EVALUASI KEBIJAKAN PROGRAM KELUARGA HARAPAN (PKH) DESA HAMBUKU LIMA KECAMATAN BABIRIK KABUPATEN HULU SUNGAI UTARA DALAM MENDUKUNG PROGRAM PENGENTASAN KEMISKINAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51878/cendekia.v5i2.4853Keywords:
Evaluasi, Kebijakan, PKHAbstract
The Family Hope Program (PKH) aims to provide conditional cash assistance to poor families, but its implementation in Hambuku Lima Village faces significant obstacles. Problems include the lack of sustainable empowerment that triggers dependency, outdated recipient data, the implementation of Family Capacity Building Meetings (P2K2) only twice a month, and lack of fund monitoring. This descriptive qualitative study evaluates the PKH policy in poverty alleviation, involving twelve purposive informants, with data from observation, interviews, and documentation. The results show that PKH in Hambuku Lima Village is quite effective. Indicators such as fairness, rationality, substantiveness, and timeliness of distribution are effective; while aspects of expected results, program objectives, justice, and initial targeting accuracy are considered quite effective. However, effectiveness is still low in crucial aspects such as optimizing recipient efforts, accountability for the use of funds, fulfillment of basic needs, quality of field implementation, handling of ethical conflicts, and validity of program assumptions. Partial success is supported by timely distribution of assistance and increasing KPM access to education services. On the other hand, the main inhibiting factors include the unsynchronization of KPM data (DTKS and Dapodik in SIKS-NG), weak supervision of fund utilization, minimal integration of KPM in the PENA economic empowerment program, and inconsistent implementation of P2K2. This study highlights vital areas that require strategic intervention and improvement to optimize PKH's contribution.
ABSTRAK
Program Keluarga Harapan (PKH) bertujuan memberikan bantuan tunai bersyarat kepada keluarga miskin, namun implementasinya di Desa Hambuku Lima menghadapi kendala signifikan. Permasalahan meliputi minimnya pemberdayaan berkelanjutan yang memicu ketergantungan, data penerima tidak mutakhir, pelaksanaan Pertemuan Peningkatan Kemampuan Keluarga (P2K2) hanya dua bulanan, dan kurangnya monitoring dana. Penelitian kualitatif deskriptif ini mengevaluasi kebijakan PKH dalam pengentasan kemiskinan, melibatkan dua belas informan purposif, dengan data dari observasi, wawancara, dan dokumentasi. Hasilnya menunjukkan PKH di Desa Hambuku Lima cukup efektif. Indikator seperti kewajaran, rasionalitas, substantif, dan ketepatan waktu penyaluran berjalan efektif; sementara aspek hasil yang diharapkan, tujuan program, keadilan, dan ketepatan sasaran awal dinilai cukup efektif. Meskipun demikian, efektivitas masih rendah pada aspek krusial seperti optimalisasi usaha penerima, akuntabilitas penggunaan dana, pemenuhan kebutuhan dasar, kualitas pelaksanaan lapangan, penanganan konflik etis, dan validitas asumsi program. Keberhasilan parsial didukung penyaluran bantuan tepat waktu dan peningkatan akses KPM terhadap layanan pendidikan. Sebaliknya, faktor penghambat utama mencakup ketidaksinkronan data KPM (DTKS dan Dapodik dalam SIKS-NG), lemahnya pengawasan pemanfaatan dana, minimnya integrasi KPM dalam program pemberdayaan ekonomi PENA, serta pelaksanaan P2K2 yang tidak konsisten. Studi ini menggarisbawahi area vital yang memerlukan intervensi dan perbaikan strategis guna mengoptimalkan kontribusi PKH.
References
Abizal, N. (2022). Efektivitas Program Keluarga Harapan (PKH) terhadap kesejahteraan masyarakat masa pandemi Covid-19 (Studi kasus Kecamatan Tangan-tangan Kabupaten Aceh Barat Daya) [Disertasi doktoral, UIN Ar-Raniry]. UIN Ar-Raniry.
Banerjee, A. V., & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty. PublicAffairs.
Cahyadi, N., et al. (2018). Cumulative impacts of conditional cash transfers: Evidence from Indonesia's Program Keluarga Harapan (NBER Working Paper No. 24668). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w24668
Coady, D., et al. (2014). Targeting outcomes redux. The World Bank.
Dartanto, T., et al. (2016). Comparing the impacts of unconditional cash transfer and conditional cash transfer on poverty and inequality: Evidence from Indonesia. Asian Economic Journal, 30(4), 393–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/asej.12104
Devereux, S., & Sabates-Wheeler, R. (2015). Transformative social protection: The state of the evidence (IDS Working Paper No. 459). Institute of Development Studies.
Dunn, W. N. (2018). Public policy analysis: An integrated approach (6th ed.). Routledge.
Engkus, H. (2022). Kebijakan publik (Konsep, formulasi, implementasi, dan evaluasi serta perubahan). PT Kimshafi Alung Cipta.
Hartadi, M. I., et al. (2024). Menguak hambatan graduasi: Dinamika Program Keluarga Harapan (PKH) pada Keluarga Penerima Manfaat (PKM). Jurnal Ilmiah Perlindungan dan Pemberdayaan Sosial (Lindayasos), 6(1), 1–9.
Hastuti, H., et al. (2021). The role of facilitators on the implementation of conditional cash transfers: Evidence from Indonesia. Development Policy Review, 39(S1), O129–O150. https://doi.org/10.1111/dpr.12509
Hudang, A. K., et al. (2024). Does conditional cash transfer deliver? The Indonesian evidence on PKH. Business: Theory and Practice, 25(2), 447–457. https://doi.org/10.3846/btp.2024.19517
Hulme, D., & Moore, K. (2012). Conceptualizing EAP: Taking a human development approach. In D. Hulme & K. Moore (Eds.), Exploring extreme poverty in an unequal world: The EAP Programme. Palgrave Macmillan.
Khandker, S. R. (2012). Microfinance and poverty: Evidence using panel data from Bangladesh. The World Bank Economic Review, 26(2), 263–286. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhr045
Koehler, G., & Lührs, T. (2017). The role of legal frameworks for social protection systems. In [Nama Editor/Para Editor (Eds.),] Social protection for sustainable development (pp. 87–106). Routledge.
Levy, D., & Schady, N. (2013). Latin America's cash transfer programs: How robust are the claims about their impacts on human capital accumulation? Journal of Economic Literature, 51(4), 1051–1080.
Lloyd-Sherlock, P. (2010). Cash transfers, social pensions and financial exclusion in low-and middle-income countries. International Social Security Review, 63(1), 25–47. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-246X.2009.01354.x
Narayan, D., et al. (2018). Moving out of poverty: The belief in mobility. Palgrave Macmillan.
Purnamasari, R., et al. (2018). Indonesia’s Program Keluarga Harapan: A success story in conditional cash transfers. World Bank.
Ravallion, M. (2016). The economics of poverty: History, measurement, and policy. Oxford University Press.
Rossi, P. H., et al. (2019). Evaluation: A systematic approach (8th ed.). Sage publications.
Sabates-Wheeler, R., & Devereux, S. (2011). Social protection for social justice? The political economy of cash transfers. In [Nama Editor/Para Editor (Eds.),] Social protection for social justice (pp. 1–23). Palgrave Macmillan.
Sachs, J. D. (2015). The age of sustainable development. Columbia University Press.
Sen, A. (2011). The idea of justice. Harvard University Press.
Skoufias, E., & Parker, S. W. (2011). Conditional cash transfers and their impact on child work and schooling: An overview. International Labour Review, 150(1–2), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1564-913X.2011.00103.x
Sulistyaningrum, S. D., et al. (2020). Twelve years of the Program Keluarga Harapan: Much done, more to do. In H. Hill, A. Negara, & M. Vidyattama (Eds.), Indonesia's development trajectory: Continuity and change in a democratic era. ISEAS Publishing.
Sumarto, S., & Suryahadi, A. (2013). The effectiveness of conditional cash transfers in Indonesia: What have we learned? SMERU Research Institute.
Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2012). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. Penguin Books.
Usman, U., et al. (2020). Accuracy of target recipients of non-cash food assistance program in Indonesia. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 10(3), 117–132. https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v10i3.17450
