Capitalizing Analysis on the Inventory, Management and Maintenance of School Physical Facilities for Quality Assurance Among Public Schools in Davao Del Norte

ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 Capitalizing Analysis on the Inventory, Management and Maintenance of School Physical Facilities for Quality Assurance Among Public Schools in Davao Del Norte Edith Jane R. Colinco Abstract. This study examined the impact of inventory, management, and maintenance practices on the quality assurance of school physical facilities in public schools across Davao del Norte. Anchored in educational resource management theories and quality assurance frameworks, the research adopted a descriptive-comparative approach, involving purposively selected participants from the public school system. Data were gathered through a rigorously validated survey instrument and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including comparative testing procedures. The results indicated that the implementation of inventory, facility management, and maintenance practices was consistently perceived as highly extensive. These practices were effectively operationalized in most school contexts, demonstrating a strong institutional commitment to optimizing resources. Correspondingly, the indicators of quality assurance, namely safety compliance, the physical functionality and condition of facilities, and stakeholder satisfaction, were also perceived to be extensively upheld. Further comparative analysis revealed significant differences in the level of quality assurance across varying degrees of implementation for each of the three facility management dimensions. In particular, schools with more robust implementation, especially in maintenance activities, demonstrated markedly higher quality assurance outcomes. The study concludes that comprehensive and well-implemented physical facility management, remarkably sustained and proactive maintenance, significantly contributes to achieving quality standards in public education. It recommends the institutionalization of systematic maintenance plans, strengthened stakeholder participation, and the adoption of data-driven inventory systems to enhance infrastructure governance in schools. KEY WORDS 1. Capitalizing analysis on the inventory 2. management and maintenance of school physical facilities 3. quality assurance Date Received: August 15, 2025 — Date Reviewed: September 20, 2025 — Date Published: October 10, 2025 1. Introduction The condition of physical facilities and the quality of assurance in public schools significantly impact students’ educational experiences. Challenges such as inadequate infrastructure and limited resources can hinder the delivery of quality education. Problems such as overcrowded classrooms and outdated technology compromise safety and impact learning out- NIJSE (2025) - comes. Adequate quality assurance includes regular facility assessments and collaboration with stakeholders to create a better learning environment and enhance academic performance. Addressing these issues can help public schools create a more conducive learning environment, ultimately promoting better academic performance and overall student well-being. In Africa, Mormah (2023) reviewed literature on the management and maintenance of physical facilities for quality assurance in Higher Education in the 21st century with the aim of accessing its implication for the academic growth and sustainability of institutions. Significantly, the administration and maintenance of physical facilities in higher education are very important to the economic and academic growth of the educational system. They are among the key factors determining success in the school system. School heads must learn the habit of maintaining existing physical facilities and transfer them to the subordinates and students as a sustaining force and vehicle for retaining equipment and facilities in their original condition of completeness and aesthetics. Meanwhile, and Kornowa and Philopoulos (2023) shared that as revenue uncertainties, increased questioning of the value of education, and a decrease in the number of students graduating from high school have created a challenging landscape for higher education leaders, never has it been so important to think to attract and enroll enough students to meet budget needs. Providing positive campus visits to prospective students and their families can increase the likelihood of application and enrollment. Furthermore, it requires an environmental/systems approach to how two areas that are likely not under the same hierarchical reporting lines can collaborate to achieve an institutional goal. Derese and Senapathy (2022) explored physical resource management practices in Wolaita Zone government secondary schools. Authors found that resource management functions such as planning, inventory, purchasing, maintenance, participatory management, and budget allocation for the provision of the required materials were poorly implemented. Purchasing physical resources revealed weaknesses in quality, quantity, time and price. Ineffective maintenance of physical resources, unqualified storekeepers, and a lack of proper follow-up are the reasons for the damage and wastage of such physical resources. The inventory practice and using inventory reports for decisions in the school were poor. The storage management system was in poor condition in all schools. The lack of users’ technical skills was a significant challenge for managing physical resources. In the Philippines, given the curriculum and demographics shift, the superintendent, in consultation with stakeholders, decided to implement project-based learning (PBL) as the district’s instructional model. PBL has significant researchbased support for authentic learning as intended by the new standards and better supports deeper learning among all students. One barrier to implementation is the existence of aging facilities. Oliveras-Ortiz (2023) shared that the poor quality of the facilities has caused tension among the district’s stakeholders. This promotes an understanding of issues related to school facilities, and the state department released new standards and a competency-based education curriculum. School-Based Management (SBM) has been a key reform program that implements decentralization in the basic education sector in various parts of the world, including the Philippines. According to a study by Villanueva and OrtegaDela Cruz (2022), English, Science, and Mathematics (ENSCIMA) teachers face several challenges that hinder the successful implementation of the curriculum and learning. These challenges include poor foundational knowledge, inadequate school facilities and instructional materials, non-compliance with time-on-task policies, student misbehavior, low academic interest, lack of parental support, and errors in learners’ materials. To address these challenges, 2ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - various strategies such as benchmarking activities through school partnerships, immersion activities, establishment of a quality management team, remedial and intervention sessions, additional School Learning Action Cell (SLAC) and In-Service Training (INSET) sessions, student orientation, and parent engagement activities like summits and symposiums have been proposed. Collaborative efforts from all stakeholders in implementing these activities are essential in ensuring efficient SBM and ultimately leading to a successful and quality education system in the country. S¸ en and Maya (2022) recommend applications of quality assurance for schools’ physical facilities of basic education by analyzing the school quality assurance applications. It is recommended in light of the results obtained that external evaluation should be made for self-evaluation and that national and international tests should be used as data for school quality assurance applications. In addition, it reveals how self-evaluation and external evaluation practices can be shaped. In Davao del Norte, the condition of school physical facilities and the associated quality assurance issues present significant challenges for the educational landscape. Many public schools in the region struggle with inadequate infrastructure, which can include overcrowded classrooms, outdated learning resources, and insufficient maintenance of facilities. These shortcomings compromise student safety and hinder effective teaching and learning processes. The lack of systematic inventory management exacerbates these problems, making it difficult to efficiently address maintenance needs and allocate resources. To improve the situation, it is essential to implement comprehensive quality assurance measures that involve regular assessments of facilities, adherence to safety standards, and active community engagement in decision-making processes in Davao del Norte. 1.1. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework of the Study —The Systems Theory is utilized to understand how various components of school facilities such as inventory, management, and maintenance—interact to impact overall quality assurance. This theory emphasizes that the effectiveness of a school system is not merely the sum of its parts but rather the relationships and processes between these components that contribute to educational outcomes (Greere, 2023). Additionally, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is relevant in discussing how the physical environment, including safety and functionality of facilities, meets the basic needs of students and educators, thus influencing their engagement and performance (Stankovska et al., 2024). Furthermore, the Theory of Planned Behavior is applied to explore how the attitudes and perceptions of stakeholders regarding facility management practices can affect their behaviors and decisionmaking processes. Additionally, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is relevant in highlighting the importance of a safe and functional physical environment in meeting the basic needs of students and educators, thereby enhancing their motivation and engagement in the learning process. By addressing these foundational needs, the study posits that schools can improve academic outcomes. Furthermore, the Theory of Planned Behavior is employed to investigate how the attitudes and beliefs of stakeholders such as teachers, students, and administrators regarding facility management influence their actions and decision-making. This theory underscores the significance of stakeholder perceptions in shaping effective management practices and ultimately impacting quality assurance. By integrating these theories, the study aims to provide a holistic view of the dynamics involved in managing school physical facilities and their implications for enhancing the quality of education in public schools. By integrating these theories, the study aims to comprehensively understand the dynamics involved in managing school physical facilities and their implications for quality assurance in the educational sector 3ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Fig. 1. Theoretical/Conceptual Framework (Vettori, 2023). Systems Theory is utilized to examine the interconnectedness of various components of school facilities, such as inventory management, maintenance practices, and overall management strategies. This theory helps illustrate that the school system’s effectiveness relies not only on the individual elements but also on how they interact to influence quality assurance. Further, the quality of school physical facilities significantly influences student and teacher outcomes. Well-maintained and adequately equipped facilities enhance student health, behavior, engagement, learning, and academic achievement. For instance, improved school infrastructure has been linked to better student performance and increased attendance rates. Conversely, inadequate facilities can hinder educational progress, particularly in under-resourced schools. Students in schools with poor physical conditions may experience decreased motivation and lower academic performance. Therefore, investing in developing and maintaining school facilities is essential to support effective teaching and learning environments. Such investments can lead to improved student outcomes and help bridge educational disparities as cited by Mkwama (2022). On the other hand, Quality assurance (QA) encompasses systematic processes designed to ensure that products or services meet established standards and fulfill customer expectations. A foundational theory in this domain is Total Quality Control, introduced by Feigenbaum, which advocates for a holistic approach to quality management across all organizational levels, emphasizing the integration of quality development, maintenance, and improvement efforts. Another significant contribution is Deming’s Theory for Quality Improvement, which underscores the importance of a system-based management philosophy. 4ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - 2. Methodology In this chapter, the researcher outlines the essential processes and steps required to conduct the study. These include selecting the study’s design, determining the respondents and sampling method, choosing the research instruments for data gathering, outlining the procedure, addressing ethical considerations, and conducting data analysis. These steps are crucial to ensure the appropriateness and correctness of the study and to produce sound data collection, analysis, and interpretation. 2.1. Research Design—The research design for this study employed a quantitative, comparative analysis to investigate the impact of inventory management and maintenance of School Physical Facilities on Quality assurance in public schools in Davao del Norte. The OneWay Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is used to analyze the differences in inventory, management, and maintenance of school physical facilities (Creswell, 2014) on the dependent variable of Quality assurance in public schools in Davao del Norte. In the study titled ”Capitalizing Analysis on the Inventory, Management, and Maintenance of School Physical Facilities for Quality Assurance among Public Schools in Davao del Norte,” employing Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) is crucial for evaluating differences across multiple groups or variables. ANOVA enables researchers to determine whether significant disparities exist in the inventory, management, and maintenance practices of school facilities across various schools or districts. Analyzing these differences, the study can identify specific areas requiring improvement, thereby enhancing overall quality assurance. Furthermore, ANOVA assists in understanding the impact of different management strategies on facility conditions, providing data-driven insights for policymakers and educational administrators to optimize resource allocation and maintenance protocols. This statistical approach ensures that conclusions drawn are based on robust evidence, facilitating informed decision-making that aims to improve the educational environment. In this study, One-Way ANOVA is employed to evaluate the impact of different practices related to inventory, management, and maintenance on the quality assurance of school facilities. The analysis can compare the mean quality assurance scores across these groups by categorizing schools into distinct groups based on their inventory management practices, facility management strategies, and maintenance effectiveness. This statistical method determines whether significant differences exist in quality assurance outcomes, indicating that certain management practices may lead to better facility conditions and enhanced educational environments. If significant differences are identified, post-hoc tests can further reveal which specific practices contribute most positively to quality assurance, providing valuable insights for school administrators and policymakers in improving educational facilities. 2.2. Ethical Consideration—The ethical consideration section of this study will address the key principles that ensure the protection and well-being of the teacher-respondents involved. This includes adhering to social values, informed consent and assent, vulnerability of research respondents, privacy and confidentiality, risks, benefits, and safety, justice, transparency, qualification of the researcher, conflict of interest, adequacy of facilities, and community involvement. 2.3. Research Respondents—The respondents of the study were the designated School Physical Facilities Coordinators from the Schools Division of Davao del Norte. To determine an appropriate sample size, Slovin’s for5ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - mula was applied, which is expressed as n = N / (1 + N * e²), where n represents the sample size, N is the total population, and e is the margin of error. Given a sample size of 200 and a 5This sample size was deemed sufficient to achieve statistical accuracy while also considering practical constraints in data collection. The use of Slovin’s formula provided a methodological basis for ensuring that the sample was representative of the target population, thereby enhancing the reliability and validity of the research findings. The researcher proportionately distributed the samples to be determined as respondents from the respective schools. The respondents will be informed through online platforms and face-to-face interactions, considering the availability of Wi-Fi connections. They were also informed about the purpose and importance of the study and its contribution to their professional development. The qualification of school physical facilities coordinators as respondents is crucial to obtaining relevant and insightful data. These coordinators typically possess specialized knowledge and experience in managing school facilities, making them well-equipped to provide valuable information about inventory practices, maintenance routines, and overall facility management. Their direct involvement in the day-to-day operations of school facilities allows them to offer practical insights into the challenges and successes faced in maintaining a quality educational environment. Furthermore, their role often involves communication with both school administration and external stakeholders, enabling them to bridge the gap between management decisions and the actual conditions of the facilities. By selecting these coordinators as respondents, I aim to gather informed perspectives that will enhance the depth and quality of my research, ultimately leading to findings that can contribute to better facility management and improved educational outcomes in public schools. 2.4. Research Instrument—This research study primarily adapted the survey instrument from the School Facility I.Q. Inventory (SFIQI), developed by Chan (2022), is recognized as an essential tool for effective school facility management. To strengthen the instrument’s content validity, additional sources were consulted, including Mormah ’s (2023) work on The Management and Maintenance of Physical Facilities for Quality Assurance in Higher Education in the 21st Century with Innovative Technologies, and the study by Kornowa and Philopoulos (2023), which emphasized the collaborative role of admissions and facilities management in ensuring quality campus experiences. The researcher conducted an extensive review of related literature to extract key concepts that informed the construction of the survey questionnaire. This rigorous process ensured that the items adequately reflected the theoretical and practical dimensions of the constructs under investigation, minimizing potential threats to the study’s internal validity. The survey questionnaire comprised two parts. The first part was designed to assess the extent of implementation of school physical facilities, with specific focus on inventory, management, and maintenance. The second part evaluated the quality assurance level, particularly regarding facility safety and compliance, functionality and condition, and stakeholder satisfaction. The survey items will undergo test-retest procedures and internal consistency analysis using Cronbach’s alpha at a .05 significance level to ensure the instrument’s reliability. According to Tavakol and Dennick (2011), Cronbach’s alpha is a widely accepted measure of internal reliability, assessing how closely related a set of items are as a group. Values above 0.70 are generally acceptable, with 0.80 indicating good reliability, and values above 0.90 reflecting excellent reliability (George Mallery, 2003). The reliability of the survey instrument was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha (), a statistical coeffi6ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - cient commonly used to evaluate the internal consistency of Likert-type scales. The Frequentist Scale Reliability Statistics table shows that the estimated coefficient alpha was = 0.978, with a standard error of 0.003 and a 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.971 to 0.983. This result indicates an excellent level of internal consistency among the items in the scale. According to George and Mallery (2003), Cronbach’s alpha values above 0.90 are considered exceptional, suggesting that the items are highly interrelated and measure the same underlying construct. The narrow confidence interval and minimal standard error further reinforce the precision and reliability of the estimate. A 5-point Likert-type scale was utilized in both parts of the survey to quantify responses. The following ranges, descriptive ratings, and interpretations were used for both school physical facilities and quality assurance domains: Scale Descriptive Ratings and Interpretation Scale Descriptive Rating Interpretation 4.20 – 5.00 Very Extensive The indicator is always manifested 3.40 – 4.19 Extensive The indicator is oftentimes manifested 2.60 – 3.39 Moderately Extensive The indicator is sometimes manifested 1.80 – 2.59 Less Extensive The indicator is rarely manifested 1.00 – 1.79 Not Extensive The indicator is not manifested Category Score Range and Interpretation Category Score Range Interpretation Low 1.00 – 2.33 Poor or Minimal Implementation Moderate 2.34 – 3.67 Average or Developing Implementation High 3.68 – 5.00 Good to Very Strong Implementation 2.5. Data Gathering Procedure—The guidelines for this process adhere to the policies of The Rizal Memorial Colleges, Inc. As part of the formal request, researchers delineate their intentions regarding data collection, analysis, and dissemination, aligning these with the overarching research goals. This communication proactively addresses anticipated concerns or questions from recipients are proactively addressed in this confidentiality measures, and the potential benefits of the study. The formal permission request explicitly seeks authorization to proceed, emphasizing the pivotal role of their support in ensuring the research’s success. Permission to Conduct the Study In November 2024, before data collection, the researcher will obtain necessary permissions from the relevant authorities, including the research adviser, the Dean of The Rizal Memorial Colleges, Inc., and the top management of DepEd Davao del Sur Division through the appropriate channels. This involved submitting a comprehensive research proposal outlining study design, procedures, and potential risks and benefits. The researcher will provide detailed information about the study’s purpose, goals, and methods for data collection, analysis, and reporting. Furthermore, in January 2025, immediately after the colloquium, the researcher will take steps to ensure that all participants are fully informed about the study, their rights, and the nature of their involvement. In7ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - formed consent will be obtained from each participant before they participated in the study. The researcher is committed to data accuracy and completeness during the last week of January 2025. The distribution and retrieval of questionnaires will be conducted using a standardized and systematic approach, ensuring reliability in collecting responses from participants. Collation and Statistical Treatment of Data The researcher will take time in data management. She will ensure that accurate data gathered will be sorted accordingly through Microsoft Excel and later transferred to JASP. All necessary information will be collected. Consistency will also be considered to make it relevant to the problem’s statement. Reliability and validity will be reviewed to lessen the degree of error in the analysis. 2.6. Data Analysis—Mean Scores and Standard Deviation Will be used to address statement problems number one, the extent of school physical facilities in terms of inventory, management, and maintenance, and number two, the extent of quality assurance in terms of facility safety and compliance, functionality and condition, and stakeholders’ satisfaction. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) was used to determine the impact of quality assurance when exposed to inventory, management, and maintenance (Tabachnick Fidell, 2019). By calculating the Fstatistic, ANOVA helps identify if the observed mean differences are statistically significant or occurred by chance. This is crucial for understanding the most effective practices. Post-hoc Analysis If ANOVA results indicate significant differences, post-hoc tests (such as Tukey’s HSD) can be conducted to pinpoint precisely which groups differ. This provides detailed insights into the effectiveness of learning resource management practices. All data processing and analysis will be performed using Jeffrey’s Statistics Amazing Program (JASP) version 0.12.20. When results were yielded, discussions and interpretations followed. 3. Results and Discussion This chapter presents the results of the study entitled ”Capitalizing Analysis on the Inventory, Management, and Maintenance of School Physical Facilities for Quality Assurance among Public Schools in Davao del Norte.” Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and post hoc tests are used to substantiate the results. The discussion of findings is grounded in empirical data and relevant literature to provide meaningful insights and implications for policy and practice in public school facility governance. 3.1. Extent of Implementation of School Physical Facilities Management —Effective facility management ensures that school environments remain functional, safe, and conducive to learning. According to Oladapo (2006), the successful implementation of school facility management is often characterized by clear maintenance schedules, efficient resource allocation, and systematic inventory procedures. Chan (2022) further supports this by highlighting that structured inventory systems contribute to educational institutions’ transparency, asset accountability, and data-driven decision-making. Moreover, Mormah (2023) confirm that schools with well-implemented management and maintenance systems are more likely to meet quality assurance benchmarks and stakeholder expectations. These systems reduce the risk of 8ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - structural degradation, ensure compliance with safety standards, and improve overall school performance. Therefore, the high level of implementation observed in the present study may be attributed to adherence to national guidelines, such as those stipulated in the Department of Education’s Basic Education Facilities Manual (DepEd, 2020), which promotes standardized procedures for facility upkeep and monitoring. Physical Facilities Management Table 1 summarizes respondents’ perceptions regarding the overall implementation of school physical facilities management across three key dimensions: inventory, ‘ that school administrators and staff consistently implement operational protocols, enforce policies, and maintain effective communication and coordination in managing school infrastructure. Maintenance Procedures followed closely with a mean score of 4.64, highlighting the consistent conduct of routine checks, timely repairs, and the encouragement of maintenance reporting. Meanwhile, Inventory of Facilities obtained a mean of 4.59, still within the Very Extensive range, reflecting schools’ commitment to tracking, recording, and utilizing inventory data for resource planning and decision-making. The overall mean average of 4.62 suggests that stakeholders perceive the management of school physical facilities in public schools in Davao del Norte as highly systematic and well-executed. This implies that schools have institutionalized practices that support infrastructure readiness, operational functionality, and alignment with educational goals, thereby contributing to an environment that is conducive to teaching and learning. Table 1. Extent of Implementation of School Physical Facilities Management No. School Physical Facilities Management n Mean Descriptive Interpretation 1 Inventory of facilities 200 4.59 Very Extensive 2 Facility Management Practices 200 4.65 Very Extensive 3 Maintenance Procedures 200 4.64 Very Extensive Mean Average 200 4.62 Very Extensive 3.2. Level of Quality Assurance in Public Schools—In the Philippine context, the Department of Education (DepEd) operationalizes quality assurance through policies such as the Basic Education Facilities Manual (DepEd, 2020), which sets the standards for school infrastructure, safety, and resource utilization. Quality assurance mechanisms in schools often involve monitoring tools, feedback systems, and performance-based evaluations to assess whether physical facilities, instructional materials, and support services align with national goals for basic education. Quality assurance in public schools refers to the systematic processes and mechanisms established to ensure that educational services meet standards of excellence, accountability, and continuous improvement. It encompasses assessing and monitoring various domains, including instructional delivery, facility safety and functionality, stakeholder satisfaction, and institutional outcomes. In the context of educational infrastructure, quality assurance specifically involves the evaluation of the physical environment to determine whether it supports safe, effective, and inclusive learning conditions. Summary of the Level of Quality Assurance in Public Schools Table 2 presents the overall summary of the level of quality assurance in public schools across three core dimensions: Safety Compliance, Functionality and Physical Condition, and Stakeholder Satisfaction. All three domains 9ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - and students to report facility concerns through accessible channels such as digital forms, QRcoded feedback systems, or suggestion drop boxes. Schools Division Office The Schools Division Office (SDO) should intensify its technical assistance and capacitybuilding initiatives, particularly in the areas of inventory control, maintenance planning, and compliance with safety standards. Special attention should be given to schools in geographically isolated or under-resourced areas. A centralized monitoring dashboard should be developed to track facility conditions across the division, enabling equitable and needs-based allocation of maintenance funds. DepEd Planners and Policymakers DepEd planners and policymakers should embed facility management indicators into the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and SIP frameworks to reinforce accountability and alignment with national quality assurance benchmarks. The Basic Education Facilities Manual should be reviewed and updated to reflect evolving priorities, including climate-resilient infrastructure, inclusive design, and digital learning readiness. Teachers and Learners Teachers and learners should be actively involved in maintaining and improving their learning environments. Educators can integrate facility care and safety awareness into classroom routines, while students can participate in initiatives such as “Adopt-a-Corner,” mural projects, or campus cleanliness drives. These activities foster a sense of ownership, responsibility, and pride in school spaces. Future Researchers Future researchers are encouraged to conduct longitudinal studies to explore how improvements in facility management affect student achievement, teacher satisfaction, and overall school climate. Comparative studies across urban and rural contexts can uncover regionspecific challenges and solutions. Additionally, cost-benefit analyses of various maintenance strategies can inform more efficient resource use and guide policy development. 5. References Abdulkareem, R. A., & Adepoju, A. A. (2021). Inventory control practices and educational quality in public secondary schools. International Journal of Educational Management,35(7), 1375–1390. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-02-2021-0089 Ahmad, A. C. (2023). E-aimss (electronic asset inventory and management system in school) for resource optimization and organizational productivity. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Educational Research and Innovation,1(3), 121–139. https://ejournals.ph/ article.php?id=20227 Akomolafe, C. O., & Adesua, V. O. (2016). The impact of physical facilities on students’ level of motivation and academic performance in senior secondary schools in south west nigeria. Journal of Education and Practice,7(4), 38–42. Chan, T. C. (2022). School facility i.q. inventory (sfiqi): An essential tool for school facility management. Educational Planning,29(3), 65–78. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ EJ1366418.pdf Cindy, A. H., Sugiyono, S., Usman, H., & Herwin, H. (2022). Factors that affect the optimization of vocational high school facilities and infrastructure. Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences,17(2), 586–600. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1331874.pdf 16 ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th). Sage Publications. Damanik, S., Suprayitno, S., Mesnan, M., & Nasution, U. (2023). The influence of leadership, quality culture, and job satisfaction on commitment in implementing quality assurance policies. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 11(6), 1555–1565. https://doi.org/10.46328/ijemst.3760 Del Mundo, R. B., & Reyes, M. A. (2023). Facility audits and quality compliance: A study of school physical inventory systems in philippine public elementary schools. Asian Journal of Educational Research and Policy,10(2), 88–101. Derese, M., & Senapathy, M. (2022). Physical resource management in government secondary schools, wolaita zone, southern ethiopia. Shanlax International Journal of Education, 11(1), 84–93. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1372988.pdf Dones, M. D., Estremera, M. L., Deuda, M. J. D., & Delima, R. R. (2023). School-based management perspectives: Exploring top-down policy execution at the grassroots level. European Journal of Educational Management,6(2), 101–118. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1391848.pdf Earthman, G. I. (2004). Prioritization of 31 criteria for school building adequacy. American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Maryland. Emmanuelle, G. (2023). Reviews of literature on accreditation and quality assurance. International Journal of Reviews,1(1), 1–57. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED629830.pdf Famularsih, S., Nuryatin, A., Handoyo, E., & Fitriati, S. W. (2022). Facility and infrastructure management at the international class program of the state islamic university in indonesia. Journal of Social Studies Education Research,13(4), 291–307. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1375615.pdf Gao, N., & Lafortune, J. (2020). Improving k–12 school facilities in california. https://www.ppic. org/publication/improving-k-12-school-facilities-in-california/ Garcia, M. T., & Valenzuela, K. J. (2022). Enhancing public school operations through digital inventory systems. Philippine Journal of Public Administration,66(1), 22–37. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2003). Spss for windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (4th). Allyn & Bacon. Greere, A. (2023). Training for quality assurance in higher education: Practical insights for effective design and successful delivery. Quality in Higher Education,29(2), 165–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2021.2020978 Hasan, M., Rahman, F., & Latif, Z. (2024a). Facility management systems and operational efficiency in schools: A quantitative evaluation. Educational Planning,31(1), 55–73. Hasan, M., Rahman, F., & Latif, Z. (2024b). Inventory systems and school facility sustainability: A quantitative study. Educational Planning,31(1), 55–73. Idris, M. O. A., Omar, A. M., Jama, M., Abdikadir, M., Hussein, A., & Omar, M. M. (2025). The effect of the school environment on the provision of quality education: A study of schools in mogadishu, somalia. Frontiers in Education,10, Article 1541502. https: //doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1541502 Ilyasov, A., Imanova, S., Mushtagov, A., & Sadigova, Z. (2023). Modernization of quality assurance system in higher education of azerbaijan. Quality in Higher Education,29(1), 23–41. 17 ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - International Organization for Standardization. (2015). Iso 9000:2015 quality management systems – fundamentals and vocabulary. Jarrell, L., & Kirby, D. (2024). Managing quality assurance at community colleges in ontario, canada: Experiences and perspectives of front-line quality managers. Quality Assurance in Education,32(2), 274–290. https://doi.org/10.1108/QAE-11-2023-0194 Kornowa, A., & Philopoulos, E. (2023). The importance of a strong campus visit: Collaboration between admissions and facilities management. College and University,98(3), 65–66, 68–74. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1407065 Kruger, J., Beckmann, J., & Du Plessis, A. (2022). The management and governance conundrum in south african public schools: Principals’ perspectives. Perspectives in Education,40(4), 312–324. Marsh, J. P., Petersen, J. C., & Judge, L. W. (2021). Strength and conditioning facilities in texas high schools: A quantitative analysis. Physical Educator,78(3), 242–260. https: //doi.org/10.18666/TPE-2021-V78-I3-10592 McNamara, S. W. T. (2023). Dismantling school administrators’ neoliberal priorities: Creating spaces for physical educators to thrive. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation Dance, 94(7), 3–4. https://doi.org/10.1080/07303084.2023.2237368 Mkwama, V. (2022). The influence of school facilities on students’ academic achievement in tanzania. International Journal of Research in Education Humanities and Commerce, 4(5). Morales, R. D., & Tuazon, M. P. (2022). Strategic school infrastructure planning for disaster resilience: The role of routine facility management in philippine public schools. Journal of Educational Facilities and Risk Reduction,5(2), 25–38. Mormah, F. O. (2023). The management and maintenance of physical facilities for quality assurance in higher education in the 21st century with innovative technologies. African Educational Research Journal,11(2), 220–224. https://doi.org/10.30918/AERJ.112.23. 008 Mulhearn, S. C., Yu, H., van der Mars, H., Griffo, J. M., & Kulinna, P. H. (2023). Mercury and motion: The influence of seasonality on off-school hours high school facility use. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education,42(2), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1123/jtpe.20210203 Nagaraju, M. T. V. (2024). Analysis of infrastructure facilities, academic facilities, community participation, and co-curricular activities in primary schools in three districts of telangana state. Journal of Education,204(2), 372–379. Nasir, A., Li, S., Ayaz, M., & Khan, A. B. (2025). Impact of educational facilities on students’ academic achievement at the secondary school level in pakistan. International Journal of School Infrastructure Management,5(2), 45–59. Navarro, F. J., & Abella, M. R. (2022). Post-pandemic infrastructure readiness of philippine public schools: A regional analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Multidisciplinary Research,10(3), 45–53. Nhlapo, V. A. (2020). The leadership role of the principal in fostering sustainable maintenance of school facilities. South African Journal of Education,40(2), Article 1790. https : //eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1257336 18 ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - of Education, D. (2020). Basic education facilities manual (revised edition). https : / / www. teacherph.com/deped-educational-facilities-manual/ Oladapo, A. A. (2006). A study of tenant maintenance awareness, responsibility and satisfaction in institutional housing in nigeria. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 10(4), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.3846/1648715X.2006.9637554 Oliveras-Ortiz, Y. (2023). Facilities beyond physical spaces: A case for the intentional design and use of learning space. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership,26(3), 16–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/15554589231171858 Oni t , a, H., Gvritishvili, A., & Maruszczak, J. (2023). Quality assurance fit for the future – students’ perspective. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED642203.pdf Petilo, J. T. (2024). Educational facilities cross evaluation in compliance with sustainable development goals (sdg) 4.a.1. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED661819 Picus, L. O., Marion, S. F., Calvo, N., & Glenn, W. J. (2005). Understanding the relationship between student achievement and the quality of school facilities: Evidence from wyoming. Peabody Journal of Education,80(3), 71–95. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327930pje8003 5 Posri, S., & Chansirisira, P. (2024). Investigation of the current situations, desired conditions, and essential requirements for participation in the quality assurance processes of small schools under the office of the basic education commission. Journal of Education and Learning,13(2), 55–63. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1421386.pdf Rouine, H., McDonnell, F., & Hanafin, S. (2022). Making a difference: The impact of statutory inspection on the quality of early years services. Child Care in Practice,28(2), 153–163. Saito, E. (2024a). Detecting weak feedback from students experiencing safety issues: A critical discussion from the perspective of the school as learning community. Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook,18, 93–103. Saito, E. (2024b). Detecting weak feedback from students experiencing safety issues: A critical discussion from the perspective of the school as learning community. Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook, (18), 93–103. https : / / files . eric . ed . gov / fulltext / EJ1433898.pdf Sanico, J. A. M. (2024). Teachers’ perspectives on facility management practices in philippine secondary schools: A qualitative study. International Journal of Progressive Research in Engineering Management and Science,4(9), 149–154. Santos, C. M., & Rivera, L. J. (2021). Facility managers as instructional enablers: A study on school leadership and infrastructure alignment. Philippine Journal of Educational Management,9(1), 48–59. S¸ en, A. Y., & Maya, ˙ I. (2022). School quality assurance applications for basic education schools. Education Quarterly Reviews,5(Special Issue 2), 773–787. https://doi.org/10.31014/aior. 1993.05.04.658 Soriano, J. T., Santos, M. V., & Cruz, D. R. (2023). Leveraging digital inventory management for school infrastructure maintenance. International Journal of Education and Development, 8(1), 34–42. Stankovska, G., Ziberi, F., & Dimitrovski, D. (2024). Service quality and student satisfaction in higher education. In N. e. a. Popov (Ed.), Bces conference book (pp. 153–160, Vol. 22). Bulgarian Comparative Education Society. https://bces-conference.org/onewebmedia/ 2024.153-160.Gordana Stankovska et al.pdf 19 ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025 NIJSE (2025) - Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson. Tavakol, M., & Dennick, R. (2011). Making sense of cronbach’s alpha. International Journal of Medical Education,2, 53–55. https://doi.org/10.5116/ijme.4dfb.8dfd Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency. (2023). Guidance note: Facilities and infrastructure (version 1.0). https://www.teqsa.gov.au/guides-resources/resources/guidancenotes/guidance-note-facilities-and-infrastructure Texas Association of School Boards. (2024a, February). 5 ways your school facilities impact student achievement [ResearchGate Source]. researchgate.nettasb.org Texas Association of School Boards. (2024b, February). 5 ways your school facilities impact student achievement. Vettori, O. (2023). No time for improvement? the chronopolitics of quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education,29(3), 407–420. https://doi.org/10.1080/13538322.2023.2189454 Villanueva, J. S., & Ortega-Dela Cruz, R. A. (2022). Confronting challenges of school-based management in a developing country. Journal on School Educational Technology,17(3), 44–55. https://doi.org/10.26634/jsch.17.3.18645 Vincent, C., Perez, A., & Filardo, M. (2022). How school facilities impact student health and performance: Advancing equity with green infrastructure. University of California, Berkeley; WestEd. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED655919.pdf Vincent, J. M., Gebrekristos, S., & Neinstedt, L. (2022). Gauging good stewardship: Is california adequately and equitably investing in its public school facilities? Center for Cities & Schools, University of California, Berkeley. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED626094. pdf Widowati, E., Koesyanto, H., Istiono, W., Sutomo, A. H., & Sugiharto. (2023). Disaster preparedness and safety school as a conceptual framework of comprehensive school safety. SAGE Open,13(4). http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/21582440231211209 Wilkins, S., Hazzam, J., & Ireland, J. J. (2024). Servicescape in transnational higher education: The effects of campus design, physical environment and facilities on student experience and satisfaction. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,34(2), 992–1011. Yamashita, N., & Morales, L. C. (2025). The role of inventory transparency in school stakeholder engagement and quality assurance. Journal of School Leadership and Management,45(2), 121–140. Yumul, J. R., Delos Reyes, C. B., & Fuentes, M. A. (2023). Instructional alignment in school infrastructure systems: Implications for learner-centered environments. Southeast Asian Journal of Educational Research and Innovation,12(3), 77–89. 20 ISSN 3028-1261 10.5281/zenodo.17368279/NIJSE.2025