Although data indicates that there is no improvement in the welfare of the poor in Sidayu village, in fact, PNPM Rural directly contributes to improving the welfare of the poor by providing incentives. poor households who participate in the construction of the project as workers and who donate money through microcredit programs. Until 2010, 142 poor households worked on the project and were paid 35,000 rupees per day by TPK. Under its microcredit program, TPK distributed Rs 29,000,000 worth of loans to 29 poor women. However, poor women's incomes have not improved as expected due to the credit service provided to them. In terms of infrastructure (construction), the PNPM has achieved the project objectives which are 10 km of cliff road, 1 km2 of dam, 10 km of drinking water. canal, 5 km irrigation canal and 3 km drainage were successfully completed. Moreover, these infrastructure constructions were carried out based on the specified quality standards, as proven by the technical experts. Based on the above data, we rate the project effectiveness higher.d. Impact Three questions were proposed to assess the impact of PNPM Rural projects, namely: 1) Did the PNPM Rural project empower the poor target? Have the infrastructures created by the PNPM Rural project been developed in the village of Sidayu? Although PNPM Rural failed to reduce the poverty rate, in the short term the program had a direct impact on the poor in Sidayu village. PNPM Rural directly contributes to improving the well-being of the poor by providing incentives to poor households who participate in project construction as workers and by donating money through microcredit programs. Until 2010, 142 poor households represented a project...... middle of document...... effort of PNPM Rural to strengthen the capacities of individuals and communities, especially poor people, to make decisions by consensus and to convert these decisions into actions and expected results that improve their prosperity. By implementing PNPM Rural, the Indonesian government provides resources and opportunities for the poor to participate in the development process, from planning to maintenance. Based on our assessment, we conclude that PNPM Rural was able to empower the poor in the development process, particularly in terms of deliberation and infrastructure construction. But in terms of the final objective “poverty reduction”, PNPM Rural was not able to reduce the poverty rate in Sidayu village. Based on the assessment, we have some recommendations for the national government, Batang local government and Sidayu community and Sidayu village. government.