OVERCOMING SLUM SETTLEMENTS: LESSON LEARNED FROM IMPLEMENTATION OF UNINHABITABLE HOUSE SOCIAL REHABILITATION PROGRAM IN SURABAYA

Slum areas can generate bad impacts on health and the environment. Thus, the government of Surabaya city arranges TAHU PANAS innovation through a social rehabilitation programs for unfit for habitation to overcome. The program has achieved good output. This is evidenced by an increase in program beneficiaries every year, a decrease in the percentage of slum areas, and an award from the Ministry of PANRB as an outstanding innovation. This research aimed to determine and describe the success of the implementation process of this program in overcoming slum settlements in Surabaya city. The success of this implementation can be understood by the theory of policy implementation by Hill & Hupe as an analysis tool. We used qualitative methods through document analysis to discuss these issues. The results showed that the implementation process seen from the characteristics of the policy was optimal because the level of ambiguity and conflict was low; policy formation is adequate in terms of policy objectives, policy standards or targets, human and financial resources as well as incentive policies; the policy transfer process is quite clear and detailed; the effect of the implementor response is quite optimal both in terms of disposition and behavior; horizontal relations between organizations are adequate; positive target group response; and the policy environment that has supported the running of the policy. The implementation process in this program to tackle slum settlements in the city of Surabaya is optimal enough, thus, successful implementation can be

A. INTRODUCTION Surabaya city as the capital city of East Java is the second largest city after Jakarta. The essence of a metropolitan area is an integrated functional unit to describe the concentration of the population in a large urban area that has grown rapidly over time. (Shi & Cao, 2020). A common problem that often occur in metropolitan areas such as the city of Surabaya is the existence of slum. Slum is a certain social challenge for both poor and developing countries. Slum can be understood as urban poverty where people living in these areas do not have adequate public services and informal land tenure (Brueckner, Mation, & Nadalin, 2019). Furthermore, Taher & Ibrahim (2014) explained that informal land tenure or often referred to as illegal settlements is an urban settlement area inhabited by people who are very poor, thus do not have access to private property.
Slum is caused by various complex matters. Conyers & Hills (1990) explained that causes of the slum emergence are the neglect of the development of marginalized areas in urban areas, poor city management, the absence of a complete and participatory introduction of housing needs and supplies, and the absence of a complete housing supply system. The phenomenon of slum in urban areas such as in Surabaya is inevitable as long as it offers economies of different scales to improve the quality of life and environment for the poor in developing areas. In line with Taher & Ibrahim (2014), Big cities will dynamically continue to develop and attract migrants from other areas, both rural and underdeveloped cities. This can be proven from the constituent components of total population growth in Surabaya city as follows: From the table above, it can be seen that during 2015 to 2017 total population growth was dominated by migration flows occurred in the city of Surabaya. Furthermore, in 2018 and 2019 total population growth was only dominated by natural population growth, although the differences were not highly significant. This migration trend can result in slum and squatter settlements in Surabaya city because it becomes a housing solution for low-income residents. In addition, the increasing population density has also triggered the emergence of slum and squatter settlements. This can be seen in the following data: From this table above, it can be seen that the population density in the city of Surabaya fluctuated. from 2015 to 2016, the population density had decreased by 440 people/km 2 . However, in 2016 to 2019, there was always enhancement and in 2018 to 2019, the increase was quite significant of 1,264 people/km 2 .
Based on data collected by Bappeko (2018c), the distribution of slum and squatter settlements in Surabaya city can be classified as follows, the uninhabitable area includes dense and uninhabitable areas in the city center covering an area of 365 hectares, along the coast covering an area of 5.77 hectares, on the edge of the rail covering an area of 113.15 hectares divided into squatters and slums, and on the riverbanks covering an area of 186.74 hectares that are grouped into squatters and slums. The scattered slum areas in Surabaya city can have an impact on health and the environment. The quality of the environment has decreased due to slum where there is a low population density, building density, and a low level of community awareness related to the potential for pollution to rivers and the settlement environment (Surya et al., 2020). Hereafter, Surya et al. (2020) also explained that this even had an impact on health. The disease will easily spread because of the intensity of social contact. Besides, slum is also prone to fires due to the density of the population and buildings so that the spread of fire is also easy and it can damage the image of the city.
The Surabaya City Government has tried to solve the problem of slum through the TAHU PANAS (tidak takut hujan dan tidak takut panas means not afraid of rain and heat) innovation that was initiated by Social Service Surabaya City. This TAHU PANAS innovation is transformed into a social rehabilitation program for uninhabitable houses. This program aims to restore social functioning and improve the quality of the homes of the poor by improving housing conditions to become habitable, healthy and safe houses. It was in line with the statement of the Mayor of Surabaya, Tri Rismaharini, to the online media Kompas.com (2018) that this program is implemented to provide convenience in providing services and improve the quality of services to the community, thus, they are more prosperous. People who can benefit from this program are the poor who are included in the data for the poor in Surabaya city and have a certificate of poverty from the urban village (Perwali Surabaya No. 6 Tahun 2019). The criteria for houses that will get repair are houses that do not have waste disposal; poor lighting and air circulation; walls and roofs in damaged or weathered condition; floors made of earth, boards, bamboo, cement or ceramics but already damaged and the floor position is lower than the road; and do not have a latrine or have a latrine but it is not feasible (Perwali Surabaya No. 6 of 2019). This program is considered quite effective in overcoming the problem of slum in Surabaya city. Thus, this can be used as lessons learned for other areas in dealing with slum. Furthermore, the success of program implementation can be viewed in terms of policies, implementing agencies, and target groups.
The social rehabilitation program for unsuitable houses has been based on a fairly clear and detailed operational policy. According to Sabatier & Mazmanian (1980), a policy formulated in a clear and detailed manner will be easier to implement because policy implementers will also find it easier to understand and translate it into real action. The more capable a policy is to provide detailed instructions arranged according to the order of importance (priority), the more likely it is that policy output can be achieved. Slum in Surabaya  The following below is a list of these priority areas. From the implementing agency, Surabaya City Government such as the Surabaya City Social Service as the coordinator in the implementation of the program has carried out their duties and functions quite well. They clearly know the distribution of slum areas and has slum area data and always try to do research on slum area (Andini, 2013). This is absolutely very useful for determining the target group who will receive the benefits of the program through the data and research they study. In addition, Andini (2013) explained that Surabaya City Government also always supports improvements in slum areas because the people really need ease their burdens both in an economic and social context. Besides, the government also always tries to provide assistance in the form of goods and services. The Surabaya City Government uses an on-site redevelopment intervention model, namely the reconstruction of very poor and unsafe settlements through gradual demolition and construction of alternative housing on site (Nassar & Elsayed, 2018). It means, the government respects the legal right of residents to alternative housing and dependence on their livelihoods in the same location. In line with Firdaus (2016) The government has made efforts to fulfill the right to adequate housing for people, especially low-income people, such as decent housing in accordance with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
Hereafter, community as the target group support the implementation of the program that substantially provide many positive benefits. the community feel assisted because their houses became livable, healthy and safe. This is supported by a statement of Tursilarini & Udiati (2020) that the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house can provide good benefits from the physical aspect. It is that the house becomes habitable because the roof, walls and floors are in better condition; the psychological aspect is that the home owner feels more comfortable, safe, and calm; as well as the social aspect that togetherness between family members and the local community is getting better. According to the news released by MENPANRB (2020), The budget allocation for repairs to houses unfit for habitation comes from the APBD (Regional Revenue and Expenditure Budget), where for each housing unit an allocation of 30 million rupiahs is received. This budget also supports the implementation of repairs to houses unfit for habitation. Thus, they can be more comprehensive and even lead to new business opportunities. The community, especially those living in the surrounding area and the recipient's family, participated in the implementation of the program, both providing assistance in the form of building materials and labor (Pratama & Niswah, 2021). Community participation in program implementation is essential to achieve good governance, McAuslan stated (Otsuki, 2016) "The city governance is good if the processes, procedures and activities are based on the participation and involvement of all citizens and their organizations to achieve transparency and accountability".
The efforts of the government together with the community in implementing TAHU PANAS innovations THAT wAS transformed into a social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house yielded quite good results. The Surabaya City Government received an award from the PANRB (Empowerment of State Apparatus and Bureaucratic Reform ) Ministry as the Top 40 Public Service Innovations which were considered to be outstanding (MENPANRB Decree No. 636/2018). In addition, there are also fewer slum areas in Surabaya city. In 2018, there was only 43.46 hectares remaining (Bappeko, 2019). The percentage of slum in Surabaya always decreases every year according to the following data. From the graph above, it can be seen that the percentage of slum areas in the Surabaya tends to decline from year to year, until in 2018 it reached 0.25%. The remaining area of slum in Surabaya is based on the calculation of the area of slums compared to the total settlement area in Surabaya of 43.46 ha compared to 17,062.69 ha (Bappeko, 2019). In accordance with the explanation above, it can be seen that both the government and the community were trying to solve the problem of slum in Surabaya through a social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation. Therefore, this research examined in terms of best practices regarding the implementation process of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation in achieving its success in overcoming the problem of slum settlements in Surabaya.
The problem of slum has been widely discussed and studied by previous researchers, as has been conducted by Suradi (2016), he examines slum in terms of social problem identification models using a circle shape with five aspects showing a cause-and-effect relationship. This identification model produces factual and comprehensive information on social problems in urban slum areas. Thus, it can be used as material for developing social policies and programs. Next, research conducted by Chowdhury & Amin (2006) complemented previous research that to solve the problem of slum, an environmental assessment (EA) is required in designing and placing infrastructure. This research used a comparative study of two slum areas in Dhaka and the situation has improved in the areas receiving the intervention. The newly built infrastructure raises new problems such as standing water but can be overcome by developing an EA integration mechanism into the slum improvement project. Besides, it is also necessary to have a group communication model in overcoming slum settlements. In line with Koswara & Mulyana (2016), the stated that The Three Way Fit group communication model by the Kelurahan Facilitator of the Community Self-Reliance Agency is needed to require officers to have full commitment and high discipline as well as good interpersonal communication skills. This communication model is simple and dynamic enough that the implementation of an uninhabitable home improvement program can be successful.
Furthermore, the improvement of slum settlements must be carried out in a participatory manner so that it is sustainable that local people are treated as partners. Adusei, Oduro-Ofori, Amponsah, & Agyeman (2018) explained that the response to slum in Kumasi, Ghana was carried out in a participatory incremental manner. In this context, it is viewed from the willingness and ability of the slum dwellers to pay for utility services, especially water and electricity. Based on the results of the research, all households are willing to pay for utility services without reducing their ability to buy living necessities so that slum reduction policies and programs can be designed in a gradual and participatory manner by making local communities as partners and drivers of the improvement process. The home improvement program that is unhabitable has had many positive impacts on both the environment and the local community. The Slum Enhancement Program in Kenya, for example, can reduce conflict, crime, insecurity and flood risk, and further strengthen resilience in highly populated and complex urban environments. (Mitra et al., 2017). This can be achieved by building social contracts and social capital and integrating different sectoral interventions.
Unlike the previous studies that have been described above, this research was reviewed from a policy perspective, namely to discuss the successful implementation of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation in overcoming slum settlements in Surabaya City. This research was studied using an analytical method, such as the theory of policy implementation by Hill & Hupe (2002). Policy implementation is an action taken after a statutory regulation is enacted. In which this law has the authority of policies, programs, benefits and tangible results (Ripley & Franklin, 1982). In line with theory explaine by Hill & Hupe (2002) This research was examined through seven aspects. There were policy characteristics, policy formation, policy transfer process, the effect of implementor responses, horizontal relationships between organizations, target group responses, and the policy environment. This research aimed to identify and describe the implementation process of the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house in achieving its success in overcoming the problem of slum in Surabaya city.

B. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK Policy Implementation: Approaches by Michael Hill & Peter Hupe
Implementation is applying of basic policy decisions, it generally takes the form of laws, executive orders or important court decisions (Sabatier & Mazmanian, 1980). Ideally, the decision identifies the problem to be addressed, establishes the objectives to be achieved, and in various ways, 'structures' the implementation process. This process usually goes through a number of stages starting with the passing of the constitution, followed by the policy output (decision) from the implementing agency, the target group's compliance with the decision, the actual impact of the policy output, the perceived impact of the institution's decision, and finally, important revisions in the constitution (Sabatier & Mazmanian, 1980). Whereas, Lipsky (1971) argued that policy implementation should focus on street level bureaucrats. In his view, street level bureaucrats are understood as public service workers who interact directly with citizens in carrying out their jobs, and who have substantial discretion in carrying out their work. Furthermore, Ripley & Franklin (1982) described that policy implementation is an action taken after a statutory regulation is enacted in which this law has the authority of policies, programs, benefits and tangible results. Policy implementation includes actions taken by implementers in which they are responsible for obtaining various resources for program implementation, budget development, and organizing activities.
An approach in policy implementation theory was created by Hill & Hupe (2002). Hill & Hupe (2002) explained that the implementation of a policy that has been designed by a policy maker can be proven from the policy output. Yet, it does not mean that this can guarantee the achievement of policy objectives. There are seven aspects that can affect the success of implementation according to Hill & Hupe (2002). First, policy characteristics. They explained that an implementation theory not only determines what aspects are used but also pays attention to the conditions in which these aspects should be used along with the reasons. In this context, Hill & Hupe (2002) agreed with Matland that the level of ambiguity and conflict in the policy implementation process will determine what must be conducted. Thus, policy implementation can run effectively and achieve success. The level of ambiguity can be seen from the derivation of policy rules, such as from strategic to technical ones that must be aligned and do not cause ambiguity for both implementers and society in understanding the policy. Afterward, the level of conflict can be seen from the compliance of the target group with the policy. This can be visualized in the Matland implementation table below. From the table above, it can be seen that administrative implementation is described as 'prerequisite conditions for a rational decision process', that is ideal for implementing a top-down model. Furthermore, political implementation, in which the implementation results are determined by power. Experimental implementation is a contextual condition in which the environment affects the results of the implementation. This is ideal for bottom-up modeling applications. Furthermore, Symbolic implementation is a condition that there are high conflicts and unclear policies. Coalition power, particularly at the local level, tends to determine policy outcomes.
The second is policy formation. Hill & Hupe (2002) explained that policy objectives and basic measures are elements of policy formation that can affect policy success. In line with Van Meter and Van Horn, they stated that standards and policy objectives are important, "a detailed and comprehensive objective of policy decisions to provide concrete and more specific standards for assessing performance". Besides, resources and incentives are also important in achieving successful implementation. Third is the policy transfer process. In this context, Hill & Hupe (2002) agrees with Goggin who explained that the stages of the policy transfer process at each level of the implementor have an impact on implementation. This policy transfer process occurs from a higher level to the lowest level. In this case, such the delivery of information related to policy implementation, who does what, who is responsible, and the main objectives of the policy.
Fourth, the effect of the implementor response. In this aspect Hill & Hupe has thoughts and ideas that are in line with Van Meter and Van Horn which divide this aspect into two categories: (1) agency characteristics and disposition, this aspect includes three things, namely the knowledge (understanding) of the implementor of the policy, the response of the implementer towards policy (accept, neutral, reject) and the intensity of the implementor's response.
(2) issues about the behavior of front-line staff, the implementor's behavior directly affects the success of policy implementation where their behavior depends on how the administrative information transfer process is. Fifth is horizontal relationships between organizations. Cooperation between organizations that is horizontal and accountability in a hierarchical manner is very important in achieving successful implementation. Sixth, the target group's response. Hill & Hupe (2002) explained that the implementation of the policy will affect the interests of other parties affected by the policy targets. In general, this has an effect on regulator policies in which the stipulated regulations will affect the interests of certain parties who have power. This has an impact on the occurrence of negotiations between the government and these parties in policy making. Weak implementor response will affect policy implementation. Seventh is the policy environment. Hill & Hupe (2002) argued that the success of policy implementation is affected by environmental aspects, such as social, political and economic conditions.

Program Concept
The program concept is closely related to the public policy process, especially for policy implementation. In implementing a policy, it is necessary to have a form of action that is transformed into a program. A program is a form of operationalization of a policy. According to the Law of the Republic of Indonesia No. 25 of 2004 concerning the National Development Planning System, a program is a policy instrument in which there are one or more activities carried out by government agencies or institutions in achieving the desired goals and objectives and obtaining budget allocations, or community activities coordinated by community agencies. Jones (2004) explained briefly that the program is a way to achieve goals. Furthermore, Owen & Rogers (1999) explain in their book quoted from Smith that the program is filled with activities that have been planned and directed to bring about certain changes in an identified and identifiable society. Programs have two main components, namely documented planning and actions consistent with that documentation. In line with Hasibuan (2013) where the program contains a clear and concrete plan and includes policies, objectives, procedures, budgets, and implementation time.
Furthermore, Yarbrough, Shulha, Hopson, & Caruthers (2011) define the program as a systematic application of resources based on logic, beliefs, or assumptions in meeting human needs or other related aspects. Yarbrough et al. (2011) characterized the program as follows.
1. A systematic and planned series of activities 2. Using managed resources 3. Achieve the desired goals 4. Dealing with special needs 5. An individual or group that is specific, identifiable, and participate in a particular context 6. Produce documented outputs, results, and impacts 7. Follows belief systems that assume either explicitly or implicitly (diagnostic, causal, intervention, and implementation theories about how the program works)

Specific costs and benefits that can be investigated The Concept of Slums
Globally, the concept of slum settlements can be understood as a physical and spatial manifestation of urban poverty and intra-city inequality (UN-Habitat, 2003). Such understanding is based on measurable indicators where an area is considered a slum if it has at least one of the following conditions, namely poor building quality, high density, poor sanitation access, and unsafe housing status (Jain, 2010). Furthermore, Cities-Alliance (1999) defined slum settlements as marginalized urban areas with poor living standards. In this context, slum settlements are seen as an area of concern because they do not have basic housing, public facilities or infrastructure, and open public spaces.
Slum settlements can be defined from various dimensions, namely, (1) physical dimensions based on housing typology, access to services and infrastructure; (2) the social dimension based on income, employment, and economic activities; and (3) a legal dimension based on land ownership and compliance with planning regulations (Srinivas, 2015;Turok, 2015). Furthermore, slum settlements can also be interpreted into two different perspectives, namely a legal perspective and a quality of life perspective (Zhang, 2018). From a legal perspective, slum settlements are illegal or illegitimate buildings where the residents who occupy them do not have ownership rights to the land they occupy. Then, the perspective of quality of life explains that slum settlements are areas that do not have basic facilities with characteristics of unhealthy, dirty, and overcrowded areas. Slums and squatter settlements exist because the city government is unable to plan and provide affordable housing for low-income people. This has an impact on slum and squatter settlements as a solution for the community (Ooi & Phua, 2007).

C. METHOD
This study discusses the success of the implementation process of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation in overcoming slum settlements in the city of Surabaya. Researchers used a qualitative method with a descriptive type because it is in accordance with the research objectives, namely to identify and describe the implementation process of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation in achieving its success in overcoming the problem of slum settlements in the city of Surabaya. The qualitative method was chosen because it serves to understand the meaning behind the social phenomena that occur in connection with the problem of slum settlements in the city of Surabaya. Meanwhile, descriptive type is useful for providing a detailed description of the research context (Neuman, 2017). In this context, qualitative research is conducted using a document analysis approach. According to Bowen (2009), document analysis is a form of systematic research method to get the meaning or meaning of a document. The research method in the form of document analysis has a focus, namely the search for basic meanings, themes and forms of various kinds of documents (Wood, Sebar, & Vecchio, 2020). Document analysis as a research method is carried out by defining a document to explore meaning, understand and develop empirical knowledge. The document analysis method used in this study, namely (Wood et al., 2020): (1) collecting initial documents that are following the research objectives; (2) open coding, namely providing a code that will later serve as the identity of the data based on the discussion of the topic in the study; (3) theoretical coding, namely collecting data into themes and concepts; and (4) build a sustainable narrative that can connect themes that emerge from the data and literature. The technique of collecting data through this document study comes from statutory regulations, official documents by the government, books published nationally and internationally, journal articles indexed by Scopus and SINTA, interviews quoted via online media, as well as various other credible online media. There are 65 pieces of literature used in this study consisting of 8 official government documents, 26 international journal articles, 12 national journal articles, 15 books both international and national, and 4 news articles with credible sources. The research was conducted from 7 October 2020 to 27 December 2020 by starting to explore various kinds of literature.

D. RESULT AND DISCUSSION
The implementation of the social rehabilitation program unhabitable house resulted in fairly optimal program output and outcomes both in terms of adequate implementers and benefits felt by the target group. The success of this implementation process can be understood through the theory of policy implementation by Hill & Hupe (2002). The program is a translation and a form of operationalization of the policy. In this case, there are seven aspects studied, such as policy characteristics, policy formation, policy transfer process, the effect of implementor responses, horizontal relationships between organizations, target group responses, and the policy environment.

Characteristic of Policy
The implementation of the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house in Surabaya city is based on the Regulation of the Mayor of Surabaya Number. 6 Year 2019 concerning the Social Rehabilitation Program for unhabitable Living Houses. The laws and regulations have explained in detail the technical aspects of program implementation. Hierarchically, this Surabaya Mayor Regulation has referred to the above regulations. Law Number. 1 Year 2011 concerning Housing and Settlement Areas is the root of the guidelines for regulations under it that are more operational. In this law, chapter VIII specifically describes the prevention and quality improvement of slum housing and slum settlements. This means that tackling slum settlements has become a national agenda which of course must be implemented by every region in Indonesia, including Surabaya city.
Furthermore, this statutory regulation was reduced to the Regional Regulation of East Java Province Number. 5 of 2012 concerning Provincial Spatial Planning 2011-2031. Article 82 of this statutory regulation explains that the handling of slum areas is divided into two categories, rural and urban areas. Furthermore, Article 82 Paragraph (3) point c states that the handling of slum settlements in rural areas is carried out by means of repairing unhabitable houses. Article 82 Paragraph (5) point c also describes the handling of slum settlements in urban areas by building flats. The assumption is that the availability of land in urban areas is less, thus, the construction of vertical houses is a fairly effective solution.
Subsequent derivative legislation is the Surabaya City Regional Regulation Number 12 Year 2014 concerning the 2014-2034 City Spatial Plan for the City of Surabaya. In this statutory regulation, it is explained about the strategies that must be carried out by the Surabaya City Government in developing housing and settlement areas to generate the harmony in Neighborhood and Hamlet in Surabaya City. This is explained in Article 16, as follw: (1) developing and arranging the proportion of high, medium and low density housing and settlements to meet the needs of the whole community; (2) improving the environmental quality of housing and settlement areas and expanding the provision of vertical housing; (3) developing new housing and settlement areas that are integrated with the surrounding areas; and (4) realizing the development of balanced housing and settlement areas, including the construction of simple houses, medium-sized houses and luxurious houses proportionally.
The seriousness of the Surabaya City Government in dealing with the problem of slum settlements is outlined in the Regulation of the Mayor of Surabaya Number 6 Year 2019 concerning the Social Rehabilitation Program for Unhabitable Living Houses. The Social Rehabilitation Program for Unhabitable Living Houses that was then transformed into the TAHU PANAS innovation, is an innovative program as pride of Surabaya city. This statutory regulation describes in detail how the operation of this program is carried out. It includes the objectives and principles, criteria and requirements, activity stages, participation, operational costs for activities, assistance, duties and responsibilities as well as guidance and supervision. Based on the explanation above, it can be seen that the Surabaya City government policy is in line with the laws and regulations above and it explains in detail how slum settlements should be handled. In this context, it is about repairing and rebuilding unhabitable houses. In line with P. Jones (2017), managing slums and squatter settlements by reshaping and then reorganizing people's lifestyles to conform with formal market measures can have a significant impact on society. This shows that the pro-community policies and solutions are in accordance with the existing problems. This kind of policy will be easily understood by the implementor and the target group because the level of ambiguity is quite low. A low level of ambiguity can have an impact on the implementation process that will run more easily because the implementors and target groups can understand the policy well, namely knowing what they have to do to achieve policy or program objectives (Hill & Hupe, 2002).
The next point that can represent the characteristics of the policy is the level of conflict in the implementation process. This is indicated by the compliance of the target group to the policy. In this context, the compliance of the target group is quite optimal because this program is implemented based on community based development. In accordance with the explanation of the Head of the Surabaya City Social Service, Suharto Wardoyo in a virtual presentation and interview for the 2020 Public Service Innovation Competition (KIPP) (MENPANRB, 2020) he explained: "This activity is formulated and implemented using a bottom-up approach, in which the operationalization of activities in the field is carried out based on the initiatives and aspirations of the community, starting from planning, implementation to supervision of development".
A policy program that provides access to outsiders such as the target group will certainly create a sense of belongings. In line with the statement of Sabatier & Mazmanian (1980), The policy implementation process will be relatively more effective because the access given makes the parties involved have a sense of belonging. Sufficient compliance of the target group is evidenced by the large number of participation made by the local community to help recipient families through the assistance of building materials and personnel (Pratama & Niswah, 2021). In line with Das (2015), participation by the community can encourage development for the community itself and the results of physical improvement. In addition, the level of community responsiveness in terms of their perception of knowledge is quite high because the role of the community is very important from the beginning to the end of program implementation. (Eriza, 2015). Responsiveness in this context is the conformity between community expectations due to the problem of slum settlements and community problem solving. Many people support the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house so that the policies that have been implemented have gained legitimacy from the community (Christiawan, 2019). This will make the target group comply with the policies that have been set so that the risk of conflict is low. The implementation process tends to be easier if the conflicts that occur are low (Hill & Hupe, 2002).
The characteristics of the policies that underlie the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house are sufficient to support the program implementation process. The implementation process will tend to be easier and have the opportunity to achieve success because the level of ambiguity and conflict in it is classified as low (Hill & Hupe, 2002). This policy is included in administrative implementation that there are prerequisite conditions for a rational decision process (Hill & Hupe, 2002). In addition, the implementation process of the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house is included in the hybrid approach because in the implementation process the community actively participates and it is directly involved in program activities in accordance with the technical implementation and from the government also regulates the community through SOP (Standard Operating Procedure). The combination between the government and the community reflects a hybrid approach in the implementation process (Kawer, Baiquni, Keban, & Subarsono, 2018).

Policy Formation
The social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house is conducted based on the Regulation of the Mayor of Surabaya Number 6 Year 2019. From the regulation, the goals and standards that must be carried out are set to make policy outputs and outcomes can be achieved. This statutory regulation explains that the goal of social rehabilitation activities for unhabitable house is "The objective of the Rutilahu Social Rehabilitation activity is to restore social function and improve the quality of housing for the poor through improving housing conditions to become habitable, healthy and safe houses" (Article 2 Perwali Surabaya No.6 of 2019). The purpose of this statutory regulation is quite clear. This program is carried out to improve the quality of the beneficiary's house. Therefore, it becomes a healthy house and restores the social function of the house. Furthermore, the policy also has certain targets or standards to be achieved and of course, it can affect policy implementation. There are several targets or standards that can be seen in the following table. Source: (Bappeko, 2018a) From the table above, information can be obtained that in order to meet the needs of a livable house in accordance with the rehabilitation policy of unfit for habitation, a standard or target is needed to be achieved. Absoultely, the target number of MBR who get livable houses must increase. Sanitation services also increase from year to year until 2021 of 100% where all residents of Surabaya have proper sanitation, and the percentage of fulfillment of livable houses must also increase until in 2021 at least 58%. In addition to the targets to be achieved, there are also requirements that must be met by the community in order to receive this program, namely having a ID Card and Family Card and being domiciled in the proposed house and proven by a domicile certificate; house conditions unfit for habitation or victims of fire or disaster; the house stands on land with legal ownership; a statement that the house and land are not in dispute and will be able to occupy the repaired house by themselves with the territorial knowledge of head of Neighborhood and Hamlet and village; a statement letter that he has never received home repair assistance from the Regional Government, except for the construction of healthy latrines; and get recommendations from the heads of Neighborhood and Hamlet known to the village head (Perwali Surabaya No.6 of 2019). The existence of these requirements will clarify the standards or targets to be achieved and of course so that the implementation of the program is truly right on target. In accordance with the statement of Van Meter & Van Horn (1975) detailed objectives and concrete and specific standards or targets are useful for assessing the performance of the implementation of the policy. Clear and specific policy objectives and standards can facilitate the policy or program implementation process (Hill & Hupe, 2002).
Besides, Hill & Hupe's theory of implementation also emphasizes that resources and incentives are needed to support the smooth running of the implementation process. In this context, resources can be divided into two, there are human resources and financial resources. Human resources in the implementation of the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house are sufficient to support the running of the program, which in its implementation, from socialization, submission of proposals, deliberations, planning, preparation, implementation, reporting and submission of activities, have involved both the government, NGOs, and community (Perwali Surabaya No.6 of 2019). The government has involved the Social Service of Surabaya and Village. Furthermore, from the NGO side, there are the Village Community Empowerment Institutions (LPMK) and the Poor Family Development Unit (UPKM). The community also participates in program implementation, including community leaders, religious leaders and Neighborhood and Hamlet. Even think tanks Institution has also contributed in terms of mentoring. This shows that the policy program implementation process uses the concept of governance, thus, policies can be more effective. Governance is a relationship between government and society that allows a policy or program to be formulated, implemented or evaluated, this refers to the institutions, regulations and networks that determine how a country or organization functions (Bhatta, 2006). Moreover, financial resources allocated for program implementation are also sufficient to build simple, healthy houses. The budget for the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation comes from Regional Revenue and Expenditure Budget (MENPANRB, 2020). Each unhabitable house will be built evenly with a budget allocation of 30 million rupiah for each house (MENPANRB, 2020;Pratama & Niswah, 2021). In this context, the program budget allocation does not consider the size of land or houses, all are given the same budget size (radarsurabaya.jawapos.com, 2020). According to Ferguson & Navarrete (2003), from a financial perspective, the first step in dealing with slum in a sustainable manner is by setting a cost limit. This is in line with the LKPJ (Accountability statement report ) data that the budget realization for slum management has increased every year. It can be seen in the following table. From the table above, it can be seen that the percentage of budget realization for dealing with slum in Surabaya tends to increase every year. In this context, programs and activities for dealing with slum settlements are carried out, such as meeting the needs for proper housing and settlement sanitation services. This means that when the budget for dealing with slum settlements becomes more adequate, the budget for programs and activities is adequate as well. In line with Doe, Peprah, & Chidziwisano (2020), economic and financial aspects that can have an impact on the sustainability of the program is the ability of implementing agencies, especially the government, non-governmental organizations and international agencies to maintain budget and staff stability and recover operating costs. The social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation is regulated in regulation of Mayor of Surabaya Number 6 of 2019 is included in an incentive policy because the program being implemented provides a number of materials given to target groups who are entitled to receive it, namely in the form of house repairs. Resources and incentives will significantly affect the implementation process, whether policy program is easy to implement (Hill & Hupe, 2002). Adequate resources and policies are incentive to help facilitate the process of implementing policies or programs (Hill & Hupe, 2002).

Policy Transfer Process
The policy transfer process plays an important role in policy implementation. When the policy transfer is clear, the implementer will be able to understand its duties and functions properly. Based on Dolowitz, Hulme, Nellis, & O'Neill (2000), policy transfer is a process in which knowledge related to policies, institutions, and ideas in one place or time is used in the development of policies, institutions and ideas in other places. Furthermore, Dolowitz & Marsh (2000) explained that a policy transfer can achieve success if, (1) the information provided is adequate, whether it is information about a policy or institution or information about how it operates at another place or time, (2) the transfer is carried out completely, that contains important elements and information about what made the policy successful, and (3) the transfer appropriately, namely taking into account the economic, social, political and ideological context.
In this context, the Regulation of the Mayor of Surabaya Number. 6 Year 2019 has described in detail the implementation of the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house starting from the socialization stage, submitting proposals, deliberations, planning, preparation, implementation, reporting and submission of activities. Information and stakeholders involved at each stage can be seen in the following table. Collection of proposals for potential beneficiaries  Delivering a letter to the village head to propose a potential beneficiary that meets the criteria and requirements.  Conducting administrative and physical verification in the field to ensure compliance with the criteria and requirements of beneficiaries and convey this to the village head.  Determining the quota of beneficiaries for each urban village based on the budget ceiling and the principle of proportionality.

Social Service of Surabaya City
 Submitting proposals for potential beneficiaries that meet the criteria and requirements.  Completing the lack of administrative files resulting from the official verification before the KRKRS deliberation.

Village Head
 Completing the lack of administrative files resulting from the official verification before the KRKRS deliberation.

Implementation Team
 Submitting work results to the PA. PKK  The handover of the results of the home improvement work to the beneficiaries is carried out based on the provisions of laws and regulations.

Source: Mayor Regulation of Surabaya No. 6 Year 2019 (processed by researchers)
From the table above, it can be seen clearly the duties and responsibilities of each stakeholder in implementing the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation include the transfer of information, who-does-what, and who is the person in charge. The adequate, complete and precise transfer of information makes program implementation easier. In accordance with Goggin who explained that the stages of the policy transfer process at each level of the implementor have an impact on implementation (Hill & Hupe, 2002). This policy transfer process occurs from a higher level to the lowest level. This is of course done to achieve the program's objectives to restore social functioning and improve the quality of housing for the poor by improving housing conditions to become habitable, healthy and safe houses.

The Effect of Implementor's Response
The effect of the implementor's response is shown through the disposition of the implementor in carrying out the policy program that will later have an impact on the behavior of the implementer. In the context of disposition, it highlights the understanding and response of implementors to policies. The implementor's understanding of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation is good enough, in which each implementor knows and understands their respective duties and functions. For example, it can be seen from the Surabaya City Social Service that is able to explain in detail the criteria for beneficiaries who can receive the program, in which the main tasks and functions of the Surabaya City Social Service include administrative and physical verification of the field for conformity to the criteria and requirements (radarsurabaya.jawapos.com, 2020). Moreover, the role of the Surabaya City Social Service in determining the number of targets, routine supervision such as house construction, budget and implementation time as well as periodic evaluations after the construction process and handover reports are quite good (Rofiah & Nawang, 2019). Next, the sub-district has a fairly good understanding of the criteria for potential beneficiaries because later on, it will be the one to propose potential beneficiaries along with the filing, most of the kelurahan already know and understand the flow of the program proposal. The RT/RW also understand their main function, in which they have been looking for and informing the community who deserves to receive the program.
From this explanation, it can be seen that the response of implementers to the policy is quite good. They accept and carry out the best possible tasks and responsibilities that have been given so that policy objectives can be achieved. This shows that there is adequate commitment by the implementors in the implementation of the program. The success of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation is determined by the dynamics of cooperation between implementers which of course is related to their commitment where program implementation can run smoothly and on time if the implementor's commitment is adequate. (Sabarisman, 2013). Efforts made to achieve policy objectives will not be successful if the implementing officials are not highly committed. According to Sabatier & Mazmanian (1980), each program needs an implementing agency that is not only neutral but persistent enough to develop new regulations and standard operating procedures, and enforce them in the face of resistance from target groups and public officials reluctant to make mandated changes. Furthermore, the intensity of the implementors in program implementation is also quite good. It can be proven by the progress of the realization of the program implementation that is quite optimal and it can provide benefits and positive impacts for the beneficiaries the following is data regarding quotas and the realization of the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house. From the table, it can be seen that the quota and realization of the social rehabilitation program for uninhabitable houses is quite a lot every year. Over the past six years, the program's implementation has been quite good. It is seen from the percentage of realization that had always ranged from above 90% and even reached 100% in 2016. This shows the seriousness of the government in overcoming uninhabitable houses in Surabaya. On the other hand, the disposition of the implementor that is already good enough in the implementation of the program will have an impact on the behavior of the implementor when running the program in real terms in the field. So far, the implementor has implemented a social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation in an optimal manner, and has even made a brochure that explains in detail the flow of submission to obtain the program so that the target group can understand it well as well. In line with the statement of Hill & Hupe (2002), the disposition and behavior of frontline implementers have a major effect on the success of implementing a policy or program. Disposition is a character of the implementers, for example, honesty, commitment, or democratic character (Edward III, 1980). Policy implementation can run well and effectively in accordance with the wishes of policy makers if the implementers have a good disposition.

Horizontal Relations Among Organizations
Horizontal relations among organizations can be seen from the coordination and cooperation between stakeholders involved in implementing the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house. The reality of field implementation, coordination and cooperation between stakeholders has gone quite well that there is a harmonious relationship, such as the relationship between the Surabaya City Social Service with UPKM (Poor Family Development Unit) and sub-districts to find unhabitable house (surabaya.tribunnews.com, 2019). In addition, The Surabaya City Social Service also invites Neighborhood and Hamlet cooperation where Neighborhood and Hamlet play a role in finding and informing the program to appropriate residents then providing recommendations to residents entitled to receive the program. Of course, later there will be activity reports, in which the UPKM is responsible for submitting an accountability report for the implementation of activities to PPK (The Commitment Officer) through the Work Handover Official Report (Perwali Surabaya No.6 of 2019). This will facilitate the implementation process because every organization involved will support the running of the policy through mutually harmonious and harmonious relationships. Coordination and cooperation between stakeholders will lead to collaboration between stakeholders. Adequate collaboration between stakeholders can have an impact on program implementation. The program can run well and smoothly so that program effectiveness can be achieved (Wibowo, 2012). As happened in Africa, where the improvement of slum involving multistakeholders, such asgovernment, private sector and society, can achieve success in responding to the real needs of urban housing for low-income communities. (Danso-Wiredu & Midheme, 2017). Hill & Hupe (2002) also revealed that cooperation or collaboration among organizations that are horizontal and accountable in a hierarchical manner is very important in achieving successful implementation.

Target Group Response
The target group's response to policies is very important because it can show how public acceptance and understanding of the policies being enforced. The reality in the field shows that the implementation of the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house has received a fairly good response from the target group. There has been much participation from the community, both beneficiary families and the local community in the form of labor assistance or building materials (MENPANRB, 2020). This is because many people feel assisted by this program, in which their previously unsuitable houses, there are many leaks, floods, and unhealthy latrines are renovated so that they can restore the social functioning of the house. In addition, the benefits of implementing this program are not only from the physical aspects of the house in the form of roofs, floors, and walls but also from psychological and social aspects, namely a sense of comfort, peace and security as well as strengthening relationships between families and neighbors. (Tursilarini & Udiati, 2020). The positive benefits obtained from the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation have made this program receive a lot of support from the community. Furthermore, Christiawan (2019) explained that many people support the social rehabilitation program for houses that are unfit for habitation so that the policies that are enforced have gained legitimacy from the community.
In addition, community participation in the program implementation process is the key to the success of a policy in overcoming the problem of unfit for habitation, good regulation without community support will not succeed (Amir, Puspitaningtyas, & Santosa, 2015). Participation or direct involvement of the community, especially marginalized people, aims to empower them by strengthening their abilities (A. K. Das & Takahashi, 2009). This can have an impact on the sustainability and improvement of the program (Cleaver, 2001). This positive response from the community as the target group can facilitate the program implementation process because the community needs this program, especially since this program is based on the principle of community based development. In accordance with the statement Hill & Hupe (2002) bahwa implementasi kebijakan akan mempengaruhi kepentingan pihak lain yang terkena sasaran kebijakan.

Policy Environment
The implementation of a policy is also affected by the conditions surrounding the policy in which the policy is implemented. The policy environment can be seen from the social, economic and political conditions. In implementing the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation, the surrounding environment, namely the social and economic conditions in the City of Surabaya, is sufficient to support the implementation of the program. This can be seen in the following data. From the table above, information can be obtained that the percentage of poor people in the City of Surabaya has decreased every year and the City of Surabaya is the area with the fourth lowest percentage of poor people in East Java Province. This shows that most of the population of Surabaya City is classified as well off so that the proportion of low-income people (MBR) is quite small. In addition, ownership of buildings and defecation (sanitation) facilities in Surabaya City is also quite good. It can be seen in the following table. *) Other houses consist of official houses, traditional houses, etc. **) Others include shared facilities, public toilets, and no use of defecation facilities.
From the table above, it can be seen that the ownership of buildings that are purely self-owned has increased from 2017 to 2018 to 59.05%. However, in 2019 it decreased insignificantly of 7.37% to 51.68%. In addition, the use of defecation facilities that use their own toilets tended to increase every year until in 2019 of 73.81%. Furthermore, the quality of residential houses in the city of Surabaya that was quite good and adequate also supports the implementation of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation where this has an impact on the proportion of uninhabitable houses that are decreasing so that the target group in program implementation is also getting smaller. This can be seen in the following data. From this table, information can be obtained that most people of Surabaya already have houses with sufficient quality. It seen from physical aspects such as roofs, floors, and walls, that each indicator has touched more than 90% even though the floor and wall indicators have decreased. insignificantly. The floor indicator decreased by 7.79% so that in 2019 it became 91.08%. The same thing happened to the wall indicator, which decreased by 0.48% to become 98.92% in 2019. Meanwhile, the roof indicator experienced a perfect increase of 100% in 2019.
As explained above, it can be seen that the conditions surrounding the policy are sufficient to support the implementation of the program, both from an economic and social perspective. The welfare of the people of Surabaya City is quite good. Then, the social conditions indicated by the ownership of the building itself and the defecation facilities themselves are also quite adequate where one of the targets of the social rehabilitation program for unfit for habitation is houses that do not have latrines or already have latrines but are not in proper condition. Likewise, the quality of the houses of most people of Surabaya City is quite good and adequate. This will have an impact on the implementation of the program, in which the social rehabilitation program for unhabitable house will be easier to implement because the policy environment supports the implementation of the program. The policy environment is a non-legal aspect. It showed the conditions surrounding the policy that can affect the policy output of implementing agencies, the compliance of target groups in policy decisions, and the achievement of policy objectives. (Sabatier & Mazmanian, 1980). In line with the statement of Hill & Hupe (2002), The success of policy implementation is also affected by environmental aspects, there are social, economic and political conditions.

E. CONCLUSION
This article discusses the implementation process of the social rehabilitation program for houses unfit for habitation in coping with slum in Surabaya using the policy implementation theory lens by Hill & Hupe. The implementation of this program in handling slum settlements in Surabaya is quite optimal. The seven aspects of successful implementation have shown positive and quite good results. The characteristics of the policy that determine how the policy is implemented are quite optimal, in which the level of ambiguity and conflict level of the policy is low. Furthermore, positive results also occurred in policy formations indicated by policy objectives and standards or targets that were quite clear and specific as well as adequate human and financial resources and policies that were incentive to facilitate the implementation process. The policy transfer process is very clear and detailed regarding the delivery of information, who does what, and who is responsible for achieving the objectives of the policy or program. The effect of the implementor response is quite good where a good implementor disposition will have an impact on the behavior of the implementor to carry out policy programs in accordance with what has been set in the laws and regulations. Furthermore, horizontal relations between organizations are also adequate where coordination and cooperation are harmonious. Positive target group responses will make the program implementation process easier. The policy environment has supported the running of the policy and has also contributed to the successful implementation of this program to cope with slum settlements in the city of Surabaya. This research also provides recommendations to stakeholders who contribute to the program implementation process. The government and other stakeholders can improve the quality of collaboration that has been built through strengthening coordination and cooperation. Thus, acceleration of the achievement of program objectives can occur, the Surabaya City Social Service can increase the quota of beneficiaries considering that there are many people who need and a positive response from them. People are expected to provide constructive criticism and suggestions for improving the quality of the program, increasing the leadership role of both the Surabaya City Social Service, headman and RT/RW because they play an important role in program implementation, and improve periodic and tiered evaluation by the involved stakeholders. Therefore, accountability of program implementation would be better.