DOI: https://doi.org/10.14710/pwk.v21i3.63635

Is The Public Satisfaction Index (IKM) Related to The Quality of Infrastructure and Facilities in Surakarta City?

*Anindya Putri Tamara orcid  -  Universitas Semarang, Indonesia
Indra Kertati  -  University of 17 Agustus 1945, Indonesia
Tiasa Adimagistra  -  Universitas Semarang, Indonesia
Agus Sarwo Edy Sudrajat  -  Universitas Semarang, Indonesia

Citation Format:
Abstract
As cities grow and diversify, public institutions play a vital role in urban planning, particularly in climate adaptation, infrastructure improvement, and community welfare.  In Indonesia, the Public Satisfaction Index (Indeks Kepuasan Masyarakat—IKM) provides a standardized tool to capture citizens’ perceptions of service quality, thereby influencing policy formulation, resource allocation, and strategies for service improvement. This study aims to provide the government with insights into the relevance of IKM to the quality of public services, particularly in terms of infrastructure and facilities. The research employs a quantitative approach with a descriptive analysis to provide a detailed and comprehensive description of the research population.  The research data utilises IKM measurements in accordance with Regulation 14/2017 of the Minister of Administrative and Bureaucratic Reform, as well as field observations, particularly in relation to infrastructure and facilities. The IKM survey covered 156 public service units with more than 3,000 respondents, while field observations were conducted on 25 purposively selected units. Observational parameters included building condition, service room quality, toilet facilities, completeness of supporting infrastructure, and accessibility for vulnerable groups such as persons with disabilities, the elderly, women, and children.  The results of this research show that there is a relationship between the value of IKM and the quality of facilities and infrastructure in the city of Surakarta. Several aspects, such as the availability and completeness of facilities and infrastructure, especially for people with special needs, have a direct impact on the public satisfaction index.
Fulltext

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: Articles
Language : EN
Recent articles
Komparasi Struktur Ruang Kota Tradisional Nagari Kurai V Jorong dengan Struktur Ruang Kota Islam Transformasi Fisik, Sosial dan Ekonomi yang Mempengaruhi Terjadinya Jentrifikasi Pariwisata di Kampung Prawirotaman Yogyakarta Analisis Pola Spasial Persebaran Penduduk Miskin di Kota Yogyakarta More recent articles
Most cited articles
The Quality of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Shelter Services of Mangkang-Penggaron Route in CBD Semarang Perubahan Penggunaan Lahan dan Kesesuaiannya Terhadap RDTR di Wilayah Peri-Urban (Studi Kasus: Kecamatan Mlati) Kesesuaian Tata Guna Lahan Terhadap Penerapan Konsep Transit Oriented Development (TOD) di Kota Semarang Pengaruh Konversi Lahan terhadap Kondisi Lingkungan di Wilayah Peri-urban Kota Semarang (Studi Kasus: Area Berkembang Kecamatan Gunungpati) PENINGKATAN KUALITAS PERMUKIMAN KUMUH UNTUK MENDUKUNG WISATA KAMPUNG PELANGI KOTA SEMARANG More cited articles
  1. Adikumoro, D. P., Nurhaeni, I. D. A., & Nugroho, R. A. (2022). Resistance of Work Culture to the Issue of Professionalism in Land Administration Services. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Communication, Policy and Social Science (InCCluSi 2022) (Vol. 682). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-07-7_44
  2. Alfianita, I. N., Augustinah, F., Ferriswara, D., & Kamariyah, S. (2025). IMPLEMENTATION of SuKMa-e JATIM APPLICATION TO INCREASE PUBLIC SATISFACTION INDEX IN EAST JAVA PROVINCE. Journal of Governance and Public Administration (JoGaPA), 2(3), 690–705
  3. Andrade, C. (2021). The Inconvenient Truth About Convenience and Purposive Samples. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 43(1), 86–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0253717620977000
  4. Bovaird, T., & Löffler, E. (2003). Evaluating the quality of public governance: Indicators, models and methodologies. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 69(3), 313–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852303693002
  5. Campbell, S., Greenwood, M., Prior, S., Shearer, T., Walkem, K., Young, S., … Walker, K. (2020). Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. Journal of Research in Nursing, 25(8), 652–661. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987120927206
  6. Djudu, R. M., Darmawan, A., & Bahri, S. (2025). Measuring Service Excellence: Evaluating Public Satisfaction through the Public Satisfaction Index. Journal of Business and Management Review, 6(4), 290–304. https://doi.org/10.47153/jbmr.v6i4.1393
  7. Dovey, K., & Pafka, E. (2020). What is walkability? The urban DMA. Urban Studies, 57(1), 93–108. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098018819727
  8. Firmansyah, A. C., & Rosy, B. (2021). Pengaruh Kualitas Pelayanan Publik Terhadap Kepuasan Masyarakat (Studi Pembuatan E-KTP di Kecamatan Sekaran Kabupaten Lamongan). Retrieved from https://ejournal.unesa.ac.id/index.php/joa
  9. Granberg, M., & Glover, L. (2021). The climate just city. Sustainability (Switzerland), 13(3), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13031201
  10. Kammer-Kerwick, M., Takasaki, K., Kellison, J. B., & Sternberg, J. (2022). Asset-Based, Sustainable Local Economic Development: Using Community Participation to Improve Quality of Life Across Rural, Small-Town, and Urban Communities. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 17(5), 3023–3047. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-022-10051-1
  11. Liu, Z., Deng, Z., Davis, S. J., Giron, C., & Ciais, P. (2022, April 1). Monitoring global carbon emissions in 2021. Nature Reviews Earth and Environment. Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-022-00285-w
  12. Loeb, S., Dynarski, S., Mcfarland, D., Morris, P., Reardon, S., & Reber, S. (2017). Descriptive analysis in education: A guide for researchers The National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance (NCEE) conducts unbiased large-scale evaluations of education programs and practices. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/
  13. Nurfarida, R. D. P., Yulianti, O., & Effendi, Y. (2021). Analysis of the Community Satisfaction Index on Public Services at the Sukaraja Sub-district Office, Seluma Regency. JURNAL EMBA REVIEW, 1(2), 108–114. https://doi.org/10.53697/emba.v1i2
  14. Ogunbajo, R. A., Bello, M. O., & Adebayo, M. A. (2016). Assessment of Urban Infrastructure Quality and User Satisfaction in Low Income Residential Neighbourhoods in Minna, Nigeria. ATBU Journal of Environmental Technology, 9(1), 98–115
  15. Prasadio, W. G., & Hidayat, A. (2023). Analysis Of Community Satisfaction Index On Public Services In Dealing With Industrial Revolution 4.0 In BBTKLP Surabaya. JSSBS (Journal of Social Sciences and Business Studies), 1(1), 21–26. Retrieved from http://gemapublisher.com/index.php/jssbs
  16. Safingi, I., Susanti, N., Survei, L., Konsultan, D., Publik, P., Lin-Peko, (, … Madiun, K. (2022). Birokrasi Pancasila: Jurnal Pemerintahan, Pembangunan dan Inovasi Daerah Indeks Kepuasan Layanan Infrastruktur Kabupaten Madiun Tahun 2021, 4(2), 72–86
  17. Segura Ramírez, L. D., van Zeijl-Rozema, A., & Martens, P. (2023). Policy integration of climate change adaptation in Central America: A review for development, land-use planning, and risk management. Latin American Policy, 14(4), 534–567. https://doi.org/10.1111/lamp.12314
  18. Sofyani, H., Ulum, I., Syam, D., & Wahjuni, S. L. (2012). ISLAMIC SOCIAL REPORTING INDEX SEBAGAI MODEL PENGUKURAN KINERJA SOSIAL PERBANKAN SYARIAH (STUDI KOMPARASI INDONESIA DAN MALAYSIA). JDA Jurnal Dinamika Akuntansi (Vol. 4). Retrieved from http://journal.unnes.ac.id/index.php/jda
  19. Sukamti, S., & Utomo, H. (2015). Analisis Indeks Kepuasan Masyarakat (IKM) pada Pelayanan Publik di Puskesmas Kelicacing Kota Salatiga. Among Makarti, 8(15), 1–15
  20. Valianto, E. B. (2020). EVALUASI CAPAIAN INDEKS KEPUASAN LAYANAN INFRASTRUKTUR. PANGRIPTA: Jurnal Ilmiah Kajian Perencanaan Pembangunan, 3(1), 27–39
  21. Van Ryzin, G. G. (2004). Expectations, performance, and citizen satisfaction with urban services. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 23(3), 433–448. https://doi.org/10.1002/pam.20020

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update: 2025-10-29 09:14:19

No citation recorded.