Analysis of Policy Implementation on The Duties and Functions of the Cabinet Secretariat (Case Study: Function of Policy Recommendation)

government seeks to regulate itself through the establishment of institutions, organizational Abstract. The implementation of the duties and functions of government institution in the President's closest circle, is an interesting thing to research. Its strategic position does not necessarily make its role carried out optimally. This can be seen from the function of providing policy recommendations carried out by the Cabinet Secretariat. Problems such as the disobedience of stakeholders to the flow of policy submissions, as well as problems on administrative matters such as supporting rules, communication strategies, information technology support, the effectiveness of policy monitoring, and the implementation of sanctions, have made the implementation of such functions not run optimally. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the implementation of the function of providing policy recommendations by the Cabinet Secretariat. The analytical framework used in this study is Policy Implementation Theory, particularly the Administrative Implementation Model by Matland (1995). This research uses the qualitative method that is descriptive analysis, with focus of the research is the Cabinet Secretariat in the period 2015 until now. The result of this study is the implementation of the function of providing policy recommendations in dealing with various challenges and problems. However, improvement efforts have been made so that the performance of the function of providing policy recommendations, which is the main performance of the Cabinet Secretariat, can be more optimal.


INTRODUCTION
The Cabinet Secretariat of the Republic of Indonesia is an institution that is in the "closest circle" of the President. It has a strategic position where the President's directives and decisions are conveyed through this institution, so that it has the opportunity to be actively involved in the state policy-making process. The duties and functions given through the rule of law further strengthen the authority of the Cabinet Secretariat in policy management.
In the concept of public policy, the duties and functions of government institutions are one type of public policy, in this case, the type of constituent policy (Anderson, 2011). In this type, the government seeks to regulate itself through the establishment of institutions, organizational Other implementation problems can be seen in the publication of several Presidential Regulation that were strongly criticized by the public. One of them is Presidential Regulation No. Several studies examining the Cabinet Secretariat were conducted by Shinoda (2005) with an article titled "Japan's Cabinet Secretariat and Its Emergence as Core Executive". This research reveals about the role problems experienced by the Cabinet Secretariat in Japan prior to the Administrative Reform. At that time, Cabinet Secretariat in Japan were rarely involved in policy management. The role of these institutions was passive, only limited to certain policies, and only act when there was a request from other Ministries. This condition is partly due to political factors, where the Prime Minister often gives policy authority to the supporting party than to the Cabinet Secretary.
However, after the Administrative Reform, institutional arrangements were carried out, One of which was the dissolution of several Ministries and the strengthening of Ministries/Institutions that were considered important, both in the context of tasks and functions as well as organizational structures and capacities (Seno, 2020). For example, the role of the Cabinet Secretariat is strengthened to be a policy coordinator, even politically above other Ministries/Institutions.
Another study revealed the dynamics of the relationship between the Cabinet Secretariat and the President which was studied by Bertelli & Grose (2007) through their article entitled "Agreeble Administrators? Analyzing the Public Positions of Cabinet Secretaries and Presidents".
The results of this study reveal that the relationship between the Cabinet Secretary and the President of the United States is not always in line. In some cases, the Cabinet Secretary have different attitudes to the President, even when dealing with Congress. One of the differences in attitude is about the discussion of the state budget which results in a difference of opinion between the two.
The campaign promise factor and the aspirations of the district community during the election is one of the reasons the Cabinet Secretary prioritizes the aspirations of the people of his district compared to the President's decision. When the Cabinet Secretary is more in line with congressional policy, the President's takes discretion whose impact is also felt by the Cabinet Department (Bertelli, 2016). In the ideal concept, the Cabinet Secretary as the President's "right hand" should always follow the direction and even try to ensure that the policies of the ministries following the direction of the President. However, based on this case, it shows that the political relationship between the Cabinet Secretary and the President is dynamic and not always in a linear line.
Furthermore, research on similar institutions in Australia was conducted by Hamburger dan Weller (2012) under the title of "Policy Advice and a Central Agency: The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC)". The results of this study revealed that the role of policy advice implemented by DPMC plays a role in the birth of Australian government policies. In addition, the policy network, as well as the role of civil servants and organizational leaders, will influence the process Of creating a government policy. Therefore, the ability of civil servants in discussing problems in the preparation of recommendations and responsiveness in seeing the developing situation is very necessary. This study aims to provide a clear description and analysis of the implementation of the function of providing recommendations carried out by the Cabinet Secretariat. In addition, it also provides an analysis of the factors that influence the implementation of the recommendation function. Through this research, it is hoped that it can contribute to enriching the study of public administration and policy, especially those with the theme of public policy implementation. Secretariat and the factors that influence it, in terms of the Administrative Implementation Model proposed by Matland (1995).

This study uses
The data collection technique used in this study is through analysis of related literatures, such as Performance Report, Strategic Plan of Cabinet Secretariat, regulations governing the implementation of such functions, news from credible sources such as daily kompas.com, cnnindonesia.com, and other news sources. In addition, to enrich the data, researchers also conducted in-depth interviews with informants from the Cabinet Secretariat, namely the Head of Subfield at the Cabinet Secretariat, as well as 2 informants from the Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs who are the main stakeholders of the Cabinet Secretariat, namely assistant deputies and subfield heads in the Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs. Interviews are conducted based on the interview guidelines that have been compiled.
The data analysis technique used is as proposed by Miles dan Huberman (2014), namely first, reducing the overall data obtained by coding and categorization. Second, interpreting the data to get the meaning of the data obtained in relation to the theory used. And finally, draw conclusions, so that the resulting research is expected to be valid based on written evidence, have strong arguments, and be scientific in the framework of Policy Implementation Theory.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Policy implementation is a crucial stage in the policy cycle because at this stage the policy is translated into action (O'Toole, 2000 ;Fischer & Miller, 2017) or in a legal context, at this stage a statutory regulation becomes an applied law (Stewart, 2000). In generally, policy implementation is basically how a policy achieve its objectives (Rangkuti & Maksum, 2019).
Likewise, the duties and functions of government institutions are established through legislation and regulations, usually at the level of a Presidential Regulation. When the regulation was enacted, the obligation for the implementer to implement the mandate given by the Presidential Regulation.
In principle, policy implementation must prioritize the effectiveness of the policy itself (Putera et al., 2020). However, at this stage of implementation, obstacles often arise due to the surrounding factors. In proving that a policy is implemented effectively, some of the ways are by checking a gap between policy objectives expected with the results obtained (McConnell, 2015), as well as to the achievement of the performance, the level of barriers, as well as the problems faced in the implementation (Hill & Hupe, 2013). From these analyzes, it will be seen how effective a policy is when it is implemented.
The discussion below describes the analysis of the implementation of the function of providing policy recommendations carried out by the Cabinet Secretariat as well as the factors that influence the implementation.

Implementation of Policy Recommendation Function
Provision of policy recommendations is the main output of the Cabinet Secretariat's performance. This is a manifestation of the function given by Presidential Regulation No. 25 of 2015 on the Cabinet Secretariat which has been amended in Presidential Regulation No. 55 of 2020.
The recommendations produced can be in the form of consideration of approval, consideration of rejection, and can also be in the form of a reminder if there is a Presidential directive that needs to be followed up.  Moreover, if the discussion is deadlocked, the presence of the Cabinet Secretariat as a representative from the Palace is urgently needed to find a solution that is following the President's Secretariat while the recommendation for approval was asked to the Cabinet Secretariat, causing confusion for Ministries/Institutions. It is considered potentially lead to the draft legislation not to be communicated to the Secretariat of the Cabinet. According to him, this process should be handled by only one institution, starting from "upstream to downstream", so that it will be more effective and not cause confusion.
However, even though there are problems in the implementation of initiative permit flow of the draft legislation, but in the substance formulation stage, the Cabinet Secretariat is always involved. This can be concluded from the statement of the Head of Subfield at the Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs which stated that at every policy discussion meeting, the Cabinet Secretariat was always actively involved and asked for its opinion.

Factors Affecting the Implementation of the Recommendation Function
Based on the Policy Implementation Model developed by Matland, 1995  In addition, currently, a SITAP application has been built to oversee the follow-up to the President's directives. The utilization of this application requires adequate information technology support. Currently, the application is already using version 3.0, but in its operation, it still uses an intranet network and access must be via a Virtual Private Network (VPN) which becomes an obstacle in terms of flexibility and ease of use of SITAP. Currently, the application can only be accessed limitedly by the Coordinating Ministry. Even though it is supposed to make it more effective and easier to update the follow-up report on the President's direction, the application can be used by all Ministries/Agencies. Due to the importance of the existing policy data in the system, it is also necessary to upgrade an adequate firewall and anti-virus system so that confidential data can be protected and prevent data hacking attempts.

Monitoring Effectiveness
In the follow-up monitoring system for recommendations produced by the Cabinet Secretariat, there are fundamental problems related to the measurement criteria. Currently, the criteria for monitoring the use of recommendations produced by the Cabinet Secretariat are still very simple, assuming that the recommendations considered to have been utilized if they have been submitted and received a response. The lack of a comprehensive monitoring system has an impact on the emergence of difficulties in assessing the utilization of the outcomes of the recommendations produced. This plays an important note in improving the effectiveness of the recommendation monitoring system that has been produced. Another form of monitoring carried out by the Cabinet Secretariat is by directly observing the implementation of policies in the field.
From this monitoring, a report will be produced along with recommendations that will be submitted to the President.
The SITAP application is also an instrument in monitoring policies. However, the Head of Sub-Section at the Coordinating Ministry for Economic Affairs stated that the system had not been

Compliance and Sanctions
In However, so far no employee has been sanctioned for leaking confidential data. As revealed by Matland (1995) that in the Administrative Implementation Model, the compliance level of the implementers at the technical level tends to be good. For this reason, the sanctions that apply to this model tend to be light and administrative in nature.

Studies
The results of the research described above illustrate that the implementation of the function of providing recommendations carried out by the Cabinet Secretariat faces several challenges, such as the policy flow that has not gone well, the need for supporting regulations to strengthen the function of the Cabinet Secretariat, a monitoring system that has not been running effectively, to technical support. information is still not sufficient. The results of this study prove the argument of the Administrative Implementation Model put forward by Matland (1995), that internal technical administrative factors are important factors in influencing the performance of policy implementation.
However, regarding the issue of policy flow that does not go through the Cabinet Secretariat, it indicates that it is necessary to carry out institutional arrangements both in the form of strengthening roles and issuing supporting regulations so that the assigned tasks and functions can be implemented optimally. Japan's experience in carrying out Administrative Reform as stated by Shinoda (2005) and Seno (2020) can be an inspiration for Indonesia in structuring and strengthening the role of the Cabinet Secretariat so that as an institution in the closest circle of the President, it can play a more optimal role in policymaking process.
Based on a review of previous research (see Shinoda, 2005 ;Seno, 2020 ;Hamburger & Weller, 2012;and Susanto, 2019), it can be concluded several things, first, the existence of the Cabinet Secretariat institution and its role in policy is very necessary. This is because the Cabinet Secretariat is the "right hand" and at the same time assists the President in managing the many policies that the President must handle. Like experiences in the United States, Japan, and Australia, the duties and functions of the Cabinet Secretariat in Indonesia must also run optimally so that the tasks of supporting policy management can run well.
Publik (Jurnal Ilmu Administrasi) I Vol. 10 (1), 2021 | 92 Second, the results of this study reveal that the Cabinet Secretariat is always in line with the President's policies and continues to strive to be a representative who carries the President's mandate in every policy discussion process. This condition is inversely proportional to the results of research by Bertelli & Grose (2007) and Bertelli (2016) regarding Cabinet Secretaries in America who in some conditions have different attitudes with the President. The results of this study strengthen the argument of the administrative implementation model, that in the context of government institutions that are top-down and hierarchical and are in a presidential system, the space for conflict or differences in attitudes between policymakers and policy implementing institutions tends to be small. Policy makers' decisions are consistently translated by implementers.
However, the phenomenon that occurred in America is a new dynamic in the relationship between the President and the institutions under President.
Third, based on the relationship between research results, previous literature reviews, and policy implementation theory, this study reveals that some non-political factors, such as internal administrative factors also have a major influence on the implementation of the duties and functions of the Cabinet Secretariat, not only those that political nature as other studies previously discussed.
This indicates that the administrative aspect also plays an important role in influencing the performance of the institution in playing policy politics. It is hoped that this will add more references to the policy-making process.

CONCLUSIONS
The implementation of the function of providing policy recommendations carried out by the Cabinet Secretariat faces various challenges that have made this function not run optimally. This is also an important note for improving the performance of the Cabinet Secretariat in the future. In general, the researchers consider that the function of providing recommendations mandated to the Cabinet Secretariat is a very appropriate policy, considering that in the first ring of the President, a party or institution is needed that is given the responsibility to oversee the policies issued by the government as has been discussed regarding the role of the Cabinet Secretariat. or the like in Japan, Australia, Korea, even the United States. For this reason, it is necessary to make improvements both through laws and regulations and organizational arrangements, so that the role of the Cabinet Secretariat through its function of providing policy recommendations becomes more assertive so that the role of the institution which is the "right hand" of the President can be realized in quality and optimally.