Document & Inventory Monitoring System (DMS IMS): Relational Database-Driven Intranet System for High-Integrity Asset Tracking in Educational Institutions

Managing institutional stockrooms through manual spreadsheets routinely produces phantom inventory, untraceable edits, multi-user update collisions, and a complete loss of accountability. To address these failures, this study designed, developed, integrated, and evaluated the Document & Inventory Monitoring System (DMS IMS), a secure, high-integrity web application built for local intranet deployment. Developed through an Agile Scrum process across seven two-week sprints, the system pairs a Laravel 9.x model-view-controller (MVC) backend with a MariaDB schema normalized to Third Normal Form (3NF) and a Bootstrap 5.3 frontend using asynchronous JavaScript and XML (AJAX). Core features include automated stock-keeping unit (SKU) generation, bcrypt credential hashing (work factor 12), an append-only audit trail, and ACID-compliant (Atomicity, Consistency, Isolation, Durability) Stock-In/Stock-Out transactions. Evaluation followed a two-stage protocol: developer-led unit and integration testing, then a ten-case system suite (ST-001 to ST-010) on an isolated local area network (LAN) simulating up to 50 concurrent connections. Initial runs achieved a 70% pass rate; three defects (a concurrency lock failure, a search-latency breach, and a valuation rounding error) were resolved through column indexing, transactional retries, and strict decimal types, yielding a 100% final pass rate. Under peak load, live-search latency fell from 1.9 seconds to 0.4 seconds, exceeding the 1.2-second requirement. DMS IMS offers public institutions a low-cost, locally hosted asset-tracking platform that keeps institutional data under institutional control without internet dependence. The findings support further pilot deployment and usability validation with actual staff.

inventory monitoring system, Agile Scrum Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC), relational database integrity, software quality testing, software engineering.

1. Bass, L., Clements, P., & Kazman, R. (2021). Software architecture in practice (4th ed.). Addison-Wesley Professional. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Beck, K., Beedle, M., van Bennekum, A., Cockburn, A., Cunningham, W., Fowler, M., Grenning, J., Highsmith, J., Hunt, A., Jeffries, R., Kern, J., Marick, B., Martin, R. C., Mellor, S., Schwaber, K., Sutherland, J., & Thomas, D. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. https://agilemanifesto.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Boehm, B. W. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. Computer, 21(5), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.59 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A quick and dirty usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, I. L. McClelland, & B. Weerdmeester (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189-194). Taylor & Francis. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bulacan State University Graduate School. (2026). Curriculum guidelines and competency descriptors for MS Computer Engineering [Unpublished institutional guidelines]. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Codd, E. F. (1970). A relational model of data for large shared data banks. Communications of the ACM, 13(6), 377-387. https://doi.org/10.1145/362384.362685 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Cohn, M. (2004). User stories applied: For agile software development. Addison-Wesley Professional. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Date, C. J. (2004). An introduction to database systems (8th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-340. https://doi.org/10.2307/249008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Diffie, W., & Hellman, M. E. (1976). New directions in cryptography. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 22(6), 644-654. https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.1976.1055638 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Elmasri, R., & Navathe, S. B. (2015). Fundamentals of database systems (7th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Forsgren, N., Humble, J., & Kim, G. (2018). Accelerate: The science of lean software and DevOps: Building and scaling high performing technology organizations. IT Revolution Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Fowler, M. (2018). Refactoring: Improving the design of existing code (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley Professional. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gamma, E., Helm, R., Johnson, R., & Vlissides, J. (1994). Design patterns: Elements of reusable object-oriented software. Addison-Wesley. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Gray, J. (1981). The transaction concept: Virtues and limitations. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Very Large Data Bases (pp. 144-154). ACM. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2010). Continuous delivery: Reliable software releases through build, test, and deployment automation. Addison-Wesley Professional. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. International Organization for Standardization. (2019). ISO 9241-210:2019: Ergonomics of human-system interaction, Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. https://www.iso.org/standard/77520.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. International Organization for Standardization & International Electrotechnical Commission. (2011). ISO/IEC 25010:2011: Systems and software engineering, Systems and software quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE), System and software quality models. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. https://www.iso.org/standard/35733.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. International Organization for Standardization, International Electrotechnical Commission, & Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. (2017). ISO/IEC/IEEE 12207:2017: Systems and software engineering, Software life cycle processes. https://www.iso.org/standard/63712.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. International Organization for Standardization, International Electrotechnical Commission, & Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. (2018). ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2018: Systems and software engineering, Life cycle processes, Requirements engineering. https://www.iso.org/standard/72089.html [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. International Software Testing Qualifications Board. (2023). Certified tester foundation level syllabus (Version 4.0). https://www.istqb.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Kleppmann, M. (2017). Designing data-intensive applications: The big ideas behind reliable, scalable, and maintainable systems. O'Reilly Media. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Martin, R. C. (2008). Clean code: A handbook of agile software craftsmanship. Prentice Hall. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Myers, G. J., Sandler, C., & Badgett, T. (2011). The art of software testing (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119202486 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2020). Security and privacy controls for information systems and organizations (NIST Special Publication 800-53, Revision 5). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-53r5 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2022). Secure software development framework (SSDF) version 1.1: Recommendations for mitigating the risk of software vulnerabilities (NIST Special Publication 800-218). https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.800-218 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Naur, P., & Randell, B. (Eds.). (1969). Software engineering: Report on a conference sponsored by the NATO Science Committee, Garmisch, 7th to 11th October 1968. NATO Scientific Affairs Division. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufmann. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. https://www.nngroup.com/books/usability-engineering/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. OWASP Foundation. (2021a). OWASP Top 10: The ten most critical web application security risks. https://owasp.org/Top10/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. OWASP Foundation. (2021b). Application security verification standard 4.0.3. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. https://owasp.org/www-project-application-security-verification-standard/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Panko, R. R. (1998). What we know about spreadsheet errors. Journal of End User Computing, 10(2), 15-21. https://doi.org/10.4018/joeuc.1998040102 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. PartKeepr. (n.d.). PartKeepr: Open source inventory management [Computer software]. https://www.partkeepr.org [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

38. Pressman, R. S., & Maxim, B. R. (2020). Software engineering: A practitioner's approach (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

39. Republic Act No. 10173. (2012). Data Privacy Act of 2012. Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2012/08/15/republic-act-no-10173/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

40. Royce, W. W. (1970). Managing the development of large software systems. In Proceedings of IEEE WESCON (pp. 1-9). IEEE. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

41. Schwaber, K., & Sutherland, J. (2020). The Scrum guide: The definitive guide to Scrum. https://scrumguides.org/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

42. Shneiderman, B., Plaisant, C., Cohen, M., Jacobs, S., Elmqvist, N., & Diakopoulos, N. (2016). Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction (6th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

43. Silberschatz, A., Korth, H. F., & Sudarshan, S. (2020). Database system concepts (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

44. Snipe-IT. (n.d.). Snipe-IT: Open source asset management [Computer software]. https://snipeitapp.com [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

45. Sommerville, I. (2016). Software engineering (10th ed.). Pearson. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

46. Tompkins, J. A., White, J. A., Bozer, Y. A., & Tanchoco, J. M. A. (2010). Facilities planning (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470446619 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]