141 Informasi - ISSN (p) 0126-0650; ISSN (e) 2502-3837 Vol. 52, No. 1 (2022), pp. 141-168 doi: http://doi.org/10.21831/informasi.v52i1.50735. 141-168 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga Sasaran Jaminan Perlindungan Sosial program in the City of Yogyakarta Marita Ahdiyana Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia Email: marita_ahdiyana@uny.ac.id Arum Diyan Sukmawati Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia Email: arumdiyan.2017@student.uny.ac.id Abstract Policy makers and implementers need to consider a good communication strategy as an instrument to support effective policy implementation. This article aims to analyze policy communication in the implementation of Social Security Target Families in Yogyakarta City. The research design used is descriptive qualitative. The results showed that the process of delivering information, clarity of information, and consistency of information have been able to support the successful implementation of the policy. Submission of information to policy implementers has been carried out through regular coordination meetings. Meanwhile, the delivery of information to the target group is carried out through socialization through television media and mass media coverage. The understanding and competence of policy implementers in their duties also supports this process. Clarity of information on policy 142 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 implementation has been determined in the regulations that guide program implementation. One of them is the use of seven aspects and sixteen parameters in program data collection. In addition, it has also involved the community in the process, although there are still issues of likes and dislikes in data collection. The consistent application of regulations, orders, and information has also made it easier for implementers to apply policies in the field. Keywords: Public policy, policy communication, implementation, social protection, socil security INTRODUCTION The social protection system plays an important role in the development process for poverty alleviation and inequality reduction. The Preamble to the 1945 Constitution mandates the government to protect the entire nation and the entire homeland, promote public welfare, and educate the nation’s life. Article 34 mandates that the poor and neglected children are looked after by the state. The state is obliged to develop a social protection system, and the state is responsible for providing proper service facilities. The central and local governments must provide social rehabilitation, social security, social empowerment, and social protection as a manifestation of the implementation of state obligations in ensuring the fulfillment of the rights to basic needs of poor and vulnerable citizens. In order to provide social protection, the government has implemented various program policies and stimulus programs that have been implemented since the New Order era. Various issues related to the problems that arise in realizing social protection through a policy or program are a challenge. Therefore, the right strategy in providing public policies that support people’s welfare in overcoming social problems is very important to study. The social protection system requires development and transformation over time to provide protection for the fulfillment of the basic needs of a decent life, especially for the poor and vulnerable (Supriyanto et al., 2014). Yogyakarta Special Region Province (DIY) experienced an increase in poverty rates in 2020. Based on the National Socio-Economic Survey by the Central Statistics Agency, the number of poor people in DIY in March 2020 was 475.72 thousand inhabitants. In September 2020 it rose to 503.14 thousand residents or 12.8% of the total population. This figure is higher than the national average of 10.19% for the September 2020 period. The number 143 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) of poor people in Yogyakarta City is actually the lowest compared to other districts/cities in DIY Province. This number continued to decrease from 2017-2019, but increased again in 2020. This was partly due to the Covid-19 pandemic which resulted in limited community economic activities. and social security. This discussion will focus on social protection programs that use data sources for the Keluarga Sasaran Jaminan Perlindungan Sosial (Target Family of Social Security Insurance/KSJPS). The KSJPS policy in the City of Yogyakarta is regulated by Yogyakarta Mayor Regulation Number 12 of 2020 concerning Guidelines for KSJPS Population Data Collection. The targeted community as the target of the program is then given a Card Towards Prosperity (Kartu Masyarakat Miskin/ KMS) to get certain social security and protection, for example for students to get the Regional Education Guarantee in the form of free 12-year compulsory education, for the elderly to get the Poor Seniors Insurance (Asuransi Lanjut Usia Miskin/ASLUM) and Death Compensation. In its implementation, the KSJPS policy in Yogyakarta City is still marked by various obstacles. Starting in 2020, KSJPS data collection has used information technology-based applications to improve accuracy, however, officers in the field encountered several problems when they wanted to upload data (jogja.tribunnews.com). The synchronization of provincial and district/ city programs with the center in the field of social welfare has also not been well integrated. The integration of the management of the KSJPS with the Integrated Data on Social Welfare which is managed by the central government is being carried out. On the other hand, the Covid-19 pandemic requires a refocusing of the Regional Revenue and Expenditure Budget to the health sector so that it has an impact on the abolition of the 2020 ASLUM program. The success of policy implementation is not only seen from the technocracy side but also from the communication aspect. Policy communication by the government is very important for policy implementation. Communication is an object of policy, as seen in the efforts of government and non-government agencies to inform and educate the public about problems in society. Effective public policy communication is an important tool to help achieve policy objectives (Quy & Ha, 2018). No matter how good the policies that have been formulated by the government, they will not succeed without the support of good and effective policy communication. Cline (2000) states that communication is a subsystem of policy implementation. Communication is the interaction of actors or policy actors. 144 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 The implementation of policies that override aspects of public communication risks causing various misunderstandings and decreasing public trust in the government. Building public trust is one of the important agendas today. In implementing the KSJPS policy, the factors that influence policy communication need to be identified to formulate an effective public policy communication strategy. On the effectiveness of financial institution policy communications, for example, communication manages expectations when it focuses on policy targets and objectives rather than on the instruments designed to achieve those goals. Target-based communication increases policy effectiveness and contributes to strengthening public trust (D’Acunto et al., 2020). Awareness of formulators and policy makers need to consider a good communication strategy as an instrument to support effective policy implementation (lan.go.id). As information technology advances, the challenges of policy communication become increasingly complex. Therefore, policy analysts must increase their knowledge of strategies that need to be implemented to address these challenges. Advances in information technology and digitalization should be used as opportunities to educate the public and improve policy literacy. The use of social media and information communication technology is an element of policy communication that can be used to involve various stakeholders (Canary & Taylor, 2020). Policy research, especially social policy analysis, often uses the concept of framing. The most problematic use occurs where framing is used to characterize policy actions and even more so in combination with changes in public opinion that framing is supposedly brought about (König, 2021). The findings of Canary & Ghorbani (2015) in an empirical research of 99 articles on policy, organization, and communication reinforce this. It was revealed that there are four constitutive themes/topics that often appear, namely: (1) framing (process and perception); (2) identity management (organizational/individual identity; (3) multi-stakeholder decision making (structure/process/voice/power); and (4) contradiction (intrasystem/intersystem). In the case of energy crisis anticipation policy, stakeholder communication construction in The policy-making process is very influential on its success or failure. From a constructivist perspective with a phenomenological approach, it is implied that the energy crisis is interpreted in various ways but refers more to economic problems to the exclusion of environmental issues (Luqman et al., 2017). Several studies on the importance of communication in policy implementation have been conducted previously. Yang and Zheng (2022) 145 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) emphasize accessibility as a policy communication efficiency factor for the Government Annual Report (GAR) in China. The Waste Management Communication Policy (WMCP) has proven to be effective as a communication channel between the government and citizens in the Municipal Solid Waste Management (MSWM) program to handle municipal waste (Kala et al., 2020). Barberio et al. (2020) in an analysis of ten Local Management Authorities (LMA) highlighted the importance of social media channels in the communication of cohesion policies for managing and communicating structural funds at the local level in the European Union (EU). In Indonesia, Sazali’s (2021) study focuses on the lack of government’s role in communicating incest prevention policies and in providing legal protection as the main cause of the incest problem in Tanjung Tiram. Meanwhile, Engkus (2020) stated the need for advocacy and supervision of e-warong with Beneficiary Families (KPM) in communication of non-cash assistance policies. Zulfiningrum et al. (2019) emphasizes participatory communication as an effective policy communication strategy to increase public awareness about black rice cultivation in Brebes Regency. A study on policy communication in program implementation was also carried out by Syaripudin & Meigawati (2020) in the policy of Organizing Billboards in Sukabumi City, Pricahyadi & Ramadani (2019) in the Policy on Improving the Quality of Population Administration Services in DKI Jakarta, and Wendra et al. (2020) in the policy on the management and utilization of swiftlet nests in Pekanbaru. In addition, Zaenudin et al. (2018) measured the effectiveness of policy communication in promoting the #KangPisMan program in waste management in Bandung with the 7c concept (clear, concise, concrete, correct, coherent, complete, and courteous). This article aims to analyze how policy communication in the implementation of KSJPS in the City of Yogyakarta. The discussion on this topic will focus on the transmission or delivery of communication, clarity of information, and consistency of information conveyed. LITERATURE REVIEW Public Policy a. Definition In general, the term policy or policy is used to designate the behavior of an actor (eg. an official, a group, or a government agency) or several actors in 146 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 a certain field. The definition stated above is still too broad and ambiguous, so a more precise definition or concept of public policy is needed. Basically, there are many definitions of public policy, and each definition gives a different emphasis. These differences arise due to the different backgrounds of experts. Public policy as a decision (choice) means that public policy is a guide that contains values and norms that have the authority to support government actions within its jurisdiction (Dunn, 2017). Public policy is also defined as a direction of action that has a purpose set by an actor or several actors in overcoming a problem or problem. Based on Anderson (2003), the important points to note are: 1. Public policy always has a specific purpose. 2. Policies contain patterns of action of government officials. 3. Policy is what the government does. Public policy can be interpreted as government intervention. Policy as a direction of action proposed by a person, group, or government in a certain environment that provides obstacles and opportunities for the proposed policy to use and overcome in order to achieve a goal or realize a goal or a specific purpose (Friedrich, 2000). This definition involves a broad dimension because policy is not only understood as an action taken by the government, but also by groups and individuals. b. Public policy stages The process of making public policy is a complex process because it involves many processes and variables that must be studied. Therefore, some political experts who are interested in studying public policy divide the processes of public policy formulation into several stages. The purpose of this division is to facilitate us in reviewing public policy. However, some experts may divide these stages in a different order. The stages of public policy according to Dunn (2017) are as follows: 1. Agenda setting stage Elected and appointed officials put matters on the public agenda. Previously, this issue competed to be included in the policy agenda. In the end, several issues enter the policy agenda of the policy makers. 2. Policy formulation stage. Issues that have entered the policy agenda are then discussed by policy makers. Problems are defined and then the best solution is sought. 147 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) The solution to this problem comes from various alternatives or policy options (policy alternatives/policy options). In policy formulation, each alternative competes to be chosen as the policy taken to solve the problem. 3. Policy adoption stage. Of the many policy alternatives offered by policy makers, in the end one of the policy alternatives was adopted with the support of the legislative majority, consensus between the directors of the institution or judicial decisions. 4. Policy implementation stage. A policy program will only be the records of the elite if the program is not implemented, that is, carried out by administrative bodies and government agencies at the lower levels. The policies that have been taken are implemented by administrative units that mobilize financial and human resources. At this stage of implementation, various interests will compete. 5. Policy evaluation stage. In this stage the policies that have been implemented will be assessed or evaluated, to see how far the policies made are to achieve the desired impact, namely solving problems faced by the community. Therefore, it is determined the criteria or criteria that can be used as the basis for assessing whether the public policy that has been implemented has achieved the desired impact or goal or not. Policy Implementation a. Definition The concept of implementation comes from English, namely, to implement. Webster and Roger’s dictionary understands it as to carry out, accomplish, fulfill, produce, complete (Hill & Hupe, 2006). Implementation is seen broadly to mean the implementation of laws in which various actors, organizations, procedures, and techniques work together to implement policies to achieve the objectives of policies or programs. Implementation on the other hand is a complex phenomenon that may be understood as a process, an output or as an outcome (Lester & Stewart, 2000). Policy implementation is the stage of the policy process immediately after the enactment of the law. Policy implementation is what happens after a law is 148 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 enacted that gives authority to a program, policy, benefit, or type of tangible output (Ripley & Franklin, 1986). The term implementation refers to several activities that follow a statement of intent about program objectives and desired outcomes by government officials. Implementation activities include actions by various actors, particularly bureaucrats, which are intended to make the program work. Regarding policy implementing agencies, policy implementation includes four types of activities: 1. Implementing agencies assigned by law with responsibility for running the program must obtain the resources needed for smooth implementation. 2. Implementing agencies develop the language of the articles of association into concrete directives, regulations, and program plans and designs. 3. Implementing agencies should organize their activities by creating bureaucratic units and routines to cope with the workload. 4. Implementing agencies provide benefits or limitations to customers or target groups (Ripley & Franklin, 1986) The task of implementation is to establish a linkage that makes it easier for policy objectives to be realized because of a government activity (Grindle, 1980). This means that implementation activities related to policies taken by the government must clarify and facilitate the achievement of the goals that have been set. If not, it means that there is an error in the policy analysis. Therefore, the task of implementation includes the establishment of a policy delivery system (Grindle, 1980). The purpose of the policy delivery system is that certain facilities are designed and run with the hope of achieving the desired goals. Thus, public policies can be translated into action programs. These action programs can then be broken down into more specific projects to be managed. Policy implementation as actions taken by individuals or groups of government or private which are directed to achieve the goals that have been set in the previous policy decisions (van Meter & van Horn, 1975). This action includes efforts to turn decisions into operational actions within a certain period as well as in order to continue efforts to achieve major and minor changes determined by policy decisions. What needs to be emphasized here is that the policy implementation phase will not begin until the objectives 149 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) and recommendations are defined or identified by policy needs. Thus, the implementation phase occurs only after the law is enacted and funds are provided to finance the implementation of the policy. Implementation is an activity or effort carried out by policy implementers in the hope of obtaining a result that is in accordance with the goals or objectives of a policy. The implementation process is a conversion process (throughput) that changes inputs (policies, objectives, and facilities) into outputs and outcomes (Anggara, 2014). Implementation is what is done based on the decisions that have been made (Handoyo, 2012). In this case, there are two parties who play a role, namely the formulator or decision maker and the implementer. Formulators and implementers must be integrated as policy actors. From the various opinions above, a common thread can be drawn that policy implementation is an activity to carry out policies, which are aimed at target groups, to realize policy objectives. b. Factors influencing policy implementation The success of implementation will be influenced by the nature or type of interest to be achieved by the policy itself. Certain types of policies will have a certain impact on the activities of the implementation process (Grindle, 1980). In electricity and clean water policies, for example, generally there are not many conflicts so that compliance from the target group is relatively easy to obtain. On the other hand, policies that are redistributive will tend to easily invite conflicts of interest, so that they will be relatively difficult to implement (Ripley & Franklin, 1986). Implementation failure occurs when the implementor does not understand the objectives and policy standards, or the implementor has interests that are different from the policy objectives and standards. On the other hand, broad acceptance of policy objectives and standards will provide greater potential for successful policy implementation. Mazmanian (1983) formulated three independent variables of policy implementation, namely: 1. whether or not the problem is easy to control 2. the ability of policies to structure implementation 3. non-policy variables that affect implementation (the size of the policy target group, the level of change to be achieved, the nature of the problem to be achieved /tractability problem). 150 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 Policy Communication Policy communication means the process of delivering policy information from policy makers to policy implementers which later the information will be conveyed to target groups to get responses from related parties (Edward III, 1980). According to Wahab (2014), policy communication is a communication what is happening within the government so that it can be translated is a delivery of messages, programs, and government ideas to society in order to achieve national goals. Communication is one of the variables on which every policy decision depends (Flor, 1991). Communication is one of the important variables that affect policy implementation public, communication is crucial successful achievement of the goals of public policy implementation. Effective implementation will be carried out, if decision makers know about what they will do (Agustino, 2006). Edward III (1980) identified four main determinant factors that will affect the process and results of policy implementation, namely: 1. Communication 2. Resources 3. Disposition 4. Bureaucratic structure Meanwhile, Van Meter & Van Horn (1975) formulated the existence of six variables that affect the results of policy implementation, namely: 1. standards and policy objectives, 2. resources, 3. communication and use of coercion, 4. disposition of the implementor, 5. the character of the implementing agency, 6. social, economic and political conditions. The communication variable will determine the effectiveness of public policy implementation. The effectiveness of policy implementation is highly dependent on the understanding of decision makers about what must be done, and this is determined by good communication. Therefore, every decision and policy regulation must be transmitted accurately and accurately to policy makers and implementers. George C. Edward III (1980) suggests that there are three critical success indicators on the communication variable in policy implementation, namely: 151 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) 1. Transmission, namely the distribution of good communication will be able to produce a good implementation result as well. 2. Clarity of information, where communication or information received by policy implementers must be clear and not confusing. 3. Consistency of information conveyed, namely orders or information given in the implementation of a communication must be clear and consistent to be implemented and executed. METHODS The approach used in this research is qualitative research. Qualitative research is a method for exploring and understanding the meaning that several individuals or groups of people ascribe to social or humanitarian problems (Creswell, 2016). This type of research is descriptive research, which is a study that aims to see a clear picture or description of certain conditions or symptoms. Qualitative descriptive research seeks to describe all existing symptoms or conditions, namely the state of the symptoms according to what they were at the time the research was conducted (Mukhtar, 2013). Researchers describe in detail and in depth the portrait of conditions or symptoms that appear in policy communication in the implementation of the KSJPS program in the City of Yogyakarta. The use of a qualitative approach in this study was carried out by matching empirical reality with a literature review using descriptive methods. Data collection was carried out at the Office of Social Manpower and Transmigration of Yogyakarta City. Data was collected by observation and in- depth interviews with informants related to the implementation of the KSJPS program in the City of Yogyakarta, namely the staff of the Yogyakarta City Manpower and Transmigration Social Service and the program recipients. In addition, researchers also collect data through library research to collect documents relevant to this research. The data is reduced and selected that have relevance to the problem. The data is then analyzed and presented in a narrative text where the data presentation refers to the problem formulation that has been determined. After being analyzed descriptively and directed at clear goals, conclusions were drawn with a focus on policy communication in the implementation of the KSJPS program in the City of Yogyakarta. This research was carried out for 6 months, starting from July 2021 to December 2021. The Covid-19 pandemic has limited activities in related institutions so that the research process is carried out in a combination offline 152 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 and online. In qualitative research, the research subject is called the informant. Research subjects are interpreted as people who are used to provide information about the situation and condition of the research background (Sugiyono, 2017). To obtain the right data in this study, the determination of informants is based on people who have competence and are in accordance with data needs. The criteria for selecting informants in this study were based on people who had been involved in the implementation of the KSJPS program for a long time and intensively in the City of Yogyakarta. The data sources in this study do not only rely on one data source, but also on multiple sources of data, namely: in-depth interviews, observation, and documentation. This study uses primary data and secondary data. The primary data in this study were data from observations, interviews, and field notes during this research. In-depth interviews will be conducted with informants who have knowledge and understanding related to policy communication issues in the implementation of KSJPS policies in the City of Yogyakarta. Meanwhile, secondary data sources were obtained through documentation and literature study from books, scientific articles in journals, print media, and the internet. The observation technique used was non-participant observation because in this study the researcher did not take part in all kinds of activities carried out, but only carried out the function of observation. In this study, information from direct observation will be combined with the results of interviews and documentation. The goal is to obtain valid data with multiple perspectives of a situation, event, or process at a time. The analysis of qualitative data in this study was carried out interactively and continued until it was completed. The data obtained were analyzed using data analysis techniques consisting of a flow of activities including data reduction, data display, conclusion drawing and verification (Miles, Huberman, & Saldana, 214). The data collected through the methods of observation, interviews, and documentation are then reduced and selected which have relevance to the specified research problem. The data and information obtained from the field are entered into a matrix, then the data is presented according to the data obtained in research in the field so that researchers will be able to master the data and not be wrong in analyzing data and drawing conclusions (Sugiyono, 2017). Data presentation aims to simplify complex information into simple data so that it is easier to understand. After the researchers compiled the data, the researchers then carried out data processing. If there is data that does not match the needs of the study, the researcher edits the data. Data editing is 153 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) to correct the data if an error occurs in data collection. The data that has been reduced is then analyzed and presented in a descriptive manner with reference to the formulation of the problem that has been determined. In the next stage, the researcher analyzes the data and describes the data so that the data can be understood and clearly according to the research objectives. The data that has been presented and analyzed leads to a clear goal, then the researcher draws conclusions by focusing on policy communication in implementing the KSJPS policy in the City of Yogyakarta. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Policy communication is the process of delivering policy information from policy makers to policy implementers and then conveying it to the target group in order to get responses from related parties. Policy implementers and target groups must know what to do and understand what is the content, objectives, directions, and target groups of policies to ensure the success of policy implementation. Discussion on policy communication KSJPS implementation in Yogyakarta City will focus on three indicators of communication variables in policy implementation, namely: delivery of communication (transmission), clarity of information, and consistency of information in implementing KSJPS program in Yogyakarta City. Submission of communication (transmission) in the implementation of the KSJPS policy in the city of Yogyakarta. Transmission is the distribution of communication. Public policies must be conveyed not only to policy implementers, but also to policy target groups and other parties with direct or indirect interests in the policy. The first factor that influences policy communication is transmission. This dimension requires that public policies can be transformed to implementers, target groups, and parties related to policies. Distribution of good communication will be able to produce a good implementation as well. The problem that sometimes arises in the distribution of communication is the existence of miscommunication because one of the many levels of bureaucracy that must be passed in the communication process. This can have an impact on distortions in communication. Before an official can implement a decision, he or she must be aware that a decision has been made and an order for its implementation has been issued. This is not always a straightforward process as it may seem. It was found that many of these decisions were ignored 154 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 or if not, there was often a misunderstanding of the decisions made. In the communication of KSJPS implementation policies, information is divided into two forms, namely: first, information related to how to implement policies. Second, information regarding compliance data from implementers to established government regulations (competent and capable) in implementing policies. Communication regarding policy objectives and targets is made to policy implementers and target groups. Submission of the intent, purpose, and content of policies to policy implementers will affect the level of knowledge of policy implementers regarding policies that must be implemented. Communications regarding the implementation of KSJPS have been carried out by the Yogyakarta City Manpower and Transmigration Social Service to policy implementers through coordination both vertically and horizontally through coordination meetings held. This is done to unite views on the implementation of the KSJPS program in the city of Yogyakarta. The parties involved in the implementation of the KSJPS are the Yogyakarta City Information Communication and Encryption Service, Forum Pemantau Independent (FORPI), The Population and Civil Registry Office, data collection officers, Community Social Workers, Kemantren, Kelurahan, RT/RW, and community representatives as ASLUM companion. Dinsosnakertrans communicates and coordinates with Diskominfo in solving problems in the KSJPS data collection application. In accordance with what was conveyed by Agus Sudrajat, Head of the Yogyakarta City Social and Manpower Office, that communication and coordination were carried out to resolve application error problems faced by data collection officers (antaranews. com). Coordination is also carried out with FORPI in monitoring and supervising the implementation of the KSJPS program in the city of Yogyakarta. The monitoring includes the accuracy of the target recipients of the program, the objectivity of the data collection process for prospective beneficiaries, and ensuring that the KSJPS is accepted by families in need. The FORPI Coordinator for the City of Yogyakarta, Baharuddin Kamba, said that the results of data collection from community leaders, RT heads and RW heads were expected to support valid data, because they were more aware of the conditions in the field. However, this is sometimes still colored by the issue of likes and dislikes. Therefore, monitoring and evaluation in the KSJPS data collection process is very necessary. 155 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) In addition to policy implementers, information on policy objectives and targets must also be conveyed to target groups to reduce distortions in implementation. One of the ways to convey information to the public is the Yogyakarta City Social Service through one of the private television stations in Yogyakarta, RBTV with the sources being the Head of the Service and the Head of Data, Information and Social Empowerment. The socialization aims to provide complete and clear information on the implementation of the KSJPS, with the aim that the community can be actively involved in monitoring and providing input to the data collection process, with the hope that the data set is valid and accurate data. Community involvement in KSJPS data collection is very much needed in order to increase the accuracy of the data so that it is right on target, which is involved from the preparation stage to the data determination stage. One of the factors that affect the high accuracy of the data is the honesty of 3 (three) elements, namely the honesty of the families recorded in providing answers, complete and correct information from community leaders, and the objectivity of the data collection officers. In its implementation, it was found that residents of Cokrodiningratan Village, Jetis Sub-district who returned 4 KMS as KSJPS membership because they felt they were no longer poor based on the specified parameters (antaranews.com). The delivery of information related to the KSJPS policy in Yogyakarta City also received positive support from the mass media. The mass media make an important contribution in helping the government convey information related to the KSJPS program. This is very helpful in delivering the KSJPS program to the public. Media coverage of the implementation of the KSJPS program in the city of Yogyakarta will help disseminate the policy so that public understanding will increase. So far, the press has paid attention to activities related to the KSJPS in the city of Yogyakarta, this can be seen from the following news releases submitted by Republika and Antara (see Figure 1). 156 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 Figure 1: News of the KSJPS program in the City of Yogyakarta The delivery of information in the implementation of the program has also been supported by the compliance of the implementers with the regulations. This was conveyed by B. Wardjono Wiyandono (Aid and Grant Manager) that the policy implementers had implemented the guidelines set out in the policy appropriately. The understanding and knowledge of policy implementers regarding what must be done shows their competence and capability in implementing policies. In addition, the policy implementors also provides space for the community to contribute in submitting complaints and criticisms. Citizen can submit any criticism and suggestions, including regarding the implementation of the KSJPS in the City of Yogyakarta through the Information and Complaints Service Unit (UPIK) of the Yogyakarta City Government. UPIK is a facility for the public to submit complaints, questions, information, and suggestions/suggestions for the development of Yogyakarta City Government services and the development of Yogyakarta City. UPIK can be visited through the website page http://upik.jogjakota.go.id/ or you can send an e-mail to upik@jogjakota.go.id. The public can also send SMS to 08122780001 or call the telephone/fax number (0274) 561270 or come directly to the Public Relations and Information Section of the Yogyakarta City Regional 157 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) Secretariat, City Hall Complex, Jalan Kenari Number 56 Yogyakarta 55165. In addition, residents of Yogyakarta City can also convey report complaints/ complaints through the complaint menu facility in the Jogja Smart Service (JSS) application. Clarity of information in the implementation of the KSJPS policy in the City of Yogyakarta Clarity of information means that communication or information received by policy implementers must be clear so that it is not confusing. According to Edward III (1980), if the policies are implemented as desired, then the implementation instructions must not only be accepted by the policy implementers, but also the communication of the policy must be clear. Sometimes it is found that the instructions passed to the executor are vague and do not specify when and how a program is executed. Communication received by policy implementers (street-level-bureaucrats) must be clear and not confusing. The ambiguity of the policy message may not necessarily hinder implementation, to some extent. However, the implementers need clarity of information in implementing the policy so that the objectives to be achieved can be achieved according to the contents of the policy. Mazmanian & Sabatier (1983) suggested that the clearer and more detailed the content of a policy is, the easier it will be to implement because the implementor will easily understand and translate it into real action. On the other hand, the ambiguity of policy content is a potential for distortion in policy implementation. The ambiguity of the communication message conveyed in relation to the implementation of the policy will risk misinterpretation or may conflict with the meaning of the original message. Clarity of information regarding the implementation of KSJPS has been stated in several regulations that regulate it. The Yogyakarta City Manpower and Transmigration Social Service has also clearly conveyed to policy implementers and target groups, as well as parties involved in implementing the policy. The KSJPS policy in the City of Yogyakarta is regulated by the Mayor of Yogyakarta Regulation Number 12 of 2020 concerning Guidelines for Data Collection of the KSJPS Population in the City of Yogyakarta. The people who are targeted as targets of social security and protection are given an identity card called KMS which is valid for one year. KSJPS data collection parameters are determined according to the Decree of the Mayor of Yogyakarta No. 510 of 2018 concerning Determination of Parameters for Population Data Collection and KSJPS 158 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 consists of seven aspects and sixteen parameters (see Table 1). If a family has fulfilled all aspects and parameters, but if at the time of data collection or field verification it is not found, or it is declared to have moved and the address is not known, then no verification is carried out on the family. Families that meet one or several parameters indirectly then become the category of KSJPS recipients. There are other parameters that must be weighed so that the family can get KMS. Based on the narrative of Bandoro Budi Nugroho (Social Extension Functional Officer), it was stated that it is necessary to look at the results of the weighting of the KSJPS parameters (see table 2). Table 1: KSJPS Data Collection Parameters Aspect Parameter Weight Income and Asset Both the husband and wife are unemployed. 8 The average income of family members per month for the last 3 months is up to IDR 423,815. 10 The ownership status of the building is not owned/ contracted/rented/protected. 6 The family does not own anything worth more than IDR 1,800,000. 4 Electricity power utilization of 450-900 kWh with an expenditure of less than IDR 75,000. 4 Shelter The residential building area is less than 8 square meters per family member. 8 The type of residential wall material is more than 50% in the form of bamboo/wood/wall without plaster. 10 Food Families cannot afford to feed family members 3 times a day. 9 Families cannot afford to buy and provide meat/ chicken/fish side dishes 2 times a week. 9 Clothing Families can only buy new clothes for each family member a maximum of 1 time in a year excluding uniforms. 3 Health The drinking and cooking water resource is not the Regional Drinking Water Company (PDAM). 2 The family does not have a toilet. 5 159 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) Aspect Parameter Weight Education The maximum education of the head of the family is junior high school graduate. 4 There are dependents of more than one family member who attend high school and below. 7 Some school-age children drop out (DO) or do not continue their education up to SMA/SMK due to economic reasons. 9 Social Families cannot participate in social activities for economic reasons. 2 Total 100 Table 2: KSJPS Program Family Stratification Stratification Weight Code Kartu Menuju Sehat 1 76-100 1 Kartu Menuju Sehat 2 51-75 2 Kartu Menuju Sehat 3 31-50 3 Technical instructions for the implementation of the KSJPS have been regulated through the Decree of the Head of the Yogyakarta City Social Service No. 220 of 2019 concerning Technical Guidelines for KSJPS Data Collection in the City of Yogyakarta. Families who are included in the KSJPS data will be given an identity by the Yogyakarta City Government in the form of KMS. People who have proof of ownership of KMS will get social security and protection in the form of guarantees and assistance that have been designed according to the situation and conditions of the community concerned. For students, they get the Regional Education Guarantee (Jaminan Pendidikan Daerah/JPD) in the form of free 12-year compulsory education, for the elderly they get ASLUM and death benefits. ASLUM assistance is regulated by Mayor Regulation No. 33 of 2021 Guidelines for the Implementation of ASLUM in the City of Yogyakarta. Meanwhile, death compensation is regulated in Mayor Regulation No. 60 of 2021 concerning Guidelines for Providing Death Compensation for Families of KMS holders in the City of Yogyakarta. The Yogyakarta City Government did not re-collect the KSJPS data in 2021, so the implementation of the program uses 2020 data (Jogjaantaranewscom). 160 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 According to the provisions in the Mayor’s Regulation, data collection can be done at least once every two years, except in certain conditions, such as a disaster. The 2020 KSJPS data collection was carried out in several stages, namely; 1. Preparation (February-March). 2. First Public Test (April). 3. Data collection (May-July). 4. Data Processing (August-September). 5. Second Public Test (October). 6. Quick Verification of Second Public Test Results (November). 7. Matching the data from the verification results with the population data and determination of the data (December). The stages of data collection are also intended so that the data collection process can be objective because it allows a check mechanism from various parties, including the community. Information consistency in implementing KSJPS policies in Yogyakarta City Instructions or information given in the implementation of a communication must be clear and consistent to be carried out and carried out. This is to support effective policy implementation. Although the orders delivered to policy implementers have an element of clarity, if the orders contain contradictory elements, it is possible that the orders will not encourage policy implementers to carry out their duties properly. On the other hand, inconsistent policy implementation orders will encourage implementers to take actions that are too lax in interpreting and implementing policies. If this happens, it will result in ineffective policy implementation because very loose measures may not be used to implement policy objectives. The policy objective in the field of social protection, according to the Strategic Plan of the Yogyakarta City Social Service for 2017-2022, is to improve a comprehensive social protection system by protecting the poor and vulnerable so that they are able to fulfill their basic needs and rights. One of the policy characteristics is characterized by the ability of the policy to structure the implementation process with clarity and consistency of objectives. Clarity in terms of regulations that are revealed in the form of Mayor Regulations and Mayoral Decrees related to the implementation of the KSJPS program are 161 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) factors that support its implementation. Consistent rules make it easier for implementers to apply policies in the field. In addition, the implementation of KSJPS in Yogyakarta City has utilized technology-based applications in its data collection. It is hoped that this will further support the implementation of the program. Because with the support of IT, the more technologically literate the target community of the policy will make it easier for the policy implementation process. The problem that sometimes becomes an obstacle in the distribution of social assistance so far is the suitability of the data. DTKS data belonging to the Ministry of Social Affairs is based on the mother’s or wife’s Family Identification Number (Nomor Identitas Kependudukan/NIK). Meanwhile, the Yogyakarta City KSJPS data uses the Head of the Family (Kepala Keluarga/KK), so there must be a crosscheck so as not to cause a double problem of assistance for the KK. The Head of the Social Protection and Security Division of the Manpower and Transmigration Office of Yogyakarta, Christina Tri Maryatun said that the problem had been resolved with the support of a Management Information System (SIM), namely SIM Pemberdayaan. For almost three years, the Yogyakarta City Government has used single data on NIK and household heads for assistance programs, which are supported by SIM Pemberdayaan based on welfare status and NIK. In this case, data on the Family Hope Program (Program Keluarga Harapan/PKH) and Non-Cash Food Assistance (Bantuan Pangan Non Tunai/BPNT) from the Ministry of Social Affairs were tracked by the names of the heads of families, then separated to avoid duplication (okezonenews.com). In the SIM Pemberdayaan, there are two poverty reduction databases. The first data is intervention data from the central government, namely the Integrated Social Welfare Data (DTKS). Meanwhile, another database comes from the Yogyakarta City Social Service data collection which has been carried out for about 10 years, namely KSJPS data. The processed results in the SIM include information on names, addresses, and NIK, poverty reduction targets from two databases at once. The information also includes targets that are cut into poverty reduction priorities and the various parameters that accompany them. SIM is of course only a tool whose effectiveness depends on the user. Various regional apparatus and other stakeholders related to poverty reduction are currently being encouraged to use MIS in every intervention carried out. The discipline of its use is also systematic, where a regional apparatus must first book 162 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 the targets contained in the SIM as an intervention participant. Furthermore, when the intervention has been carried out, the regional apparatus must also confirm in the SIM that the participant has received the intervention. If this mechanism works, overlapping target beneficiaries can be eliminated. However, it will take longer time for regional devices to be able to feel the benefits of the SIM. It is necessary to overhaul the system from what has been used so far. In addition, the validity of the data is also a separate issue. The SIM that has been built has been based on NIK so that it is truly unique and overcomes the problem of the similarity of names, addresses, and other identities. If later the SIM has been fully utilized, all records of interventions that have been carried out from a NIK will be available. An individual or family will be detected, whether they have received health contribution assistance or not, and whether the assistance comes from the central or regional government. Therefore, target data with a truly valid NIK is very important for poverty reduction efforts. Verification and validation of data to produce valid data is the most important part of the whole process. In the city of Yogyakarta, the basis for this NIK intervention was strengthened by the existence of SIM Pemberdayaan. The MIS is an intervention base with target data content. The regional apparatus that intervenes must include the type of intervention in the target data. In the end, the SIM will completely contain target data based on name, address, NIK, welfare parameters, needs, and interventions that have been received in order to avoid overlapping problems and ineffective interventions. To get there, target data based on a valid NIK is absolutely necessary so that data verification and validation is a very important process. CONCLUSION Policy communication in implementing the KSJPS program in the City of Yogyakarta seen from the process of delivering information to policy implementers and target groups, clarity of information, and consistency of information has been able to support the successful implementation of the KSJPS policy. Three critical success indicators on the communication variable, namely: the delivery of information to policy implementers and target groups as well as the compliance of the implementers, clarity of information, and consistency of information have been able to support the successful implementation of the KSJPS program in the city of Yogyakarta. 163 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) Communications regarding the implementation of KSJPS have been carried out by the Yogyakarta City Manpower and Transmigration Social Service to policy implementers through coordination meetings which are held regularly. One of the ways to convey communication about the KSJPS program to policy targets is through RB TV. Mass media is also very helpful in conveying information to the public through reporting on the implementation of the KSJPS program. This has increased public knowledge about the implementation of the KSJPS so that they can participate in the implementation of the program. However, in data collection activities, data disintegration problems are still encountered. However, this has been overcome with the Management Information System /SIM Pemberdayaan. The success of this communication is also supported by the capacity and competence of the implementers to the regulations that have been set in implementing the policy. Policy implementers have clearly stated the aims and objectives of the policy. Clarity of information regarding the implementation of KSJPS is regulated through the KSJPS data collection parameters which consist of seven aspects and sixteen parameters. In addition, the mechanism has also involved the community in the process. Communities also receive clear and consistent information about policy implementation. REFERENCES Agustino, L. (2006). Dasar-dasar kebijakan publik. CV Alfabeta. Anggara, S. (2014). Kebijakan publik. Pengantar. Pustaka Setia. Anderson, J. E. (2003). Public policymaking: An introduction. Houghton Mifflin Company, pp. 1 – 34. Accessed http://www.kropfpolisci.com/ public.policy.anderson.pdf Barberio, V., Kuric, I., Mollona, E., & Pareschi, L. (2020). The use of social media in EU policy communication and implications for the emergence of a European public sphere. Investigaciones Regionales, 2020 (46). Canary, Heather. E., Blevins, M., & Ghorbani, S. S. (2015). Organizational policy communication research: Challenges, discoveries, and future directions. Communication Reports, 28(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/0893 4215.2013.865063 Canary, Heather E, & Taylor, Julie L. (2020). Policy communication. Engaging multiplicity. Chapter 37. Editor: Mary John O’Hair. April. https://doi. org/10.1002/9781119399926.ch37 164 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 Cline, K. D. (2000). Defining the implementation problem: Organizational management versus cooperation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10(3), 551–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/ oxfordjournals .jpart.a024281 Creswell, J. W. (2016). Research design, pendekatan metode kualitatif, kuantitaif, dan campuran. 4th Ed. Pustaka Pelajar. Dunn, William N. (2017). Public policy analysis: an integrated approach. Routledge. Sixth Edition. Accessed https://accord.edu.so/course/material/public-policy-and-analysis-480/ pdf_content D’Acunto, F., Hoang, D., Paloviita, M., & Weber, M. (2021). Effective policy communication: Targets versus instruments. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3764722 Edward III, George C. (1980). Implementing public policy. Congressional Quarterly Press. Engkus, E. (2020). Komunikasi kebijakan bantuan pangan nontunai melalui E-Warong. Jurnal Penelitian Komunikasi, 23(1). https://doi.org/10.20422/ jpk.v23i1.677 Flor, A.G. (1991). Development communication and the policy sciences. Journal of Development Communication. December 1991. Asian Institute of Development Communication (Kuala Lumpur) https://www.academia.edu/578845/Development_Communication_ and_the_Policy_Sciences Friedrich, C. J. (2000). Public policy and the nature of administrative responsibility. The Science of Public Policy. Grindle, M. S. (1980). Politics and policy implementation in the third world. Princeton University Press. 310 pp. https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.4230020308 Handoyo, E. (2012). Kebijakan publik. Widya Karya. Hill, M., & Peter Hupe (2006). Implementing public policy. Sage Publication. 231 pp. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0047279403227288 Kala, K., Bolia, N. B., & Sushil. (2020). Waste management communication policy for effective citizen awareness. Journal of Policy Modeling, 42(3). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2020.01.012 Kamil, I. (2018). Peran komunikasi pemerintahan dalam penanganan lingkungan kumuh. Mediator: Jurnal Komunikasi, 11(1), 129–139. 165 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) https://doi.org/10.29313/mediator.v11i1.3322 König, P. D. (2021). A magic bullet in policy communication? On the ambiguous use of framing in policy research. Policy Studies, 42(1). https://doi.org/10 .1080/01442872.2019.1581153 Lester, J. P., & Joseph Stewart. (2000). Public policy: an evolutionary approach (Third Ed). Boston Wadsworth Thomson Learning Luqman, Y., Sumardjo, S., Sarwoprasodjo, S., & Tambunan, A. H. (2017). Solusi menuju konvergensi arah komunikasi kebijakan publik dalam rangka antisipasi krisis energi. Jurnal Ilmu Komunikasi, 15(2). https://doi. org/10.31315/jik.v15i2.2161 Mazmanian, Daniel A and Paul A. Sabatier. (1983). Implementation and public policy. Scott Foresman and Company. Miles, M.B, Huberman, A.M, & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. A methods sourcebook, Edition 3. Sage Publications. Terjemahan Tjetjep Rohindi Rohidi, UI-Press. Mukhtar. (2013). Metode praktis penelitian deskriptif kualitatif. GP Press Group. Pricahyadi, M., & Ramadani, T. (2019). Strategi komunikasi kebijakan pemerintah Provinsi DKI Jakarta pada Peraturan Gubernur Nomor 110 Tahun 2018. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi: Media Pengembangan Ilmu Dan Praktek Administrasi, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.31113/jia.v16i1.222 Quy, H., & Ha, T. T. (2018). An empirical assessment of public policy communications in Central Region of Vietnam. Modern Economy, 09(12). https://doi.org/10.4236/me.2018.912128 Ripley, R. B., & Grace A. Franklin. (1986). Bureaucracy and policy implementation. 2nd Ed. Chicago III: Dorsey Press. Sazali, H. S. (2021). Komunikasi kebijakan publik dalam penanggulangan inses di Kecamatan Tanjung Tiram. Inovasi, 18(1). https://doi.org/10.33626/ inovasi.v18i1.305 Sugiyono. (2017). Metode penelitian kuantitatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. CV Alfabeta. Suparno. (2017). Implementasi Kebijakan publik dalam teori dan praktik. Implementasi kebijakan ketahanan pangan Kabupaten Rembang. Dwiputra Pustaka Jaya. Supriyanto, R. W., dkk. (2014). Perlindungan sosial di Indonesia: Tantangan 166 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168 dan arah ke depan. Bappenas. Syaripudin, A. F., Nur, T., & Meigawati, D. (2020). Komunikasi kebijakan publik dalam penyelenggaraan reklame di Kota Sukabumi. Publikauma : Jurnal Administrasi Publik Universitas Medan Area, 8(2). Van Meter, D. S. & van Horn, C. E. (1975). The Policy implementation process: a conceptual framework. https://doi.org/10.1177% 2F009539977500600404 Wahab, Solihin A. (2014) Analisis kebijakan: dari formulasi ke penyusunan model-model implementasi kebijakan publik. Bumi Aksara. Wendra, R. May, Afrizal, T., Larasati, E., & Yuniningsih, T. (2020). Policy communication of licensing business swallow’s nests in Pekanbaru City. Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Administrasi Publik, 10 (2). https://doi.org/10.26858/ jiap.v10i2.15516 Yang, J., & Zheng, X. (2022). Government annual report: decision usefulness, information accessibility and policy communication efficiency– observations from 19 Chinese cities. Policy Studies, 43(3). https://doi.org /10.1080/01442872.2020.1724277 Zaenudin, H. N., Sartika, R., & Haryanegara, M. E. A. (2022). The effectiveness of policy communication in promoting #KangPisMan program among university students. Informasi, 51(2). https://doi.org/10.21831/informasi. v51i2.39435 Zulfiningrum, R., Sumardjo, Saleh, A., & Agusta, I. (2019). Komunikasi kebijakan dalam program pengembangan pertanian beras hitam: Analisis NVIVO 11. Jurnal PIKOM (Penelitian Komunikasi Dan Pembangunan), 20 (2). Website Badan Pusat Statistik Kota Yogyakarta. (2020). Kemiskinan Kota Yogyakarta 2018- 2020. BPS Kota Yogyakarta. Accessed https://jogjakota.bps.go.id/indicator/154/89/1/kemiskinan-kota- yogyakarta.html Komunikasi kebijakan lebih penting ketimbang sosialisasi kebijakan. (2021, December 22). Accessed Komunikasi Kebijakan Lebih Penting Ketimbang Sosialisasi Kebijakan - Wawasan Knowledge Sector Initiative (KSI) (ksi-indonesia.org) 167 Policy communication in the implementation of the Keluarga ...(Marita Ahdiyana, Arum Diyan Sukmawati) Okezone News. (2020, April 30). 53.319 KK Terdampak pandemi di Kota yogyakarta dapat bantuan, ini pembagiannya. Accessed https://news.okezone.com/read/2020/04/30/510/2207137/53-319-kk- terdampak-pandemi-di-kota-yogyakarta-dapat-bantuan-ini-pembagiannya. Penerapan strategi komunikasi kebijakan yang baik memegang peran kunci bagi efektivitas implementasi kebijakan. (2021, September 10). Accessed https://lan.go.id/?p=6827 Ramadhan, A. (2020, October 12). Dinsos Kota Yogyakarta: pendataan ksjps 2021 terkendala masalah teknis. Tribun Jogja. Accessed https://jogja. tribunnews.com/2020/10/12/dinsos-kota-yogyakarta-pendataan-ksjps- 2021-terkendala-masalah-teknis Republika. (2021, July 23). Penyaluran bansos ditargetkan selesai sebelum 25 Juli. Republika. Accessed https://republika.co.id/berita/daerah/jawa-tengah-diy/qwn4yk380/ penyaluran-bansos-ditargetkan-selesai-sebelum-25-juli Rusqiyati, EA. (2019, July 19). Dinas Sosial Kota Yogyakarta mengapresiasi warga kembalikan KMS. Accessed https://jogja.antaranews.com/berita/386994/dinas-sosial-kota-yogyakarta- mengapresiasi-warga-kembalikan-kms Rusqiyati, EA. (2020, July 5). Data KSJPS Yogyakarta diupayakan dapat masuk DTKS pusat. Antara News. Accessed https://jogja.antaranews.com/ berita/435738/data-ksjps-yogyakarta-diupayakan-dapat-masuk-dtks-pusat Rusqiyati, EA. (2021, December 3 ). Yogyakarta tetap menggunakan data 2021. Antara News. Accessed https://jogja.antaranews.com/berita/524505/ yogyak ar t a-tet ap-menggunak an-dat a-ksjps-2021-untuk-program- sosial-2022 Wardhani, CM. (2020, July 5). Dinsos Kota Yogya upayakan data KSJPS Masuk ke DTKS Pusat. Tribun Jogja. Accessed https://jogja.tribunnews. com/2020/07/05/dinsos-kota-yogya-upayakan-data-ksjps-masuk-ke-dtks- pusat. 168 Informasi, Vol. 52. No. 1. (2022), 141-168