount than expected, as can be seen in 2021 and 2022, with an increase of 789% and 729%, respectively, in relation to the amount paid via rapporteur amendments in 2020. From the analysis of the six years regarding the total amount per type of amendment, it can be seen that individual amendments, which are mandatory, correspond to the largest number of amendments and the highest amount paid out. However, the amounts earmarked for rapporteur amendments account for 39%, as shown in Table 6.
Closing remarks
This study directly addressed the central question — how parliamentary funding amendments allocated to the BCF/PCF and the MHC performed between 2017 and 2022 — synthesizing four patterns: i) significant volume of funding; ii) predominance of individual amendments, with an acceleration of committee-drafted amendments in 2021–2022; iii) regional concentration of funds in the Northeast and Southeast; and iv) incomplete coverage, with municipalities not included during the period. Together with the increase in election years, these findings characterize PA amendments as a relevant complementary source, though marked by distributional asymmetries and low budgetary predictability.
The main new developments in the study are: a) Unprecedented integration of databases (FNS Amendment Panel, 2017–2022, and IBGE demographic/socioeconomic variables) to produce indicators adjusted for population and municipal profile, showing that the per capita analysis alters the hierarchy of the main recipients (better relative positioning of the North Region); b) Measurement of peaks in committee-sponsored amendments in 2021–2022, with percentage increases well above those of 2020, consistent with electoral cycles, documenting the change in the composition of PA allocations; c) Identification of municipalities not receiving incremental PA allocations for BCF/PCF and MHC throughout the analyzed period, highlighting coverage gaps; d) Documentation of the predominance of individual amendments in the total number of proposals and amounts paid, concurrent with the recent expansion of committee amendments; and e) Evidence of year-over-year instability in the frequency of transfers to municipalities, suggesting budgetary volatility for health actions and services.
Among the implications for public health policies and management, the following stand out: i) Active transparency and traceability for committee-initiated amendments (nominal disclosure of proposers, criteria, and local justifications); ii) Explicit redistributive criteria for need-based PA funding allocations (target population, Municipal Human Development Index, disease burden, and PHC coverage), with per capita caps per municipality; iii) A minimum multi-year forecast for funding increases, reducing annual volatility and enabling continuous planning; iv) Priority for structural block grants, avoiding the replacement of regular funding with episodic increases; and v) Strengthening of evaluation and social oversight (National Health Council) and institutional oversight (TCU/DenaSUS), with public dashboards to monitor implementation and results.
Limitations include the fact that this is a descriptive analysis; thus, causal effects of PA on SUS performance cannot be inferred. Future research should employ multivariate models and time-series/counterfactual analyses to estimate the impact of PA on indicators (PHC coverage, municipal out-of-pocket spending, waiting times, and health outcomes), as well as explore the interaction between electoral cycles and allocation decisions.
In summary, the funding amendments analyzed contributed to supplement health financing but, during the study period, tended to: concentrate funds in the Northeast and Southeast; exclude a portion of municipalities; and grew through rapporteur's PAs at a pace incompatible with criteria of equity and predictability. The body of evidence supports operational recommendations to mitigate inequalities and enhance the effectiveness and stability of financing.
Acknowledgments
We would like to extend our special thanks to the Ministry of Health, the Department of Labor and Health Education Management (SGTES), and the Department of Health Education Management (DEGES). We would also like to thank the University of Goiás, the University’s Center for Innovation in Health Education and Labor Management (CIGETS), and the Research Support Foundation (FUNAPE).
-
Campos MSLF, Paschoalotto MAC, Simões LRO. Public Health funding in the Brazilian National Health System (SUS): an analysis of parliamentary amendments in Brazil from 2017 to 2022. Interface (Botucatu). 2026; 30: e260498 https://doi.org/10.1590/interface.260498
-
Funding
This article is part of the SIMAPES project (System for Mapping, Monitoring, and Evaluation of Health Education), developed by the Federal University of Goiás (UFG) through FUNAPE, and funded by the Brazilian Ministry of Health.Secretariat for Labor Management and Health Education of the Ministry of Health (SGTES/MS) / Postgraduate Program in Administration (PGADM-FACE-UFG).Marco Antonio Catussi Paschoalotto was funded by National Funds from the Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) of Portugal and, where eligible, co-funded by European funds, under project UID/00758/2025 and DOI: 10.54499/UID/00758/2025, from the Center for Research in Political Science at the University of Minho.
- (d)
- (e)
- (f)
- (g)
- (h)
- (i)
- (j)
Data Availability
Research data is only available upon request.
References
- 1 Ferreira GA, Ferreira CA. O Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) brasileiro: trajetória e perspectivas. Rev Direito Debate. 2023; 32(59):e11861.
-
2 Brasil. Presidência da República. Emenda Constitucional nº 86, de 17 de Março de 2015. Altera os arts. 165, 166 e 198 da Constituição Federal, para tornar obrigatória a execução da programação orçamentária que especifica [Internet]. Brasília: Casa Civil; 2015 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/emendas/emc/emc86.htm
» https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/emendas/emc/emc86.htm - 3 Silva AS, Lima LD, Baptista TWF, Vieira FS, Andrade CLT. Transferências federais por emendas parlamentares aos municípios: implicações para o financiamento do SUS. Cienc Saude Colet. 2024; 29(7):e03152024.
-
4 Piola SF, Vieira FS. Texto para Discussão (TD) 2497: As emendas parlamentares e a alocação de recursos federais no Sistema Único de Saúde [Internet]. Rio de Janeiro: Ipea; 2019 [citado 1 Nov 2024]. Disponível em: https://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/handle/11058/9354
» https://repositorio.ipea.gov.br/handle/11058/9354 -
5 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 204, de 29 de Janeiro de 2007. Regulamenta o financiamento e a transferência dos recursos federais para as ações e os serviços de saúde, na forma de blocos de financiamento, com o respectivo monitoramento e controle [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2007 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2007/prt0204_29_01_2007.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2007/prt0204_29_01_2007.html -
6 Massuda A, Malik AM, Lotta G, Siqueira M, Tasca R, Rocha R. Brazil’s primary health care financing: case study. Lancet Global Health Commission Financing Primary Health Care. – Working Paper No. 1 [Internet]. 2022 [citado 1 Nov 2024]. Disponível em: https://eaesp.fgv.br/sites/eaesp.fgv.br/files/u793/brazilsprimaryhealthcarefinancing_casestudy_1.pdf
» https://eaesp.fgv.br/sites/eaesp.fgv.br/files/u793/brazilsprimaryhealthcarefinancing_casestudy_1.pdf -
7 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria de Consolidação nº 6, de 28 de Setembro de 2017. Consolidação das normas sobre o financiamento e transferência dos recursos federais para as ações e os serviços de saúde do Sistema Único de Saúde [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2017 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2017/prc0006_03_10_2017.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2017/prc0006_03_10_2017.html -
8 Brasil. Controladoria-Geral da União. Emendas parlamentares [Internet]. Brasília: CGU; 2024 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: https://portaldatransparencia.gov.br/entenda-a-gestao-publica/emendas-parlamentares
» https://portaldatransparencia.gov.br/entenda-a-gestao-publica/emendas-parlamentares -
9 Javaroni V. Orçamento secreto: as inconstitucionalidades das emendas de relator-geral [monografia]. São Paulo: Faculdade de Direito, Universidade de São Paulo; 2023 [citado 1 Nov 2024]. Disponível em: https://bdta.abcd.usp.br/directbitstream/8634e79d-e1df-4edc-b86e-bcdd4f426481/Vinicios%20Javaroni.pdf
» https://bdta.abcd.usp.br/directbitstream/8634e79d-e1df-4edc-b86e-bcdd4f426481/Vinicios%20Javaroni.pdf -
10 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Sistema de Legislação da Saúde [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2024 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: http://saudelegis.saude.gov.br/saudelegis/secure/norma/listPublic.xhtml
» http://saudelegis.saude.gov.br/saudelegis/secure/norma/listPublic.xhtml -
11 Brasil. Presidência da República. Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil de 1988 [Internet]. Brasília: Casa Civil; 1998 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicao.htm
» http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/constituicao.htm -
12 Brasil. Presidência da República. Decreto nº 11.798, de 28 de Novembro de 2023. Aprova a Estrutura Regimental e o Quadro Demonstrativo dos Cargos em Comissão e das Funções de Confiança do Ministério da Saúde e remaneja e transforma cargos em comissão e funções de confiança [Internet]. Brasília: Casa Civil; 2023 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2023-2026/2023/decreto/D11798.htm
» http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2023-2026/2023/decreto/D11798.htm -
13 Brasil. Presidência da República. Lei nº 8.142, de 28 de Dezembro de 1990. Dispõe sobre a participação da comunidade na gestão do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS) e sobre as transferências intergovernamentais de recursos financeiros na área da saúde e dá outras providências [Internet]. Brasília: Casa Civil; 1990 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l8142.htm
» https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l8142.htm -
14 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria GM/MS nº 885, de 4 de Maio de 2021. Regulamenta o art. 23 do Decreto nº 7.827, de 16 de outubro de 2012, para dispor sobre os procedimentos de cobrança administrativa e de instauração de tomada de contas especial para recomposição ao erário de valores transferidos na modalidade fundo a fundo, no âmbito do Ministério da Saúde [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2021 [citado 15 Jan 2024]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2021/prt0885_07_05_2021.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2021/prt0885_07_05_2021.html -
15 Pereira BLS, Oliveira ACR Jr, Faleiros DR. Portaria 3992/2017: desafios e avanços para gestão dos recursos no Sistema Único de Saúde. Rev Saude Publica. 2019; 53:58. doi: 10.11606/s1518-8787.2019053001052.
» https://doi.org/10.11606/s1518-8787.2019053001052 - 16 Turino F, Sodré F. Organizações sociais de saúde financiadas por emendas parlamentares. Trab Educ Saude. 2018; 16(3):1201-19.
- 17 Gil AC. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. 4a ed. São Paulo: Atlas; 2002.
-
18 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 375, de 10 de Março de 2014 [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2014 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2014/prt0375_10_03_2014.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2014/prt0375_10_03_2014.html -
19 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 600, de 10 de Junho de 2015. Regulamenta a aplicação das emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos à Rede SUS no exercício de 2015, para incremento do Teto de Média e Alta Complexidade e do Piso de Atenção Básica, com base no disposto no art. 36, § 6º, da Lei nº 13.080, de 2 de janeiro de 2015, e dá outras providências [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2015 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2015/prt0600_10_06_2015.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2015/prt0600_10_06_2015.html -
20 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 268, de 25 de Fevereiro de 2016. Regulamenta a aplicação das emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos à Rede SUS no exercício de 2016, para aplicação no incremento do Teto de Média e Alta Complexidade e do Piso de Atenção Básica, com base no disposto no art. 38, § 6º, da Lei nº 13.242, de 30 de dezembro de 2015 [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2016 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2016/prt0268_25_02_2016.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2016/prt0268_25_02_2016.html -
21 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 788, de 15 de Março de 2017. Regulamenta a aplicação das emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos ao SUS no exercício de 2017, para incremento do Teto de Média e Alta Complexidade e do Piso de Atenção Básica, com base no disposto no art. 40, § 6o, da Lei no 13.408, de 26 de dezembro de 2016, e dá outras providências [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2017 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2017/prt0788_20_03_2017_rep.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2017/prt0788_20_03_2017_rep.html -
22 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 565, de 9 de Março de 2018. Regulamenta a aplicação das emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos ao Sistema Único de Saúde - SUS no exercício de 2018, nos termos do art. 38, § 6º, inciso II, da Lei nº 13.473, de 8 de agosto de 2017, e dá outras providências [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2018 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2018/prt0565_12_03_2018.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2018/prt0565_12_03_2018.html -
23 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 395, de 14 de Março de 2019. Dispõe sobre a aplicação de emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos ao Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), para a realização de transferências do Fundo Nacional de Saúde aos Fundos de Saúde dos Estados, Distrito Federal e Municípios, no exercício de 2019 [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2019 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2019/prt0395_05_04_2019_rep.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2019/prt0395_05_04_2019_rep.html -
24 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria nº 488, de 23 de Março de 2020. Dispõe sobre a aplicação de emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos ao Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), para a realização de transferências do Fundo Nacional de Saúde aos Fundos de Saúde dos Estados, Distrito Federal e Municípios, no exercício de 2020 [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2020 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2020/prt0488_23_03_2020.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2020/prt0488_23_03_2020.html -
25 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Gabinete do Ministro. Portaria GM/MS nº 1.263, de 18 de Junho de 2021. Dispõe sobre a aplicação de emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos ao Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), para a realização de transferências do Fundo Nacional de Saúde aos fundos de saúde dos Estados, Distrito Federal e Municípios, no exercício de 2021 [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2021 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2021/prt1263_18_06_2021.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2021/prt1263_18_06_2021.html -
26 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria GM/MS nº 684, de 30 de Março de 2022. Dispõe sobre a aplicação de emendas parlamentares que adicionarem recursos ao Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), para a realização de transferências do Fundo Nacional de Saúde aos fundos de saúde dos Estados, Distrito Federal e Municípios, no exercício de 2022 [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2022 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2022/prt0684_31_03_2022.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2022/prt0684_31_03_2022.html -
27 Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Portaria GM/MS nº 449, de 5 de Abril de 2023. Dispõe sobre as regras para as transferências do Fundo Nacional de Saúde aos fundos de saúde dos Estados, Distrito Federal e Municípios, relativas a emendas parlamentares que destinarem recursos ao Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS), em 2023 [Internet]. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2023 [citado 4 Dez 2023]. Disponível em: https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2023/prt0449_05_04_2023.html
» https://bvsms.saude.gov.br/bvs/saudelegis/gm/2023/prt0449_05_04_2023.html - 28 Ulinski KGB, Carvalho BG, Vieira FS, Rodrigues R, Lima LD. Efeitos das emendas parlamentares no financiamento municipal da atenção primária à saúde do Sistema Único de Saúde. Cad Saude Publica. 2024; 40(3):e00007323.
Edited by
-
Editor
Manoela de Carvalho https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4226-1332
-
Associated editor
Estela Najberg https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2852-4442
Source: Authors, 2024.