The Six-Month Nutrition Fund
The Sangguniang Barangay approves a six-month nutrition fund of ₱54,000 for 120 children, with 40 feeding days planned. The council's allocation is fixed: 45% for supplemental feeding, 25% for vitamins and deworming, and 30% for supplies. You have a supplier quote of ₱6.50 per child per feeding day for the meal, and the supplies the centre actually needs cost ₱13,500. As the program clerk, you must prepare a one-page status note for the next session. No additional funds can be requested this quarter, and the council will not accept a plan that quietly reduces the number of children covered. You may work only with the approved figures and the quote on hand.
1. Compute the feeding allocation, the amount available per child per feeding day, and the shortfall against the quote.
Read the worked answer
Step 1 - feeding allocation. ₱54,000 × 0.45 = ₱24,300
Step 2 - total child-feeding-days required. 120 children × 40 days = 4,800 child-days
Step 3 - amount available per child-day. ₱24,300 ÷ 4,800 = ₱5.06 (₱5.0625 before rounding)
Step 4 - amount actually needed at the quote. 4,800 × ₱6.50 = ₱31,200
Step 5 - shortfall. ₱31,200 − ₱24,300 = ₱6,900
The plan as approved is underfunded by about ₱1.44 per child-day. Do not report "₱5.06 is close enough" - at ₱5.06 the centre cannot buy the meal described in the quote.
2. Without new funds and without cutting the number of children, how many full feeding days can actually be funded? State what you recommend telling the council.
Read the worked answer
Compute the affordable days: ₱24,300 ÷ (120 × ₱6.50) = ₱24,300 ÷ ₱780 = 31.15 days
You cannot serve a partial day, so the fund covers 31 full feeding days, leaving ₱120 unused (31 × ₱780 = ₱24,180).
What to tell the council - three points, in this order:
- The approved allocation buys 31 of the planned 40 days, not 40. This is a fact, not a proposal.
- The gap is ₱6,900, or 9 feeding days (9 × ₱780 = ₱7,020; the ninth day falls ₱120 short, which the residual covers).
- The choice before them is therefore narrow and should be stated as such: cut days to 31, or change the menu to a lower-cost but still adequate meal, or source the ₱6,900 from another line. Do not silently stretch the fund by serving smaller portions - that meets the count while defeating the purpose, and it is the kind of quiet substitution that surfaces at audit.
Note: the 25% vitamins/deworming line (₱13,500) is not available for feeding; it is a separate expenditure with its own purpose.
3. The supplies line was budgeted at 30% but the actual supplies cost is ₱13,500. Compute the saving, the resulting maximum feeding days if the saving is realigned, and the remaining gap.
Read the worked answer
Step 1 - supplies budget. ₱54,000 × 0.30 = ₱16,200
Step 2 - saving. ₱16,200 − ₱13,500 = ₱2,700
Step 3 - feeding fund after realignment. ₱24,300 + ₱2,700 = ₱27,000
Step 4 - feeding days now affordable. ₱27,000 ÷ ₱780 = 34.6 days → 34 full days (34 × ₱780 = ₱26,520; the ₱480 left over does not buy a 35th day).
Step 5 - remaining gap to the full 40 days. ₱31,200 − ₱27,000 = ₱4,200
Reading the result honestly: realigning the saving closes roughly a third of the original gap. It does not rescue the plan. Six feeding days are still unfunded. Present the realignment as a partial remedy, and be explicit that the arithmetic - not a preference - still leaves a ₱4,200 hole, which is the figure the council must act on.