Clear ideas. Concrete application.
For teams that take part in decisions about resources, time or services: build a fictional budget, compare alternatives and explain criteria, trade-offs and review. The course connects needs, care, barriers and opportunities through diverse cases, without turning equitable economics into a one-size-fits-all school or offering financial advice.
For whom
Professionals and teams from companies, administrations, educational centers and community entities who participate in decisions about resources, organization of time or service design.
What you will learn
- Distinguish resources, needs, costs, distribution criteria and trade-offs in simple cases.
- Identify paid and unpaid care, and relate them to time, barriers and opportunities.
- Construct and justify a limited fictional budget, comparing alternatives and their possible effects.
- Communicate assumptions, boundaries and simple indicators to review a decision.
The syllabus, no mystery.
Each module combines concepts, a practice and a question to build your own criterion.
- Equitable economy as a pedagogical framework, not a single school of thought
- Resources, needs and priorities
- Accessibility, non-discrimination and who may be excluded
- Diversity of roles, ages, capacities and living arrangements in the cases
Classify a fictitious service case into resources, needs, barriers, priorities and pending decisions; justify a first priority.
A question to ponderWhat changes in a decision when, besides asking how much it costs, we ask who can access it and who is left out?
Your result: Needs sheet with three needs, two barriers, one justified priority, and one outstanding question; it becomes the initial section of the budget.
Your final project.
Individual or team fictitious budget of 100.000 units for care, accessibility, training and spaces. It integrates the needs sheet and the timeline map, three criteria, two alternatives that each add up to 100.000, advantages and trade-offs, possible unattended people, an indicator and review after co-evaluation. In teams, distribution of contributions is recorded and a brief individual justification.
This is how we work.
How we review what has been learned
Integrated assessment: concepts and distinctions (25%), coherence of totals and assumptions (25%), transparent justification of criteria and caveats (30%), and communication of limits and review (20%). It may be submitted and presented orally or in writing; ideological affinity is not scored and personal exposure is not required.
Format and sessions
Four 4-hour sessions or equivalent blocks, in-person, live virtual or . The 16 hours include explanation, practice and assessment; breaks organized separately.
Before starting
No prior knowledge is required. Work will be done with fictitious cases and accessible materials; there are no mandatory tasks outside the course.
Proposed instructor profile
Proposed instructor profile: an interdisciplinary team with relevant professional experience in care, applied economics, organization or socio-educational intervention. Profile, requirements and availability will be verified before each edition.
Scope of the course
Applied economic literacy with fictitious budgets. It is not an audit nor fiscal, financial, labor, legal or budgeting advice; it does not offer recommendations for personal economic decisions, certification or guarantee of results. The sources are for consultation, not endorsements by CRUSH.
Reference sources
The cited entities are sources for consultation, not collaborators or endorsers of CRUSH.