p–ISSN: 2723 - 6609 e-ISSN: 2745-5254

Vol. 5, No. 8 August 2024 http://jist.publikasiindonesia.id/

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3190

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System

Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning and Budgeting

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Perencana Ahli Muda pada Badan Pusat Statistik, Indonesia

Email:

[email protected]

*Correspondence

ABSTRACT

Keywords: redesign,

planning, budgeting,

output.

The Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System (RSPP)

is one of the government's efforts to realise effective and

efficient planning and budgeting at the central and regional

levels. The implementation of RSPP is expected to be able

to answer problems in the planning and budgeting system,

including the inconsistency of central and regional

expenditure programs, differences in programs used in

planning and budgeting documents, the formulation of

program nomenclature and normative outcomes, and

development performance information in planning and

budgeting documents that are difficult for the public to

understand. However, in its implementation, there are still

problems faced by Ministries/Institutions so the Ministry of

Finance together with the Ministry of National Development

Planning/Bappenas need to periodically evaluate the

formulation of RSPP in Ministries/Institutions through the

Work Plan and Budget documents that have been issued. The

process of improving the implementation of RSPP in

Ministries/Institutions is followed by improving the

guidelines and rules that oversee the implementation of

RSPP in Indonesia. Several policies need to be taken to

support the implementation of RSPP, namely the Logical

Framework policy in the Formulation of Performance and

Performance Indicators as well as the Synchronization of

Planning and Budgeting Documents through the Integration

of Planning and Budgeting Applications so that planning and

budgeting documents become harmonious and easy to

understand. For the implementation of RSPP to be effective

and efficient, the Ministry of Finance together with the

Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas need

to periodically evaluate the performance information that

has been prepared by the Ministries/Institutions by the

Regulation on the Implementation of Planning and

Budgeting System Redesign.

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning

and Budgeting

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3191

Introduction

Planning and budgeting are two things that are interrelated and require synergy to

realize effective and efficient planning and budgeting (Sodikin, 2020). Efforts to improve

the quality of planning and budgeting in Indonesia began with the launch of the reform

of state financial management (Suryadi, 2023). This reform was marked by the enactment

of Law Number 17 of 2003 concerning State Finance, Law Number 1 of 2004 concerning

the State Treasury and Law Number 15 of 2004 concerning the Audit of State Financial

Management and Responsibility. Meanwhile, related to planning, was marked by the

enactment of Law Number 25 of 2004 concerning the National Development Planning

System (Zunaidi & Santoso, 2021).

By the mandate of Law Number 17 of 2003 concerning State Finance, the

preparation of planning and budgeting by Ministries/Institutions are guided by 3 (three)

budgeting systems, namely (1) Unified Budgeting Approach, (2) Performance-Based

Budgeting Approach and (3) Medium Term Expenditure Framework Approach (Rahim,

2022). The Integrated Budgeting Approach is carried out by integrating the entire

planning and budgeting process within the Ministries/Institutions to produce RKA-K/L

documents with budget classifications according to organization, function and type of

expenditure (economy). The performance-based budgeting approach is a budgeting

system that pays attention to the relationship between funding and performance and pays

attention to efficiency in achieving this performance (Anggriawan, 2023). Meanwhile,

the KPJM Approach is a policy-based budget preparation that causes budget implications

for more than 1 (one) year (Purnomo, 2021).

The implementation of the Law package in the field of State Finance does not

automatically result in effective and efficient state financial management (Madjid, 2020).

To improve Performance-Based Budgeting, especially regarding the measurement and

evaluation of budget performance, the Government issued Government Regulation (PP)

Number 90 of 2010 concerning the Preparation of Work Plans and Budgets of

Ministries/Institutions (RKA-K/L) (Pratama, 2017). Ministries/Institutions and Local

Governments (Pemda) are introduced to the reward and punishment system and the

application of fee standards. In addition, to answer the challenge of disintegration in

program and budget planning, the government passed Government Regulation Number

17 of 2017 concerning Planning and Budgeting Synchronization which regulates the role

of institutions and responsibilities for the preparation of national development plans and

budgets as well as the control of the achievement of development goals (Sihaloho, Ariza,

& Munandar, 2024).

However, as the planning and budgeting process in Indonesia has been running

for approximately 8 (eight) years, Budget Reform is considered to still not show the

effectiveness of planning and budgeting through the results of evaluations conducted by

the Ministry of Finance and the National Development Planning Agency (Bappenas). The

results of the evaluation include 4 (four) things, namely (Ministry of Finance, 2020):

1. Central and regional spending programs are not synchronized so their performance

achievements have not met the target;

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3192

2. The programs used in planning and budgeting documents are different so they are

difficult to consolidate;

3. The formulation of program nomenclature and the outcome of a program are not

directly visible (normative); and

4. Development information contained in budgeting planning documents is difficult for

the public to understand.

The results of the evaluation show that the challenges and needs to improve the

quality of the budget and the implementation of the Money Follow program reflect the

duties and functions of the Ministries/Institutions as well as the program objectives

(outcomes) (Amin, 2019). In addition, the preparation of planning, budgeting,

implementation, monitoring, evaluation and reporting becomes easier to consolidate. This

is what prompted the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of National Development

Planning/Bappenas to redesign the Planning and Budgeting System (Biswan & Grafitanti,

2021).

The redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System, hereinafter abbreviated as

RSPP, is an alignment between performance-based planning and budgeting, changing

budgeting from an input base to an output base to improve the quality of planning and

budgeting as well as the effectiveness of state spending. RSPP is one of the planning and

budgeting approaches to implement the money-follow program so that it has an impact

on the community (value for money). The RSPP was first implemented during the

preparation of the 2021 State Budget. Guidelines for the preparation of Programs,

Activities and Outputs (outputs) of Ministries/Institutions used in the preparation of

planning and budgeting documents are outlined in the Joint Circular Letter of the Deputy

for Development Financing of the Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas

and the Directorate General of Budget of the Ministry of Finance Number: S-

122/MK.2/2020 and B-517/M.PPN/D.8/PP.04.03/05/2020, Date: June 24, 2020, Matter:

Guidelines for Redesigning the Planning and Budgeting System. The general purpose of

implementing RSPP is to realize more targeted and flexible planning and budgeting as

well as to improve the relationship between budget allocation and performance.

Planning and budgeting reform is one of the efforts to realize effective and efficient

planning and budgeting. However, over time, planning and budgeting reforms and various

regulations that have been drafted have not succeeded in realizing effective and efficient

planning and budgeting. Therefore, the Indonesian government launched the Redesign of

the Planning and Budgeting System in 2020 which was used for the preparation of the

2021 State Revenue and Expenditure Budget (APBN).

The redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System can help to accelerate

economic growth and recovery as well as strengthen reforms with detailed and thorough

socialization, as well as periodic supervision and evaluation of each program that is being

implemented. The Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System will facilitate the

synchronization process between planning and budgeting documents and the information

contained in the Budget Implementation Entry List (DIPA) can be easily understood by

the public (Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, 2020).

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning

and Budgeting

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3193

Challenges and needs to improve the quality of planning and budgeting in Indonesia

which reflect the functional duties of ministries and ministries and objectives (outcomes)

that reflect the results of national program performance so that an initiative to redesign

the planning and budgeting system has emerged. The implementation of RSPP is expected

to be able to overcome the problem of central and regional spending programs that are

out of sync so that the performance achievements have not met the target. One example

of program missynchronization occurs in the physical Special Allocation Fund (DAK)

regarding road construction between national, provincial and district/city road priorities.

The construction of the road infrastructure is a program of the central government so that

when the infrastructure has been completed and will be handed over to the Regional

Government, the Regional Government refuses because it is not to the needs of the

Regional Government and the consequence is to carry out infrastructure maintenance that

has been programmed by the central government.

In addition, the implementation of the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting

System is expected to overcome the problem of programs used in different planning and

budgeting documents that it is difficult to consolidate. Before the implementation of the

RSPP, 428 programs overlapped between ministries/institutions. This is because each

echelon official in one ministry/institution submits a program proposal. Therefore,

periodic synchronization is needed between the budget document in Bappenas and the

planning in the respective ministries and agencies with the programs in the budgeting

document (DIPA). For example, there is a Stunting program involving 18

ministries/institutions and local governments, so a cross-ministry/institution program

involved in the program is needed. With the reform of the budget for the implementation

of RSPP in 2021, it can reduce the number of programs from ministries/ministries from

428 to 102 programs consisting of 1 generic program, 17 cross-ministry/institution

programs and 84 specific programs (Sri Mulyani, Media Indonesia 2020).

The next problem is that the formulation of program nomenclature and the outcomes

of a program are not directly visible (normative) so it is difficult to connect the output

and the outcome of the budget. For example, we want the Farmer Exchange Rate (NTP)

to be above 100, which means that farmers have an advantage from the production of

agricultural commodities compared to the amount of farmers' consumption (farmers'

spending). However, the written program nomenclature is normative or cannot be

measured so it will have an impact on the achievement of outcomes (Sri Mulyani, Antara

2020).

The development performance information contained in budgeting planning

documents is difficult for the public to understand, and it is also a problem in the planning

and budgeting system that must be overcome. The development performance information

contained in the planning document (Renja K/l) and the budgeting document (DIPA) is

very normative and has too many descriptions, this has caused criticism from various

parties who find it difficult to understand the document which has an impact on the

principle of accountability. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the performance

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3194

information structure so that the relationship between inputs, outputs, outcomes and

impacts can be seen (Olfah et al, 2023).

The four problems and evaluation of the planning and budgeting system in

Indonesia are used as the basis for redesigning the budgeting system which is expected to

be able to clarify the relationship between programs, activities, outputs and outcomes and

can increase synergy between Echelon I work units or between ministries and agencies in

achieving development goals so that spending efficiency is maximized.

The objectives of this study are:

1. Examining the effectiveness and challenges of implementing the Redesign of the

Planning and Budgeting System by Ministries/Institutions;

2. Identify the implementation of the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System at

the Central Statistics Agency;

3. Provide recommendations for improvement strategies related to the implementation of

Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in the future to realize effective and efficient

planning and budgeting.

This policy paper will be useful for the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of

National Development Planning/Bappenas to improve the implementation of a more

effective and efficient Planning and Budgeting System Redesign as well as for

Ministries/Institutions in compiling performance information by the program objectives

(outcomes) to be achieved.

Research Methods

The analysis of the discussion in this policy paper uses a descriptive approach based

on literature and a study of laws and regulations related to the Redesign of the Planning

and Budgeting System. The literature used is in the form of documents produced by

Ministries/Institutions as guidelines in the implementation of the Redesign of the

Planning and Budgeting System as well as various rules prepared by the Ministry of

Finance and the Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas as guidelines for

the implementation of the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System of all

Ministries/Institutions. Until now, there has not been much research or policy paper

related to the implementation of the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System in

Indonesia, so the literature is limited to documents made by the Ministry of Finance and

the Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas. In addition, the collection of

documents through correspondence with the Ministry of Health and the Supreme Court

related to the implementation of the RSPP.

A case study was also conducted on the implementation of the Redesign of the

Planning and Budgeting System at the Central Statistics Agency (BPS), to see the

effectiveness of the RSPP in the preparation of planning and budgeting documents as well

as the obstacles in the preparation of the RSPP structure in BPS. The data used related to

the implementation of the RSPP at the Central Statistics Agency was obtained from the

Work Plan and Budget (RKA) document in 2021.

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning

and Budgeting

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3195

Results and Discussion

Effectiveness and Challenges of the Implementation of Planning and Budgeting

System Redesign

The implementation of the Planning and Budgeting System Redesign policy is a

policy rolled out by the government to answer the gap between planning and budgeting.

With the implementation of RSPP, it is hoped that planning and budgeting can go hand

in hand and synchronously to realize effective and efficient planning and budgeting. The

implementation of the RSPP which began in the preparation of the 2021 State Budget has

shown its effectiveness slowly as shown in Table 1.

Table 1

Restructuring of Performance Information for 2020-2021 at the Ministry/Lembaga

Performance

Information

2020

January 2021

July 2021

Program

414

102

Program

Objectives

1.077

954

965

Output

Program

1.252

830

846

Activities

3.021

2.521

2.502

Activity

Output

7.076

KRO

231

238

20.995

21.408

Table 1. shows that the number of programs decreased in mid-2021 after the

implementation of RSPP. The number of programs in 2020 was 414 programs, which

decreased in 2021 to 102 programs consisting of 1 Generic Program, 17 Cross-

Ministry/Institution Technical Programs and 84 Ministry/Institution Specific Technical

Programs. This is to the principles of RSPP implementation, where programs can be

carried out by one or more Echelon I Units, and even one program can be carried out by

one or more Ministries/Institutions. Simplification also occurred in activities, in 2020, the

number of activities was 3,021 activities, which decreased in mid-2021 to 2,502 activities.

The implementation of activities can be carried out by one or more Echelon II Units

within the same Echelon I scope or across Echelon I Units in one Ministry/Institution to

increase synergy in achieving activity goals. The restructuring of performance

information can overcome duplication of budgeting so that it becomes more effective and

efficient.

According to the Ministry of Finance (2020), the implications of the

implementation of RSPP cause changes in the process of formulating performance

information nomenclature at the following levels:

1. The program, not only describes the duties and functions of Echelon I but also

describes the functions of the Ministries/Institutions themselves which are formulated

directly by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of National Development

Planning/Bappenas as the coordinator of the relevant Ministries/Institutions;

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3196

2. Outcome (Program Objectives), reflects the results of the program's performance to be

achieved at the national level. If the program formulated is cross-

Ministries/Institutions, the nomenclature of program objectives and indicators is

formulated by their respective duties and functions and by their contribution to

achieving the program objectives;

3. Activities, formulated by the activities carried out by the Echelon II unit to produce

output to support the realization of the above goals. Activities can also be cross-

Echelon II units and cross-Echelon I within the same Ministry/Institution;

4. The output, in formulating the output, must reflect the final product produced as "real

work and eye-catching". The formulation of output is divided into Classification of

Output Details (KRO) and Output Details (RO).

The information structure of Program performance, Outcomes (program

objectives), Activities, KRO and RO in the Work Plan and Budget Work Plan of

Ministries/Institutions after the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System is

explained in the following figure:

Figure 1. Renja and RKA-K/L Data Structure in RSPP

The implementation of RSPP in the 2021 fiscal year carried out by

Ministries/Institutions is still not optimal in the preparation of performance information

on both KRO and RO programs, and activities. Issues on the implementation of RSPP

from Ministries/Institutions in 2021 include (Ministry of Finance, 2021):

1. The technical program of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry still contains the

Detailed Classification of Output (KRO) and Detailed Output (RO) for Generic

Programs in some ministries and agencies.

2. The technical program of the Ministry of Ministries and Agencies still contains non-

specific ROs, including:

a. The nomenclature of RO is the same as KRO

Kegiatan

Program

Sasaran Program

Output Program

Sasaran Kegiatan

Indikator Kinerja

Program

Indikator Output

Program

Indikator kinerja

Kegiatan

Klasifikasi Rincian

Output

Rincian Output

Indikator KRO

Indikator RO

Lokasi RO

Komponen

Lokasi

• Lokasi

• Sumber

Pendanaan

• Alokasi

• Target

• Tagging: PN, PP, KP,

ProPN, JanPres, MP,

Tematik

• Upload: RAB&TOR

• Unit Kerja Es 2

• Jenis Komponen

• Indikator

Komponen

• Indikator

Pengadaan Barang

& Jasa

Keluaran/

Output Kegiatan

Outcome

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning

and Budgeting

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3197

b. RO units in the form of packages/activities

c. RO is not an end product and/or the beneficiary of RO is not external to the

Ministry of Ministries

3. The Technical KRO still contains generic components

4. RO with units that are not of the same type/equivalent/cognate with KRO so that the

sum of the RO volume becomes biased.

5. RO that is not the same as KRO

The existence of implementation issues as a result of the initial evaluation

conducted by the Ministry of Finance can be used as a guideline by Ministries/Institutions

to improve performance information in the process of preparing the K/L Work Plan in the

following year.

Based on the RSPP principles set by the Ministry of Finance together with the

Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas, the programs of

Ministries/Institutions are grouped into 2 (two), namely:

1. Generic Program (supportive)

The nomenclature formula used in the RSPP is a management support program.

The management support program is a program designed to support the implementation

of the Ministries/Institutions in running the government (bureaucracy). The KRO and RO

used are KRO and RO that support the internal administrative activities of the

Ministry/Institution.

2. Technical Programs

The technical program is a program designed to implement national development

priorities that have been set out in the 2020-2024 RPJMN and the Government Work Plan

(RKP). The technical programs of Ministries/Institutions are grouped into 2, namely:

a. Technical programs are Cross-Ministries/Institutions, which are the government's

flagship programs that are implemented by more than 1 () Ministries/Institutions that

are thematic and sustainable.

b. Specific technical programs implemented by 1 Ministry/Institution

The management support program is a merger of several supporting programs of

Ministries/Institutions that have currently been implemented in Ministries/Institutions,

namely the technical management support program of the Ministry/Institution, the

apparatus supervision program, the facilities and infrastructure program, the training

program/BPSDM and the R&D program as long as it does not produce products that will

be mass-produced/implemented. The training program in question is as long as the

participants or beneficiaries are the State Civil Apparatus (ASN) or the participants come

from the general public but the graduates will become ASN.

The implementation of the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System has

not been fully by expectations. Some Ministries/Institutions still exist where the

Management Support Program is used by the Technical Work Units, for example, internal

services spread across the Technical Work Units. This will result in duplication of the

budget because the Management Support Program should only be used by the supporting

Work Unit. Therefore, special guidelines are needed related to the standardization of

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3198

KRO and RO which should be in the Management Support Program and the Technical

Program so that there is no confusion of duties and functions. In addition, implementation

issues also occur in technical programs that still contain non-specific RO, for example,

the same RO nomenclature as KRO, the RO unit of the package/activity and the RO is

not the final product and/or the beneficiary of the RO is not external.

Table 2

Program Redesign at the Ministry of Health

Initial Programs (9 Programs)

Redesign 6 Programs

Management Support Program and

Implementation of Other Technical

Tasks of the Ministry of Health

Public Health Programs

Outcome: Increasing the availability and

affordability of quality health services for all

communities

Program to Improve Supervision and

Accountability of the Ministry of

Health Apparatus

Health Service and JKN Program

Outcome:

1. Implementation of strengthening national

health insurance

2. Increasing access to basic health services

and quality referrals for the community

3. Increased access, independence, and quality

of pharmaceutical preparations and medical

devices

4. Increasing the fulfilment of health human

resources according to standards

Health Research and Development

Program

Public Health Development Program

Health Service Development

Program

Vocational Education and Training Program

Outcome: Increasing the fulfilment of health

human resources according to standards

Disease Prevention and Control

Program

Disease Prevention and Control Program

Outcome: Decrease in infectious diseases,

non-communicable diseases, and

improvement in mental health

Pharmaceutical and Medical Device

Program

Science and Technology Research and

Innovation Program

Outcome: Improving the quality of research,

development and its use for health program

policy inputs

Health Human Resources

Development and Empowerment

Program (PPSDMK)

Management Support Program

Outcome:

1. Increasing coordination in the

implementation of duties, coaching and

providing management support of the

Ministry of Health

2. Increasing transparency and accountability

of governance and achieving the goals of

bureaucratic reform in the Ministry of

Health

Program to Strengthen the

Implementation of National Health

Insurance

Table 2 shows the redesign of the program at the Ministry of Health, the number of

initial programs is 9 programs after implementing the RSPP into 6 programs, consisting

of 1 generic program and 5 technical programs. Simplification of programs at the Ministry

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning

and Budgeting

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3199

of Health to realize more effective and efficient planning and budgeting. Simplification

is also carried out on activities, KRO and RO at the Ministry of Health.

Table 3

Program Redesign at the Ministry of Finance

Initial Programs (12 Programs)

Redesign of 5 Programs

Management Support Program and

Implementation of Other Technical

Tasks of the Ministry of Finance

(SETJEN)

Fiscal Policy Program

(BKF, DGT, DJBC, DJA, DJPK and DJPPR)

Supervision and Accountability

Improvement Program of the Ministry of

Finance Apparatus (ITJEN)

Education, Training and Competency

Certification Program in the Field of

State Finance (BPPK)

State Revenue Management Program

(DJP, DJBC, DJA dan LNSW)

State Budget Management Program

(DJA)

Program to Improve the Quality of

Central and Regional Financial

Relations (DJPK)

State Expenditure Management Program

(DJA, DJPK dan DJPPR)

Financing and Risk Management

Program (DJPPR)

Fiscal and Financial Sector Policy

Formulation Program (BKF)

State Treasury Management Program

(DJPB)

Program Pengelolaan Perbendaharaan,

Kekayaan Negara dan Risiko

(DJPB, DJKN, DJPPR, ITJEN dan BLU

LMAN)

Tax Revenue Enhancement and Security

Program (DJP)

Supervision, Service and Revenue

Program in the Customs and Excise

Sector (DJBC)

Management Support Program

(All Echelon I Units – including BLU)

State Wealth Management Program,

Settlement of State Receivables

Management and Auction Services

(DJKN)

Indonesia Service Integration Program

National Single Window (LNSW)

Table 3 shows the restructuring of the Ministry of Finance's program before and

after the implementation of the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System. The

number of programs in the Ministry of Finance before the Redesign of the Planning and

Budgeting System was carried out was 12 programs which were held by each Echelon I

Unit. After the implementation of RSPP, the program was simplified into 5 programs

which are an integration of several Echelon I Units. The RSPP at the Ministry of Finance

not only has an impact on the planning and budgeting system but also encourages synergy

and collaboration between echelon I units in the context of carrying out tasks so that they

are more effective and efficient.

Activity Redesign

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3200

In addition to program redesign, activity redesign also needs to be carried out to

simplify activities in Ministries/Institutions to facilitate the assessment of performance

accountability and budget for the implementation of activities. The activities that are

prepared no longer reflect the duties and functions of Echelon II units or vertical Task

Forces from Ministries/Institutions, but rather reflect the activities carried out by the unit

to produce outputs to support the realization of development goals (outcomes). Activities

can be carried out by more than one Echelon II unit within the scope of Echelon I units

or across Echelon I units.

Based on the RSPP principles set by the Ministry of Finance together with the

Ministry of National Development Planning/Bappenas, the formulation of activities is

grouped into 2 (two), namely:

1. Generic Activities (supportive)

Generic activities are activities that support the internal implementation of

Ministries/Institutions (internal management support). Generic activities in the

Management Support Program under the responsibility of the Secretariat General/Main

Secretariat of the Ministry/Institution.

2. Technical Activities

Technical activities are activities related to technical programs, which support the

implementation of the duties and functions of Ministries/Institutions in supporting

national development goals. Technical activities of Ministries/Institutions are grouped

into 2, namely:

1. Technical activities are cross-sectional, which are activities of Ministries/Institutions

carried out by two or more Echelon II Work Units within the same Echelon I Work

Unit or across Echelon I.

2. Specific technical activities carried out by 1 Echelon II unit.

The implementation of activities by two or more Echelon II Units within the same

Echelon I scope aims to improve coordination and synergy between Echelon II Work

Units in achieving certain goals. Cross-border activities are applied not only to the

planning and budgeting process but also to the monitoring and evaluation process as well

as performance accountability assessment. Ministries/institutions that carry out cross-

border activities compile different activity objectives and activity performance indicators

for each implementing work unit.

Table 4

Implementation of RSPP at the Ministry of Health in 2021

Program

Activities

KRO/RO

Public Health

5 Activities

47 KRO – 216 RO

Health Services and

JKN

15 Activities

99 KRO – 223 RO

Vocational

Education and

Training

4 Activities

41 KRO – 145 RO

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning

and Budgeting

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3201

Disease Prevention

and Control

7 Activities

60 KRO – 291 RO

Science and

Technology

Research and

Innovation

4 Activities

45 KRO – 54 RO

Management

Support

23 Activities

257 KRO – 609 RO

Simplification of information on the performance of programs, activities, KRO and

RO at the Ministry of Health in 2021 is shown in Table 4. The program at the Ministry of

Health is 6 programs consisting of 1 generic program and 5 technical programs held by

all Echelon I Units. The Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of National Development

Planning/Bappenas need to evaluate the simplification of performance information that

has been carried out by Ministries/Institutions to see the efficiency of the implementation

of RSPP. The number of KRO and RO in each activity at the Ministry of Health is still

relatively large, so it needs to be re-examined so that the budget structure formed is easy

to understand.

Output Redesign

Output is the most striking part of the change in the implementation of the

Planning and Budgeting System Redesign. These outputs or outputs are divided into two,

namely the Classification of Output Details (KRO) and Output Details (RO). The urgency

of redesigning the output is to group the outputs produced in the form of goods and

services that have been non-standard so that it becomes difficult to compare and measure

their efficiency. KRO is a clustering of similar ROs and has the same or diverse units.

The characteristics of KRO are:

1. KRO nomenclature in the form of goods or services;

2. KRO is not a real output that directly describes the achievement of activity goals;

3. KRO is general, so it can be used by all Ministries/Institutions;

4. The KRO has a certain unit that has been predetermined;

5. KRO is standard so that Ministries/Institutions are not allowed to change the

nomenclature or KRO units;

6. KRO is comparable where the output, and budget allocation unit between each KRO

can be compared with each other.

Output Details (RO) is the final product produced by the government, either in the

form of goods or services to achieve activity targets. RO is prepared by each

Ministry/Institution so that it can adjust to activities at the upper level. Characteristics of

RO include:

1. RO nomenclature in the form of goods and services;

2. RO nomenclature describes a specific focus/locus of an activity;

3. RO is a real output that describes the achievement of the target activities of the

implementing work unit directly;

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3202

4. RO for technical activities is the final product with beneficiaries outside the relevant

Ministries/Institutions;

5. RO for generic activities with internal beneficiaries of the organization is an

intermediate output;

6. RO is very specific (unique) which reflects the tasks and functions of the work unit

that produces it;

7. The unit in RO is the same as the unit in KRO;

8. RO is open so that Ministries/Institutions can make changes to the RO nomenclature

according to needs.

At the beginning of the implementation of RSPP, there were still many formulations

of RO that were not by the characteristics of RO, including RO is not a real output, RO

nomenclature refers to the name of the organizational unit, tasks and functions as well as

sources of funds, RO is not specific to the locus and focus.

In the implementation of RSPP which has been going on for three years, there are

still several challenges that need to be improved so that the implementation of RSPP runs

optimally and the effectiveness of planning and budgeting can be realized. Challenges in

the implementation of RSPP include:

1. There are still some RO nomenclatures that do not reflect the product in the form of

final goods/services. The improvement targets carried out are the improvement of the

Detailed Output (RO) formula and its performance indicators as well as the

improvement of the use of KRO.

2. RO units that are not the same type/equivalent/cognate with KRO so that the sum of

the RO volume becomes biased.

3. There are different budget needs for the same RO. The target of improvements made

for the same RO is to standardize budget needs.

4. The planning and budgeting application system is still not integrated. Further

coordination is needed between the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of National

Development Planning/Bappenas regarding the synchronization of the planning and

budgeting system so that it can simplify the budget preparation process.

5. Flexibility in budget implementation. Further coordination with relevant regulators is

needed in the implementation of a more flexible budget so that it can cut the time

needed and the budget implementation process is not disrupted.

Implementation of Redesign of Planning and Budgeting System at the Central

Statistics Agency

The restructuring of program performance information at the Central Statistics

Agency began in 2020 before the Redesign of the Planning and Budgeting System was

implemented. In 2019, before the restructuring, there were 4 programs at BPS, then in

2020, it became 2 programs, namely the BPS Management Support Program and the

Implementation of Other Technical Tasks and the Statistical Information Provision and

Service Program (PPIS). Table 3. shows the restructuring of the program at BPS along

with the program goals that will be achieved in the period 2020 – 2024. The BPS

Apparatus Facilities and Infrastructure Improvement Program and the BPS Apparatus

The Implementation of Planning and Budgeting System Redesign in Efforts to Reform Planning

and Budgeting

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3203

Supervision and Accountability Improvement Program are merged into the BPS

Management Support Program and the Implementation of Other Technical Tasks.

Table 7

Program Restructuring at BPS

Initial Programs (4

Programs)

Program Redesign (2 Programs)

BPS Management Support

Program and

Implementation of Other

Technical Tasks

BPS Management Support Program and

Implementation of Other Technical Tasks

Outcome:

1. Increasing the management of BPS human

resources in the framework of institutional

governance

2. Increased supervision and accountability of

BPS performance

3. Increasing services by providing facilities

and infrastructure according to standards

4. Improving the governance of budget use

and implementation of activities

5. Increasing office services

BPS Apparatus Facilities

and Infrastructure

Improvement Program

BPS Apparatus

Supervision and

Accountability

Improvement Program

Statistical Information Provision and Service

Program (PPIS)

Outcome:

1. Increasing the use of quality statistical data

2. Ensuring the availability of statistics that

meet quality assurance standards

3. Improving the quality of relationships with

data users (User Engagement)

4. Strengthening K/L/D/I's commitment to

SSN

5. Strengthening sectoral statistics of K/L/D/I

Statistical Information

Provision and Service

Program

Programs at BPS are divided into 2, namely the Management Support Program and

the Implementation of Other Technical Tasks BPS which is a generic program and the

Statistical Information Provision and Service Program which is a technical program by

the duties and functions of each Echelon I unit. The implementation of RSPP. The

management support program only accommodates general and supporting activities

carried out by the Echelon I Unit which is also supportive. While the Statistical

Information Provision and Service Program is technical and carried out by the Technical

Echelon I Unit, the Technical Echelon I Unit at BPS consists of the Deputy for

Methodology and Statistical Information, the Deputy for Social Statistics, the Deputy for

Distribution and Services Statistics, the Deputy for Production Statistics and the Deputy

for Balance Sheet Statistics and Regional Analysis.

Tabel 8

Hasil Redesain KRO dan RO pada Program Teknis BPS Tahun 2021

Become

Activities

Output

Activities

KRO

Kartika Sukma Oktanidya

Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Teknologi, Vol. 5, No. 8, August 2024 3204

054.GG

Statistical Information

Provision and Service

Program

054.GG

Statistical Information

Provision and Service

Program

054.GG.2899

Statistical Information

Provision and Service

Program

054.GG.2899

Provision and

Development of

Production Balance

Statistics

2899.006

Publications/Production

Balance Report

2899.BDB

Institutional Facilitation

and Development

2899.006.001

No Suboutput

2899.BDB.100

Sectoral Statistics

Development Report

2899.008

Publikasi/Laporan Inter

Regional Input Output

2899.BMA

Data and Public

Information

2899.008.001

No Suboutput

2899.BMA.006

Publications/Production

Balance Report

2899.009

Publication/Report of

the National Tourism

Satellite (TSA) Balance

Sheet

2899.QMA

Data and Public

Information

2899.009.001

No Suboutput

2899.QMA.009

Publication/Report of the

National Tourism