Saturday’s 180-guest wedding is finished. On Monday, the menu says food should have cost $2,466, while the supplier invoices total $2,612. It looks like a $146 miss, but the storeroom still contains food bought for more than this event.

What you bought and what the event used are different numbers.

Start with the expected cost

Expected, or theoretical, food cost comes from the confirmed menu, recipe quantities, usable yields, and the ingredient prices used for the plan.

For this illustrative wedding:

Expected food cost = $2,466.00
Guests = 180

$2,466.00 ÷ 180 = $13.70 expected food cost per guest

This is the baseline you approved before production. It does not prove what the kitchen consumed; it states what the plan should have consumed under its recorded assumptions.

Do not call every purchase event usage

The supplier invoices for the event week total $2,612. Some of those purchases replaced pantry stock that remains after service. The event also used ingredients already on the shelf before those invoices arrived.

The unopened oil on Monday is not Saturday’s food cost.

Start with a consistent attribution boundary:

Attributed food cost = beginning stock documented as used by the event
                     + purchases assigned to the event
                     − closing stock retained from those assigned goods

“Assigned” matters. If an invoice serves three events, allocate or count the relevant stock instead of charging the entire document to the wedding. Call the result actual usage only when physical counts and recorded movements account for all the food inside that boundary.

Reconcile the 180-guest wedding

For the worked example:

Beginning stock documented as used =    $72.00
Purchases assigned to the event =     $2,612.00
Closing stock retained =               −$184.00
                                        ---------
Attributed food cost =                $2,500.00

Now compare the attributed cost with the plan:

$2,500.00 attributed − $2,466.00 expected = $34.00 unfavorable variance

$2,500.00 ÷ 180 ≈ $13.89 attributed food cost per guest

The purchase total was $146 above the expected cost. Once the recorded stock boundary is respected, the attributed variance is $34. That is not proof of physical consumption when counts or movements are missing.

Put both numbers against the sale

At an illustrative selling price of $68 per guest:

Revenue = 180 × $68.00 = $12,240.00

Expected food-cost percentage:
$2,466.00 ÷ $12,240.00 × 100 ≈ 20.1%

Attributed food-cost percentage:
$2,500.00 ÷ $12,240.00 × 100 ≈ 20.4%

These are food-only percentages. They do not become profit figures unless every other relevant cost has also been handled.

Explain the $34; do not decorate it

The remaining difference is a prompt to inspect evidence, not permission to pick a cause. In this example, the records show:

Recorded production waste =          +$38.00
Lower-cost accepted substitution =    −$4.00
                                      -------
Explained variance =                  +$34.00

Other events may point to changed supplier prices, overproduction, portion drift, an incorrect yield, a receiving error, unrecorded transfers, or a stock-count mistake. Leave unexplained amounts labelled unexplained until you have evidence.

Carry the answer into the next event

Close the job with both sides intact:

  • What the confirmed menu should have cost.
  • What purchases and documented stock use were attributed to the event.
  • What remained on the shelf.
  • Which recorded causes explain the variance.
  • Which recipe, yield, buying, or production assumption needs review.

The wedding closes with a named $34 attributed variance, not a guessed $146 loss. The remaining $184 stays on the shelf, ready to belong to the next job only when that job uses it.