1.
Institutional Setting of Poverty
Reduction/Social Protection
Programs in Indonesia
2.
Institutional Issues on CCT
Program
Vita Febriany
The SMERU Research Institute
www.smeru.or.id
Programs Related to Poverty Reduction
Sector
Political, Law and
Security
Economic related
programs
Social welfare
Total
Number
of
Programs
Number of
Executing
Agencies
Budget
(million
US$)
15
9
500
69
12
4,000
33
117
11
32
2,500
7,000
2
Ministerial Task Force (TKPK)
• Launched in 2005
• A cross-sectors forum
• Expected to accommodate all efforts to reduce
poverty
• Consisting of:
• 19 ministers
• 3 head of bureau and
• other non-governmental members
• Chair: Coordinating Minister of People’s Welfare
• TKPK offices are also established at provincial and
district level
3
Under TPKP framework, since 2008, all
programs dealing with poverty reduction
have been coordinated into 3 clusters of
program
4
Cluster I
Social Assistance
Aim: to reduce
economic cost burden
of the poor
Main Instruments:
Rice for the poor, Health
Card, CCT, scholarship for
the poor.
Other Instruments:
Social assistance for
disabled, elderly, children,
etc.
Targets in 2009:
18.5 million the near poor,
poor, and very poor
households.
“Giving a fish”
Cluster II
Community
Empowerment
Aim: to increase the
poor’s income &
affordability
Main Instruments:
PNPM Mandiri (National
Community Empowerment
Program) PPK, P2KP,
PPIP, PISEW, etc.
Targets in 2009:
6,408 villages
“Train how to fish”
Cluster III
Micro-enterprises
Empowerment
Aim: to increase
savings & business
sustainability of SMEs
Main Instruments:
Credit for the People
(KUR)
Targets in 2009:
US$ 2 billion for 4 million
microcredit recipients
“Provide fishing rod
and boat”
5
The Drawback of TKPK
(Ministerial Task Force)
• Poor coordination across ministries
• Most ministers are from different political parties
•
•
•
•
and interest groups
Conveying diverse poverty alleviation and agenda
Bureaucratic fragmentation
Financial limitations
Weak deciding power
6
Special Task force
•
In Mid 2010 TKPK changed its name into the national team
for poverty reduction acceleration (TNP2K).
• Three main tasks:
• To formulate the poverty reduction policy and program,
• To make the poverty reduction activities more synergic between
ministries and institutions,
• To perform the monitoring and evaluation function.
•
Led directly by the Vice President
• The office is next to the Vice President office
• Vice President checks the progress in every two weeks
7
Head
: Vice President
Deputy I : Coordinating Minister of People’s Welfare
Deputy II : Coordinating Minister of Economic Affairs
Members
Executive Secretary:
Welfare Affairs Deputy of
Vice President Secretary
Cluster 1:
Household based Integrated
Social Assistance
(Vice President Office)
Cluster 2:
Community Empowerment
based Social Assistance /
PNPM Mandiri
(Coordinating Ministry of
People’s Welfare)
Cluster 3:
Micro-enterprises
Empowerment based Social
Assistance
(Coordinating Ministry of
Economic Affairs)
8
Institutional Issues on
CCT program
CCT program in Indonesia
• Known as Family of Hope Program (PKH).
• Implemented since 2007.
• Transferring funds directly to women.
• Employing 12 health and education
indicators.
• In 2010 covers around 800,000 poor
households.
10
Institutional Issues of PKH
• At central government: between ministries
• Between central and local governments
• At village level
11
Between Ministries
• PKH is a demand driven program.
• Managed by The Ministry of Social Affairs (MoSA)
• Inter-sectors coordination is provided by a central
coordinating team
• MoSA is considered as lack of credibility compared
to other ministries
• Difficult to ensure other ministries' support and
commitment
12
Between Central and Local Governments
• PKH is a central government program.
• Indonesia is a very decentralized country with
•
•
•
•
autonomy lies at the district government.
PKH has been implemented only at selected
districts.
There is an MOU between central and district
governments.
Low level of local governments’ commitment
(‘business as usual’).
District health and education offices follow strategies
from their line ministries and local government
policy.
13
At village level
• Service providers at the village level follow policies
at the district level.
• Lack of information at services providers
• Extra burden no additional compensation
• Resulted in the virtual absence of compliance
monitoring.
14
PKH Institutional Interrelationship
Ministry of Health
Ministry of
Social Affairs
Ministry
of Education
Central
MOU
District
Government
Health
Office
Social Affairs
Office
Education
Office
District
Health clinics
Field Facilitators
Schools
Village
15