Page 632

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

An IT Governance Framework for Blockchain-Enabled Information

Integrity in Philippine Private Higher Education Institutions

Joy Camagon Bañas; Eduardo R. Yu II

AMA University, Quezon City, Philippines

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51583/IJLTEMAS.2026.150600049

Received: 12 June 2026; Accepted: 17 June 2026; Published: 04 July 2026

ABSTRACT

Information integrity is a critical priority for private higher education institutions (PHEIs) as it supports

institutional credibility, graduate employability, and compliance with accrediting and regulatory bodies.

Academic recordkeeping in Philippine PHEIs continues to evolve as part of broader digital transformation

initiatives. Although blockchain technology offers features such as immutability, decentralization, and

verifiability, its adoption should not be approached solely as a technical undertaking. Effective implementation

requires IT governance mechanisms that align technological initiatives with institutional goals, ensure

responsible resource allocation, manage organizational and security risks, and facilitate coordination among key

stakeholders. This study proposes an adaptable IT Governance Framework for blockchain-enabled information

integrity in Philippine private higher education institutions. Developed from the perspectives of stakeholders

within a PHEI context, the framework highlights the coordinating role of the IT Department while integrating

the responsibilities of the Registrar, Finance Office, Accreditation or Quality Assurance Unit, and Senior

Management. The framework combines blockchain capabilities with governance practices involving strategic

alignment, resource and investment management, risk management and security, roles and accountability, and

performance and compliance monitoring. Using a mixed-method approach involving surveys and interviews

with key institutional stakeholders, the findings provide empirical support for governance-driven blockchain

adoption characterized by clear policies, phased implementation, stakeholder collaboration, and adequate

resource allocation. The proposed framework offers a practical roadmap for institutional leaders seeking to

strengthen information integrity while advancing digital transformation in a manner that promotes trust,

accountability, and regulatory compliance. The study concludes that blockchain adoption should be regarded not

merely as a technology upgrade but as an IT governance initiative that can be adapted by Philippine PHEIs

operating within similar governance and regulatory environments.

Keywords: IT Governance, Blockchain, Information Integrity, Academic Recordkeeping, Resource

Management

INTRODUCTION

The accuracy and reliability of academic records remain fundamental responsibilities of higher education

institutions. Transcripts, diplomas, and certificates represent more than evidence of student achievement; they

reflect institutional credibility, support graduate employability, and demonstrate compliance with accrediting

and regulatory bodies. Any compromise in the authenticity or integrity of these records can erode stakeholder

trust, damage institutional reputation, and undermine confidence in the educational system (Wang et al., 2024;

Delgado-von Eitzen & Pisani, 2021). As higher education institutions continue to pursue digital transformation,

safeguarding academic information has become both a technological imperative and a governance concern.

In private higher education institutions (PHEIs), the responsibility for maintaining information integrity extends

across multiple functional units. The Registrar serves as the custodian of academic records and ensures their

accuracy, consistency, and accessibility. The Information Technology (IT) Department oversees the

technological infrastructure that supports data security, system reliability, and the integration of emerging

technologies. The Finance Office evaluates the sustainability of technology investments and allocates the

Page 633

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

resources necessary for implementation, while the Accreditation Unit ensures adherence to regulatory

requirements and quality standards. Senior Management provides strategic direction and institutional oversight,

enabling these units to work collaboratively toward shared organizational objectives. The effectiveness of

academic recordkeeping, therefore, depends not only on the technologies adopted but also on the governance

structures that coordinate institutional efforts (Bianchi et al., 2021).

Blockchain technology has emerged as a promising innovation capable of enhancing the integrity of academic

records through its features of immutability, decentralization, and verifiability (Bhaskar et al., 2021; Kuleto et

al., 2022). These characteristics offer opportunities to reduce credential fraud, streamline verification processes,

and strengthen trust among students, employers, accrediting bodies, and other stakeholders (Castro & Oliveira,

2021; Raimundo & Rosário, 2021). However, the successful adoption of blockchain requires more than technical

implementation. Without clear governance mechanisms, defined responsibilities, adequate resource allocation,

and effective risk management practices, institutions may encounter implementation challenges that limit the

realization of its potential benefits.

Recognizing these considerations, this study proposes an adaptable IT Governance Framework for blockchain-

enabled information integrity in Philippine private higher education institutions. The framework highlights the

importance of strategic alignment, resource and investment management, risk management and security, roles

and accountability, and performance and compliance monitoring in guiding blockchain adoption. Developed

from the perspectives of stakeholders within a specific PHEI context, the framework is intended to serve as a

practical guide for Philippine private higher education institutions operating within similar governance and

regulatory environments. While institutions may differ in organizational structures, resource capacities, and

operational practices, the proposed framework may be adapted to their specific contexts while preserving its

core governance principles. By positioning blockchain adoption within a broader IT governance perspective, the

study provides a roadmap for strengthening academic information integrity, supporting institutional

accountability, and advancing long-term digital transformation initiatives.

METHODOLOGY

The study employed a management-oriented approach to examine information technology (IT) governance

practices, strategic alignment, resource management, and stakeholder perspectives concerning blockchain

adoption within a Philippine private higher education institution (PHEI) context. To ensure a comprehensive and

balanced analysis, a mixed-method research design integrating quantitative survey data and qualitative interview

findings was utilized. Although grounded in a specific institutional setting, the study sought to identify

governance practices and institutional functions commonly found among Philippine PHEIs, thereby informing

the development of an adaptable framework that may be applied within similar governance and regulatory

environments.

The management-oriented, mixed-method approach highlights the importance of aligning institutional strategies

with governance mechanisms and resource allocation, reflecting the governance principles discussed by Bianchi

et al. (2021). At the same time, it captures the diverse experiences, insights, and expectations of institutional

stakeholders. Through the integration of quantitative and qualitative data, the study achieves methodological

triangulation, thereby enhancing the credibility, reliability, and interpretative depth of the analysis. This design

offers a holistic understanding of organizational impact, policy adherence, and decision-making efficiency,

which would be less robust if only a single-method approach were used.

The conceptual framework illustrates how IT governance principles and blockchain technology can be integrated

to strengthen information integrity within the PHEIs. It demonstrates how effective governance mechanisms

ensure that blockchain adoption promotes transparency, compliance, and strategic alignment. The framework

also underscores the collaborative role of multiple institutional units, emphasizing that blockchain

implementation is not purely a technological endeavor but a coordinated governance process requiring

cooperation across administrative, financial, and accreditation domains.

The framework identifies the IT Department as the key driver of institutional coordination, responsible for

ensuring that blockchain-enabled initiatives align with PHEIs long-term digital transformation objectives.

Page 634

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Through structured communication, policy alignment, and oversight, the IT Department facilitates the

integration of blockchain technology in ways that reinforce institutional accountability and data integrity.

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework for Blockchain-Enabled Information Integrity

As shown in Figure 1, the conceptual framework positions blockchain adoption as a governance-driven initiative

built upon cross-departmental collaboration. The Registrar, Finance Office, Accreditation Unit, and Senior

Management function as the primary domain contributors, each providing specialized expertise in record

management, resource allocation, regulatory compliance, and policy formulation. Within this configuration, the

IT Department acts as the central coordinating body that connects these institutional units, promoting unified

decision-making and information sharing.

The framework directly addresses governance challenges such as fragmented coordination, insufficient risk

oversight, and limited transparency by establishing a structured process of accountability and performance

monitoring, consistent with the governance principles emphasized by Tan et al. (2021) and van Pelt et al. (2020).

At the core of the model are five key IT governance domains: Strategic Alignment, Resource and Investment

Management, Risk Management and Security, Roles and Accountability, and Performance and Compliance

Monitoring. These domains collectively form the structural foundation for aligning blockchain initiatives with

institutional strategies, ensuring effective resource distribution, mitigating operational and cybersecurity risks,

and tracking performance and compliance outcomes.

On the right side of the framework, these governance domains are linked to blockchain's defining features,

including immutability, decentralization, verifiability, smart contracts, consensus protocols, and data encryption,

which have been identified as key attributes supporting secure and trustworthy educational record systems

(Bhaskar et al., 2021; Delgado-von Eitzen & Pisani, 2021). These technological capabilities strengthen data

Page 635

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

reliability and protect academic records from unauthorized access or tampering. By interconnecting governance

functions with blockchain attributes, the model establishes blockchain adoption as a management and

governance innovation rather than merely a technical upgrade. It thereby enhances institutional credibility,

operational efficiency, and adherence to data privacy and accreditation standards.

Data Collection Methods

To gather empirical insights and inform the development of the proposed framework, the study employed four

primary data collection methods: document review, surveys and interviews, comparative analysis, and

framework design.

Document Review- Existing institutional policies, procedures, and IT systems related to academic recordkeeping

were analyzed to identify governance gaps, process inefficiencies, and operational challenges. This review

provided a foundational understanding of PHEIs current information management practices and informed the

development of the governance-based blockchain framework.

Surveys and Interviews- Structured surveys and semi-structured interviews were conducted with key

institutional stakeholders to evaluate readiness for blockchain adoption, identify existing challenges, and assess

resource constraints. The participants represented institutional units commonly found in Philippine private

higher education institutions and were selected based on their involvement in governance, academic

recordkeeping, resource allocation, regulatory compliance, and strategic decision-making related to emerging

technologies. Their perspectives provided insights into governance practices that informed the development of

an adaptable framework for blockchain-enabled information integrity within similar PHEI contexts.

 Registrar – Custodian of academic records (n = 10)

 IT Department – Technical lead for blockchain implementation and system maintenance (n = 10)

 Finance Office – Oversees budget allocation and resource sustainability (n = 5)

 Accreditation Unit – Ensures regulatory compliance and accreditation readiness (n = 5)

 Senior Management – Provides oversight, institutional direction, and policy approval (n = 5)

The surveys measured stakeholder perspectives across five governance dimensions: strategic alignment,

resource and investment management, risk management and security, roles and accountability, and performance

and compliance monitoring. Open-ended interview questions elicited qualitative insights on perceived benefits,

challenges, and practical considerations for blockchain adoption. The integration of survey metrics and interview

narratives allowed for both quantitative assessment of the governance model and qualitative exploration of

stakeholder experiences.

Comparative Analysis- Academic and industry literature concerning blockchain adoption in higher education

was reviewed to benchmark best practices and identify governance models that ensure information integrity

(Delgado-von Eitzen & Pisani, 2021; Wang et al., 2024). This comparison facilitated the contextualization of

PHEIs institutional needs within broader international trends, highlighting governance structures that

successfully integrated blockchain technology in academic recordkeeping.

Framework Design- Findings from document review, stakeholder surveys, interviews, and comparative analysis

were synthesized to formulate the proposed IT governance framework. The design process emphasized the

alignment of blockchain functionalities with institutional priorities, ensuring that technology adoption supports

compliance with national education and data privacy policies, as well as internal operational objectives.

Ethical Considerations

The study adhered to established ethical principles governing research involving human participants.

Participation in the surveys and interviews was entirely voluntary, and respondents were informed of the purpose

Page 636

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

of the study, the nature of their involvement, and their right to decline participation or withdraw at any stage

without penalty. Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection.

To protect participant privacy and confidentiality, no personally identifiable information was included in the

analysis or reporting of findings. Responses were aggregated and presented at the institutional unit level (e.g.,

IT Department, Registrar, Finance Office, Accreditation Unit, and Senior Management) to prevent the

identification of individual respondents. Data collected through surveys and interviews were used solely for

academic purposes and were securely stored with access limited to the researchers.

The study also ensured that participants were not exposed to physical, psychological, social, or professional

harm arising from their involvement. Given that the research explored perceptions regarding governance

practices and blockchain adoption rather than sensitive personal matters, the level of risk to participants was

considered minimal. Permission to conduct the study within the selected private higher education institution was

obtained from the appropriate institutional authorities prior to data collection.

Interpretative Discussion

The results of the data collection and comparative analysis were consolidated into a governance-oriented design,

reflecting the interdependence of strategic, operational, and technological functions within PHEIs. The proposed

framework (see Figure 2) integrates the five IT governance domains: Strategic Alignment, Resource and

Investment Management, Risk Management and Security, Roles and Accountability, and Performance and

Compliance Monitoring, under the coordination of the IT Department.

Each institutional unit contributes to the governance process through specific responsibilities and feedback

mechanisms. The Registrar ensures data integrity in academic recordkeeping, the Finance Office manages

resource sustainability and investment monitoring, the Accreditation Unit ensures regulatory compliance, and

Senior Management provides strategic oversight and institutional direction. The IT Department serves as the

core facilitator of communication, system integration, and policy alignment, ensuring that governance activities

remain coordinated across institutional units commonly found in Philippine PHEIs.

The governance configuration creates a clear chain of accountability and minimizes coordination gaps between

technical and administrative units. It also strengthens internal communication, enabling more agile responses to

compliance and security challenges.

Figure 2. Proposed IT Governance Framework for Blockchain Integration

Page 637

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

As illustrated in Figure 2, the proposed framework for blockchain-enabled information integrity positions the IT

Department as the central coordinating authority overseeing the integration of blockchain technology into PHEIs

governance processes. Each governance domain contributes to a specific management dimension:

 Strategic Alignment ensures that blockchain projects directly support institutional goals, accreditation

standards, and long-term digital transformation strategies.

 Resource and Investment Management oversees budgeting, funding allocation, and system integration to

maintain financial sustainability and technological readiness.

 Risk Management and Security focuses on mitigating cybersecurity threats, ensuring compliance with

the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (Republic Act 10173), and safeguarding institutional data assets.

 Roles and Accountability clarifies the decision-making hierarchy, delineating responsibilities across

institutional units to prevent overlap and ensure transparency.

 Performance and Compliance Monitoring establishes performance indicators and continuous evaluation

mechanisms to measure the success of blockchain adoption initiatives and ensure adherence to

institutional and regulatory standards.

Supporting these domains are the core technological features of blockchain, namely immutability,

decentralization, and verifiability, which form the foundational layer of the governance framework and have

been widely recognized as mechanisms for strengthening the integrity and traceability of educational credentials

(Bhaskar et al., 2021; Kuleto et al., 2022). These features ensure that academic records are securely stored,

tamper-resistant, and auditable, thereby enhancing trust among stakeholders and accrediting bodies.

The model aligns with key regulatory frameworks in the Philippines, particularly the Commission on Higher

Education (CHED) policies, the Data Privacy Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10173), and internal PHEIs IT and

academic policies. By embedding blockchain functionalities within established governance systems, the

framework ensures that innovation remains compliant with national regulations while advancing institutional

transparency and efficiency, consistent with the governance perspective advanced by Tan et al. (2021).

Summary of Methodological Rationale

The integration of governance principles with blockchain capabilities demonstrates that effective technology

adoption requires not only technical infrastructure but also strategic leadership, stakeholder engagement, and

regulatory compliance, consistent with the observations of Bianchi et al. (2021) and Tan et al. (2021). The mixed-

method design supports this conceptualization by combining empirical stakeholder input with governance theory

and industry practice (Bianchi et al., 2021; Tan et al., 2021).

The comprehensive methodological approach establishes a practical roadmap for educational institutions aiming

to strengthen information integrity through blockchain technology while ensuring regulatory compliance,

operational sustainability, and institutional accountability. The proposed IT governance framework for

blockchain integration functions both as an analytical model and as an actionable management guide that may

inform strategic decision-making among Philippine private higher education institutions operating within similar

governance and regulatory contexts. While developed from the perspectives of stakeholders within a specific

PHEI setting, the framework is intended to be adaptable to institutions with comparable organizational structures

and information integrity requirements.

RESULT

Respondent Profile

A total of 35 key institutional personnel representing functional units commonly found in Philippine private

higher education institutions participated in the survey within the selected PHEI context. The respondents were

composed of the following groups: IT Management (n = 10), Registrar Staff (n = 10), Finance Office (n = 5),

Page 638

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Accreditation or Quality Assurance Unit (n = 5), and Senior Management (n = 5). These participants were

selected based on their direct involvement in governance, resource allocation, and academic recordkeeping

processes that influence blockchain adoption.

All items were evaluated using a five-point Likert scale, where 5 = Strongly Agree, 4 = Agree, 3 = Neutral, 2 =

Disagree, and 1 = Strongly Disagree.

Weighted Mean Scores per Governance Domain

The survey measured five governance domains corresponding to the proposed IT Governance Framework for

Blockchain-Enabled Information Integrity: Strategic Alignment, Resource and Investment Management, Risk

Management and Security, Roles and Accountability, and Performance and Compliance Monitoring.

Table 1 presents the computed weighted mean (WM) values across respondent groups.

Table 1. Weighted Mean Scores by Governance Domain and Respondent Group

Respondent

Group

Strategic

Alignment

Resource &

Investment

Management

Risk

Management

& Security

Roles &

Accountability

Performance

Compliance

Monitoring

Accreditation

Unit

4.93

4.80

4.93

5.00

Finance

Office

4.73

4.60

4.73

4.67

4.60

Management

4.77

4.73

Registrar

Staff

4.97

4.87

4.83

4.87

4.93

Senior

Management

5.00

Overall

Mean

4.88

4.83

4.81

4.83

4.85

All domains received ratings between 4.81 and 4.88, which correspond to Strongly Agree (Very High

Agreement). This indicates a strong institutional consensus on the importance of governance-driven blockchain

adoption.

C. Computation of Weighted Mean

Formula:

∑(fi⋅ xi)

Weighted Mean (WM) =

Where:

fi = frequency of each response

Page 639

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

xi = weight assigned to each response

N = total number of responses

D. Domain-Specific Results

1) Strategic Alignment

Table 2. Weighted Mean Scores of Strategic Alignment Governance Domain

Scale

Weight (w)

Frequency (f)

f × w

Strongly Agree

465

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Total

105

512

WM = = 4.88

105

Interpretation: Strongly Agree (Very High Agreement). The respondents emphasized that blockchain initiatives

should align with PHEIs strategic goals and accreditation mandates.

2) Resource and Investment Management

Table 3. Weighted Mean Scores of Resource and Investment Management Governance Domain

Scale

Weight (w)

Frequency (f)

f × w

Strongly Agree

445

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Total

105

507

WM = = 4.83

105

Interpretation: Strongly Agree (Very High Agreement). Adequate budget allocation, infrastructure, and training

are essential for blockchain implementation success.

3) Risk Management and Security

Page 640

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Table 4. Weighted Mean Scores of Risk Management and Security Governance Domain

Scale

Weight (w)

Frequency (f)

f × w

Strongly Agree

435

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Total

105

505

WM = = 4.81

105

Interpretation: Strongly Agree (Very High Agreement). There is a clear recognition of the importance of

cybersecurity, privacy protection, and operational safeguards.

4) Roles and Accountability

Table 5. Weighted Mean Scores of Roles and Accountability Governance Domain

Scale

Weight (w)

Frequency (f)

f × w

Strongly Agree

445

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Total

105

507

WM = = 4.83

105

Interpretation: Strongly Agree (Very High Agreement). Clear delineation of roles and accountability

mechanisms are critical to ensure integrity in academic recordkeeping.

5) Performance and Compliance Monitoring

Table 6. Weighted Mean Scores of Performance and Compliance Monitoring Governance Domain

Scale

Weight (w)

Frequency (f)

f × w

Strongly Agree

450

Agree

Neutral

Page 641

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Scale

Weight (w)

Frequency (f)

f × w

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Total

105

509

WM = = 4.85

105

Interpretation: Strongly Agree (Very High Agreement). Continuous performance evaluation and compliance

monitoring are viewed as vital for maintaining information integrity.

Qualitative Findings

Open-ended responses identified data security, transparency, immutability, and efficiency as the primary

perceived benefits of blockchain adoption. Respondents highlighted faster verification processes, enhanced trust

with accrediting bodies, and improved operational efficiency as significant advantages.

Key challenges include financial constraints, technical complexity, and training needs. Respondents also

recommended management support, phased implementation, and clear policies to address these concerns.

Figure 3. Process Flow for Blockchain-Enabled Academic Recordkeeping

The process flow clarifies how governance decisions are operationalized within the blockchain ecosystem. It

highlights accountability checkpoints, ensures transparency of academic record transactions, and provides a

Page 642

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

mechanism for continuous improvement through structured monitoring and evaluation, reflecting the principles

of performance monitoring and accountability emphasized by Bianchi et al. (2021).

The process flow illustrates how each governance domain contributes to blockchain-enabled recordkeeping,

from strategic alignment and resource allocation to risk control, accountability, and performance monitoring.

In practical implementations, secure integration layers may be established between the blockchain network and

existing institutional databases through application programming interfaces (APIs), middleware services, or

similar interoperability mechanisms. These components facilitate controlled data exchange, authentication,

encryption, and transaction validation while supporting compliance with institutional security policies and data

privacy regulations. Such integration approaches enable institutions to leverage blockchain capabilities while

maintaining the functionality of existing academic information systems, thereby reducing implementation

complexity and supporting phased technology adoption.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

DISCUSSION

The findings reveal a strong institutional consensus that blockchain adoption in PHEIs should be governed

through a structured IT governance framework rather than implemented solely as a technological initiative. The

consistently high weighted mean scores (WM = 4.81–4.88) suggest that respondents recognize governance

mechanisms as essential prerequisites for ensuring information integrity and successful digital transformation.

The highest-rated domain, Strategic Alignment (WM = 4.88), indicates that respondents perceive blockchain

initiatives as most effective when aligned with institutional objectives, accreditation requirements, and long-

term digital transformation goals. This finding supports the argument of Bianchi et al. (2021), who emphasized

that IT governance in higher education must ensure that technology investments contribute directly to

organizational objectives and institutional value creation. Similarly, Wang et al. (2024) noted that blockchain

initiatives in education often fail when implemented as isolated technological projects without integration into

broader institutional strategies. The high level of agreement among respondents suggests that PHEIs recognize

that blockchain adoption should reinforce, rather than disrupt, existing educational missions and governance

structures.

The results for Resource and Investment Management (WM = 4.83) highlight stakeholders' awareness that

blockchain implementation requires substantial organizational commitment beyond software acquisition.

Respondents emphasized the importance of financial sustainability, infrastructure readiness, and workforce

capability. These findings align with Mohammad and Vargas (2022), who identified financial constraints and

limited technical expertise as major barriers to blockchain adoption in higher education institutions. Likewise,

Alshareef et al. (2022) argued that leadership support and strategic investment decisions significantly influence

organizational readiness for emerging technologies. Therefore, successful blockchain adoption in PHEIs

depends not only on technological feasibility but also on sustained institutional investment and capacity-building

initiatives.

Although Risk Management and Security obtained the lowest weighted mean among the five domains (WM =

4.81), it still reflected very high agreement among respondents. This result suggests that respondents

acknowledge cybersecurity, privacy protection, and operational resilience as critical governance concerns. Given

the sensitive nature of academic records, blockchain implementations must comply with data protection

requirements, including the Philippine Data Privacy Act of 2012 (Republic Act No. 10173). Previous studies

similarly emphasize that while blockchain offers immutability and transparency, institutions must address risks

related to privacy, access control, and governance mechanisms (Delgado-von Eitzen & Pisani, 2021; Tan et al.,

2021). The findings imply that PHEIs are aware that blockchain alone does not eliminate security risks and must

be complemented by robust governance controls.

The high agreement in Roles and Accountability (WM = 4.83) demonstrates respondents' recognition of the need

for clearly defined responsibilities across institutional units. Blockchain initiatives involve multiple stakeholders,

Page 643

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

including the IT Department, Registrar, Finance Office, Accreditation Unit, and Senior Management. The

findings support van Pelt et al. (2020), who argued that clearly articulated governance structures are fundamental

to blockchain success because they establish decision rights, accountability mechanisms, and stakeholder

coordination. The respondents' perspectives indicate that effective implementation requires cross-functional

collaboration rather than isolated decision-making within technical departments.

Similarly, Performance and Compliance Monitoring (WM = 4.85) underscores the importance of continuous

evaluation and regulatory oversight. Respondents recognized that governance effectiveness should be measured

through performance indicators, audits, and compliance reviews. This finding is consistent with Bianchi et al.

(2021), who emphasized that effective IT governance in higher education requires continuous monitoring and

evaluation mechanisms to ensure alignment with institutional objectives, accountability, and ongoing

improvement. Moreover, blockchain adoption within higher education must remain responsive to evolving

accreditation standards and institutional policies to sustain stakeholder trust.

While the findings demonstrate strong stakeholder support for governance-driven blockchain adoption, the

results should be interpreted within the scope of organizational readiness rather than technological validation.

The proposed framework focuses primarily on governance structures, institutional coordination, and decision-

making mechanisms. Consequently, technical performance considerations such as transaction latency,

interoperability with legacy student information systems, smart contract maintenance, and distributed ledger

scalability were not empirically evaluated. These factors remain important implementation considerations that

may influence operational outcomes in actual deployment environments. Future pilot implementations may

provide additional evidence regarding the interaction between governance effectiveness and technical

performance under real-world conditions.

Overall, the findings extend existing literature by demonstrating that, within the context of Philippine PHEIs,

stakeholders perceive blockchain adoption primarily as a governance challenge rather than merely a

technological innovation. While previous studies predominantly focused on blockchain's technical capabilities,

such as immutability and verifiability (Bhaskar et al., 2021; Kuleto et al., 2022), the present study highlights the

equally critical role of governance structures in ensuring successful implementation. The results therefore

provide empirical support for the proposed IT Governance Framework as a practical and context-sensitive model

that may serve as an adaptable guide for Philippine private higher education institutions operating within similar

governance and regulatory environments.

CONCLUSION

The study concludes that key institutional personnel within the selected PHEI context exhibit very high levels

of agreement regarding the integration of blockchain technology within a structured IT governance framework.

The findings affirm that blockchain adoption should not be viewed solely as a technological upgrade but as an

organizational transformation requiring strategic leadership, policy support, resource commitment, and

accountability mechanisms.

The consistently high weighted mean scores across all governance domains demonstrate that strategic alignment,

sustainable investment, risk management, role clarification, and continuous performance monitoring are

essential conditions for successful blockchain-enabled academic recordkeeping. The study contributes to the

growing body of literature on blockchain in higher education by emphasizing that governance readiness is

equally important as technological readiness.

Consequently, the proposed IT Governance Framework provides an adaptable roadmap for Philippine private

higher education institutions seeking to strengthen information integrity while ensuring compliance, operational

sustainability, and stakeholder trust. Although developed from the perspectives of stakeholders within a specific

PHEI context, the framework may be tailored to institutions with comparable governance structures and

regulatory requirements while preserving its core governance principles.

Page 644

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY

This study was developed from the perspectives of stakeholders within a specific Philippine private higher

education institution (PHEI) context and did not involve the deployment of a blockchain prototype, pilot

implementation, or operational network testing. Consequently, the findings primarily reflect stakeholder

perceptions, governance readiness, and organizational considerations rather than empirical system-performance

metrics. No blockchain node simulations, ledger stress testing, smart contract execution testing, or transaction

throughput evaluations were conducted to validate the framework under actual operating conditions.

The study is also limited by its purposive sample of thirty-five (35) institutional stakeholders drawn from a single

PHEI environment. While the selected respondents represent key governance functions involved in academic

recordkeeping and technology decision-making, the findings may not fully represent the diversity of governance

structures, resource capacities, and technological readiness levels across other Philippine higher education

institutions.

Furthermore, although respondents expressed strong agreement regarding resource and investment management

requirements, the study did not quantitatively evaluate implementation costs, system migration complexity,

database synchronization challenges, interoperability constraints, or long-term maintenance requirements

associated with integrating blockchain technologies into existing university information systems. These

operational and technical considerations warrant further investigation through pilot implementations and multi-

institutional validation studies.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the findings of the study and the proposed IT Governance Framework, the following recommendations

are offered to support the successful adoption of blockchain-enabled academic recordkeeping in PHEIs:

1. Adopt a Phased Implementation Approach. PHEIs should initiate pilot blockchain projects within the IT

Department and Registrar's Office before institution-wide deployment. A phased approach enables

institutions to identify technical and operational challenges, assess stakeholder readiness, and minimize

implementation risks. This recommendation is consistent with Wang et al. (2024), who emphasized

incremental adoption strategies to improve the sustainability of blockchain initiatives in educational

settings.

2. Establish a Governance Committee. Institutions should create a multi-unit IT Governance Council

composed of representatives from the IT Department, Registrar, Finance Office, Accreditation Unit, and

Senior Management. Such a committee can oversee policy formulation, decision-making, and

accountability mechanisms. This aligns with van Pelt et al. (2020), who highlighted the importance of

clearly defined governance structures in ensuring successful blockchain implementation.

3. Ensure Sustainable Budgeting and Resource Allocation. Dedicated funding should be allocated for

technological infrastructure, cybersecurity measures, system maintenance, and staff development. Since

financial constraints remain a major barrier to blockchain adoption, long-term investment planning is

necessary to support institutional readiness and sustainability (Mohammad & Vargas, 2022).

4. Incorporate Blockchain-Specific Procurement and Vendor Evaluation Criteria. Institutions should

incorporate blockchain-specific procurement evaluation criteria during vendor selection and project

planning. These criteria may include assessment of cryptographic dependencies, protocol upgrade

mechanisms, interoperability capabilities, security certification requirements, vendor support

commitments, and the availability of a Cryptographic Bill of Materials (CBOM). Such evaluations can

assist decision-makers in identifying long-term security, interoperability, and sustainability

considerations while supporting effective technology governance throughout the system lifecycle.

Page 645

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

Table 7. Blockchain Procurement and Vendor Evaluation Matrix

Evaluation Area

Governance Consideration

CBOM Availability

Visibility of cryptographic dependencies and security components

Protocol Update Pathway

Long-term maintainability and support for future upgrades

Interoperability

Integration with existing student information systems (SIS) and institutional

databases

Security Certifications

Compliance with security standards and institutional requirements

Vendor Support and

Maintenance

Sustainability, technical assistance, and issue resolution

5. Define Performance Metrics and Compliance Mechanisms. PHEIs should establish key performance

indicators (KPIs), conduct periodic audits, and implement compliance reviews to evaluate the

effectiveness of blockchain initiatives. Continuous monitoring ensures that blockchain systems remain

aligned with institutional objectives and regulatory requirements, consistent with the governance

principles emphasized by Bianchi et al. (2021), particularly the importance of continuous monitoring and

evaluation in ensuring that IT initiatives remain aligned with institutional objectives.

6. Develop Secure Inter-System Integration Strategies. PHEIs should establish standardized application

programming interfaces (APIs) and middleware architectures that enable secure communication between

blockchain platforms and existing student information systems, registrar databases, and accreditation

management systems. Data exchanges should employ encryption, access control mechanisms, and

privacy-preserving protocols to ensure that sensitive academic information remains protected throughout

transmission and storage.

7. Evaluate Scalability and Operational Sustainability. Future implementations should assess the ability of

blockchain-enabled systems to support increasing transaction volumes, institutional growth, and

evolving operational requirements. Considerations may include system performance, interoperability,

resource utilization, and governance mechanisms that ensure long-term sustainability and service

reliability, particularly during periods of high demand such as enrollment, graduation processing, and

credential verification activities.

8. Promote Capacity Development and Change Management. Institutions should provide continuous

technical and governance training programs for personnel involved in blockchain operations. Leadership

support, stakeholder engagement, and capability-building initiatives are essential to reducing resistance

to change and enhancing organizational readiness for digital transformation (Alshareef et al., 2022).

9. Encourage Future Empirical Validation of the Framework. Future studies may apply and evaluate the

proposed IT Governance Framework in actual blockchain pilot implementations across a broader range

of higher education institutions. Expanding the sample size and examining implementation outcomes

will enhance the generalizability and practical applicability of the framework.

REFERENCES

1. Wang, X., Younas, M., Jiang, Y., & Imran, M. (2024). Transforming education through blockchain:

A systematic review of applications, projects, and challenges. IEEE Access, 13, 13264–13284.

https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3519350

2. Mikroyannidis, A., Third, A., & Domingue, J. (2024). Blockchain-based decentralised micro-

accreditation for lifelong learning. Interactive Learning Environments. Advance online publication.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2024.2401485

Page 646

www.rsisinternational.org

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LATEST TECHNOLOGY IN ENGINEERING,

MANAGEMENT & APPLIED SCIENCE (IJLTEMAS)

ISSN 2278-2540 | DOI: 10.51583/IJLTEMAS | Volume XV, Issue VI, June 2026

3. Alshareef, N., Sandhu, K., Shahzad, K., & Hussain, W. (2022). Role of leadership in adoption of

blockchain technology in small and medium enterprises in Saudi Arabia. Frontiers in Psychology, 13,

Article 911432. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.911432

4. Kuleto, V., Ilić, M., Dumangiu, M., Ranković, M., Martins, O. M. D., Păun, D., & Mihoreanu, L.

(2022). The potential of blockchain technology in higher education as perceived by students in Serbia,

Romania and Portugal, 14(2), Article 749. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020749

5. Mohammad, A., & Vargas, S. (2022). Barriers affecting higher education institutions' adoption of

blockchain technology: A qualitative study. Informatics, 9(3), Article 64.

https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics9030064

6. Siddiqui, S. T., Ahmad, M. O., Khamruddin, M., & Gupta, A. K. (2022). Blockchain and IoT for

educational certificates generation and verification. In 2022 2nd International Conference on

Computing and Information Technology (ICCIT). IEEE.

https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCIT52419.2022.9711656

7. Alam, S., Abdullah, H., Abdulhaq, R., & Hayawi, A. (2021). A blockchain-based framework for

secure educational credentials. Turkish Journal of Computer and Mathematics Education, 12(10),

5157–5167. https://doi.org/10.17762/turcomat.v12i10.5298

8. Bhaskar, P., Tiwari, C. K., & Joshi, A. (2021). Blockchain in education management: Present and

future applications. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 18(1), 1–17.

https://doi.org/10.1108/ITSE-07-2020-0102

9. Bianchi, I. S., Sousa, R. D., Pereira, R., van Hillegersberg, J., & Mezzomo, A. (2021). Information

technology governance for higher education institutions: A multi-country study. Informatics, 8(2),

Article 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/informatics8020026

10. Bucea-Manea-Țoniș, R., Martins, O. M. D., Bucea-Manea-Țoniș, R., & Gheorghiță, C. (2021).

Blockchain technology enhances sustainable higher education. Sustainability, 13(22), Article 12347.

https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212347

11. Castro, R. Q., & Oliveira, M. A.-Y. (2021). Blockchain and higher education diplomas. European

Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 11(1), 154–167.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11010013

12. Delgado-von Eitzen, C., & Pisani, F. (2021). Blockchain applications in education: A systematic

literature review. Applied Sciences, 11(24), Article 11811. https://doi.org/10.3390/app112411811

13. Raimundo, R., & Rosário, A. (2021). Blockchain system in higher education. European Journal of

Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education, 11(1), 276–293.

https://doi.org/10.3390/ejihpe11010021

14. Tan, E., Mahula, S., & Crompvoets, J. (2021). Blockchain governance in the public sector: A

conceptual framework for public management. Government Information Quarterly, 39(6), Article

101625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2021.101625

15. van Pelt, R., Jansen, S., Baars, D., & Overbeek, S. (2020). Defining blockchain governance: A

framework for analysis and comparison. Information Systems Management, 38(1), 21–41.

https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530.2020.1720046

16. Awaji, B., Solaiman, E., & Albshri, A. (2020). Blockchain-based applications in higher education: A

systematic mapping study. arXiv preprint. https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.14528

17. Mahamatov, N., Kuvnakov, A., & Yokubov, B. (2020). Application of blockchain technology in

higher education. In 2020 International Conference on Information Science and Communications

Technologies (ICISCT). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICISCT50599.2020.9351424

18. Salandanan, M. T. (2020). Blockchain technology as a competitive advantage for higher education

institutions in the Philippines. Millennium Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 1(3), 1–15.

https://doi.org/10.47340/mjhss.v1i3.16