Pemberdayaan Masyarakat Miskin Melalui Program Usaha Peningkatan Pendapatan Keluarga Sejahtera (UPPKS) di Kota Padang Panjang
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to determine how the process of implementing a business program to increase the income of prosperous families in the city of Padang Panjang, identify the obstacles encountered and find out the efforts taken in overcoming obstacles in the implementation of the program. This research is motivated by the fact that not all people from the poor are included, efforts are not carried out collectively, lack of participation from prosperous family groups III plus to want to act as foster father, the amount of capital provided by the government is insufficient in the implementation of UPPKS activities and often capital in the wrong use for consumptive purposes.The method used in this research is qualitative by using descriptive methods, because the study provides a description of the situation as it should. The selection of informants is done by purposive sampling. The type of data is primary data and secondary data collected through observation, interviews and documentation studies. The validity test is done through triangulation of sources. Then the data analysis techniques used can be grouped in 3 stages, namely data reduction, presentation and drawing conclusions.Research findings indicate that the implementation of the UPPKS program is in accordance with existing procedures but has not been fully able to improve the welfare of its members and is not optimal. This can be seen with the still found obstacles in the implementation, the obstacles encountered in the implementation of the UPPKS program in the city of Padang Panjang can be categorized into two forms, namely internal and external constraints. Internal constraints include: weak oversight of the program, lack of capital sourced from the government, uneven development. And external constraints include: the use of aid that has not been maximized, the lack of creativity and innovation of some groups in finding and utilizing sources of funds, the late repayment of loans. To overcome obstacles in the process of implementing the UPPKS program, efforts were made to include prosperous families III acting as foster fathers in groups, conducting coaching, and constraints originating from program participants made efforts such as mentoring regarding the UPPKS program's true purpose, conducting a ball pick-up system on the member who is stuck in payment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".