TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Ombudsman finds possible mismanagement in social aid distribution
A probe by the Indonesian Ombudsman has found potential mismanagement in the Family Hope Program among some local officials, particularly in the process of nominating and verifying potential recipients.
Change Size
People wait in line on May 15, 2020 at the Khatib Sulaiman Post Office in Padang, West Sumatra, to receive cash assistance through a program run by the Social Affairs Ministry. (Antara/Iggoy el Fitra)
T
he Indonesian Ombudsman has found potential maladministration by some village officials and social affairs agencies at the municipal and regency levels in the distribution of social assistance from the government’s Family Hope Program (PKH).
From an investigation launched last year into 12 cities and regencies in four provinces, the Ombudsman has found at least three indications of maladministration, especially in the process of identifying potential recipients, which could have resulted in the exclusion of many people eligible for the aid.
According to a 2021 Social Affairs Ministry regulation, either the ministry or village official can proposed potential social aid recipients if the process involves the public. People who considered themselves as eligible recipients can also register themselves via an app managed by the ministry.
The data of the potential recipients will then be verified and validated by social affairs agencies at respective cities or regencies before the PKH aid is distributed.
Ahmad Sobirin, acting head of the institution’s social assistance probe, told a press conference on Thursday that the Ombudsman had found indications village officials had violated the existing procedure when they unilaterally proposed aid recipients without public participation.
Another finding showed that officials at municipal or regency social affairs agencies did not cross-check recipient data with information on the ground when verifying their lists of potential recipients, Ahmad said.
Some city and regency officials’ “verification and validation was based only on documents” that were submitted by potential recipients, he said.
