Public Services in the Raskin Program: Evaluation in Damai Bahagia Subdistrict, South Balikpapan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.26618/hdgf8542
Public Service Effectiveness, Raskin Program, Targeting Accuracy and Transparency, Damai Bahagia
Abstract
Persistent urban poverty and uneven food assistance delivery continue to challenge equitable public service provision in Indonesian cities. This study evaluates public service delivery in the Raskin Program in Damai Bahagia Subdistrict, South Balikpapan, with specific attention to service procedures, targeting accuracy, distribution transparency, and beneficiary satisfaction. A descriptive qualitative design was applied through in-depth interviews with local officials, program implementers, community representatives, and beneficiary households, supported by direct observation and document review. Data were analyzed using an interactive qualitative model involving data reduction, data display, and conclusion drawing, with source and method triangulation to strengthen credibility. The findings show that the program reached low-income beneficiaries and was supported by positive staff attitudes and responsive interpersonal service. However, its effectiveness was constrained by unclear procedures, limited information access, distribution delays, uneven transparency, and weak beneficiary-data updating, which increased the risk of inclusion and exclusion errors. The study concludes that food assistance effectiveness depends on local administrative capacity, procedural clarity, data governance, and accountability mechanisms. The novelty of this study lies in integrating service quality, targeting accuracy, transparency, and satisfaction in a localized urban Raskin evaluation. The findings contribute to public service and social assistance governance by offering empirical insights for improving equitable, transparent, and accountable food assistance delivery.
References
[1] Acharya, K. K., & Scott, J. (2022). A study of the capabilities and limitations of local governments in providing community services in Nepal. Public Administration and Policy, 25(1), 64–77. https://doi.org/10.1108/PAP-01-2022-0006
[2] Afandi, S. A., Afandi, M., Erdayani, R., & Afandi, N. H. (2023). Indonesia’s open government: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Governance and Social Policy, 4(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.24815/gaspol.v4i1.31522
[3] Anisa, Sopian, A., & Hidayatulloh, H. (2024). Feasibility of Al-Muthalaah teaching materials based on Miles and Huberman model analysis and Pancasila student profile. Jurnal Iqra’: Kajian Ilmu Pendidikan, 9(2), 312–326. https://doi.org/10.25217/ji.v9i2.4357
[4] Arthur, M., Saha, R., & Kapilashrami, A. (2023). Community participation and stakeholder engagement in determining health service coverage: A systematic review and framework synthesis to assess effectiveness. Journal of Global Health, 13, 04034. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.13.04034
[5] Asamoah, D. (2025). The role of health services regulation in healthcare delivery. Electronic Journal of Medical and Dental Studies, 14(1), em0108. https://doi.org/10.29333/ejmds/16003
[6] Asmorowati, S., Schubert, V., & Ningrum, A. P. (2022). Policy capacity, local autonomy, and human agency: Tensions in the intergovernmental coordination in Indonesia’s social welfare response amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 15(2), 213–227. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1869142
[7] Azmat, F., Ferdous, A. S., Wali, F., Muttakin, M. B., & Haque, M. Z. (2025). Does actors’ engagement with capacity-building training programs enable delivery of SDG-aligned public services? The case of senior public officials. Journal of Service Theory and Practice, 35(2), 171–195. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTP-03-2023-0103
[8] Burlacu, S., Rădulescu, C.-V., Bălu, E. P., & Dobre, F. (2023). Socio-cultural sustainability for resilience in public services: Strategies for achieving inclusive and equitable service delivery. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 12(3), 29. https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2023.v12n3p29
[9] Cai, Q., & Zhang, C. (2023). Does the smart city improve public service delivery? A quasi-natural experiment based on a smart city pilot program in China. Public Performance & Management Review, 46(3), 752–769. https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2023.2166087
[10] Campos, S. A., & Peeters, R. (2022). Policy improvisation: How frontline workers cope with public service gaps in developing countries: The case of Mexico’s Prospera program. Public Administration and Development, 42(1), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.1907
[11] Costa, E., & Andreaus, M. (2021). Social impact and performance measurement systems in an Italian social enterprise: A participatory action research project. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 33(3), 289–313. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-02-2020-0012
[12] Edlmann, F. R. P., & Grobbelaar, S. (2021). A framework of engagement practices for stakeholders collaborating around complex social challenges. Sustainability, 13(19), 10828. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910828
[13] Furidha, B. W. (2024). Comprehension of the descriptive qualitative research method: A critical assessment of the literature. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.56943/jmr.v2i4.443
[14] Gao, W., Mao, J., & Shi, X. (2024). Do firms benefit from public information services: Evidence from a tax hotline program in China. China Economic Review, 83, 102078. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chieco.2023.102078
[15] Gawron, G. (2023). Co-production practices in public social services during the COVID-19 lockdown period: An example from centers for older adults organized under the Polish government’s multiannual program “Senior+.” Polish Sociological Review, 221(1), 85–105. https://doi.org/10.26412/psr221.05
[16] Geng, Y. (2024). Transparency for what purpose? Designing outcomes-focused transparency tactics for digital platforms. Policy & Internet, 16(1), 83–103. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.362
[17] Giest, S., & Samuels, A. (2023). Administrative burden in digital public service delivery: The social infrastructure of library programs for e-inclusion. Review of Policy Research, 40(5), 626–645. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12516
[18] Gridley, K., Baxter, K., Birks, Y., Newbould, L., Allan, S., Roland, D., Malisauskaite, G., & Jones, K. (2022). Social care causes of delayed transfer of care from hospital for older people: Unpicking the nuances of provider capacity and patient choice. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.13911
[19] Guerrero, M., Liñán, F., & Cáceres-Carrasco, F. R. (2021). The influence of ecosystems on the entrepreneurship process: A comparison across developed and developing economies. Small Business Economics, 57(4), 1733–1759. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00392-2
[20] Hartina Dewinta, S., & Rahman, A. (2025). Evaluasi kriteria penerima Program Bantuan Beras Sejahtera Daerah (RASDA) pada Desa Kaong Kecamatan Upau Kabupaten Tabalong. JAPB, 8(2), 1649–1662. https://doi.org/10.35722/japb.v8i2.1364
[21] Heinzel, M., Reinsberg, B., & Swedlund, H. (2025). Transparency and citizen support for public agencies: The case of foreign aid. Governance, 38(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12863
[22] Hillo, J., & Vento, I. (2025). Show me what you’ve got: A survey experiment of aid allocation dynamics under transparency and austerity mandates. Policy Studies, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/01442872.2025.2478878
[23] Ilato, R., Hatu, R. A., Pakaya, A. R., & Balango, M. (2022). Poor population and poverty prevention program based on public service in Gorontalo, Indonesia. Res Militaris, 12(2), 3106–3118. https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85141218864?origin=resultslist
[24] Kalkar, U., & González Alarcón, N. (2023). Facilitating data flows through data collaboratives: A practical guide to designing valuable, accessible, and responsible data collaboratives (A. Muente & S. G. Verhulst, Eds.). https://doi.org/10.18235/0005185
[25] Lee, J. B., & Kim, S. (2024). Understanding gaps between objective and subjective performance measures: Accreditation of public service organizations and citizen satisfaction. The American Review of Public Administration, 54(3), 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1177/02750740231193431
[26] Mariyah, S., & Wobcke, W. (2025). Evaluating area-level features for proxy means test models: Evidence from rural, semi-urban and urban districts in poverty targeting. Journal of Computational Social Science, 8(3), 74. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42001-025-00405-8
[27] Martin, E., Fisher, O., Merlo, G., Zardo, P., Barrimore, S. E., Rowland, J., & Davies, J. M. (2022). Impact of a health services innovation university program in a major public hospital and health service: A mixed methods evaluation. Implementation Science Communications, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-022-00293-3
[28] Mashami, R. A., Suryati, S., Harisanti, B. M., & Khery, Y. (2023). Identification of local wisdom of the Sasak Tribe in chemistry learning as an effort to strengthen student character. Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan IPA, 9(1), 337–345. https://doi.org/10.29303/jppipa.v9i1.2434
[29] Moreno-Albarracín, A. L., Ortega-Rodríguez, C., Licerán-Gutiérrez, A., Labella, Á., & Martínez, L. (2021). Transparency indicators to improve accountability for non-profit organizations: A Spanish case study. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 27(3), 763–782. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2021.14821
[30] Mulisalsabilla, S. A., & Rodiyah, I. (2025). Implementation of the village sustainable development goals program in reducing poverty through the BLT-DD Program Sugihwaras Village, Candi District, Sidoarjo Regency. Proceeding of International Conference on Social Science and Humanity, 2(2), 2606–2620. https://doi.org/10.61796/icossh.v2i2.319
[31] Nasrullah, M., Ismail, I., & Yusrie, N. R. (2025). Strategy improvement quality service customs work obtained right on land and buildings at the Makassar City Regional Revenue. Journal of Public Policy and Local Government, 128–136. https://doi.org/10.70188/s1zmy343
[32] Nawafleh, S. (2022). Development programs and achieving service efficiency in public sector institutions in Jordan: E-government as a moderator. Poverty & Public Policy, 14(3), 268–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/pop4.348
[33] Nevedal, A. L., Reardon, C. M., Widerquist, M. A. O., Jackson, G. L., Cutrona, S. L., White, B. S., & Damschroder, L. J. (2021). Rapid versus traditional qualitative analysis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation Science, 16(1), 67. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-021-01111-5
[34] Nurhadian, I., & Khoirunurrofik, K. (2022). Service quality and public satisfaction with Indonesia’s tax amnesty program. International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management, 37(1), 99–118. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijpqm.2022.126004
[35] Pratiwi, E. (2025). Building public trust: Government communication in the implementation of social welfare policies. TOPLAMA, 3(1), 86–95. https://doi.org/10.61397/tla.v3i1.438
[36] Ramadhan, M., & Ifransyah, R. (2025). The impact of the administrative system on the effectiveness of retribution collection and its contribution to the local own-source revenue of Tapin Regency. International Journal of Law, Environment, and Natural Resources, 5(2), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.51749/injurlens.v5i2.144
[37] Ramanadhan, S., Revette, A. C., Lee, R. M., & Aveling, E. L. (2021). Pragmatic approaches to analyzing qualitative data for implementation science: An introduction. Implementation Science Communications, 2(1), 70. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43058-021-00174-1
[38] Rammohan, A., & Tohari, A. (2024). Food vouchers and dietary diversity: Evidence from social protection reform in Indonesia. Food Security, 16(1), 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-023-01413-0
[39] Rauhaus, B. M. (2022). Public service motivation of street-level bureaucrats amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: An analysis of experiences in implementation of an at-home vaccination program. State and Local Government Review, 54(1), 82–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/0160323X221079242
[40] Rulandari, N., Natision, A., Esien, E. B., & Kesmawan, A. P. (2022). The policy implementation of Social Ministry’s cash assistance program during the COVID-19 pandemic in Jakarta. Journal of Governance and Public Policy, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.18196/jgpp.v9i1.13113
[41] Rupaiedah, A., Kismartini, K., & Dwimawanti, I. H. (2021). Analysis of pioneering Raskin innovation for the pattern of labor-intensive food in North Central Timor District. International Journal of Social Science and Religion, 191–206. https://doi.org/10.53639/ijssr.v2i3.47
[42] Saa, S., & Patty, R. (2025). Public poverty alleviation policies: Analyzing the success of social assistance programs amid the global economic crisis. International Journal for Science Review, 2(10). https://doi.org/10.71364/ijfsr.v2i10.78
[43] Sager, F., & Gofen, A. (2022). The polity of implementation: Organizational and institutional arrangements in policy implementation. Governance, 35(2), 347–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12677
[44] Sari, A. R. (2023). The impact of good governance on the quality of public management decision making. Journal of Contemporary Administration and Management, 1(2), 39–46. https://doi.org/10.61100/adman.v1i2.21
[45] Sarumaha, Y., Siregar, H., & Siagian, N. (2023). Pengelolaan Program Raskin terhadap peningkatan kesejahteraan masyarakat di Desa Aek Pamienke, Kecamatan Aek Natas, Kabupaten Labuhan Batu Utara. Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Politik, 3(1), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.51622/jispol.v3i1.1346
[46] Schaffner, J., Glewwe, P., & Sharma, U. (2025). Why programs fail: Lessons for improving public service quality from a mixed-methods evaluation of an unsuccessful teacher training program in Nepal. The World Bank Economic Review, 39(2), 473–496. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/lhae028
[47] Sheldon, E., Ezaydi, N., Ditmore, M., Fuseini, O., Ainley, R., Robinson, K., Hind, D., & Lobo, A. J. (2024). Patient and public involvement in the development of health services: Engagement of underserved populations in a quality improvement programme for inflammatory bowel disease using a community-based participatory approach. Health Expectations, 27(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.14004
[48] Sofyani, H., Pratolo, S., & Saleh, Z. (2022). Do accountability and transparency promote community trust? Evidence from village government in Indonesia. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change, 18(3), 397–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAOC-06-2020-0070
[49] Stenderup, R., & Pedersen, M. J. (2025). Compliance burden versus program integrity protection: A survey experiment on citizen attitudes toward administrative documentation requirements in public service policy. Public Administration Review, 85(5), 1512–1527. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.13919
[50] Ugyel, L. (2022). Governance networks in the delivery of public healthcare services in the Pacific: Implementation of the Bougainville Healthy Communities Programme. Asia & the Pacific Policy Studies, 9(1), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/app5.340
[51] Van Geet, M. T., Verweij, S., Busscher, T., & Arts, J. (2021). The importance of policy design fit for effectiveness: A qualitative comparative analysis of policy integration in regional transport planning. Policy Sciences, 54(3), 629–662. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-021-09429-z
[52] Wang, D., Li, W., Zhang, Y., Parrado, S., & Ni, T. (2025). Can co-production enhance professional public service provision? Evidence from vocational training programme for people with disabilities in China. Journal of Asian Public Policy, 18(3), 745–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2024.2325855
[53] Widiarto, A. E., Hassan, M. S., Rusli, M. H. M., & Setiawan, E. B. (2025). The authority relationship of central and local governments in forming laws and regulations: Between Indonesia and Malaysia. Legality: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum, 33(1), 148–167. https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v33i1.36629
[54] Williams, V. N., McManus, B., Brooks-Russell, A., Yost, E., Olds, D. L., & Tung, G. J. (2023). Cross-sector collaboration between public health, healthcare and social services improves retention: Findings from a nurse home visiting program. Prevention Science, 24(6), 1209–1224. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-023-01538-w
[55] Zhao, H., Chen, D., Li, Y., Wang, G., Lian, X., & Ren, H. (2025). Subjective and objective perception differences of urban public service facilities and their implications for planning decisions. Land, 14(12), 2418. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14122418
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 JED (Jurnal Etika Demokrasi)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
