Home / Current Issue / Paper 1720181
Analysis of DILG Harmonized Infrastructure Audit Reports for Selected Public Buildings in Cabanatuan City: Inspection Priorities, Seismic Referrals, and Egress Findings
Subject area: Science,Engineering and Technology · Area of research: Engineering Management
DOI: https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I1-1720181
Abstract
This study examined 53 building-level reports generated using the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Harmonized Infrastructure Audit Tool (HIAT) for selected public buildings in Cabanatuan City. Using a cross-sectional descriptive-evaluative design, the analysis covered Form 1 Inspection Prioritization Ratings (IPR), construction-period groups, Form 2A Rapid Visual Screening (RVS) scores and referral recommendations, and readable Form 2B egress and life-safety entries. The mean IPR was 53.8 ± 9.4 (range, 33-70). The only building constructed before 1992 had an IPR of 65.0, while the mean IPR was 55.3 for buildings constructed from 1992 to 2010 (n = 17) and 52.7 for those constructed after 2010 (n = 35). Of the 52 reports with generated RVS scores, the mean was 2.37 ± 0.30; two reports (3.8%) scored below 2.0, and two others scored exactly 2.0. Despite this, 43 of all 53 reports (81.1%) recommended detailed structural evaluation or investigation. This wide difference shows that the referral outcome cannot be understood from the numerical cut-off alone, although the specific reason for referral was not consistently documented. The most common readable Form 2B adverse findings involved directional signs (39/41, 95.1%), fire-exit doors (35/38, 92.1%), exit signs (40/44, 90.9%), exit illumination (31/37, 83.8%), and emergency exits (18/38, 47.4%). The results support more focused records review, corrective maintenance, and professional follow-up. They should not be interpreted as a declaration that any individual building is structurally safe or unsafe.
Keywords
Cabanatuan City, Infrastructure Audit, Public Buildings, Rapid Visual Screening, Seismic Vulnerability, Risk-Based Prioritization, Egress Safety.
How to cite this paper
@article{1720181,
author = {Donato L. Estrella Jr., Christopher M. Ladignon, Noel T. Florencondia},
title = {Analysis of DILG Harmonized Infrastructure Audit Reports for Selected Public Buildings in Cabanatuan City: Inspection Priorities, Seismic Referrals, and Egress Findings},
journal = {Iconic Research And Engineering Journals},
year = {2026},
volume = {10},
number = {1},
pages = {3493-3500},
issn = {2456-8880},
url = {https://www.irejournals.com/formatedpaper/1720181.pdf},
abstract = {This study examined 53 building-level reports generated using the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) Harmonized Infrastructure Audit Tool (HIAT) for selected public buildings in Cabanatuan City. Using a cross-sectional descriptive-evaluative design, the analysis covered Form 1 Inspection Prioritization Ratings (IPR), construction-period groups, Form 2A Rapid Visual Screening (RVS) scores and referral recommendations, and readable Form 2B egress and life-safety entries. The mean IPR was 53.8 ± 9.4 (range, 33-70). The only building constructed before 1992 had an IPR of 65.0, while the mean IPR was 55.3 for buildings constructed from 1992 to 2010 (n = 17) and 52.7 for those constructed after 2010 (n = 35). Of the 52 reports with generated RVS scores, the mean was 2.37 ± 0.30; two reports (3.8%) scored below 2.0, and two others scored exactly 2.0. Despite this, 43 of all 53 reports (81.1%) recommended detailed structural evaluation or investigation. This wide difference shows that the referral outcome cannot be understood from the numerical cut-off alone, although the specific reason for referral was not consistently documented. The most common readable Form 2B adverse findings involved directional signs (39/41, 95.1%), fire-exit doors (35/38, 92.1%), exit signs (40/44, 90.9%), exit illumination (31/37, 83.8%), and emergency exits (18/38, 47.4%). The results support more focused records review, corrective maintenance, and professional follow-up. They should not be interpreted as a declaration that any individual building is structurally safe or unsafe.},
keywords = {Cabanatuan City, Infrastructure Audit, Public Buildings, Rapid Visual Screening, Seismic Vulnerability, Risk-Based Prioritization, Egress Safety.},
month = {July},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.64388/IREV10I1-1720181}
}