Laboratoria is a nonprofit social enterprise that trains Latin American women who lacked access to university education or stable jobs into web developers and UX designers through a six-month intensive bootcamp, connecting them to tech-industry jobs. In 2014, Mariana Costa Checa and others, facing the difficulty of finding diverse talent at their own web-development company, started it in Lima, Peru — “then let's train them ourselves.” Beyond technical skills, it emphasizes social skills like confidence, communication, and the ability to keep learning, accompanying students to employment. Over 3,500 have graduated, over 1,100 companies have hired, and the job-placement rate is about 79% (2024). Post-program income is said to rise 2.8–3.7 times on average, and many become their household's main earner. It is a narrow gate — only about 9% of applicants are admitted — and the cost is paid in installments after getting a job (free if you don't get one). From Peru it spread to Chile, Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, and other Latin American countries.
●●○ medium
There is no confirmed −; independently verified + decide the position (B). No unreachable strike-through.= non-additive meter
Laboratoria: Bringing women who had no opportunity into tech jobs. The letter is B; certainty is medium. Unconfirmed concerns are placed under “Watching.” (As of 2026-Q2; estimate based on public information.)
Main narrative
One person’s story (N1)
+ before → after
Camila Flores, a Chilean graduate, had long sold ice cream but sought “something that would challenge me and give me freedom,” and joined Laboratoria. The learning was far harder than she imagined, but she overcame it and began a new career as a quality-assurance (QA) engineer. “I never thought my life could change this much in a year,” she says.
Source nature: Scotiabank Perspectives / P2 independent media (Scotiabank Perspectives). Positive effects are not used to offset negatives.
Positive / negative effects
+ effects
- Since 2014 Laboratoria has trained over 3,500 women, over 1,100 companies have hired, and the placement rate reached about 79% (2024). Many were unemployed at application, and post-program income rises substantially on average. It admits regardless of education or prior job, lifting the diversity of the tech industry itself. It won the World Summit Award (2017), and Google.org named its founder a global “Leader to watch.”P1 independent evaluation (World Summit Award / Google.org / World Bank)
− effects (confirmed)
- No confirmed −.
- Independent verification of income multiples and placement rates (mainly self-reported)
- The impact of a tech downturn and entry-level-job automation on the employment environment
- Renewing vocational training for the AI era, and expanding target countries and enrollment.
A second look
The core + is economic independence for women who had been cut off from opportunity, and the diversification of the tech industry (people), backed by the World Summit Award, the World Bank, the Citi Foundation, Google.org, and Scotiabank. That said, income multiples and placement rates rest mainly on self-reporting, and independent verification of long-term retention and wage trajectories is still to come. A tech downturn and AI automation of entry-level jobs could also affect graduates' employment environment.
Sources
How to read this assessment
- Reachable upper bound (ceiling): a confirmed − sets the ceiling, and independently verified + decide the position within it. + do not cancel out −.
- The weight of evidence is not symmetric: only confirmed − are counted; the volume of disputes or allegations goes under “Watching.” + are counted from independent evidence, while an organization’s own PR is treated as “reference.”
- Size is not value: scale is not used in the assessment. Matters that stay within money or competition—investors, shareholders, sanctions, trade secrets—are also excluded.
- The letter (assessment) and certainty (how reliable the information is) are separate axes.
This is a translation; the Japanese version is authoritative. The assessments here are generated automatically by AI based on published criteria. The operator does not alter individual results. Because they are AI-generated they may contain errors, and they are opinion and commentary, not statements of fact. Where evidence is insufficient, the entry is marked “On hold.” Requests for correction are accepted via the form.
Terms: Narrative Value = an assessment (A–G) of the distance between the story an organization tells and its reality / Ceiling meter = a visualization of the reachable upper bound / Watching = unconfirmed matters not counted / Protected stakeholders = people, animals, nature, and future generations. | Generated by: AI | As of: 2026-Q2 | Back to top