Breaking the Chains of Poverty: Examining the Efficacy of the Family Hope Program in Indonesia and Its Alignment with Policy Theories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents an evaluation conducted in Indonesia to assess the impact of the Family Hope Program (PKH) on poverty alleviation and its alignment with policy theories.A mixedmethods approach, combining quantitative data analysis and qualitative interviews, was employed to measure the welfare-improving effects of PKH and validate the survey results.The analysis indicates that PKH reduces poverty in Aceh Province, Indonesia.However, several barriers hinder its widespread implementation, including limited program coverage, low population awareness, and the need for improved communication and coordination.The report suggests researching alternative approaches to enhance the effectiveness of PKH's poverty reduction programs.Potential recommendations include expanding the program's scope to reach more beneficiaries, fostering better communication and coordination among stakeholders, and providing comprehensive education about the program's benefits to the community.The study's findings make a valuable contribution to the existing research on poverty alleviation programs and offer insights that can inform policymakers and practitioners about improving the effectiveness of PKH in combating poverty in Aceh, Indonesia and beyond.The study's findings align with the Rational Choice Theory, suggesting that families in the Aceh Province, Indonesia, have made rational decisions to participate in the Family Hope Program due to the perceived benefits, including educational support.The results also support policy feedback theory, indicating that the program's positive impact on poverty alleviation may create a feedback loop, leading to sustained poverty reduction.Additionally, Social Capital Theory highlights the potential role of social connections and community engagement in maximizing the program's benefits and fostering long-term poverty reduction.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".