THE EFFECT OF REGIONAL FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, REGIONAL FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING SYSTEMS AND INTERNAL CONTROL SYSTEMS GOVERNMENT ON THE REGIONAL GOVERNMENT PERFOMANCE (CASE STUDY ON BKD IN BOYOLALI REGENCY)

: This study aims to determine the Effect of Regional Financial Management, Regional Financial Accounting System and Internal Control System Government on Regional Government Perfomance. The methodhology used in this research is the quantitative. The population used is all employee of BKD Boyolali. In this study a sample of 54 employees. While for the technique of data collection is done by using questionnaires. To facilitate problem solving, this study was conducted using multiple linear regression models with the help of IBM SPSS Statistics 25. Based on the second partial test, shows that the Regional financial Accounting System variable has a significant effect on on Regional Government Perfomance. Based on the third partial test, shows that the Internal Control System Government variable has a ignificant effect on on Regional Government Perfomance. Based on the results of the simultaneous data test,be concluded that simultaneously or together the variables of the Effect of Regional Financial Management, Regional Financial Accounting System and Internal Control System Government is a factor that effect the Regional Government Perfomance.


Introduction
With the effective implementation of regional autonomy, many changes have occurred in the State of Indonesia which are seen as very important and fundamental. The existence of a paradigm shift in government, from centralized (centralized) to decentralized (regional autonomy) greatly affects the dynamics of local government administration to realize good governance. (mertyani, 2015).
Currently, local governments are faced with many demands, both internally, namely increasing optimal performance and externally, namely the desire of the community so that local governments can realize the goals of a prosperous local community as an involvement in the implementation of regional autonomy that prioritizes performance accountability and improvement of public services. (Halim & Hidayat,2015). Therefore, it is important for local governments to pay more attention to the implementation of regional financial management and regional financial accounting systems. In addition, the government's internal control system on the performance of local with a decentralized system that is transparent, efficient, effective and accountable to the wider community. To achieve this, smart thinking is needed through innovation in the accounting system. (Halim,2012:40) c. Internal Control System Government Increasing transparency and accountability in the preparation of government administration as well as improving the quality of government administration requires a government internal control system which is a government control system that must be applied to Regional Work Units (SKPD) (Sukmaninggrum, 2012). According to Arens (2010), internal control is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance about the achievement of management objectives in the following categories: 1) operating effectiveness and efficiency, 2) reliability of financial reports, 3) compliance with applicable laws and regulations. The objectives of internal control will be achieved if the five elements of internal control are fulfilled and fully implemented. The five elements of internal control are: the control environment, risk assessment, control activities, information and communication, and supervision (PP No. 60 of 2008). d. Regional Government Perfomance Regional Government Perfomance According to Chabib (2011:3), performance is a description of the extent to which the implementation of an activity / program / policy has been achieved in achieving the goals, mission and vision of the organization as outlined in formulating the organization's strategic plan. The performance of a local government is a reflection of the success of an activity/program that has been carried out to achieve development goals which are realized in the form of results in the form of improving services to the community. The performance of the local government is not hidden from the community, but must be informed because the community as a stakeholder regarding the level of achievement of the results, is associated with the mission and vision of the organization. Through this information, the steps or corrective actions needed to determine the main activities/programs can be taken, and at the same time used as feedback as material for planning.

Research Method
This study uses quantitative methods. This research was conducted by distributing questionnaires as a means of collecting data so that it can be analyzed statistically. Quantitative research is useful for testing and examining the relationship between variables to make it easier to measure and analyze so that the truth can be known from the research studied. The calculation technique in the questionnaire will use a Likert scale. The Likert scale is a scale used to measure the attitudes, opinions, and perceptions of a person or persons about social phenomena. The data analysis method in this study uses the SPSS program (Statistical Product and Service Solution). This study was tested using several statistical tests, including descriptive statistical tests, test data quality and classical assumption test. This study uses quantitative data obtained from distributing questionnaires to employees of the Boyolali BKD Office. The questionnaire was conducted from April 19, 2022 to April 27, 2022. These 28 questionnaires were distributed to 54 respondents.
The operational definition of a variable is a definition that is able to give meaning and specify activities in order to measured based on their respective variables. Inthis study the independent variable (X) is regional financial management, the regional financial accounting system and the governent's internal control system while the dependent variable (Y) Regional government Perfomance. a. The Regional Financial Management variable (X1) has a mean value of 44.59, a maximum value of 50, a minimum value of 40, a standard deviation of 3.277, and a median value of 45 so that it can be said that in general respondents agree that regional management can support Regional Government Perfomance. b. The Regional Financial Accounting System (X2) variable has a mean value of 35.96, a maximum value of 40, a minimum value of 32, a standard deviation value of 2.781, and a median value of 36 so that it can be said that in general respondents agree that the Regional Financial Accounting System can support Regional Government Perfomance c. The Government Internal Control System (X3) variable has a mean value of 22.28, a maximum value of 25, a minimum value of 20, a standard deviation of 1.731 and a median value of 22, so it can be said that in general respondents agree that the d. The Local Government Performance Variable (Y) has a mean value of 22.78, a maximum value of 25, a minimum value of 20, a standard deviation of 2.296 and a

Multiple Linear Regression Equation Test Results
The following are the results of multiple linear regression tests shown in Table 3.2 below: The following are the results of the resulting regression equation: Based on the multiple linear regression equation, it can be explained as follows: 1. The constant value (α) = -2.178 is a constant value, which means that if the variables of regional financial management, regional financial accounting systems and government internal control systems are equal to zero (0) then regional government perfomance decreases. 2. The regression coefficient value of regional financial management (X1) is -0.224 and is negative, meaning that for every 1 unit increase in regional financial management, it 3. The regression coefficient value of the regional financial accounting system (X2) is 0.402 with a positive sign meaning that every 1 unit increase in the regional financial 4. The regression coefficient value of the government's internal control system (X3) is 0.92, which is positive, meaning that every 1 unit increase in the government's internal

Model Feasibility Test (Statistical Test F)
Model Feasibility Test or F test is a joint test to test the significance of the effect of regional financial management variables, regional financial accounting systems and government internal control systems together on the regional government perfomance. In the F test, the F_count results are 36.324, which is greater than F_table, which is 3.179 with a significant level of 0.000 less than 0.05, meaning that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted, meaning that the variables of regional financial management, regional financial accounting systems and local government internal control systems are jointly or simultaneously affect the regional government perfomance.

Individual Parameter Significance Test (Test Statistical t)
The t-test is used to determine whether the regional financial management, regional financial accounting system and government internal control have a significant effect or not on regional government perfomance measures. 1. The results of the t-test for the regional financial management variable obtained a t_count value of -1.619 with a significant level of 0.112. With a significance limit or p-value of 0.05 (α = 0.05), the t_table is 0.67933. This means t_count< t_table-1,619< 0.67933. Or the significance value is 0.112> 0.05, which means that H0 is accepted and H2 is rejected. This means that local government financial management does not affect the regional government perfomance. 2. The results of the t-test for the regional financial accounting system variable obtained the t_count value of 2.879 with a significant level of 0.006. With a significance limit or pvalue of 0.05 (α = 0.05), the t_table is 0.67933. This means t_count > t_table 2.879> 0.67933. or a significance value of 0.006 <0.05, which means that H0 is rejected and H3 is accepted. This means that the regional financial accounting system affects the regional government perfomance. 3. The results of the t-test for the government's internal control system variable obtained a t_count value of 4.965 with a significant level of 0. With a significance limit or p-value of 0.05 (α=0.05), the t_table obtained was 0.67933. This means t_count > t_table 4,965 > 0.67933. Or a significance value of 0 <0.05, which means H0 is rejected and H4 is accepted. It means that the local government internal control system affects the regional government perfomance.

Coefficient of Determination Test (Adjusted R² )
Determination test is a test used to determine the amount in percent of the effect of the independent variable as a whole on the dependent variable (Ghozali, 2005). From the results of the analysis of the factors that affect the performance of local governments in the table presented, it shows that the value of the coefficient of determination ( ) is 0.667, which means that all independent variables are regional financial management X1), regional financial accounting system (X2), control system Regional internal (X3) has a joint contribution of 66.7% to the dependent variable, namely the regional government perfomance (Y), while 33.3% is influenced by other factors.

Discussion
Effect of regional financial management, regional financial accounting systems and internal control systems on regional government perfomance.
Based on the results of this study, the F test results obtained F_count of 36.324 which is greater than F_table which is 3.179 with a significant level of 0.000 which is smaller than 0.05, meaning that H0 is rejected and H1 is accepted, meaning that the variables of regional financial management, regional financial accounting systems and local government internal control systems are generally accepted. together or simultaneously affect the regional government perfomance.

Effect of local financial management on regional government perfomance
Based on the results of this study, the t-test value of the regional financial management variable (X1) obtained a t_count value of -1.619 and a p-value of 0.112. Furthermore, t_count is compared with t_table, which is -1.619 < 0.67933 and p-value p-value is compared to alpha 0.112> 0.05. The results of the comparison show that the t_count value is smaller than t_table and the p-value is greater than alpha. Which means that statistical analysis in this study found that the second hypothesis (H2) is that regional financial management has no significant effect on the regional government perfomance. Thus, the second hypothesis is rejected.
Effect of the regional financial accounting system on the regional government perfomance Based on the results of this study, the t-test value of the regional financial accounting system variable (X2) obtained a t_count value of 2.879 and a p-value of 0.006 .. Furthermore, t_count is compared with t_table, which is 2.879> 0.67933 and p-value is compared to alpha 0.006 <0 ,05. The comparison results show that the t_count value is greater than t_table and the p-value is smaller than alpha. Which means that statistical analysis in this study found that the third hypothesis (H3) is that the regional financial accounting system has a significant effect on the regional government perfomance. Thus the third hypothesis can be accepted.

Effect of the government's internal control system on the regional government perfomance
Based on the results of this study, the t-test value of the government internal control system variable (X3) obtained a t_count value of 4.965 and a p-value of 0. Furthermore, t_count was compared with t_table, which was 4.965> 0.67933. and p-value compared to alpha 0 < 0.05. The comparison results show that the t_count value is greater than t_table and the p-value is smaller than alpha. Which means that statistical analysis in this study found that the fourth hypothesis (H4), namely the government's internal control system has a International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR) Peer Reviewed -International Journal Vol-6, Issue-3, 2022 (IJEBAR) E-ISSN: 2614-1280 P-ISSN 2622-4771 https://jurnal.stie-aas.ac.id/index.php/IJEBAR International Journal of Economics, Business and Accounting Research (IJEBAR) Page1267 significant effect on the regional government perfomance. Thus the Fourth Hypothesis can be accepted.

Conclusion and Suggestion 4.1 Conclusions
a. Based on the results of hypothesis testing of Regional Financial Management, Regional Financial Accounting System and Government Internal Control System, the calculated F value is 36.324 with a significance level of 0.000. The level of significance is smaller than 0.05. Thus, it can be interpreted that Regional Financial Management, Regional Financial Accounting System and Government Internal Control System have a significant effect on Regional Government Performance. b. Based on the results of the Regional Financial Management hypothesis testing, the tcount value is -1.619 with a significance level of 0.112. The level of significance is greater than 0.05. Thus, it can be interpreted that Regional Financial Management has no effect on Regional Government Performance. c. Based on the results of hypothesis testing of the Regional Financial Accounting System, the t-count value is 2.879 with a significance level of 0.006. The level of significance is smaller than 0.05. Thus, it can be interpreted that the regional financial accounting stem has an effect on the performance of the regional government. d. Based on the results of the hypothesis testing of the Government Internal Control System, the t-count value is 4.965 with a significance level of 0. The significance level is less than 0.05. Thus it can be interpreted that the Government's Internal Control System has an effect on the performance of local governments.

Suggestion
Suggestions that can be submitted by the author as a result of the research, discussion and conclusions above. The authors hope in this study can help provide more value in further research. a. For further research, it is necessary to carry out other data collection methods to obtain more data. b. For further research, it is expected to increase the number of research samples and to be able to conduct research elsewhere, so that the results will be more generalized. c. This study shows that the Adjusted R^2 of 66.7% means that there are still 33.3% of other variables that contribute to the performance of local governments.