THE EFFECTIVENESS AND RISK CONTROL ANALYSIS OF SELF-

SUPPORTING HOUSING STIMULANT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN NORTH

SUMATERA PROVINCE

Thesis Summary

Arranged by:

Dinnie Ananda Rizky

NIM. 19/449707/PTK/12966

MASTER OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENT ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING - GADJAH MADA UNIVERSITY

Yogyakarta, Indonesia
March 2022

i
 APPROVAL SHEET

THESIS SUMMARY

THE EFFECTIVENESS AND RISK CONTROL ANALYSIS OF SELF-

SUPPORTING HOUSING STIMULANT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM IN NORTH
SUMATERA PROVINCE

Dinnie Ananda Rizky

19/449707/PTK/12966
has been approved by Advisor Team

Advisor

Ir. Suprapto Siswosukarto Ph.D.

NIP. 196504071992031003

Co-advisor

Ir. Ashar Saputra, S.T., M.T., Ph.D.

NIP. 19770616 200501 1 002

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENT

Page
APPROVAL SHEET ........................................................................................................ ii
TABLE OF CONTENT ................................................................................................... iii
ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... iv
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 1
2.1 Provision of Livable Houses ......................................................................... 1

2.2 Implementation of BSPS Program ................................................................ 2

2.3 Effectiveness ................................................................................................. 2

2.4 Risk Control .................................................................................................. 3

CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .............................................................. 3

3.1 Research Procedure ....................................................................................... 3

CHAPTER 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION .................................................................. 5

4.1 Respondent Data............................................................................................ 5

4.2 Effectiveness Interpretation Analysis ............................................................ 5

4.3 Risk Control Analysis ................................................................................... 6

4.4 BSPS Program Implementation Process ....................................................... 9

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION .................................................... 11

5.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................... 11

5.2 Suggestion ................................................................................................... 11

REFERENCES ............................................................................................................... 11

iii
 ABSTRACT

The Self-Supporting Housing Stimulant Assistance Program (BSPS) is a community-based

program in the housing sector to improve basic service infrastructure and increase access to
decent, safe, harmonious, and regular housing and settlements for Low-Income Communities
(MBR) in Indonesia. North Sumatra Province is one of the provinces that received assistance
from the BSPS program. In 2020, North Sumatera Province received housing assistance in
quality improvement activities of 7,077 allocations spread over 15 districts/cities. For this
reason, it is necessary to carry out further analysis regarding the level of effectiveness, risk
control, and program implementation processes as a benchmark for development following the
government’s objectives in reducing uninhabitable houses in Indonesia.
In this research, the analysis used was descriptive quantitative analysis. Data were collected
using a questionnaire given to the Field Facilitator (TFL) as much as 65 TFL under the Slovin
formula sampling calculation. Analysis of program effectiveness employed the SPSS
application (version 25). The risk control analysis utilized the Analytical Hierarchy Process
(AHP) method and a risk category index matrix with data provided to the SNVT Team of Self-
Help Housing in North Sumatera Province as expert respondents. The analysis phase began
by grouping the questionnaire data, interpreting the results, weighing the data analysis, and
formulating the findings based on the theoretical basis.
The research results show that the program’s implementation was very effective even in the
conditions of the Covid-19 pandemic, with an average percentage of 86.61%. In the risk
category index matrix of 18 sub-variables, there were seven low-category sub-variables and
11 medium-category sub-variables. The percentage weight of risk control obtained was based
on the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method, namely community self-help 27.02%,
community understanding of RLH 12.68%, and TFL competence 8.91%. In its implementation,
non-technical aspects such as regulations and technical program instructions under the needs,
geographical location/location of assistance, weather, and customs had the most significant
influence on the program’s sustainability.
Keywords: BSPS, effectiveness, risk control, quality improvement

iv
 CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

According to Law Number 1 of 2011 concerning Housing and Settlement Areas, it is explained
that owning a decent house is the right of all Indonesian people. One of the facilities for
building assistance and housing procurement for Low-Income Communities (MBR) carried
out by the government is The Self-Supporting Housing Stimulant Assistance Program (BSPS).

The Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing assists in improving the quality of housing
through the BSPS Program during the Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia in 2020. The Ministry
of Public Works and Public Housing assists in improving the quality of housing through the
BSPS Program despite the Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia in 2020. North Sumatra Province
is one of the provinces that received the BSPS Program in quality improvement activities in
Indonesia in 2020, with a total allocation of 7,077 aid recipients spread over 15 regencies/cities.

The Corona Virus Disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic in 2020 resulted in limitations in

consideration of every decision-making regarding preventive mechanisms and actions from
each party, especially Field Facilitators (TFL). They were in direct contact with the beneficiary
community. Based on mobility limitations, this study uses the point of view of the Field
Facilitator (TFL) as a community assistant and the SNVT Self Supporting Team for Housing
Provision for North Sumatera Province.

This study aimed to further examine the effectiveness and risk control in the implementation
process based on the regulations and technical guidelines of the program with the government’s
prospect in overcoming the problem of Uninhabitable Houses (RTLH) throughout Indonesia.
In analyzing the interpretation of the effectiveness value, SPSS 25 software was used. This
research can also be used as a benchmark to develop the implementation of the BSPS Program
by the government’s objectives in increasing decent and livable houses.

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Provision of Livable Houses

The housing needed with annual backlog continues to increase, with 7.6 million housing units
requiring quality improvement. The existing houses do not meet the requirements for a decent
and livable place to live (Ministry of Public Works and Public Housing, 2015). Hawiyah (2016)
stated that the existing reality to realize a decent house inhabited for low-income communities
is challenging. The fulfillment of housing needs by applicable rules and standards is influenced
by various aspects, one of which is the condition of the house, including community finances.

1
2.2 Implementation of BSPS Program
Julianto (2020) argued that the implementation of the BSPS program could not be separated
from the participation of the recipient community as the main actors. Involvement in joint
decision-making with beneficiaries with village government and TFL and the implementation
of guidance in using results and evaluation.
According to Rahayu (2019), in improving the implementation of the BSPS program, it is
necessary to develop technical guidelines for the performance of the BSPS program regularly
due to the development of situations and field conditions that differ from year to year. The
amount of assistance provided by the government is also considered inadequate. The
requirement for self-reliance is often seen as a violation of the technical guidelines for program
implementation. Hence, TFL’s role in providing socialization and encouraging self-reliance for
aid recipients is examined. Figure 1 will describe the activities in the BSPS Program from
planning implementation to evaluation by BSPS technical instructions Number 07/SE/Dr/2018.

Figure 1. Flowchart of BSPS Activities

Source: BSPS Technical Guidelines No. 07/SE/Dr/2018

2.3 Effectiveness
Lisaini (2013) explained in her research that it provides an understanding of effectiveness. In
measuring the effectiveness of an activity/program, it is necessary to consider several
influencing indicators, i.e., understanding the program, being on target, being on time,
achieving goals, and real change.

2
Likewise, the analytical method was carried out in determining effectiveness (Sudarta, 2018).
If each research variable that has been analyzed gets a percentage value of > 75%, it can be
concluded that the variable is influential. On the contrary, if the value obtained is < 75%, it can
be concluded that the variable is ineffective. If the value obtained is between 51-75%, it can be
said that the variable is quite effective.

2.4 Risk Control

Kurniawan (2021) asserted that quantifying specific risk priorities will provide an overview of
the impacts. The design of a development strategy depends on the magnitude of the impact. In
this case, management risk has the most significant percentage of risk—the use of AHP in
setting risk control priorities such as dealing with risks in solving existing problems.

According to Umboh (2021), determining the risk variables in the construction implementation
can be identified according to the actual category. The risk variables include materials, labor,
design, environment, finance, construction implementation, politics, contracts, and
management.

CHAPTER 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This research was conducted in North Sumatra Province, implementing The Self-Supporting
Housing Stimulant Assistance Program (BSPS) in the 2020 fiscal year, spread over 15
districts/cities receiving the aid allocation. The method used in this study was quantitative
descriptive by its objectives which describes the evaluation of the BSPS Program in North
Sumatra Province.

3.1 Research Procedure

Step 1: The preliminary study was conducted before collecting previous literature and research
related to research.
Step 2: Next, data collection was carried out. As for the study, this employed direct primary
data from the field with objective evaluation by charging questionnaire form online since the
study was held from July-October 2021 during the Corona Virus Disease-19 (COVID-19)
pandemic, limiting the researcher's face to face contact with respondents. Respondents in this
study were Facilitator Field (TFL), amounting to 65 respondents. TFL as companion public
receiver help has an essential role during the planning, implementation process development,
and accompaniment in enhancement quality decent house inhabit. Next, the control risk
analysis deployed the questionnaire form provided to the SNVT Team consisting of eight
respondents by purposive random sampling. However, at the time, the research completed a
3
consistency test results questionnaire that meets the criteria for analysis only amounted to three
respondents.
Step 3: Subsequently, the effectiveness and risk control BSPS program were analyzed with
criteria from predetermined indicators along with the processes carried out directly in the field.
The steps in analyzing the data are as follows.
1. With variable study, the next spelled out through the appropriate sub-variables. The
detailed sub-criteria are described in Table 1.
Table 1. Variables Study Effectiveness
Variable Sub Variable
Product (X1) 1. Standardization physical house
2. Infrastructure
3. Empowerment public
Program Mechanism (X2) 1. Mechanism financing

2. Suitability technical guidelines

Responsiveness (X3)
Program Achievement (X4)
Development (X5)
Potential (Y)
3. Execution time
1. Accompaniment receiver help
2. Understanding the BSPS Program
Enhancement quality appropriateness inhabit
Creativity applied method _
Program integration

2. Do testing validity and reliability. Based on results testing the validity of which was carried
out, 54 items of questions on the questionnaire were given to respondent study capable
explain conditions measured in the study this. Next, on testing reliability
obtained, Cronbach’s Alpha of each variable 0.60 which means variable could say the
reliable.
3. Then done, testing with assumption test classic helped SPSS software ( version 25).
4. Next conducted testing multiple linear regression.
5. Determine hypothesis research. The Hypothesis (H) in the study is there is an influence
product (X1), program mechanism (X2), responsiveness (X3), program achievement (X4),
development (X5 ) by effective to program potential (Y ) simultaneous.
Step 4: On analysis, the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) uses Ms. Excel. The steps taken
in do analyze this data are as follows.
1. Identification risk and manufacture questionnaire.
2. Distribution and collection questionnaire to expert respondents.
3. Calculation matrix pair and weight relative.

4
4. Test the consistency of CI and CR data.
a. CI Test

CI =

Description :
CI : index consistency
λ max : largest eigenvalue from matrix order n
n : size matrix
b. CR test

CR =

Description :
CR : ratio consistency
CI : index consistency
RI : value random generator
5. Calculation of global weights and priorities control risk.
6. Calculation risk score for getting probability impact matrix.
Risk Score = Probability x Impact
7. Analysis control risk to sustainability implementation of the BSPS Program.

CHAPTER 4. RESULT AND DISCUSSION

4.1 Respondent Data

In the interpretation effectiveness analysis in this study, the total respondents obtained were 65
Facilitators Field (TFL). Samples were obtained using the Slovin formula calculation with 90%
accuracy. The expected error percentage was 10% of the population of 184 Facilitators Field
assisting the BSPS Program in North Sumatra Province in 2020.

Next, the control risk analysis required expert respondents for expert judgment to take excellent
and valid decisions. Thereby, respondents who filled in a questionnaire were the SNVT Team,
which participated in implementing the BSPS Program, amounting to three respondents who
met the consistency test from eight respondents.

4.2 Effectiveness Interpretation Analysis

In implementing the 2020 fiscal year, North Sumatra Province received 7,077 BSPS Program
assistance spread over 15 districts/cities. Table 2 presents the cumulative interpretation of the
effectiveness value based on data obtained from 65 research respondents.

5
 Table 2. Interpretation of the Effectiveness of the BSPS Program
No. Variable Effectiveness Cumulative Total Value
(%) (%) (%) Interpretation
1 Output (X1) 89,48
Physical standardization of the house 91,35
Infrastructure 81,46
Community empowerment 95,62
2 Program Mechanism (X2) 91,26
Financing mechanism 92,00
Right on target 95,94
On time 85,85
3 Responsiveness (X3) 88,86 86,62 Very effective
Beneficiary assistance 86,46
Understanding the BSPS Program 91,26
4 Program Achievement (X4) 89,78
Improved Habitability Quality 89,78
5 Development (X5) 84,12
The creativity of the method applied 84,12
6 Program Potential (Y) 76,18
Indicators of success 76,18

From Table 2, it can be concluded that the implementation of the North Sumatra Province
BSPS Program was very effective based on the results of the Field Facilitator Staff (TFL)
questionnaire with a percentage of 86.62%. Therefore, with a relatively large allocation and
the Covid-19 pandemic condition, the implementation of the BSPS Program based on
community empowerment with a labor-intensive cash scheme was running as expected by the
government in realizing livable houses for the people of Indonesia, especially people with low
incomes.
4.3 Risk Control Analysis
In implementing the BSPS Program, risk control is needed as an optimal step in determining
overall risk management. Risk control analysis utilized the Analytical Hierarchy Process
(AHP) method. The AHP method looks for priority control risk by testing the Consistency
Index (CI) and Consistency Ratio (CR). If the CI value obtained is 0, then the matrix could be
said consistent with an inconsistent limit be measured using Mark Random Index (RI ) based
on total criteria/sub-criteria (n). If the CR value obtained is over 0.1, then comparative
evaluation judgment must be fixed. However, if the CR ratio is less or equal to 0.1, then the
result calculation can be declared correct. Thereby, the recapitulation is outlined in Table 3
below.

6
 Table 3. Recapitulation of λ max, CI value, and CR value
Value Respondent
1 2 3
λ max 5.29 5.30 5.00
CI 0.07 0.08 0.00
RI 1.12 1.12 1.12
CR 0.07 0.07 0.00

Likewise, with the data that has been declared consistent, the value of the criteria can be
calculated by Table 4.
Table 4. Overall Value and Priority
Purpose Criteria Relative Sub Criteria Relative Total Cumula Prio-
Value Value Value tive (%) Rity

Schedule and 0.36 Self-supporting 0.76 0.27 27.02 1

Finance housing
Payment method 0.12 0.04 4.20 9
Progress delay 0.12 0.04 4.29 8
Community 0.19 Community 0.68 0.13 12.68 2
Engagement understanding about
RLH
Coordination of KPB 0.02 0.02 2.19 14
Community 0.04 0.04 3.88 10
participation
Management 0.24 Facilitator 0.37 0.09 8.91 3
and competencies
Coordination Lack of companion 0.15 0.04 3.57 11
coordination
Supervision from the 0.19 0.05 4.50 7
District Technical
Team
Construction 0.29 0.07 6.93 4
Risk Control planning, control,
Priority reporting
Resource 0.13 Material quality 0.39 0.05 5.13 6
Material mobilitation 0.23 0.03 3.04 12
Development of 0.12 0.02 1.55 16
technology
application
Inadequate 0.09 0.01 1.24 18
equipment
Inadequate 0.17 0.02 2.22 13
construction
workforce
Others 0.09 Implementation of 0.65 0.06 5.60 5
regulations and
technical guidelines
in the field
Natural disasters and 0.15 0.01 1.30 17
weather
Environmental, 0.20 0.02 1.74 15
social and cultural
influences

7
Then the risk category is carried out to determine the category or grouping of each sub-criteria
based on the severity index value of the opportunity and the impact of the risk obtained. The
risk category can be seen in the following matrix map.

5 Very
high
4 High
Opportunity

3 Medium 1A,1B,1C,2A,
2B,2C,3A,3B,
4E,5B,5C

2 Low 3C,3D,4A,4B,
4C,4D,5A
1 Very low

1 Very low 2 Low 3 Medium 4 High 5 Very high

Impact
Figure 2. Risk Category Matrix

By the probability impact matrix in Figure 2, the results of grouping risk categories in 18 sub-
criteria are as follows:
Table 5. Sub-Criteria for Low Category Risk
Code Sub-Criteria Risk Score (%) Category
3C Supervision from the District Technical 24.31 Low
Team
3D Construction planning, control, reporting 29.17 Low
4A Material quality 34.03 Low
4B Material mobilitation 34.03 Low
4C Development of technology application 19.44 Low
4D Inadequate equipment 33.33 Low
5A Implementation of regulations and technical 29.17 Low
guidelines in the field

Table 6. Sub-Criteria for Medium Category Risk

Code Sub-Criteria Risk Score (%) Category
1A Self-supporting housing 56.25 Medium
1B Payment method 44.44 Medium
1C Progress delay 43.75 Medium
2A Community understanding about RLH 61.11 Medium
2B Coordination of KPB 38.89 Medium
2C Community participation 55.56 Medium
3A Facilitator competencies 55.56 Medium
3B Lack of companion coordination 44.44 Medium
4E Inadequate construction workforce 50.00 Medium
5B Natural disasters and weather 43.75 Medium
5C Environmental, social and cultural influences 50.00 Medium

Based on Table 5 and Table 6, the results show seven risks in the low category and 11 risks in
the moderate category. Based on the analysis of risk control priorities using the AHP method

8
and risk categories based on the risk score calculation for each risk sub-criteria, the risk control
must focus on potential hazards considered to have high risks to be more effective and efficient.
In this case, those include self-supporting housing, community understanding of RLH, and the
competence facilitators are priorities for risk control because overall, they influence each other.

These risk controls can be resolved through risk avoidance by the theory described by Flanagan
and Norman (1993) regarding risk control by taking risk avoidance actions, which are carried
out during planning or pre-implementation of physical construction. Preventive actions taken
are also adjusted to the needs and developments of the times so that risk control can be carried
out correctly. In developing the implementation of the BSPS Program, the implementing
parties need to make innovations such as socializing the use of applications related to the BSPS
Program to Facilitators as community companions so that this program can run on a target.

4.4 BSPS Program Implementation Process

The SNVT Team of North Sumatra Province is one of the BSPS Program actors, with a role or
duty to supervise and control the program implementation with the assistance of the
Management Consultant of North Sumatra Province in 15 Regencies /Cities 7,077 allocation
recipient of the BSPS Program of 2020.

Implementing BSPS Program has steps following the BSPS Technical Guidelines Number
07/SE/Dr/2018. The steps are socialization, verification, preparation of proposals, preparation
of DRPB, physical implementation, and final report, in which every activity must be discussed
for introduction and deepening receiver understanding against the performance of the BSPS.

Construction implementation is the essence of the BSPS program. In this section, this
implementation is conducted directly by the community personally or using the builder service
as surrounding inhabitants with skills in processing construction building. In this section, the
independence of each recipient’s help could be observed. The construction implementation is
divided into two stages. The product’s performance is also supervised directly by the Field
Facilitator, who acts as a facilitator for the beneficiaries. In implementing BSPS 2020 activities,

9
the assistance budget was IDR 17.500.000.00. A total of IDR 2.500.000,00 of the total budget
was used for the builder wage to support government programs in labor-intensive work.

Figure 3. Realization District BSPS Program Implementation of South Tapanuli

(Source : SNVT PP Provsu , 2020)
The implementation of the BSPS program can be seen in Figure 3. Quality improvement of
house receiver is in the South Tapanuli Regency Parau Sorat District with a self-subsistent of
IDR 15.000.000.00. In its implementation, SNVT Housing Provision of North Sumatra
Province monitored, supervised, and controlled the physical implementation on the recipient
and conducted follow-up actions.

Tools monitoring was provided to TFL in an excel format form, including building structure
checking sheet from the foundation, columns, beams, roofs, walls, and mortar quality used by
every receiver from regencies/cities of recipients of the 2020 NAHP BSPS Program (Quality
Assurance and Quality Control). Every checked point must include photo documentation as
evidence. The score was automatically produced following the check results inputted. After
inputting the checking of each receiver, the result was recapitulated in a Rapid Assessment
sheet carried out by the Facilitator Coordinator, while the Quality Assurance and Quality
Control were performed by TFL.

The performance evaluation meeting was conducted twice at the end of the activity. The
evaluation aims to evaluate activities implemented from the beginning to the end of BSPS
activities. It was attended by all elements implementing BSPS in North Sumatra Province. The
implementation technical was to listen to presentations from all BSPS implementers regarding
physical progress achievements in their respective places, obstacles encountered, and solutions
taken.

Then, the reporting activity was carried out. There are several mandatory reports to be made
by the parties involved in the program. Help receivers accompanied by TFL compiled and
delivered an accountability report of BSPS utilization to PPK. All parties involved submitted

10
a tiered report as utilization transparency proof until the Director of Self-Supporting House
accepted the report.

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION

5.1 Conclusion
The conclusion obtained in accordance with results and discussion is as following:
a

1. BSPS program in North Sumatra Province in 2020 was running very effectively even in the
Covid-19 pandemic, which can be seen from each variable with an average percentage of
86.61%. The result of effectiveness value interpretation shows that the government’s effort
to fulfill livable houses for MBR according to Law Number 1 of 2011 concerning Housing
and Settlement Areas through labor-intensive mechanism has succeeded.
2. The risk with a high weight percentage for control was the sub-criteria for self-supporting
housing by 27.02%, with the control of conducting community meetings for mutual
responsibility and socialization. The sub-criteria for public understanding of livable houses
was 12.68%, with the control of doing regular assistance. The sub-criteria of facilitator
competence had a percentage of 8.91%, with the control of providing coaching and
workshops to improve the competence of facilitators. Of the 18 sub-criteria risks, there were
seven sub-criteria in the low category and 11 sub-criteria in the moderate category.
3. The BSPS program implementation aspects with significant roles in the program’s success
and need to be reviewed further are non-technical factors such as regulations and technical
instructions for the program by the needs, geographical location/location of assistance,
weather, and customs.
5.2 Suggestion
It should be necessary to set standards for the implementation, supervision, and control that
can be reviewed so that the implementation is more efficient and effective so that the program
implementation process can run as planned for the program’s sustainability in the future.

REFERENCES

Direktorat Rumah Swadaya. 2020. Temuan Direktorat Rumah Swadaya Dalam Pelaksanaan
Kegiatan
Fanny, Septia. 2020. Efektivitas Implementasi Program Perumahan Bersubsidi Bagi
Masyarakat Berpenghasilan Rendah Kota Pekanbaru (Studi Kasus : Kecamatan
Tenayan Raya)
Flanagan, R dan Norman, G. 1993. Risk Management And Construction . Blackwell. Science.
Frick, H dan Mulyani. 2006. Arsitektur Ekologis. Yogyakarta:Penerbit Kanisius

11
Hawiyah, Siti. 2016. Evaluasi Kebijakan Program Rehabilitasi Rumah Tidak Layak Huni
Masyarakat Kelurahan Sijantung Kecamatan Galang Kota Batam Tahun 2014
Julianto, Pebi. 2020. Partisipasi Masyarakat Dalam Program Bantuan Stimulan Perumahan
Swadaya (BSPS) di Desa Koto Baru Kecamatan Koto Baru (2020)
Lisaini. 2018. Efektivitas Pelaksanaan Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Miskin Melalui Program
Bantuan Rumah Tidak Layak Huni oleh Dinas Sosial Tenaga Kerja dan Transmigrasi di
Kabupaten Padang Lawas Utara
Mamangkey, Anderson. 2019. Pelaksanaan Program Bantuan Stimulan Perumahan Swadaya
(BSPS) di Kecamatan Amurang Timur Kabupaten Minahasa Selatan
Peraturan Menteri Pekerjaan Umum dan Perumahan Rakyat Nomor 02/PRT/M/2016 tentang
Peningkatan Kualitas Terhadap Perumahan Kumuh dan Permukiman Kumuh
Peraturan Menteri Pekerjaan Umum dan Perumahan Rakyat Nomor 07/PRT/M/2018 tentang
Bantuan Stimulan Perumahan Swadaya (Berita Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2018
Nomor 403)
Peraturan Menteri Negara Perumahan Rakyat Republik Indonesia Nomor:
22/Permen/M/2008 Tentang Standar Pelayanan Minimal Bidang Perumahan Rakyat
Daerah Provinsi dan Daerah Kabupaten/Kota
Soefaat. 1997. “Kamus Tata Ruang”, Direktorat Jenderal Cipta Karya Dep. PU dan Ikatan Ahli
Perencanaan Indonesia, Jakarta
Steers, M Richard. 1985. Efektivitas Organisasi Perusahaan. Jakarta: Erlangga
Sudarta, Ridwan Dibya. 2018. The Effectiveness of Self-Supporting Housing Stimulant
Assistance Program on Feasibility ofLow-Income People House in Daerah Istimewa
Yogyakarta
Sugandi, Yogi Suprayogi. 2011. Administrasi Publik. Yogyakarta : Graha Ilmu
Umboh, Alfian H. 2021. Pemodelan Pengelolaan Risiko Proyek Konstruksi Oleh Perusahaan
Pelaksana Konstruksi (Studi Kasus Proyek Konstruksi Di Pemerintah Daerah
Kabupaten Minahasa)
Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2011 tentang Perumahan dan Kawasan Permukiman
(Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2011 Nomor 7, Tambahan Lembaran
Negara Nomor 5188)
Widayanti, Rizka. 2018. Evaluasi Program Bantuan Stimulan Perumahan Swadaya di Kel.
Tamanan, Kec. Tulungagung, Kab. Tulungagung
Saaty, Thomas L. 1993. Pengambilan Keputusan Bagi Para Pemimpin
Yushy. 2017. Evaluasi Pelaksanaan Program Bedah Rumah di Kota Padang

12