PITS

Solo developer · AI-assisted development

Presented and defended · UI refinement

Exploring how project maps, budget records, evidence review, and citizen reporting can make public infrastructure information easier to scrutinize.

Python
Kivy
KivyMD
MySQL
OpenStreetMap

November–December 2025

Source code

Make records visible. Keep evidence reviewable.

Choose a step to follow the workflow. Markers highlight the relevant part of each original screenshot.

01Inspect the records02Find pending evidence03Review before accepting

PITS project table showing location, budget, progress, and status

Step 1 of 3

Inspect the records

The project table brings names, locations, budgets, progress, and publication status into a single view. These are application records, not independently verified public project data.

Step 2 of 3

Find pending evidence

Uploads awaiting verification are listed separately, with project, submission type, uploader, and file information.

Step 3 of 3

Review before accepting

Check, Accept, and Decline controls make the evidence-review stage explicit in the administrator interface.

A design decision

Project records and evidence verification are separate concerns. Administrator controls provide an explicit review step for submitted uploads.

The tradeoff

A review workflow depends on the quality of evidence and the reviewer. An approval control alone cannot independently establish that a public project is legitimate.

The motivation

PITS explores how organized infrastructure records, budgets, progress, and evidence can support public scrutiny. A suspected ghost-project report is a concern for review, not proof of wrongdoing.

Administrator workflows

Administrators can verify or reject uploads, delete projects with double confirmation, clear the database, review audit logs and system statistics, and export CSV reports.

Moderator workflows

Moderators create projects with materials, labor, and equipment budgets; upload progress photos, engineer statements, and budget reports; update progress and status; and set project GPS coordinates. BudgetTracker provides safe, warning, critical, and exceeded states before new costs are logged.

Citizen workflows

Public users can search and filter projects, browse a progress-colored map and document galleries, comment on and like updates, report suspected ghost projects, and export project lists. Registration includes email, username-availability, and password-strength validation.

The interface challenge

Achieving the interface I wanted with Kivy was difficult at my level of experience. I chose a simpler UI so I could complete the core workflows. This was a tradeoff in my implementation, rather than a claim that Python or Kivy cannot support richer interfaces.

Presentation and feedback

After I presented and defended the project, my professor liked the concept and recommended more work on the UI. The listed workflows are implemented in the academic desktop prototype; public deployment and real-world adoption are not claimed.

What I learned through this project

The experience I take into the next project: technical decisions, practical tradeoffs, and ways of working.

Python fundamentals
Building PITS helped me practice basic Python concepts and file handling while connecting them to an application with multiple user roles.
Scope and interface tradeoffs
I learned to prioritize working core workflows when the desired interface exceeded what I could comfortably implement, then use presentation feedback to identify improvements.
Making records reviewable
Budget breakdowns, evidence review, audit logs, and exports helped me think about how information needs to be organized for other people to inspect it.

Talk to me about a project