Evaluating the SPBE-Based Monitoring and Evaluation System for Village Facilitators’ Performance
Keywords:
Electronic-Based Government System, Performance Evaluation, Village Facilitators, DRP Evkin, Risk ManagementAbstract
Digital transformation in public governance has driven the implementation of the Electronic-Based Government System (EBGS) as a key framework for enhancing efficiency, accountability, and transparency in public service delivery, including in village development management. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the EBGS-based monitoring and evaluation system in assessing the performance of Professional Village Facilitators (PVFs) within the context of village assistance programs. A descriptive qualitative approach was employed, drawing primarily on document analysis, including the 2024 PVF Performance Evaluation SOP, EBGS evaluation reports, and academic references. Findings indicate that the evaluation system, based on the DRP and DRP Evkin applications, has successfully integrated daily activity reporting and qualitative supervisor assessments into a streamlined digital platform. The system applies a balanced scoring mechanism that combines quantitative metrics (working hours) and qualitative assessments (work competencies). The adoption of EBGS has enabled real-time performance tracking and reduced data distortion at the field level. Nonetheless, challenges persist, such as delays in supervisor assessments, vacant evaluator positions, and limited infrastructure capacity in certain regions. The system has also incorporated risk management principles by classifying technical and structural risks and adopting mitigation strategies grounded in both technological and organizational structures. These findings suggest that EBGS holds significant potential for improving performance evaluation governance at the village level. However, institutional reinforcement and technical support remain crucial. Policy recommendations include enhancing the digital capacity of PVFs, expanding system features, and strengthening infrastructure in remote areas to ensure equitable and sustainable EBGS implementation.
References
Anthopoulos, L. G. (2021). Smart city governance: From e-government to smart govern-ance. Springer.
Dinata, R. R., Achmad, M., Maryani, D., & Sartika, I. (2025). Evaluation of governance of local government information system in Ministry of Home Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia. Jurnal Syntax Transformation, 6(6), 110–127.
Dunleavy, P., Margetts, H., Bastow, S., & Tinkler, J. (2006). Digital era governance: IT cor-porations, the state, and e-government. Oxford University Press.
Gil-García, J. R., Helbig, N., & Ojo, A. (2022). Being smart: Emerging technologies and in-novation in digital government. Government Information Quarterly, 39(2), 101664.
Hariyono, E., Sutrisno, A., & Ramadhan, R. (2025). Evaluasi kebijakan digitalisasi pela-yanan publik: Pendekatan kualitatif deskriptif. Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Negara, 15(1), 45–58.
Hilda, T., Sartika, I., Prabowo, H., & Polyando, P. (2024). Analysis of the readiness of the regional government of Malinau District North Kalimantan Province in commemo-rate digital transformation. TRANSFORMASI: Jurnal Manajemen Pemerintahan, 16–35.
Kementerian Desa PDTT. (2024). Standar Operasional Prosedur Evaluasi Kinerja Tenaga Pendamping Profesional (SOP Evkin TPP 2024). Jakarta: Kemendesa PDTT.
Kementerian PANRB. (2018). Peraturan Presiden Republik Indonesia Nomor 95 Tahun 2018 tentang Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik (SPBE).
Kementerian PANRB. (2024). Laporan Evaluasi Nasional Sistem Pemerintahan Berbasis Elektronik 2020–2024. Jakarta: Kementerian PANRB.
Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Kroll, A. (2015). Drivers of performance information use: Systematic literature review and directions for future research. Public Performance & Management Review, 38(3), 459–486.
Lindquist, E. A., & Huse, I. (2017). Accountability and monitoring government in the digi-tal era: Promise, realism and capacity-building. Canadian Public Administration, 60(4), 627–656.
Meijer, A., & Bolívar, M. P. R. (2016). Governing the smart city: A review of the literature on smart urban governance. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 82(2), 392–408.
Moynihan, D. P., Kroll, A., & Nielsen, P. A. (2017). Performance management: Learning versus performance pressures. Public Administration Review, 77(6), 869–880.
Nastia, N., Sartika, I., Hugua, H., & Pusung, C. R. (2024). Percepatan pembangunan desa melalui transformasi digital menuju desa cerdas. JIAP (Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi Publik), 12(2), 191–201.
Perry, J. L., & Wise, L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Admin-istration Review, 50(3), 367–373.
Rifa’i, A. (2023). Pendekatan kualitatif dalam analisis kebijakan publik: Studi sistem evaluasi berbasis elektronik. Jurnal Administrasi Publik Digital, 3(2), 123–138.
Setiyono, B., & McLeod, R. H. (2018). Civil service reform in Indonesia: The case of e-government. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 40(1), 85–110. https://doi.org/10.1355/cs40-1e
Wahyudi, R., & Suhardi, S. (2023). Evaluating the effectiveness of e-government imple-mentation in Indonesia using the SPBE framework. Journal of Digital Government, 5(1), 55–74.
Wirtz, B. W., Weyerer, J. C., & Rösch, M. (2020). Citizen and social media: A digital public sphere. Government Information Quarterly, 37(2), 101386.
