Chapter 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter presents the data gathered through the research instrument
used. The following analyses and interpretations were presented according to the
order of questions laid down in the questionnaires.
Problem 1. Profile of the Respondents
Table 3 presents the distribution of respondents according to age.
Table 3
Distribution of Respondents According to Age
Age Range
21 30 years old
31 40 years old
41 50 years old
Above 50 years old
TOTAL

Frequency
6
8
15
15
44

Percentage
14%
18%
34%
34%
100%

Thirty four percent (34%) of the respondents were above 50 years old and
age ranges from 41 to 50 years old. Eighteen percent (18%) of the respondents were
between 31-40 years old. Respondents aged 21-30 is fourteen (14%) of the total
respondents.
Table 4 presents the distribution of respondents according to gender.
Table 4
Distribution of Respondents According to Gender
Gender
Male
Female
TOTAL

Frequency
13
31
44

Percentage
30%
70%
100%

Table 4 shows that the number of the female respondents (70%) is very far
from the number of male respondents (30%) with the total of 31 for female and 13 for
male. Based on the figure, the dominated gender among the respondents is female.
Table 5 presents the distribution of respondents according to their position in
the cooperative.

Table 5
Distribution of Respondents According to their Position in the Cooperative
Position
Board of Director
General Assembly
Committee
General Manager
Other members
TOTAL

Frequency
7
2
3
2
30
44

Percentage
16%
5%
7%
5%
68%
100%

Sixty-eight percent (68%) of the respondents belongs to other members

group, showing that most of them having position in the management such as
chairperson, secretary, treasurer, etc. Sixteen percent (16%) of the respondents
were the Board of Directors of their respective cooperative. Respondents having the
position of committee is 7% of the total respondents. On the other hand, five percent
(5%) of the respondents were General Manager, so as the General Assembly group.
Table 6 shows the distribution of the respondents in terms of their length of
service or of being a member in the cooperative.
Table 6
Distribution of Respondents According to their Length of Service
Years
5 years and below
6 10 years
11 15 years
16 20 years
Above 20 years
TOTAL

No. of respondents
6
5
14
5
14
44

Percentage
14%
11%
32%
11%
32%
100%

Herein, it shows that 32% of the respondents tied between 11 to 15 members

years and those above 20 years being a member. Out of the 44respondents, 14%
are servicing the cooperative 5 years and below, and 11% of them are tied between
6 to 10 members years and those 16 to 20 years being a member.
Problem 2. Perspective of the Cooperative

39

Table 7 shows the distribution of the respondents cooperative type.

Table 7
Distribution of Respondents Cooperative According to its Kind
Kind of Cooperative
Multi-purpose cooperative

Frequency
44

Percentage
100%

It shows above that a 100% of the respondents were a member of a MultiPurpose Cooperative. The result indicates that the researchers were only entertained
by Multi-Purpose Cooperatives. One of the good reasons to this is that the registered
cooperatives in the Cooperative Development Authority (CDA) were mostly
organized as Multi-purpose cooperative.
Table 8 shows the distribution of the respondents cooperative in terms of its
operating years.
Table 8
Distribution of Respondents Cooperatives According to its Operating years
Years
16 20 years
Above 20 years
TOTAL

Frequency
13
31
44

Percentage
30%
70%
100%

It shows above that a majority of 70% of the respondents said that their
cooperative exists for about 20 years now. Out of the 44 respondents, 30% were
members of cooperative whose operating years is between 16 to 20 years now. The
result indicates that cooperatives life span may be longer than a decade.
Table 9 shows the distribution of the respondents cooperative in terms of its
number of members.
Table 9
Distribution of Respondents Cooperative According to its Number of Members
Members
101 to 200
401 to 500

Frequency
19
9
40

Percentage
43%
20%

Above 500
TOTAL

16
44

36%
100%

It shows that 43% of the respondents said that their cooperative has the
number of members that ranges from 101 to 200. 14% were members of cooperative
whose members were already above 500 in numbers, while 20% said that they have
401 to 500 members in their cooperative. The result indicates that cooperatives still
exist because of hundreds of people who want to become a member of it.
Table 10 shows the distribution of the respondents cooperative in terms of its
total members share capital.
Table 10
Distribution of Respondents Cooperative According to its
Members Share Capital
Amount
50, 000 and below
50,001 to 100,000
TOTAL

Frequency
34
10
44

Percentage
77%
23%
100%

It shows above that 77% of the respondents said that their cooperative has a
share capital of Php50, 000 and below, while only 23% were members of cooperative
whose share capital ranges from Php50, 001 to Php100, 000.

41

Table 11 shows the distribution of the respondents respective cooperative in

terms of its total assets.
Table 11
Distribution of Respondents Cooperative According to its Total Assets
Amount
1 Million and below
1.1 Million to 2 Million
Above 5 Million
TOTAL

No. of respondents
4
8
32
44

Percentage
9%
18%
73%
100%

It shows above that 73% of the respondents said that their cooperative has a
total asset of above 5 Million, while 18% were members of cooperative whose total
assets ranges from Php1.1 Million to Php2 Million; and only 9% answered that their
cooperative has Php1 Million and below total assets.
Table 12 shows the distribution of the respondents respective cooperative in
terms of its total net surplus.
Table 12
Distribution of Respondents Cooperative According to its Net Surplus
Amount
50,001 to 100,000
Above 300,000
TOTAL

Frequency
19
25
44

Percentage
43%
57%
100%

It shows above that 57% of the respondents said that their cooperative has a
total net surplus Above Php300, 000, while 43% were members of cooperative
whose total net surplus ranges from Php50, 001 to Php100, 000.

42

Problem 3. Perception of the respondents

Table 13 presents the weighted mean of the Perception of the Officers on The
Cooperatives Internal Control in terms of effectiveness and efficiency of operations.
Table 13
Weighted Mean and Verbal Interpretation of the Officers Perception on the
Effectiveness and Efficiency of Cooperatives Operation

3.1.1.
Cooperative properties are
protected from loss or misuse.
3.1.2.
Incompatible duties are
segregated, if possible.
3.1.3.
Equipment and supplies
are safeguarded.
3.1.4.
Staff
members
with
financial
or
business
responsibilities
are
properly
trained and supervised, and
performs their responsibilities with
utmost care and competence.
Grand Mean

Weighted
Mean
4.41

Verbal
Interpretation
Somewhat Agree

4.34

Somewhat Agree

4.39

Somewhat Agree

4.41

Somewhat Agree

4.39

Somewhat Agree

Respondents evaluated 4.41 as somewhat agree both the protection of

cooperative properties and the training and supervision for staff members with
financial or business responsibilities. They rated the safeguarding of equipment
duties 4.39, verbally interpreted as somewhat agree; and same verbal interpretation
for segregation of incompatible, rated as 4.34.
The overall perception of respondents in the Perception of the Members on
The Cooperatives Internal Control in terms of effectiveness and efficiency of
operations has a grand mean of 4.39 which is verbally interpreted as somewhat
agree.

43

Table 14 presents the weighted mean of the Perception of the Officers on The
Cooperatives Internal Control in terms of reliability of financial reporting.
Table 14
Weighted Mean and Verbal Interpretation of the Officers Perception on the
Reliability of Cooperatives Financial Reporting

3.2.1.
Financial statements are
properly
authorized
and
documented.
3.2.2.
Financial records and data
are accurate and complete.
3.2.3.
Accounts
payable
are
accurate and punctual.
3.2.4.
Accounting records are
periodically reconciled.
3.2.5.
Any
unnecessary
weaknesses or financial risks are
promptly corrected.
GRAND MEAN

Weighted
Mean
4.36

Verbal
Interpretation
Somewhat Agree

4.27

Somewhat Agree

4.39

Somewhat Agree

4.45

Somewhat Agree

4.45

Somewhat Agree

4.39

Somewhat Agree

Respondents rated 4.36 and somewhat agree on the matter that their
financial statements were properly authorized and documented. They rated the
financial records accuracy and punctuality 4.27, and 4.39 for the accuracy and
punctuality of accounts payable both as somewhat agree. Same verbal
interpretation for periodical reconciliation of accounting records and the correction of
financial weaknesses and risks, both rated as 4.45.
The overall perception of respondents on the cooperatives internal control in
terms of reliability of financial reporting has a grand mean of 4.39 which is verbally
interpreted as somewhat agree.
The table above presents the weighted mean of the Perception of the Officers
on The Cooperatives Internal Control in terms of Compliance with the Philippine
Cooperative Code of 2008.

44

45

Table 15
Weighted Mean and Verbal Interpretation of the Officers Perception on the
Cooperatives Compliance with the Philippine Cooperative Code of 2008

3.3.1.
The cooperative submits
the
requirements
for
reregistration or registration under
RA 9520.
3.3.2.
The cooperative amended
its existing article of cooperation
and by-laws in provision with the
Philippine Cooperative Code of
2008.
3.3.3.
The cooperative submitted
the requirements for certificate of
tax exemption under RA 9520.
3.3.4.
The cooperative conducts
several seminars and trainings for
the officers as indicated on the
implementation guidelines of the
Philippine Code.
3.3.5.
The cooperative complied
for the additional reportorial
requirements of CDA under
Philippine Cooperative Code of
2008.
GRAND MEAN

Weighted
Mean
4.89

Verbal
Interpretation
Strongly Agree

4.75

Strongly Agree

4.77

Strongly Agree

4.50

Somewhat Agree

4.77

Strongly Agree

4.74

Strongly Agree

Respondents rated 4.89 and interpreted as strongly agree on the matter that
their cooperative submitted the requirements for re-registration or registration under
RA 9520. They rated the cooperatives amendment of existing article of cooperation
and by-laws in provision with the Philippine Cooperative Code of 2008,4.75, while
4.77 for the cooperatives submission of the requirements for the certificate of tax
exemption under RA 9520 which are both verbally interpreted as strongly
agree.There is same verbal interpretation for the cooperatives compliance with the
additional reportorial requirements of CDA under Philippine Cooperative Code of
2008, rated as 4.77. Cooperatives supervision of several seminars and trainings for

46

the officers as indicated on the implementation guidelines of the Philippine Code was
interpreted as somewhat agree with a mean of4.50.
The overall Perception of Respondents on The Cooperatives Internal Control
Practices in terms of Compliance with the Philippine Cooperative Code of 2008 has a
grand mean of 4.74 which is verbally interpreted as strongly agree.
Problem 4. Problems encountered and proposed solutions as perceived by the
officers with regards to cooperatives internal control practices.
Table 16 presents the weighted mean of the Perception of the Officers on The
Cooperatives Internal Control in terms of the problems that they have encountered.
Table 16
Weighted Mean and Verbal Interpretation of the Officers Perception on the
Cooperatives problems with regards to its Internal Control Practices

4.1.1.
There were checks issued
without
pre-approved
documentation
for
the
expenditure.
4.1.2.
Data entries were not
timely made.
4.1.3.
No back up or any
recovery systems for electronic
systems and everyone has access
to various systems.
4.1.4.
Cooperative property is
borrowed or otherwise used for
private purposes.
4.1.5.
The Cooperative fails to
submit
the
registration
requirements on time.
GRAND MEAN

47

Weighted
Mean
1.75

Verbal
Interpretation
Somewhat
Disagree

2.00

Somewhat
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree

1.93

1.70

Somewhat
Disagree

1.11

Somewhat
Disagree

1.70

Somewhat
Disagree

The overall perception of respondents has a grand mean of 1.70 which is

verbally interpreted as somewhat disagree which means that the cooperative do not
somewhat suffer from the problems existing in the cooperative.
The table above presents the weighted mean of the Perception of the Officers
on the Proposed Solutions for the Existing Problems in Cooperatives.
Table 17
Weighted Mean and Verbal Interpretation of the Officers Perception of the
Proposed Solutions for the Existing Problems in Cooperatives

4.2.1.
Every receipt to and
expenditure from a revolving fund
and a petty cash fund should be
supported by clear documentation.
4.2.2.
Financial
reporting
deadlines should be followed.
4.2.3.
Cooperative
personal
property having a monetary value
(excluding, for example, trash,
outdated equipment, consumed
consumables,
and
spoilage)
should be discarded only with the
Boards prior approval.
4.2.4.
Properties
should
be
frequently
monitored
and
inspected.
4.2.5.
The Cooperative should
file the registration requirements
on time.
GRAND MEAN

Weighted
Mean
4.00

Verbal
Interpretation
Somewhat Agree

4.64

Strongly Agree

4.45

Somewhat Agree

4.52

Strongly Agree

4.89

Strongly Agree

4.50

Somewhat Agree

The overall perception of respondents has a grand mean of 4.50 which is

verbally interpreted as somewhat agree. This means that the cooperative members
somehow agree with the following proposed solutions even if they do not fully suffer
from the problems existing in the cooperative. Some of the statements presented
were rated by the respondents that they strongly agree that such controls should be
implemented inside the cooperative. These controls are financial reporting deadlines
48

should be followed, inventories should be periodically inspected, and that

cooperatives should register on time to avoid delays.
Problem 5. Significant difference between the profile of the cooperative
officers and the following lead variables:
Table 18 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents Age
and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Cooperatives Internal
Control.
Table 18
Significant difference between the Respondents Age and the Lead Variables
regarding their Perception on the Cooperatives Internal Control
Lead Variables
Efficiency and Effectiveness of
Operations

F-value
0.245

Reliability of Financial
Reporting

0.195

Compliance with the Philippine

Cooperative Code

1.467

p-value
0.864
0.899
0.238

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

H0
H0
H0

Table 18 shows that Efficiency and Effectiveness of Operations has an Fvalue of 0.245and a p-value of 0.864; Reliability of Financial Reporting, F=0.195 and
p=0.899; and lastly, the Compliance with the Philippine Cooperative Code,
F=1.567and p=0.238.
Since the p-values of these aspects of internal control are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their age, do not differ
significantly with regards to their assessment on the Cooperatives internal control
practices.
49

Table 19 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents

Gender and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Cooperatives
Internal Control.
Table 19
Significant difference between the Respondents Gender and the
Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the
Cooperatives Internal Control Practices
Lead Variables
Efficiency and Effectiveness of
Operations

F-value
0.018

Reliability of Financial
Reporting

0.000

Compliance with the Philippine

Cooperative Code

0.061

p-value
0.894
0.991
0.806

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

H0
H0
H0

Table 19 shows that Efficiency and Effectiveness of Operations has an Fvalue of 0.018and a p-value of 0.894; Reliability of Financial Reporting, F=0.000 and
p=0.991; and lastly, the Compliance with the Philippine Cooperative Code, F=0.061
and p=0.806.
Since the p-values of these aspects of internal control are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their age, do not differ
significantly with regards to their assessment on the Cooperatives internal control.
Table 20 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents
Position in the Cooperative and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the
Cooperatives Internal Control.

50

Table 20
Significant difference between the Respondents Position in the Cooperative
and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Cooperatives
Internal Control Practices
Internal Control
Efficiency and Effectiveness of
Operations

F-value
0.302

Reliability of Financial
Reporting

0.196

Compliance with the Philippine

Cooperative Code

0.830

p-value
0.875
0.939
0.514

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

H0
H0
H0

Table 20 shows that Efficiency and Effectiveness of Operations has an Fvalue of 0.302and a p-value of 0.875; Reliability of Financial Reporting, F=0.196 and
p=0.939; and lastly, the Compliance with the Philippine Cooperative Code, F=0.830
and p=0.514.
Since the p-values of these aspects of internal control are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their age, do not differ
significantly with regards to their assessment on the Cooperatives internal control.
Table 21 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents
Length of Service and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the
Cooperatives Internal Control.
Table 21
Significant difference between the Respondents Length of Service and the
Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Cooperatives Internal Control
Practices
Internal Control
Efficiency and Effectiveness of
Operations

F-value
1.899

51

p-value
0.130

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

H0

Reliability of Financial
Reporting

1.784

Compliance with the Philippine

Cooperative Code

1.484

0.152
0.226

Not
Significant

Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

H0
H0

Table 21 shows that Efficiency and Effectiveness of Operations has an Fvalue of 1.899and a p-value of 0.130; Reliability of Financial Reporting, F=1.784 and
p=0.152; and lastly, the Compliance with the Philippine Cooperative Code, F=1.484
and p=0.226.
Since the p-values of these aspects of internal control are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their length of service
in the cooperative, does not differ significantly with regards to their assessment on
the Cooperatives internal control practices.
Table 22 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents Age
and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Problems Encountered and
Proposed Solutions.
Table 22
Significant difference between the Respondents Age and the Lead Variables
regarding their Perception on the Problems Encountered and Proposed
Solutions

Problems encountered
Possible solutions

F-value
0.479
0.419

p-value
0.698
0.740

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

H0
H0

Table 22 shows that problems that the cooperative encountered has an Fvalue of 0.479and a p-value of 0.698; and possible solutions as perceived by the
respondents, F=0.419 and p=0.740.
52

Since the p-values of the problems and possible solutions are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their age, does not
differ significantly with regards to their assessment on the Cooperatives internal
control and the recommendation of possible actions.
Table 23 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents
Gender and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Problems
Encountered and Proposed Solutions.
Table 23
Significant difference between the Respondents Gender and the Lead
Variables regarding their Perception on the Problems Encountered and
Proposed Solutions

Problems encountered
Possible solutions

F-value
0.017
0.068

p-value
0.898
0.795

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

H0
H0

Table 23 shows that problems that the cooperative encountered has an Fvalue of 0.017and a p-value of 0.898; and possible solutions as perceived by the
respondents, F=0.068 and p=0.795.
Since the p-values of the problems and possible solutions are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their gender, does not
differ significantly with regards to their assessment on the Cooperatives internal
control and the recommendation of possible actions.

53

Table 24 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents

Position in the Cooperative and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the
Problems Encountered and Proposed Solutions.

54

Table 24
Significant difference between the Respondents Position in the Cooperative
and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Problems
Encountered and Proposed Solutions

Problems encountered
Possible solutions

F-value
0.751
0.705

p-value
0.564
0.594

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

Not
Significant

Accept

H0
H0

Table 24 shows that problems that the cooperative encountered has a Fvalue of 0.751and a p-value of 0.564; and possible solutions as perceived by the
respondents, F=0.705 and p=0.594.
Since the p-values of the problems and possible solutions are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their position in the
cooperative, does not differ significantly with regards to their assessment on the
Cooperatives internal control practices and the recommendation of possible actions.
Table 25 presents the Significant Difference between the Respondents
Length of Service and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the Problems
Encountered and Proposed Solutions.
Table 25
Significant difference between the Respondents Length of Service in the
Cooperative and the Lead Variables regarding their Perception on the
Problems Encountered and Proposed Solutions

Problems encountered
Possible solutions

F-value
1.276
0.357

p-value
0.296
0.838

55

Remarks
Not
Significant

Decision
Accept

Not

Accept

H0

Significant

H0

Table 25 shows that problems that the cooperative encountered has an Fvalue of 1.276and a p-value of 0.296; and possible solutions as perceived by the
respondents, F=0.357 and p=0.838.
Since the p-values of the problems and possible solutions are all greater than
0.05, they are assumed not significant, therefore the null hypotheses were all
accepted. This means that the respondents, when grouped by their length of service
in the cooperative, does not differ significantly with regards to their assessment on
the Cooperatives internal control practices and the recommendation of possible
actions.

56