C.S.E.

COGNATE BUSINESS PROJECT

SCHOOL BASED ASSESSMENT (S.B.A)

YEAR: MAY/JUNE 2019

NAMES OF CANDIDATE: M’RALD RICHARDS, KYLA QUASHIE, ALIYAH KIRK,

ALIYAH PAUL, SHARI KHAN

SCHOOL: ST. GEORGE’S COLLEGE

CENTER NUMBER: 160063

CANDIDATE NUMBERS:

SUBJECT: P.O.A, P.O.B, ECONOMICS

TEACHERS:MR. MOHAMMED, MR. CHARLES, MR. RAYMOND

TITLE: The M.O.E’S policy on obesity and its effect on sales and profitability on the

school’s cafeteria

DATE SUBMITTED:

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page number

TOPIC/ISSUE/PROBLEM 3

OBJECTIVES 4

BACKGROUND/OVERVIEW 5

METHODOLOGY 6-7

PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA 8-25

CONCLUSION 26

RECOMMENDATION 27

BIBLIOGRAPHY 28

APPENDIX 29-33

2
 TOPIC/ISSUE/PROBLEM

 Research Topic
An investigation into the Ministry of Education’s policy on obesity and its effect on student purchases, sales and
profitability in the school’s cafeteria.

 Research Problem
This project was designed to research the Ministry of Education’s policy on obesity and its effect on students and the
cafeteria. It hopes to reveal exactly how it has affected sales as well as profitability in the school’s cafeteria.

3
 OBJECTIVES

Research objectives

➢ Factors influencing the demand for sugary drinks

➢ Relationship between sales and profitability in the school’s cafeteria

➢ Impact of declining sales on profitability in the school’s cafeteria

Syllabus objectives

➢ Expose students to a real life situation which will further promote understanding of economic issues.

➢ Allow students to expand their knowledge promote self – learning and acquire important report writing and
investigative skills

➢ Develop an understanding of essential economic concepts, principles and approaches.

4
 BACKGROUND/OVERVIEW

The history of the cafe:

Richard’s cafe came into existence in the year 1994, with a monetary gift given to him by his father. The

café we know now has evolved tremendously, since it was quite smaller than what it is at present. It was

only a few years ago that the café was able to make renovations to make it more accommodating for both

them and us as their customers. They try their best to uphold their motto of giving back to the students, since

we are all considered one family.

The need for research:

This topic is important to the student because it affects health matters and will seek to corroborate studies

chronicling poor quality of life which leads to obesity.

Obesity affects society negatively because it puts a strain on the country’s health care system, and now

persons suffering from obesity are plagued with non communicable diseases (NCDS), such as hypertension,

cardiac arrest, diabetes, learning disorders and in some cases cancer.

5
 METHODOLOGY

This topic was chosen to satisfy the requirements of CSEC which is to complete an SBA for cognate business
subjects.

To create this, both primary and secondary sources were used to collect data.

The primary sources used were the questionnaire, the interview and our observations. The secondary sources used
were the internet, textbooks and in-class notes.

 The Questionnaire

This survey was distributed to 30 students of St. George’s College, ranging from forms 1 to 5. Each questionnaire
contained a total of 24 questions. These questions were based on the Ministry of Education’s policy to ban the sale
sugary drinks in the nation’s schools. From this, 10 of them were closed questions and 14 were open ended.

Advantages of using a questionnaire

1.) A large amount of data could have been collected

2.) This could have been done in a relatively short space of time

3.) It was cost effective

Disadvantages of using a questionnaire

1.) There is the possibility that some of the answers would have been dishonest

2.) The process of setting up a questionnaire is time consuming

3.) The answers might have been biased

6
  The Interview

This was conducted by 2 group members who interviewed Mr. Richard Lackraj, the owner of the school Cafeteria.
This took place on December 15th, 2018 and 8 open ended questions on the issue of the MOE’s policy on the banning
of sugary drinks. This allowed us to directly collect qualitative information.

Advantages of using an interview

1.) A one on one interaction is made

2.) Forging relationships

3.) The information is heard from a different point of view ad is straight from the source without
speculation

Disadvantages of using an interview

1.) It can be time consuming

2.) Some answers may be vague

7
 PRESENTATION OF DATA

#1 Do You Consume Sugary Drinks

Yes 23 76.67%
No 7 23.33%
Table #1

Mean: 1

Median: 15

Mode: 23

Figure #1

DO YOU CONSUME SUGARY DRINKS

No
23%

Yes
77%

8
#2 If yes, Why?
Peer Pressure 2 6.67%
Varity 4 13.33%
Familiarity 11 36.67%
Availability 9 30%
Necessity 4 13.33%
Other 0 0%
Table #2

Mean:1

Mode:11

Median:4

Figure #2

Chart Title

Peer Pressure
30%
Varity
13% Familiarity
13%
Availability
37%
0% Necessity
13% 7% Other

9
#3 What factors influence your purchase of sugary drinks?

Price 5 16.67%
Income 1 3.33%
Taste 16 53.33%
Quality 5 16.67%
Advertising 0 0%
Substitute 3 10%
Other 0 0%
Table #3

Mean: 1

Median: 5

Mode: 16

Figure#3

10
 Factors that influence your purchase

Factors that influence your

purchase
Price
0, 0%
3, 10%
0, 0% 5, 17%
Income

5, 17% 1, 3% Taste

Quality

Peer Pressure

16, 53% Substitute

Other

#4 If Yes, Who Sells

Cafe 5 16.67%
Vendor 15 50%
Mini Mart 6 20%
Other 4 13.33%
Table#4

Mean: 1

Median: 6

Mode: 15

11
Figure #4

16
Who Sells It

14 15

12

10

6
6
4 5
4
2

0
Cafe Vendor Mini Mart Other

Who Sells It

#5 Do You Agree or Disagree?

Yes 16 53.33%
No 14 46.67%
Table#5

Mean: 1

Median: 15

Mode: 16

Figure #5
12
 Do You Agree
Do You Agree

16.5

16

15.5

15

14.5

14

13.5

13
Yes No

#6 How Rigid Is This Enforcement

None 2 6.67%
Very Little 3 10%
Moderately 16 53.33%
Highly Enforced 9 30%
Table #6

Mean: 1

Median: 6

13
Mode: 16

Figure #6

How Rigid Is Enforcement

HIGHLY ENFORCED 9

MODERATELY 16

VERY LITTLE 3

NONE 2

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

How Rigid Is Enforcement

#7 Who Do You Think Ensures That The Policy Is Followed

Student Council 0 0%
Principal 23 76.67%
Teachers 2 6.67%
Prefect 0 0%
School Supervisor 3 10%
No One 2 6.66%
Table#7

14
Mean: 1

Median: 2

Mode: 23

Figure#7

Who Ensures Compliance

Student Council
Principal
6%
0% 7%
Teachers
17%
77% Prefect
0% 10%
School Supervisor
No One

#8 Has It Affected Your Purchases

Yes 16 53.33%
No 14 46.67%
Table#8

Mean: 1

Median: 15

Mode: 16
15
Figure#8

Has it Affected Your Purchases

47% Yes
53% No

#9 If Yes, How has it Affected You

No Effect 15 50%
Small 10 33.33%
Great 5 16.67%
Table#9

16
Mean: 1

Median: 10

Mode: 15

Figure#9

How has it affected you

GREAT 5

SMALL 10

NO EFFECT 15

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

How has it affected you

#10 Are You Health Conscious

Yes 23 76.67%
No 7 23.33%
Table#10
17
Mean: 1

Median:15

Mode: 23

Figure#10

Are You Health Conscious

23 7

YES NO

Are You Health Conscious

#11 How Successful Is This policy In The Fight Against Obesity

18
None 10 33.33%
Small 15 50%
Large 5 16.67%
Table#11

Mean: 1

Median: 10

Mode: 15

Figure#11

How Successful In Fight Against Obesity

17%

33%

50%

None Small Large

19
 Analysis of Data

Fig. 1 shows, ‘Do you consume sugary drinks?’

In fig. 1,the mean was 1,thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was
15,thus all options valued 15 and more are important: Yes. The mode was 23, i.e Yes, this option
was chosen the most.

Fig 2 shows, ‘If yes, why?’

In fig 2, the mean was 1,thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 4,
thus all options valued 4 and more are important: Familiarity, Availability, Necessity and Varity.
The mode was 11, i.e. Familiarity, this option was chosen the most.

Fig 3 shows, ‘Factors that influence your purchase.’

In fig 3, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 5, so
all options valued 5 and more are important: Price, Taste and Quality. The mode was 16 i.e.
Taste, this option was chosen the most.

Fig 4 shows, ‘If yes, who sells?’

In fig 4, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 6, so
all options valued 6 and more are important :Vendor and Mini Mart. The mode was 15 i.e.
Vendor, thus this option was chosen the most.

Fig 5 shows, ‘Do you agree?’

In fig 5, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 15,
thus all options valued 15 and more are important: Yes . The mode was 16 i.e. Yes, this option
was chosen the most.

Fig 6 shows, ‘How rigid is this enforcement?’

In fig 6, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 6,
thus all options valued 6 and more are important: Moderately and Highly enforced. The mode
was 16 i.e. Moderately, this option was chosen the most.

Fig 7 shows, ‘Who ensures compliance?’

20
In fig 7, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 2,
thus all options valued 2 and more are important : Principal, Teachers, No One and School
Supervisor. The mode was 23 i.e Principal, this option was chosen the most.

Fig 8 shows, ‘Has it Affected your purchases?’

In fig 8, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 15,
thus all options valued 15 and more are important: Yes. The mode was 16 i.e Yes, this option
was chosen the most.

Fig 9 shows, ‘If Yes, how has it Affected you?’

In fig 9, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 10,
thus all options valued 10 and more are important : No effect and Small. The mode was 15 i.e
No effect, this option was chosen the most.

Fig 10 shows, ‘Are you health conscious?’

In fig 10, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 15,
thus all options valued 15 and more are important : Yes. The mode was 23, Yes, this option was
chosen the most.

Fig 11 shows, ‘How Successful is this policy in the fight against obesity?’

In fig 11, the mean was 1, thus on average each respondent chose 1 option. The median was 10,
thus all options valued 10 and more are important : None and Small. The mode was 15 i.e Small,
this option was chosen the most.

21
 RATIO CALCULATIONS

 2016
CA/CL Current Ratio - 33000/1600 = 21:1

 2017
CA/CL Current Ratio - 32600/1400 = 23:1

 2018
CA/CL Current Ratio - 24800/1500 = 17:1

 2016
CA – S/CL Acid Test – 9000/1600 = 7

 2017
CA – S/CL Acid Test – 9600/1400 = 7

 2018
CA – S/CL Acid Test – 7800/1500 = 5

 2016
COGS/AVER.S Rate of Stock Turn – 401200/23000 = 17

 2017
COGS/AVER.S Rate of Stock Turn – 394400/23500 = 17

 2018
COGS/AVER.S Rate of Stock Turn – 337800/20000 = 17

22
  2016
GP/SALES × 100 Gross Profit Margin – 174800/576000 = 0.30

 2017
GP/SALES × 100 Gross Profit Margin – 168000/562000 = 0.30

 2018
GP/SALES × 100 Gross Profit Margin – 136200/474000 = 0.29

 2016
NP/SALES × 100 Net Profit Margin – 146500/576000 = 0.25

 2017
NP/SALES × 100 Net Profit Margin – 139700/562000 = 0.25

 2018
NP/SALES × 100 Net Profit Margin – 108000/474000 = 0.23

 2016
NP/OC × 100 Return on Capital Employed – 146500/111400 = 1.32

 2017
NP/OC × 100 Return on Capital Employed – 139700/105200 = 1.33

 2018
NP/OC × 100 Return on Capital Employed – 108000/928000 = 0.12

23
 Analysis of Quantitative Data
First to test for the liquidity of the cafeteria, the current ratio, acid test and rate of stock turn were
calculated. The current ratio shows the extent to which your assets can be used to pay off your debts in
the business and the acid test shows this using the most liquid assets. From the results it can be seen that
the cafeteria is in a good liquidity state but after the Ministry of Education’s policy, this has been shown
to decrease slightly. The rate of stock turn shows how fast the stocks of a business are replenished for the
year. As seen in the calculations this number was 17 throughout the year. i.e. the business was able to
purchase new stocks 17 times for the year. This indicates that the business was doing well in terms of
sales even after the Ministry of Education’s policy was implemented. Overall these ratios show that the
business is liquid and is able to pay off debts or expenses very easily as they become due.

Next, the profitability of the business over the 3 year period was investigated. To do this, the calculations
of the Gross profit margin, Net profit margin and Return on capital employed were done. The gross profit
margin shows the amount of profit made on every dollar before any expenses are deducted. This was
worked out to be .30 for 2016 and 2018 but .29 in 2019. The net profit was also calculated which
presented the amount of profit made on every dollar after expenses are deducted. This was .25 in 2016
and 2017 but fell to .23 in the year of 2018. This all shows that the business is still very employed was
calculated which shows how efficiently a company can generate profits from its capital invested by
comparing net profit to the capital invested. This was shown to be decreasing significantly (by 1.20
points) since the policy’s implementation. From this we can say that the company has not been generating
enough profits compared to the capital employed since the ban of sugary drinks.

24
 Findings
The liquidity of the cafeteria remained the same but sales and profitability have fallen slightly. This is a
direct result of the policy that was implemented which banned sugary drinks. It has been very difficult for
the cafeteria to acquire substitutes. This has also allowed competition to increase as outside vendors can
still sell these products and students can bring them from home. Despite this students have become more
health conscious and drink more water.

25
 PRESENTATION OF DATA
 Interview

#1 The effect of on sales because of this policy?

-Devastating.

#2 Why?

- Because it took 85% of the sales

#3 What counter measures have you put in place?

- Maintain price for available products

#4 What is the effect of this police on your competition?

- None

#5 What you can’t sell, does your competition sell,eg. Sugary drinks?

- Yes

#6 How rigid is the enforcement of this policy?

- None from the ministerial point of view

26
#7 Has your competition risen over time?

- Yes

#8 How difficult is it to acquire substitutes?

- Not Difficult, we had no other choice, only could sell water

#9 Who enforces this policy?

Mrs. Manraj (Acting Principal St Georges College)

27
 Observation
Since the MOE’s decision to ban the sale of sugary drinks in schools, students have become more health
conscious and have started purchasing more water from the cafeteria. The variety of drinks sold ate the
café have decreased with only 100% fruit juice and water being sold. Even so, the number of students
who buy from them has not seemed to change. However, outside vendors, competing with the cafeteria,
still continue to sell soft drinks and juices with high amount of sugar. With this, there are many students
who decide to purchase drinks from them regardless.

28
 CONCLUSION
In conclusion the amount of sales and profitability of the cafeteria has decreased since the implementation
of the Ministry of Education’s policy which banned the sale of sugary drinks in schools. However, the
policy does have a positive effect on the health of the students as they are encouraged to drink more
water.

29
RECOMMENDATION

30
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

https://www.verywellhealth.com/the-physical-consequences-of-

childhood-obesity-1095130

http://www.guardian.co.tt/article-6.2.349045.fa76b4d0a5

31
 APPENDIX
QUESTIONNAIRE

1. Do you know the M.O.E’S policy on obesity?

YES NO

2. If yes, please state what it is

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

3. Who do you think ensures the policy is followed?

Student council Principal Teachers Prefect

School Supervisor No one

4. Do you agree with this policy?

YES NO

5. Please justify your above answer

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

6. In your opinion has the policy affected your purchases in the café?

YES NO

7. If yes, how has it been affected?

No effect Small Great

32
8. Are you health conscious?

YES NO

9. Why?___________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

10. Do you consume sugary drinks?

Yes No

11. Why?

Peer pressure Familiarity Thirst Necessity

Other______________

12. If yes, how often do you consume sugary drinks?

Everyday Once a week Once a month More than once a day

Other___________

13. Do you buy sugary drinks?

Yes No

14. If you answered yes above, please

state____________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________

15. Why would you buy?

Not health conscious Peer pressure

33
16. What factors influence your purchase?

Price Income Taste Quality Peer pressure

Substitute Other_______________________________

17. Are sugary drinks sold in school?

Yes No

18. If yes, who sells it?

Café Vendor Mini mart Other_______________________

19. What do you currently buy? _________________________________________

20. What is no longer sold in the café? ____________________________________

________________________________________________________________

21. Are you aware of any substitutes that should be sold instead?

Yes No

22. Identify _______________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________

23. How successful is this policy in the fight against obesity?

None Small Large

24. How rigid is this enforcement?

None Very little Moderately Highly enforced

34
 Lackraj Café:Financial highlight 2016-2018
2016 2017 2018

Sales 576000 562000 474000

Cost of Goods Sales 401200 394400 337800

Inventory 24000 23000 17000

Purchases 403200 393400 331800

Gross Income 174800 168000 136200

Rent 12000 12000 12000

Salaries 5000 5000 5000

Transport 1500 1600 1400

Utilities 800 800 800

Depreciation 8000 8000 8000

Sundry Expenses 1000 1000 1000

2016 2017 2018

Net Income 146500 139700 108000

Equipment 24000 22000 20000

Appliances 26000 24000 22000

Fixtures 16000 15000 14000

Utensils 14000 13000 12000

Inventory 24000 23000 17000

Accounts Receivable 3000 2600 2800

Cash 6000 7000 5000

35
Accounts Payable 1200 1100 1300

Accruals 400 300 200

capital 111400 105200 91300

113000 106600 92800

36