Indonesia Conference Directory

The implementation of the Village Fund policy has brought a significant changes. The villages previously receiving a very limited budget managed centrally by the higher level of government have now been given a relatively bigger budget and authority for independent management. Most of the fund has been used for infrastructure activities accounting for 75,6% (Prakosa, 2017). The transparent use of Village Fund for physical development realized in the last few years (2015 to 2017), did not meet the quality of infrastructure in supporting facilities and infrastructure. This study was aimed to evaluate the implementation of village road infrastructure related to village funding. This research was conducted in the three villages (Gondang, Kertanegara and Karanggambas) of Purbalingga Regency. Data were obtained from surveys, observations, interviews and documentation. The data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative methods in four steps namely data reduction, data presentation and conclusion drawing. The results of this study indicate that (1) The three villages have not fully implemented village planning in accordance with Permendagri No. 114 of 2014, (2) The road damage rate of Gondang village in 2015 was 6,627%, asphalt road in 2016 was 10,680%, asphalt road in 2017 was 19,274%, Karanggambas Village Road in 2015 was 16,938%, asphalt road in 2016 was 14,635%, asphalt road in 2017 was 1,019%, and Kertanegara Village Road road concrete rebates in 2016 was 5,972%, concrete rebate road in 2017 was 7,200%, asphalt road in 2017 was 5,604%, (3) The commitment and quality of human resources (village head, PTPKD, BPD, PPHP) had an effect on the success of the implementation of infrastructure planning and development, (4) There was a low the level of maintenance of infrastructure ( village road) by local community.