The vending machine contract
A secondary school of 1,200 students has a vending machine contract worth $28,000 per year to the canteen. A student survey finds 38% buy a sugary drink at least four days a week; the canteen manager says removing the machine would cut revenue used to subsidise hot meals for 90 students on fee relief. The principal wants an immediate ban from next Monday. Student leaders report that some students buy drinks because the water bubblers are broken or queued, and that sports teams are sponsored by a beverage company. The school's health plan says it uses a whole-school approach and student voice.
1. Analyse the immediate ban proposal using the Ottawa Charter action areas and equity. What is the strongest judgement?
Read the worked answer
A ban is an example of healthy public policy and could create a supportive environment, but an immediate ban without alternatives may penalise students who rely on the canteen subsidy and may shift purchases to nearby shops. Broken bubblers show the school has not created a supportive environment for water. Student voice is a community action asset but is being ignored. Sponsorship shows commercial influence that undermines critical health literacy.
Equity matters: 90 students on fee relief could lose subsidised meals if canteen revenue falls. A ban must protect that subsidy in writing.
The strongest judgement is to support the direction but reject the Monday deadline. Sequence the change: fix and add water stations, negotiate the contract or reformulate stock, protect the meal subsidy, involve student leaders in messaging, teach critical literacy about marketing, and set a trial date. A ban alone is policy without environment or participation.
2. Advise a phased implementation plan and explain how the school should evaluate it.
Read the worked answer
Phase 1 (weeks 1–4): repair and add bubblers and chilled water; audit canteen finances; negotiate the contract; guarantee the meal subsidy in writing.
Phase 2 (term 1): run a student-led survey and education on sugary drinks and marketing; trial reduced stock; monitor sales and water use.
Phase 3: remove sugary drinks if water access and alternatives are in place; review the contract.
Evaluation: collect quantitative data on vending sales, water station use, canteen revenue, meal subsidy uptake and student drink consumption. Collect qualitative data through focus groups and student voice. Compare before and after, and analyse by equity group such as fee relief. Include process measures and unintended consequences. Decide in advance what counts as success and what would trigger a pause.