For three decades, capital has been plunged into an organic crisis that has conditioned the maintenance of its accumulation bases, which led to a process of bourgeois recomposition in order to restructure work and production, as well as reconfigure the relationship between the State and civil society, seeking to renew the conditions of accumulation. Such process of bourgeois recomposition affects all spheres of social life, including public policies for human formation, which assume a strategic character, both for training new workers and for the ethical and moral conformity of civil society in the face of new conditions of sociability. In this context, the National Institute of Educational Studies and Research Anísio Teixeira (INEP) has undergone significant transformations, assuming a new role in the planning and management of public education systems in the country. In this investigative proposal, we take as object of analysis this reconfiguration of INEP, which from the governmental body of technical and scientific articulation of the Ministry of Education (MEC), was restructured to be the State apparatus responsible for building the consensus around the new model of public management of education in the country. Our objective is to explain the process by which INEP was led to the strategic role of intellectual mentor of the political pedagogy of capital to educate public education systems and their professionals for the consensus around the hegemonic conception of school, curriculum, teaching and educational management. It is a basic research, of qualitative analysis, of an explanatory character, which falls under the category of documentary research, although it also uses semi-structured interviews as an instrument of data collection. With this investigation, we hope to fill some gaps in studies about the managerial reform of state apparatus in Brazil, which are: 1) to approach the managerial reform of public education systems as a dimension of State reform; 2) to establish relations between the capital crisis, bourgeois recomposition and changes in educational management; 3) appoint INEP as an intellectual mentor and controller of educational management methods and processes through its most recent strategic function of managing large-scale educational assessment in the country; 4) explain the influence of international organizations in establishing conditions for the restructuring of INEP. Our hypothesis is that the restructuring of INEP resulted in its being led to the role of State apparatus with a primary role in the conduct of the political pedagogy of capital to maintain consensus around a certain model of management of public education systems, more in tune with the ideal. the “New Public Management”, of neoliberal hue mediated by the Third Way. Finally, we conclude that the international organizations played a great influence on the reform of the educational field, contributing to the restructuring that led INEP to the condition of a strategic organ for the bourgeois recomposition in the educational field, and in this sense, it started to perform two important functions, trainer staff and disseminator of the political pedagogy of capital.