procurement system for ccsfp

CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FERNANDO PAMPANGACity of San Fernando (P)

PROCUREMENT SYSTEMFOR THE CITY COLLEGEOF SAN FERNANDO, PAMPANGA

Precious Gem V. DavidJohn Carlo V. Quizon

February 2015

Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga xi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Advisers RecommendationPanels ApprovalAcknowledgmentDedicationAbstractTable of ContentsList of TablesList of FiguresChapter I INTRODUCTIONBackground of the StudyStatement of the ProblemObjectivesSignificance of the StudyScope and DelimitationChapter II THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKReview of Related StudiesReview of Related LiteratureConceptual FrameworkChapter III METHODOLOGYProject Research DesignProject DevelopmentEvaluation ProcedureEvaluation CriteriaInstruments and Techniques Usediiiiiivvviviiixx

13345

7811

1223252527Chapter IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONProject and Technical DescriptionProject Structured OrganizationProject Limitations and CapabilitiesProject Evaluation Chapter V SUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONSummaryConclusionRecommendationAppendicesAppendix A:FURPS Evaluation FormAppendix B:QuestionnaireAppendix C:ReferencesAppendix D:Researchers Profile

28284041

454546

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 Population of the respondentsTable 3.2 Likert scaleTable 4.1 Hardware and software requirements of the proposed systemTable 4.2 Respondents rating on the functionality of the proposed systemTable 4.3 Respondents rating on the usability of the proposed systemTable 4.4 Respondents rating on the reliability of the proposed systemTable 4.5 Respondents rating on the performance of the proposed systemTable 4.6 Respondents rating on the supportability of the proposed system

2526284142434444

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1 Input-Process-Output (IPO) diagram of the proposed systemFigure 3.1 Context Data Flow DiagramFigure 3.2 Level 1 Data Flow DiagramFigure 3.3 Hierarchical Input-Process-Output (HIPO) of the proposed systemFigure 3.4 Hierarchical Input-Process-Output (HIPO) of the proposed system (Continuation)Figure 3.5 Program Flowchart of the proposed system (Log in)Figure 3.6 Program Flowchart of the proposed system (Main Form)Figure 3.7 Program Flowchart of the proposed system (Continuation)Figure 3.8 Program Flowchart of the proposed system (Continuation)Figure 3.9 Program Flowchart of the proposed system (Continuation)Figure 3.10 Program Flowchart of the proposed system (Continuation)Figure 3.11 Program Flowchart of the proposed system (Continuation)Figure 3.12 Iteration in Agile Development CycleFigure 4.1 Procurement System Log-inFigure 4.2 Change ServerFigure 4.3 Register AccountFigure 4.4 Projects HomeFigure 4.5 Projects InboxFigure 4.6 Projects SentFigure 4.7 Compose MessageFigure 4.8 Messages InboxFigure 4.9 Messages Sent

1112131415

1617181920212223282929293030313132Figure 4.10 RemindersFigure 4.11 AccountsFigure 4.12 Add ReminderFigure 4.13 Create New ProjectFigure 4.14 Budget ProposalFigure 4.15 Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) breakdownFigure 4.16 Capital Outlay (CO) breakdownFigure 4.17 Personal Services (PS) breakdownFigure 4.18 Sample AIP generated using the proposed systemFigure 4.19 Sample MOOE generated using the proposed systemFigure 4.20 Sample Budgetary Requirements generated using the proposed systemFigure 4.21 Sample Financial Plan Summary generated using the proposed systemFigure 4.22 Manage DepartmentFigure 4.23 Update User InformationFigure 4.24 Change PasswordFigure 4.25 Comparative SummaryFigure 4.26 Sample Bar Chart showing the allocation of budget (MOOE, CO, and PS) for the budget year, current year, and the past yearFigure 4.27 Sample Pie Chart showing the allocation of budget to projects, programs, and activities, separately for MOOE, CO and PS for the budget year3233333434353535363637

37

3838393940

40

CHAPTER IINTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND OF THE STUDYThe City College of San Fernando, Pampanga (CCSFP) was established in 2009 with the purpose of providing free education to deserving Fernandinos. Since its founding, the City College has held curricular and co-curricular activities and programs that cater the students total development. The foundation of the City College building along with its facilities, such as the library, computer laboratories, and science laboratories, has helped encourage and motivate the students to do well in their studies. The CCSFP is considered as a department of the Local Government Unit of the City of San Fernando, Pampanga. As a department of the City Government, the CCSFP complies with the policies and requirements of the City Finance Committee with respect to its budget and procurement needs. At present, the City Government follows and requires the preparation of an Annual Investment Plan (AIP), Project Procurement Management Plan (PPMP), Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary.The process is more particularly described as follows:For a program, project, or activity to materialize, a budget proposal is prepared by the project coordinator, at least 45 days prior to its implementation. The budget proposal includes the title of the program, project, or activity, the department objectives, the date or period in which the program, project, or activity is going to be implemented, the expected output, the budget, and the breakdown of the budget.Six months prior to the following fiscal year, each CCSFP department submits its expected projects, programs, and activities. The AIP is then consolidated and prepared by the administrative officers of CCSFP. The AIP covers all the intended projects, programs, and activities that the CCSFP will implement for the entire budget year.The funding source of the budget is identified based on its utilization. If the project requires Personal Services (PS), i.e., project based and fixed term employees, the funding source is the General Funds (GF). Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE), such as food, supplies, and utilities, are also funded by the GF. The Capital Outlay (CO) includes equipment, furniture and fixtures, and other purchases that are retained in the CCSFP. The CO follows bidding and awarding procedures before being funded by the City Mayors Office.After the AIP is reviewed and approved by the CCSFP President, it goes through deliberation by the City Budget Office and the Sangguniang Panglungsod. The CCSFP then prepares the PPMP for the MOOE and the CO separately. The budget is given every quarter of the year, and the PPMP is necessary for the City Government to determine how much of the budget should be given for each quarter. After the PPMP, the Budgetary Requirements form is prepared. This form shows the breakdown of the total proposed budget.The end product is the summary of all the projects, programs, and activities, and the budget appropriated quarterly for each item. This Financial Plan needs to be reviewed by the City Budget Officer, and approved by the City Mayor, before the programs, projects, and activities are implemented.The AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary are encoded in Microsoft Excel. The forms are prepared individually and tallied manually.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEMThe CCSFP needs an enhanced system to address its requirements for procurement efficiently, while consuming less time and effort in the process.The existing CCSFP procurement process uses basic electronic system mainly for encoding and printing.The current procurement process is inefficient and complicated. Since the office and department heads (project coordinators) are not guided with what to write on the budget proposals, the administrative officers send the proposals back for the office and department heads to fill in the omitted fields. It usually takes the administrative office one to two weeks to consolidate the budget proposals and prepare the AIP. The data are unorganized and the process is laborious. The procurement documents (AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan) are prepared individually. Since the budget and the breakdown are manually tallied, there is a tendency for the amounts to be imbalanced. If only one item is missed, everything has to be reviewed and recomputed. There have been instances when the amounts on the Budgetary Requirements are not balanced with the AIP, especially after making adjustments, and the administrative officers had to check all of the printed reports for the discrepancies.

OBJECTIVESThe main objective of the study was to design and develop the Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga.The researchers aimed to develop a system that organizes the data, and automatically generates the AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary, using only the budget proposals encoded by the project coordinators using the same system, to easily determine how much of the budget is needed by the CCSFP for each month and quarter of the year.The researchers aimed to develop a straightforward system by simplifying procedures, such as encoding and categorizing data, or eliminating other procedures entirely, such as manually tallying the breakdown versus the budget, thus, significantly cutting down the time necessary to prepare the required documents. Using the Procurement System, the reports are generated instantly, as opposed to the current process which takes up one to two weeks for the preparation of procurement documents.The researchers aimed to develop a module that sends and receives budget proposals from the project coordinator (client) to the administrative officer (server), and vice versa, through a network.

SIGNIFANCE OF THE STUDYThe Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga was designed and developed for the benefit of CCSFP, CCSFP Administrative Office, project coordinators, the researchers, and future researchers.The system benefits CCSFP in such a way that its departments procurement needs could be easily and quickly attended to because of the faster processing of the procurement documents. Its departments programs, projects, and activities are implemented with ease because the budget allocated to them will be given at their projected period.The system benefits the CCSFP Administrative Office because the process is simplified and straightforward. The amounts do not have to be manually tallied, and the AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary do not have to be encoded individually; therefore, time and resources are saved.The system is also beneficial to the project coordinators because the system serves as a guide on what data to enter for the budget proposals. The system may also help project coordinators in such a way that the submitted proposals can be monitored should these proposals be subjected to modifications.Designing and developing this system is constructive to the researchers because of the knowledge and skills the researchers gained throughout the development of the system, which can be applied to their future endeavors. This study may serve as guidance for future researchers who would like to contribute to the further development of the Procurement System. This may also provide reference for future researchers who are interested in developing systems with similar concept or platform.

SCOPE AND DELIMITATIONSScopeThis study is conducted for the preparation of necessary documents for the procurement process Budget Proposals, AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary.The process is described as follows:In the module for creating the budget proposal, the project coordinator can add, update, or delete the details of the program, project, or activity. After entering the details of the proposal, the project coordinator breaks down the budget. This form is then submitted by the project coordinator to the administrative officer through a network. The submitted budget proposals are reviewed and evaluated by the administrative officer. If there are necessary adjustments to the proposal, the administrative officer sends it back to the project coordinator using the system, together with remarks on the changes that should be made. After the budget proposals have been submitted and approved within a deadline, the AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary can be generated using the details from the budget proposals.All necessary procurement documents, which include the AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary, can be printed, or exported as an MS Excel or PDF file.

DelimitationsThe system does not automatically send the reports to the City Budget Office. The reports are still printed, and then signed by the CCSFP President before sending to the City Budget Office.The system generates reports based on the data entered by the users. It does not suggest nor forecast the budget to be appropriated for the following years.The system is used only for the preparation of the necessary documents for procurement. It does not cover the bidding and awarding process, and the actual purchasing of goods.

CHAPTER IITHEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATUREVisual Basic .NET (VB.NET) is an object-oriented programming language which is a development of Visual Basic (VB) implemented on the .NET Framework. This is an effective programming language to use in developing Windows desktop applications (Bai, 2012). The researchers agree with this statement, because VB.NET, being a product of Microsoft, makes it practical to develop desktop applications for the Windows operating system.C# is a general-purpose programming language derived from C. Similar to VB.NET, C# has access to .NET Framework libraries. The C# syntax is concise, while VB.NET has longer structure; however, the user can shorten the codes in VB.NET using the With/End With construct (Yagulasamy, 2005). Choosing between VB.NET and C# is largely subjective. Users who have greater knowledge in Java choose to use C# because of the similarities in syntax. One of the reasons the researchers single out VB.NET is their knowledge in the programming language which can help them develop high-quality software.One of the advantages of VB.NET is the visual programming environment, which allows the user to easily and efficiently design and develop a program by manipulating the program elements graphically rather than specifying them in text; hence, the drag-and-drop feature (Microsoft, 2012). Although this can be applied to majority of the programming languages, some of these languages such as Java need a third-party development environment to effectively utilize visual programming (Horstmann & Cornell, 2007).Setting aside their levels of proficiency in programming languages, the researchers tried to find other languages which are not Microsoft products but can be fully utilized for the development of the Procurement System. The researchers found it most practical to use Java among this pool of programming languages. Aside from it being open source, Java makes it relatively easy for a beginner to develop a small useful program in a short amount of time. However, the same can also be said about VB.NET. It may not be open source, but it is more practical in a way that it does not need a third-party development environment, and that it makes programming Windows applications more achievable than any other programming language.MySQL is a Relational Database Management System (RDMS) owned by the Oracle Corporation. It is open source, but it is comparable in security and reliability to costly RDMS such as Microsoft Access and Oracle SQL (Kofler, 2005). Even though Microsoft Access is already compatible with VB.NET because it has access to the .NET Framework, its storage capacity is only two gigabytes (LearnITAnytime, 2013), while MySQL can store up to eight gigabytes of data.The researchers prefer MySQL over other database engines because it is simpler and easier to implement, and can provide the researchers what they need to develop secure and reliable software. REVIEW OF RELATED STUDIES*more studies*Government procurement or public procurement is governed by the RA 9184 known as the Government Procurement Reform Act, an act providing for the modernization, standardization and regulation of the procurement activities of the government and for other purposes.Procurement is one of the key aspects in the governments efforts to improve service delivery and governance. It covers every aspect of the service delivery processes from determining the need for goods, works, or services to timely procurement and delivery (ADB, 2010).According to the Section 8 of RA 9184, the Government Electronic Procurement System, more commonly known as the PhilGEPS, serves as the primary and definitive source of information on procurement. The PhilGEPS serves as the official system to advertise and distribute specifications for public bidding opportunities. It is an essential part of the government procurement reform program designed to improve transparency, efficiency, and value for money. The PhilGEPS is an information site, consisting primarily of a Public Tender Board, Electronic Catalogue, and a Supplier Registry (Procurementservice.org, 2008).Although PhilGEPS has been implemented for transparency and ease of procurement procedures, it does not cover the preparation of the necessary procurement documents.The City College of San Fernando, Pampanga (CCSFP), as a department of the Local Government Unit, needs to abide by the policies of the City Finance Committee in procurement, according to Article I Section 3 of RA 9184. According to the interview conducted by the researchers with Atty. Caylao (2014), the CCSFP process of procurement starts with the budget proposal. The budget proposal comprises the title of the project, the objective of the department in procuring the project, the period in which the project needs to be procured, the expected output, and the estimated breakdown of the budget.After the budget proposals are approved, the Annual Investment Plan (AIP) is prepared. The AIP constitutes the total resource requirements of the Local Government Unit consisting of the Annual Capital Expenditures and Regular Operating Expenditures which serve as basis for the preparation of the annual and any supplemental budgets (NEDA & ADB, 2007). The approved AIP will be the basis of budget allocations. If not included in the approved AIP, the project will not be funded by the government.The Procurement Management Plan (PPMP) is prepared and submitted for approval by the City Budget Officer, taking into consideration the availability of funds and budget allocation for CCSFP. The CCSFP will then adjust the PPMP to reflect the budget allocation for their respective programs, projects, and activities.The Budgetary Requirements is prepared after the PPMP, which includes a detailed breakdown of the total project costs and the sources of funds.The end product is the summary of financial plan, broken down for Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE), Capital Outlay (CO), and Personal Services (PS).

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

INPUT

PROCESS

OUTPUT

Budget Proposal, AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, Financial Plan SummaryAnalyzing and undergoing normalization proceduresProcurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga

Manual encoding of procurement requirements of CCSFP using MS ExcelSimplifying the existing procurement process

Interview and FURPS evaluation of the existing procurement process of CCSFPScoping out and defining what the system will do

Studies and Literature Review, Visual Basic .NET 2012, MySQLDesigning the database and the graphical user interface

Figure 2.1 Input-Process-Output (IPO) diagram of the system

This Input-Process-Output model shows the inputs and the processing of the necessary inputs of the current procurement process of CCSFP, setting in motion the development of the proposed Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga.

CHAPTER IIIMETHODOLOGY

PROJECT RESEARCH DESIGNThe researchers made use of modeling techniques Data Flow Diagram, Hierarchical Input-Process-Output, and Program Flowchart in designing the system. Using these models as bases, the researchers were able to develop the system continuously without encountering major difficulties.

Data Flow DiagramProcurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga0Project CoordinatorAdministrative Officer-Budget Proposal

-Remarks for Budget Proposal Modification-Confirmation of Approved Proposal

-Budget Proposal-AIP-PPMP-Budgetary Requirements-Financial Plan Summary

-Remarks for Budget Proposal Modification-Confirmation of Approved Proposal

Figure 3.1 Context Data Flow Diagram

Project details1

Submission of Budget ProposalsAdministrative OfficerProcurementRecords3

Generation of Procurement Documents2

Checking of Projects for RevisionProject CoordinatorProject for revisionRevised projectProjectProjectApproved ProjectGenerated ReportsRevised projectProject for revisionBudget proposal detailsRevision detailsProject Details

Figure 3.2 Level 1 Data Flow Diagram

Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga 9Hierarchical Input-Process-Output1.11.1Sent Project List1.10.1Received Project List1.11.1.1Sent AIP1.10.1.1Received AIP1.11.1.3Sent PPMP (MOOE)1.11.1.4Sent PPMP (CO)1.11.1.2Sent Budgetary Requirements1.10.1.3Received PPMP (MOOE)1.10.1.4Received PPMP (CO)1.10.1.2Received Budgetary Requirements1.0Procurement SystemLog in1.3File1.4*Maintenance1.2Register Account1.1Change Host Address1.5Tools1.6User1.7View1.7.1Summary and Charts1.6.1Update Information1.6.2Change Password1.5.1Calculator1.5.2Notepad1.4.1*Accounts1.4.2*Manage Departments1.4.1.1*Add User Account1.4.1.2*Manage User Accounts1.8About1.3.1New Project1.16.1*Active Accounts1.16.2*Inactive Accounts1.9Projects Home1.10Projects Inbox1.11Projects Sent1.12Messages Compose1.13Messages Inbox 1.14Messages Sent1.16*Admin Accounts1.17*Admin Add Reminder1.15Messages Reminders

Figure 3.3 Hierarchical Input-Process-Output (HIPO) of the systemFor Figure 3.3, the components marked with an asterisk (*) means that these panels are not visible on the client side of the system.Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga 14

1.9.1Project List1.9.1.1Budget Proposal List1.9.2Send Project1.9.1.1.1Add/Update Budget Proposal1.9.1.1.2Print1.9.1.1.2.1AIP1.9.1.1.1.1PPMP (MOOE)1.9.1.1.2.3PPMP (MOOE)1.9.1.1.2.4PPMP (CO)1.9.1.1.2.2Budgetary Requirements1.9.1.1.2.5Appropriations1.9.1.1.1.3Personal Services1.9.1.1.1.3PPMP (CO)1.9Projects Home

Figure 3.4 Hierarchical Input-Process-Output (HIPO) of the system (Continuation)

Program Flowchart

StartEnter username and passwordClick Log in?YNMain FormClick Cancel?YNStopAA

Figure 3.5 Program Flowchart of the system (Log in)

For the Program Flowchart (Figures 3.5-3.11), the components marked with an asterisk (*) means that these processes are not applicable to the client side of the system, thus, proceeding to the next step following the marked components.

Main FormEnter Project Title and Project YearA1Is File clicked?YNIs Maintenance clicked?*YNIs New Project clicked?YNIs Exit clicked?YNStopA1Is Accounts clicked?*YNIs Manage Departments clicked?*YNBA1ABudget Proposal FormCManage Department Form*

Figure 3.6 Program Flowchart of the system (Main Form)

AIs Tools clicked?YNIs Calculator clicked?YNIs Notepad clicked?YNCIs User clicked?YNIs Update Information clicked?YNIs Change Password clicked?YNSystem CalculatorSystem NotepadUpdate Information FormChange Password FormCA

Figure 3.7 Program Flowchart of the system (Continuation)

AIs View clicked?YNIs Summary clicked?YNIs Charts clicked?YNCIs About clicked?YNFinancial Plan ChartsAboutAC


AIs Projects Home clicked?YNSelect ProjectIs Open clicked?YNBudget Proposal/ AIP FormIs Delete clicked?YNBBProject DeletedIs Send clicked?YNBIs Projects Inbox clicked?YNSelect Received ProjectGenerated Received FormsAEnter RecipientSend ProjectB


AIs Project Sent clicked?YNSelect sent projectGenerated Sent FormsIs Messages Compose clicked?YNEnter message and recipientSend MessageC1C1Is Messages Inbox clicked?YNSelect received messageDisplay received messageCIs Messages Sent clicked?YNSelect sent messageDisplay sent messageCIs Messages Reminders clicked?YNDisplay remindersCA


AIs Admin Accounts clicked?*YNAccountsIs Admin Add Reminder clicked?*YNEnter reminder and dateSet reminderCC


PROJECT DEVELOPMENTThe researchers designed and developed the proposed Procurement System using Visual Basic .NET 2012 and MySQL. The Agile Development Cycle serves as the framework for the development of the system. In ADC, the features are taken from start to finish within iterations.The iteration is illustrated as follows:Feature 1Feature 2Feature N

Figure 3.12 Iteration in Agile Development CyclePlanningThe researchers gathered information regarding the CCSFPs existing procurement process through personal interviews, evaluations, and previous procurement documents. They were able to identify the problems that the administrative office is having with regards to the preparation of the necessary documents for procurement. The researchers, using their sources of information, had the projects requirements defined to initiate the development of the system.AnalysisIn this phase, the researchers constructed the data flow of the system. Following the definition of requirements, the researchers evaluated the objectives of the study, and the modules the system needs to achieve these goals. Since the researchers are using the Agile approach, the main modules and other features were taken one or few at a time, depending on the necessity of the system.DesigningThe researchers constructed the database, and designed the user interface of the system, relative to the systems data flow. For every iteration, the database, the data flow, and the user interface were augmented to provide modules and features for the enhancement the system, but with no conflicts with the previous designs.DevelopmentThe researchers developed their system using Visual Basic .NET and MySQL. Throughout the development of the system, the researchers documented their attained objectives and took notes of the areas that needed improvement.TestingThe researchers facilitated a series of beta tests to ensure that the requirements of the system were achieved, as well as to evaluate and find solutions for the encountered errors.Implementation and MaintenanceUpon its implementation, the researchers will update the system in whichever area necessary, and observe the system for possible errors.EVALUATION PROCEDUREThe system evaluation was conducted in the respondents respective offices in the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga. The primary respondents are three CCSFP administrative officers for the server side, and six office and department heads for the client side of the system. The respondents were selected for the reason that they are the persons involved with the CCSFP procurement.

Table 3.1 Population of the respondentsRespondentsNumber

Administrative Office3

Education Department1

Business Administration Department1

Office of the Student Affairs Office1

Guidance Office1

Library1

Medical and Dental Services Unit1

EVALUATION CRITERIAThe researchers used the FURPS model (see Appendix A) to identify the significant attributes of the system and express them in measurable terms. The FURPS stand for Functionality, Usability, Reliability, Performance, and Supportability.Functionality encompasses the feature set and capabilities of the program, generalities of the functions that are delivered, and the security of the overall system. Usability is the attribute that considers human factors, overall aesthetics, consistency and documentation. Reliability is evaluated by measuring the frequency and severity of failure, the accuracy of output results, the mean time between failure, the ability to recover from failure, and the predictability of the program. Performance is measured by evaluating processing speed, response time, resources consumption, and efficiency. Supportability combines program extensibility, adaptability, and serviceability, in addition to testability, compatibility, configurability, the ease with which a system can be accessed, and the ease with which problems can be localized.The researchers used the Likert scale to measure the perception of the respondents on the proposed Procurement System. A Likert scale is a psychometric response scale often used in questionnaires, and is the most widely used in survey research. The researchers used a scale of one to five five being the highest, and one being the lowest score. Table 3.2 shows the Likert scale that was used to quantify and interpret the respondents answers to the FURPS evaluation.

Table 3.2 Likert scaleMean ValueCriteria

4.21-5.00Strongly Agree

3.41-4.20Agree

2.61-3.40Fairly Agree

1.81-2.60Disagree

1.00-1.80Strongly Disagree

INSTRUMENTS AND TECHNIQUES USEDThe researchers used methods conducting interviews, and distributing questionnaires and evaluation forms to gather information about the existing procurement process of the CCSFP, and to evaluate the Procurement System.The researchers conducted interviews to the respondents to gain better understanding of the existing procurement process, and to formulate the solution to the difficulties faced by the administrative officers with regards to the preparation of procurement documents.The researchers prepared questionnaires, which are sets of prearranged questions, for the respondents to answer in relation to the development of the system.The researchers also formulated a FURPS evaluation form (see Appendix A) to measure the efficacy of the system based on its functionality, usability, reliability, performance, and supportability.

CHAPTER IVRESULTS AND DISCUSSION

PROJECT TECHNICAL DESCRIPTIONThe researchers recommend the hardware and software specifications shown in Table 4.1 to maximize the performance of the system.

Table 4.1 Hardware and software requirements of the systemHardware RequirementsSoftware Requirements

Pentium 4 processor or higher Windows Operating System

512 MB RAM or higher MySQL

minimum of 50MB disk storage MySQL connector

.NET framework 4.5

PROJECT STRUCTURED ORGANIZATION

Figure 4.1 Procurement System Log-inFigure 4.1 shows the Log-in, which prevents unauthorized persons to access the system. It also shows links to change the server (see Figure 4.2), and to register an account (see Figure 4.3). The account is validated by the admin (administrative officer) upon submission.

Figure 4.2 Change Server

Figure 4.3 Register Account

Figure 4.4 Projects HomeFigure 4.4 shows the Projects Home panel, which contains the list of projects for the budget year, the current year, and the previous years.

Figure 4.5 Projects Inbox

Figure 4.6 Projects Sent

Figures 4.5 and 4.6 show the Projects Inbox and Sent, respectively. If the user is on the server side of the system, the Inbox panel contains the submitted proposed projects of the office and department heads (project coordinators). The Sent panel contains the projects sent back to the office and department heads with remarks on the changes that should be made on the proposals.

Figure 4.7 Compose MessageFigure 4.7 shows the Compose Message panel. With this form, the users, both server and client, can interact and exchange messages.

Figure 4.8 Messages InboxFigures 4.8 and 4.9 show the Messages Inbox and Sent, respectively which contains the users received and sent messages. The user has the option to reply to the sender, forward messages to other users, or delete messages. The user is informed of incoming messages through the Windows notification tray.

Figure 4.9 Messages Sent

Figure 4.10 RemindersFigure 4.10 shows the Reminders. This panel displays the requirements and their deadlines set by the admin. The user is informed of new reminders through the Windows notification tray.

Figure 4.11 AccountsFigure 4.11 shows the Accounts panel. The active accounts are either verified accounts, or accounts that have been created by the admin. The inactive accounts are the submitted accounts which are not yet verified by the admin. This panel is not visible on the client side of the system.

Figure 4.12 Add ReminderFigure 4.12 shows the Add Reminder form, where the admin sets the requirements deadlines. This panel is not visible on the client side of the system.

Figure 4.13 Create New ProjectFigure 4.13 shows the New Project window. On this form, the user creates a project set which will contain the budget proposals. This form leads to the Budget Proposal form (See Figure 4.14).

Figure 4.14 Budget ProposalFigure 4.14 shows the Budget Proposal form. This form is used to create budget proposals which are consolidated to generate the AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and Financial Plan Summary (See Figures 4.18, 4.19, 4.20, and 4.21 for sample documents). The budget is then broken down according to its utilization MOOE, CO, or PS (See Figures 4.15, 4.16, and 4.17).

Figure 4.15 Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) breakdown

Figure 4.16 Capital Outlay (CO) breakdown

Figure 4.17 Personal Services (PS) breakdown

Figure 4.18 Sample AIP generated using the system

Figure 4.19 Sample MOOE generated using the system

Figure 4.20 Sample Budgetary Requirements generated using the system

Figure 4.21 Sample Financial Plan Summary generated using the system

Figure 4.22 Manage DepartmentFigure 4.22 shows the Manage Department panel under the Maintenance menu. On this panel, the admin may add, update, and delete departments. The departments are necessary to identify which CCSFP offices are implementing the programs, projects, or activities on the Budget Proposal (see Figure 4.14).

Figure 4.23 Update User InformationFigure 4.23 shows the Update User Information panel under the User menu.

Figure 4.24 Change PasswordFigure 4.24 shows the Change Password panel under the User menu. The password should be, at least, eight characters long.

Figure 4.25 Comparative SummaryFigure 4.25 shows the annual Summary panel under the View menu. It shows comparative information regarding the allocations for the budget year, current year, and the past year. The Summary can also be viewed as charts (see Figures 4.26 and 4.27).

Figure 4.26 Sample Bar Chart showing the allocation of budget (MOOE, CO, and PS) for the budget year, current year, and the past year Figure 4.27 Sample Pie Chart showing the allocation of budget to projects, programs, and activities, separately for MOOE, CO and PS for the budget year

PROJECT LIMITATIONS AND CAPABILITIESThe Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga was designed and developed to address the needs of the CCSFP in the preparation of procurement documents.The system allows the admin to manage account registrations. It is also capable of securing the database by preventing unauthorized persons in accessing the system.The system is capable of guiding the project coordinators in creating their budget proposals, and sending them to the administrative officers through a network. The system allows the admin to modify, give remarks, and send back the budget proposals to the project coordinators.The system includes a module that allows users to interact by exchanging messages. It also allows the admin to set and delete reminders.The system is capable of generating, exporting, and printing necessary procurement documents, such as the AIP, PPMP for MOOE and CO, Budgetary Requirements, Financial Plan Summary, and Annual Comparative Summary and Charts.

PROJECT EVALUATIONThe respondents evaluated the proposed Procurement System using the FURPS model. The researchers gathered and interpreted the results of the evaluation.

FunctionalityTable 4.2 Respondents rating on the functionality of the systemIndicatorsMeanInterpretation

1. Department records are well organized.5.00Strongly Agree

2. Records are shared and are accessible by any authorized person in the department.5.00Strongly Agree

3. Generating procurement reports is relatively fast and accurate.4.67Strongly Agree

4. The method used in recording and generating reports is secured.5.00Strongly Agree

5. Searching records is fast and easy.5.00Strongly Agree

Average4.93Strongly Agree

Table 4.2 shows that the lowest mean obtained was 4.67. The data indicate that the system scored the lowest in generating procurement reports. The slow generation of documents is possibly caused by the large amounts of data being consolidated to create the reports.The highest mean obtained was 5.0. The data indicate that the system scored high in terms of security and data organization. The high rating for security is due to the security feature of the system which prevents unauthorized access. The high rating for data organization is due to the well-structured lists of submitted forms.

UsabilityTable 4.3 Respondents rating on the usability of the systemIndicatorsMeanInterpretation

1. The proposed Procurement System is convenient to use.4.78Strongly Agree

2. The system can be easily understood and navigated. 4.67Strongly Agree

3. The platform being used provides consistent look and feel.4.89Strongly Agree

4. The forms and reports can be viewed and printed without difficulty.5.00Strongly Agree


Table 4.3 shows that the lowest rating obtained was 4.67. The data indicate that the system scored the lowest in the ease of navigation. Since the system involves a huge quantity of information, the researchers designed the interface taking into consideration the best possible way to display the modules in different windows, sacrificing the ease of navigation.The system scored 5.0, the highest rating, in the ease of viewing and printing reports. The user only has to click on Print, and the generated reports are displayed. The user does not need to adjust cells like in Microsoft Excel for the contents to fit.

ReliabilityTable 4.4 Respondents rating on the reliability of the systemIndicatorsMeanInterpretation

1. User inputs are properly validated.5.00Strongly Agree

2. Duplicate records are easily detected.5.00Strongly Agree

3. Data modification can be done with ease.4.67Strongly Agree

4. The system provides user log-in and system activities can be tracked down to the users accordingly.5.00Strongly Agree

5. Reports are properly dated and accounted for.5.00Strongly Agree


Table 4.4 shows that the lowest rating obtained was 4.67 for the ease of data modification. The difficulty in data modification is possibly caused by the systems user interface, in which the user has to go to different panels before completely modifying the information. The researchers decided on creating separate panels for the modules because it is more suitable than putting all the requirements in one window.The rating of 5.0 on the other four indicators shows that the system is reliable in terms of validating the input and tracking user activities. The system validates the data encoded by the user to minimize possible errors, and it filters duplicate records. The users activities are tracked since the usernames, and the date and time of activities are displayed alongside the reports submitted to the system.PerformanceTable 4.5 Respondents rating on the performance of the systemIndicatorsMeanInterpretation

1. Response time and processing time are in acceptable range.4.89Strongly Agree

2. Usage of computer resources is maximized.5.00Strongly Agree

3. Data retrieval in every department is fast and easy.5.00Strongly Agree


Table 4.5 shows that the lowest rating obtained by the system is 4.89 based on the response time and processing time. The cause of this is the huge amount of data being consolidated to generate procurement documents which slows the processes of the system. Slow processing time can also be attributed to the hardware components of the computer used during the evaluation. It can also be attributed to the other processes the computer was undergoing which are not associated to the system.The system scored 5.0 on the other indicators which interprets that the system has an agreeable performance which can be attributed to the huge comparison in terms of management between the existing procurement process and the Procurement System. SupportabilityTable 4.6 Respondents rating on the supportability of the systemIndicatorsMeanInterpretation

1. The system can be applied and used in any computer and operating system.4.11Agree

2. The system can be applied and installed with minimum hardware requirements.5.00Strongly Agree

3. The system supports data back-up and restoration procedures.4.78Strongly Agree


Table 4.6 shows that the lowest rating obtained was 4.11 attributed to the portability of the system. Since it was developed using Visual Basic .NET, the system only runs in Windows operating system.The highest score obtained by the system in terms of supportability is 5.0. The data indicate that the system scored the highest in the minimum hardware requirements of the system. The system does not consume much disk space during installation and execution, and it runs well on at least Pentium 4 processor.

CHAPTER VSUMMARY, CONCLUSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONSUMMARYThe current procurement process of the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga has proven to be tedious and unorganized. Due to the inconveniences the administration is experiencing using the existing process, the researchers came up with the Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga to simplify and organize the preparation of the necessary documents for procurement.The system was designed and developed by the researchers by making use of different methodologies and analytical tools that aided them in the system development, such as the Agile Development Cycle (ADC), Data Flow Diagrams (DFD), Hierarchical Input-Process-Output (HIPO), and program flowchart.The result of the evaluation shows that the system successfully achieved the requirements agreed upon by the researchers and the CCSFP Administrative Office.

CONCLUSIONThe researchers designed and developed the proposed Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga that addresses CCSFPs requirements for procurement efficiently with less time and effort.The researchers developed the Procurement System which organizes the data, and automatically generates the AIP, PPMP, Budgetary Requirements, and the summary of the financial plan, using only the budget proposals encoded by the project coordinators using the same system.The system is straightforward; it simplifies laborious processes and eliminates unnecessary procedures, significantly cutting down the time needed to prepare the required documents.The system includes a module that sends and receives budget proposals from the project coordinator (client) to the administrative officer (server), and vice versa, through a network.The system was evaluated and approved by three administrative officers and six office and department heads.

RECOMMENDATIONThe researchers recommend that the Procurement System be widened in range. Not only can it be used by the City College of San Fernando, but also by the other departments of the Local Government Unit.The future researchers can also develop a module that forecasts the budget allocations for the next years using data analytics.The system can be designed and further developed for other operating systems to increase its supportability.

Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga 17

APPENDIX A

CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FERNANDO, PAMPANGACity of San Fernando, Pampanga

FURPS EVALUATION FORM(Project Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga)

Name:Position:

Date:Signature:

Objective:The objective of this evaluation form is to test the proposed system by evaluating it using the FURPS Model (Functionality, Usability, Reliability, Performance, and Supportability).Instruction:Please rate the proposed system by checking the box that corresponds to your rating in the table below.12345

Strongly DisagreeDisagreeNeutralAgreeStrongly Agree

FUNCTIONALITYDescription: 1 2 3 4 5

1. Department records are well organized.

2. Records are shared and are accessible by any authorized person in the department.

3. Generating procurement reports is relatively fast and accurate.

4. The method used in recording and generating reports is secured.

5. Searching records is fast and easy.

USABILITYDescription: 1 2 3 4 5

1. The proposed project procurement system is convenient to use.

2. The proposed system can be easily understood and navigated.

3. The platform being used provides consistent look and feel.

4. The forms and reports can be viewed and printed without difficulty.

RELIABILITYDescription: 1 2 3 4 5

1. User inputs are properly validated.

2. Duplicate records are easily detected.

3. Data modification can be done with ease.

4. The proposed system provides user log-in and system activities can be tracked down to the users accordingly.

5. Reports are properly dated and accounted for.

PERFORMANCEDescription: 1 2 3 4 5

1. Response time and processing time are in acceptable range.

2. Usage of computer resources is maximized.

3. Data retrieval in every department is fast and easy.

SUPPORTABILITYDescription: 1 2 3 4 5

1. The proposed system can be applied and used in any computer and operating system.

2. The proposed system can be applied and installed with minimum hardware requirements.

3. The proposed system supports data back-up and restoration procedures.

Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, PampangaAppendix A

APPENDIX B

CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FERNANDO, PAMPANGACity of San Fernando, Pampanga

QUESTIONNAIRE(Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga)

Name:Position:

Date:Signature:

1. Please explain the existing project procurement process of the City College of San Fernando, Pampanga (CCSFP).

2. What platform are you using in preparing the necessary documents? Is this platform easy to use?

3. How much time do you exert in the preparation of the documents?

4. How are the records organized?

5. Have you encountered errors and miscalculations using the existing system? If yes, how are these errors detected?

6. Can the records be accessed by anyone? Do you have security measures to prevent unauthorized access?

7. On which aspects of the existing procurement process are you having difficulties?

8. Are you satisfied with the existing procurement system? If no, are you willing to test a new system to help you with the procurement needs of the CCSFP?

Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, PampangaAppendix B

APPENDIX CREFERENCES

BooksBai, Y. (2012). Practical Database Programming with Visual Basic .NET. (2nd ed.). Wiley-IEEE Press

Government Procurement Policy Board. (2009). Handbook on Philippine Government Procurement. (5th ed.). GPPB.

Horstmann, C. S. & Cornell, G. (2007). Core Java, Volume I Fundamentals. (8th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Kofler, M. (2005). The Definitive Guide to MySQL 5. (3rd ed.). Apress.

National Economic and Development Authority & Asian Development Bank. (2007). Guidelines on Provincial/Local Planning and Expenditure Management. (Vol. 2). NEDA & ADB.

InterviewAtty. Caylao, C. F. R. (2014, September 11). Personal Interview.

WebsitesAsian Development Bank. (2010, November 19). Strengthening National Public Procurement Processes. Retrieved October 15, 2014, from http://www.adb.org/projects/43219-012/details

LearnITAnytime. (2013, November 18). Know The Advantages And Disadvantages Of Microsoft Access. Retrieved October 15, 2014, from http://www.learnitanytime.com/4031/know-the-advantages-and-disadvantages-of-microsoft-access-2/

Microsoft Robotics. (2012). VPL Introduction. Retrieved October 14, 2014, from http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb483088.aspx

Yagulasamy, A. (2005, April 14). Complete Comparison for VB.NET and C#. Retrieved October 15, 2014, from http://blogs.msdn.com/b/csharpfaq/archive/2004/03/11/what-are-the-advantages-of-c-over-vb-net-and-vice-versa.aspx

Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, PampangaAppendix C

Procurement System for the City College of San Fernando, PampangaAppendix D