Part of the Kitchen Manager track. Lesson 4 of 10.
Where in the shift: monthly, and before any menu change.
Prerequisites: Modules 3, 13, 47.
The sequence
Cost every component at edible-portion cost.
Include garnish, fat, sauce, and waste.
Compute contribution in dollars.
And compare theoretical to actual.
The decisions
Which number to decide on. Contribution in dollars, not food cost percentage.
Because you cannot bank a percentage — the rent is paid in dollars, per Module 47.
A high-priced item at a bad percentage can contribute several times what a cheap item at a good percentage does.
And the honky-tonk correction: the kitchen is a retention mechanism rather than a profit center. Food keeps people in the building and the revenue that produces lands at the bar, where no food report attributes it.
Which means before removing anything, three questions: how often does it appear on a multi-cover table, is it what people name when they describe the room, and does it extend how long a table stays.
If any answer is yes, model the beverage effect before cutting it.
What you are reading
The gap between theoretical and actual food cost. A persistent gap in one direction is the finding — yield, waste, or portion drift.
And the sales mix, because a percentage that improved on a mix shift is not an improvement.
What goes wrong here
Costed on as-purchased weight. Every plate understated by the inverse of the yield.
Optimized on percentage. The percentage improves exactly as predicted and total profit falls.
And the beverage effect valued at zero — which is a decision made by omission.
Verification
Rank the menu twice, by percentage and by contribution. The lists will not match and the gap is the module.
The boundary
Nothing here is financial or tax advice — costing structure and financial reporting belong with a CPA.