Implementation of Poverty Reduction Policy Program Hope Family (PKH) in Bone Regency
Firman Hamzah
Public Administration, Puangrimaggalatung Bone High School of Administration, Indonesia Email: [email protected]
(Received: 11 May 2022; Revised: 29 July 2022; Published: 22 September 2022)
ABSTRACT
This study aims to determine the implementation of the Poverty Reduction Policy for the Family Hope Program (PKH) in Bone Regency, especially in the health sector. This type of research is descriptive research with a qualitative approach. The data collection technique used in this study was through observation (observation), interviews, and documentation with the key informant of the head of the Social Service Office of Bone Regency using the qualitative interactive model data analysis technique from Miles Hubarman and Saldana. The results of this study indicate that the implementation of the Poverty Reduction Policy for the Family Hope Program (PKH), The Family Hope Program (PKH) in the health sector in Bone Regency has been implemented quite well, judging from the dimensions that there is sufficient time available, namely according to the schedule and cycle that has been set in implementing PKH in the health sector in Bone Regency. The implementation of the PKH program is of course realized by the existence of a clear cycle of the flow of assistance to the local community.
Keywords: Implementation, Policy, Family Hope Program (PKH)
INTRODUCTION
The South Sulawesi Provincial Social Service noted that Bone Regency occupies the third position in South Sulawesi with the highest number of poor people, namely 488,288 out of 176,014 family cards (Muchlis, 2018). There are several indications that in Bone Regency there are many poor people, namely the number of street children, beggars, father/mother carrying carts, and so on. Based on the Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 15 of 2010 concerning the Acceleration of Poverty Reduction, that in an effort to accelerate poverty reduction, it is necessary to take coordinated steps in an integrated manner and across actors in preparing the formulation and implementation of poverty reduction policies.
In line with that, in order to implement Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 15 of 2010, to improve the quality of life of poor and vulnerable families through increasing accessibility to health, education and social welfare services,
it is necessary to have a social protection program that is planned, directed and sustainable, a Minister of Social Affairs Regulation is drafted. Number 1 of 2018 concerning the Family Hope Program. The existence of this regulation is a long-term program that is expected to be able to accommodate or overcome the problem of poverty in Bone Regency. To minimize poverty problems in Bone Regency, the Ministry of Social Affairs issued the Family Hope Program (PKH) and was implemented by the Social Service which is one of the government agencies engaged in the social sector. This program certainly seeks to develop a social protection system for the poor in Indonesia.
PKH exists to improve the quality of human resources or the lives of poor and vulnerable families through increasing accessibility to health, education and social welfare services. Looking at the socio-economic conditions and health services for pregnant women and the lack of nutritional intake, it has an effect on nutritional problems for children under five, maternal mortality and under-five mortality. The fact is that not all people can get proper health services. This is because they do not have sufficient funds to access these health services. Seeing these problems, PKH in the health sector provides more opportunities for the community to access health services. This is very possible because with this program the Very Poor Households (RTSM) who become PKH participants will find it easier to access the available health services. From the problems found, the government, namely the Social Service, should make policies that are adjusted to what are the main problems and these policies need to be monitored and evaluated, as stated by (Dunn, 2013, pp. 26–28) explaining the stages of public policy from problem formulation , forecasting, recommendation, monitoring and evaluation. In addition, Brian W. Hogwood and Lewis A. Gunn in (Wahab, 2016, pp. 167–176), explained that to be able to implement perfect public policy, certain requirements are needed, one of which is for program implementation, available sufficient time and resources.
Based on this, in Bone Regency there are 22,871 Heads of Households as PKH recipients spread across every District (Indriani, 2019). Social assistance received as PKH beneficiaries is divided into two types, namely permanent assistance and component assistance. In regular assistance, if it is regular, each family gets Rp. 550.000,- /family/year and if PKH access gets Rp. 1.000.000,-/family/year. while for component assistance for every soul in the PKH family, especially in the health sector, namely pregnant women Rp. 2,400,000, - and Early Childhood Rp. 2,400,000, - (Indonesia, n.d.).
PKH Beneficiary Families (KPM) in the health sector, in addition to receiving social assistance as above, also have obligations including obstetric checks for pregnant women, provision of nutritional intake and immunization as well as weighing children under five and pre-school children at the nearest health facility.
METHOD
This study uses a phenomenological approach with a qualitative research type.
Qualitative phenomenological approach is a method that can be used in understanding the interactions between actors about certain phenomena. It is the most suitable method for understanding the perceptions and interactions that actors make about certain phenomena (Denzin, N. K., & Linclon, 2005). This study implementation of the Poverty Reduction Policy for the Family Hope Program (PKH) in Bone Regency with data collection techniques through observation, interviews and documentation and the key informant of this research is the head of the sosial department of Bone Regency. Analysis of qualitative research data proposed by Miles and Huberman, namely: data reduction, data presentation and drawing conclusions/verification.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
The implementation of PKH policies in the health sector in Bone Regency by looking at the problems implicitly with the theoretical approach by Brian W. Hogwood and Lewis A. Gunn in (Wahab, 2016) then the policy is only focused on the dimensions.
Adequate time and resources are available, where The second condition of this theory, it often arises between constraints that are external. Policies that have a certain level of physical and political feasibility may not succeed in achieving the desired goals because they involve short time constraints with too high expectations.
Based on the research findings, it is shown that the implementation of PKH, especially in the health sector, has been well implemented following the procedures, mechanisms and has hit the target as well as regarding the implementation of the time following the cycle and schedule provided by the implementing agency so that it runs on time.
The time for the implementation of PKH in Bone Regency has been adequate because it has been determined according to the scheduled procedure. The procedure is that there are several stages starting from the month of commitment verification which is the month used in updating the data, then there is the final closing month, which is the deadline month for the implementers to verify the data before entering the distribution of aid. In this study, the implementation time was divided between the distribution of PKH social assistance and the provision of health services to PKH KPM. Regarding the schedule for distributing PKH social assistance, namely every three months with four stages, namely January, April, July and October. Meanwhile, the schedule for providing health services to KPM PKH is routine at the beginning of each month. As stated based on the results of an interview with Mrs. SB as a health cadre, that “the time for providing health facilities is at the beginning of every month. Meanwhile, cash assistance is usually given every three months”, (Interview, SH on February 14, 2022).
Based on this statement, what was explained by the PKH Coordinator of Bone Regency was in accordance with the cycle of receiving social assistance, as follows:
Figure 1: PKH Social Assistance Acceptance Cycle Source: Bone District Social Service, 2022
The Social Assistance Receipt Cycle is a reference, guideline, and benchmark used by the relevant implementing agencies and PKH implementers in the timing of the distribution of PKH social assistance to PKH beneficiary families. In this cycle there is a data verification time which includes data updating, final closing time, SP2D submission time and PKH social assistance distribution time based on the existing stages. Phase I period (January-March) is distributed in January. Phase II period (April-June) is distributed in April. Phase III period (July-September) is distributed in July. Phase IV period (October-December) is distributed in October.
Based on the results of observations, there are findings in the field, although the time for the PKH implementation has been according to the procedure and has been scheduled, especially in 2020 the PKH KPM is limited in accessing health services as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. On this basis, the authors also dig deeper into the implementers regarding the time that has been provided whether it is on time and on target. As for the results, several informants said that the timing of the implementation of PKH in the health sector was right on target because KPM PKH as the people who received assistance were underprivileged people and were registered with DTKS, and on time because they had followed the existing schedule and cycles that had been provided.
Public policy is a complex policy and involves a broad impact, therefore the implementation of public policy will involve various necessary resources, both in the context of resources or actor resources. This requirement follows the requirements of the second item, meaning that on the one hand it must be guaranteed that there are no constraints on all the required resources, on the other hand, every stage of the
implementation process, a combination of these sources must be provided (Brian W.
Hogwood and Lewis A. Gunn). in Wahab, 2016). In practice the implementation of the program requires a combination of funds, manpower (HR), and the equipment needed to carry out the program must be prepared simultaneously, but if there is one component experiencing delays in its provision so that the program implementation is delayed.
CONCLUSION
From the results of research and observations in the field, the authors conclude that the Family Hope Program (PKH) in the health sector in Bone Regency has been implemented quite well, judging from the dimensions that there is sufficient time available, namely according to the schedule and cycles that have been set in implementing PKH in the field of health, health in Bone Regency. The implementation of the PKH program is of course realized by the existence of a clear cycle of the flow of assistance to the local community. The local government through related agencies should provide full support and support for the Family Hope Program (PKH), namely by paying attention to and constantly updating the Integrated Social Welfare Data (DTKS) of the people of Bone Regency so that there is no more social jealousy that occurs in the community regarding PKH. It is also hoped that PKH Facilitators pay more attention to the condition of KPM and report KPM data to the Regional Government so that DTKS can be updated properly and PKH can be carried out on target.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aslinda, & Guntur, M. 2017. Changes in the Policy on Implementation of Space Utilization by Street Vendors in Makassar City. 1, 630-634.
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search/q=cache;Lq9Hn9fNUX4J;https//o js.unm.ac.id/semanaslemlit/article/download/en.
BPS. 2019. Poverty and Inequality. BPS.go.id. https://www.bps.go.id/subject /23/kemiskinan-dan-ketimangan.html.
D., Rian. Nugroho. 2004. Public Policy Formulation, Implementation, and Evaluation.
Jakarta: Elex Media Komputindo.
Dunn, W. N. 2013. Introduction to Public Policy Analysis (2 ed.). Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.
Hamdi, M. 2015. Public Policy Process, Analysis and Participation. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia.
Huberman, M. and Saldana, J. 2014. Qualitative Data Analysis, A Methods Sourcebook, 3rd Edition. USA: Sage Publications. Translation of Tjetjep Rohindi Rohidi, UI- Press.
Mulyadi, D. (2016). Public Policy Studies and Public Services. Alphabet.
Novandric, M. D. 2015. Implementation of the Policy for the Acceleration of Poverty Reduction (Strategy for Accelerating Poverty Reduction Through the Implementation of Model Villages in Mondokan Exit, Tuban District, Tuban Regency). Public Policy and Management, 3(3), 147–156.
Minister of Social Affairs Regulation No. 1 of 2018 concerning the Family Hope Program.
Sugiyono. 2016. Administrative Research Methods: complemented by R&D Methods (23rd ed.). Bandung: Alphabeta.
Wahab, S. A. 2016. Policy Analysis from Formulation to Formulation of Public Policy Implementation Models. Jakarta: Earth Literacy.
Winarno, B. 2016. Public Policy in the Globalization Era Theory, Process, and Comparative Case Studies. Yogyakarta: Center of Academic Publishing Service.
