AIM University Group

Learning Outcome 1: REFERRED

AC 1.1 — Q1 F&B and the Hospitality Experience. You mention menu, atmosphere, service standards and integration with events and rooms, but you do not explain how F&B actually works with the other departments during a guest's stay. No specific Kingston Manor examples. REFERRED

AC 1.2 — Q2 Significance of F&B Management. Strongest section. You cover menu planning, staff training and cost control and include the impact of poor management. Would benefit from named Kingston Manor scenarios and direct discussion of 5-star service standards. PASS

AC 1.3 — Q3 Challenges and Trends. You list challenges and trends but do not evaluate them. The brief asks you to weigh adaptation strategies — which would work for Kingston Manor, at what cost, with what impact. REFERRED

AC 1.4 — Q4 Historical Evolution. You capture the shift to experience-centred dining and apply it to Kingston Manor, but you name no historical milestones. The brief explicitly asks for them, and on a 20-mark question this is a substantial gap. REFERRED

Learning Outcome 2: REFERRED

AC 2.1 — Produce a professionally formatted and cost-effective F&B menu that aligns with the established budget constraints. The only F&B document submitted is the partially completed costing template; no menu plan or formatted menu document accompanies it. The dishes are identifiable and culturally appropriate (saltfish wantons, jerk chicken skewers, curry goat with rice and peas, sweet potato pudding, tropical mocktails), but there is no menu concept, no presented menu, and no evidence that the menu is cost-effective or budget-aligned, since the per-guest and event-level sections are blank. (REFERRED)

AC 2.2 — Critically analyse and justify menu choices based on market research and customer preferences. No menu concept, market justification, or customer-preference analysis has been submitted. The Section F cost-control notes that would carry this reasoning remain as the template's unfilled prompt text, so the justification required under this criterion is not evidenced in the F&B submission. (REFERRED)

AC 2.3 — Apply pricing strategies and perform cost analysis for proposed menus. Section A contains ingredient-level costing, but it is duplicated, a Main row is blank, and several portion figures do not reconcile with the stated quantities and unit costs (goat at $7/g for 200g is recorded as $225 rather than $1,400). More importantly, Section B (dish totals), Section C (menu cost per guest), Section D (pricing calculation), and Section E (event total costing) are all empty, so no margin, per-guest cost, or financial viability has been produced against the stated 200-guest count and the $5,000 JMD target price, which is never derived. (REFERRED)

AC 2.4 — Present the menu professionally and effectively, addressing questions and feedback competently. There is no professional menu document to present, and the costing on which a pricing defence would rest is incomplete, so this criterion is not met on the evidence submitted. (REFERRED)

Overall Feedback
Your F&B submission is Referred. What is present, an identifiable Jamaican menu and a started dish-costing table, sits inside an otherwise incomplete template: there is no menu plan, no market justification, and the dish-total, per-guest, pricing, and event-costing sections are blank, with arithmetic errors in the costing that does exist. To clear the referral, complete the full costing template (corrected per-portion figures, dish totals, full menu cost per guest, a pricing calculation with a stated margin, and event total costing for the confirmed guest count), add the menu concept and market justification, and submit a formatted professional menu.

Learning Outcome 3: REFERRED
AC 3.1 — Develop a comprehensive food safety plan integrating best practice and regulatory compliance. The plan is thorough and venue-specific, citing the Public Health Act, the Food and Drug Act, Bureau of Standards Jamaica, Codex, and HACCP, with CCPs, a full hazard analysis table, and an allergen register. The food safety component is strong, but the Section 3 menu and financial review that also sits under this criterion is absent. Met for food safety. (PASS)

AC 3.2 — Demonstrate practical application and adherence to food safety standards. The practicum was completed on campus, but the unprepared and unorganized delivery means the practical application of food safety standards was not adequately demonstrated. Not met. (REFERRED)

AC 3.3 — Develop customer service strategies and guidelines aligned with the concept. The hybrid plated and assisted service model, welcome and interaction standards, etiquette, and communication levels are well matched to the boutique positioning. Met. (PASS)

AC 3.4 — Reflect on the impact of food safety on satisfaction and operations and propose improvements. You analyse the effect of safety controls on speed, flow, convenience, and guest comfort, then give practical balancing strategies such as timed batch service and aesthetic integration of covered equipment. Met. (PASS)

Overall: the food safety plan, hazard table, service strategy, and reflection are strong. The unit is referred for two reasons: the practical demonstration was not adequately performed, and the submission omits the Section 3 menu presentation and financial review, including the required cost summary. Add the costed menu and re-attempt the practical component to address both.

Learning Outcome 4: Incomplete
No Submission