AIM University Group

Learning Outcome 1: REFERRED

Your submission shows a developing understanding of event planning, with a solid failure analysis in Q3. However, Q2 does not go beyond general statements and does not demonstrate how specific planning decisions influence the guest experience — this criterion needs to be resubmitted.

AC 1.1 — Q1 Event Planning Concepts. You work through the lifecycle stages in reasonable detail such as concept and design, budget management, vendor/supplier coordination, marketing, risk management, and post-event feedback. Objectives and stakeholder roles are mentioned but not
fully explained. PASS

AC 1.2 — Q2 Planning Decisions. Your answer stays at a general level. You note the importance of understanding what the client wants and following the lifecycle, but you do not provide a specific Kingston Manor example or show how particular planning decisions shaped the guest experience and event outcome. REFERRED

AC 1.3 — Q3 Analysis of Failure. You identify poor budget management as your failure scenario and trace it through effectively — funding shortages lead to catering failure, which leads to displeased guests, unmet objectives, reputational damage, and future business loss. PASS

AC 1.4 — Q4 Professional Reasoning. You make a clear case for evaluation like it reveals mistakes, shortfalls, and areas for improvement, and builds skill for future events. The reasoning is valid, though it would be stronger with reference to data-driven evidence such as guest feedback or performance metrics. PASS

Learning Outcome 2: REFERRED

AC 2.1 — Outline the event planning timeline and stages; identify key milestones and deadlines.
Your wedding-day timeline on slide 6 walks through the day from 1:30 pm vendor arrival to 12:00 am venue reset with appropriate transitions for ceremony, cocktail hour, reception, dancing, cake cutting, and farewell. However, the pre-event lead-in is collapsed into a single "1-3 Months Prior" bullet that does not demonstrate PLC application beyond the event-day itself, with no two-month, one-month, or three-week milestone bands, no vendor lock-in dates, no rehearsal point, no final headcount cut-off, and no marketing-launch reference. The brief expects a structured timeline showing how the event moves from conception through planning to execution, not only what happens on the day. (REFERRED)

AC 2.2 — Set SMART event goals and align them with the organisation's mission and vision.
Your SMART objective on slide 4 is well constructed, specifying 90 percent guest satisfaction, 80 percent memorable rating, the $15,000 USD budget ceiling, the March dry-season date, and the 4:00 pm to 10:00 pm timing. Brand alignment is articulated through references to Kingston Manor's boutique destination-wedding positioning. This is the strongest single feature of the submission. (PASS)

AC 2.3 — Develop strategies to measure and evaluate event success using KPIs.
The Evaluation stage on slide 12 develops four KPIs (90 percent guest satisfaction, 80 percent attendance against confirmed RSVPs, the $15,000 budget envelope, 20 plus social media mentions) and links them to Net Promoter Score, feedback forms, and learner observation. The KPIs are linked back to your SMART objectives appropriately, although the evaluation section is delivered as a single dense paragraph rather than as a structured framework with each KPI laid out for clarity. (PASS)

Justification & Integration — Justify planning decisions; integrate the Kingston Manor context; demonstrate professional reasoning.
The Implementation, Risk, and Concept Map sections contain multiple issues that prevent achievement at this criterion. First, slide 9 labels a Concept Map but presents three paragraphs of prose instead of an actual visual map, which does not meet the deliverable expected by the brief. Second, the Risk and Contingency section on slide 11 contains voice-to-text transcription errors that obscure the analytical intent, with phrases such as "instrument weather Branston rain", "conductor for analysis", and "two extra waiters to facilitate a prompt relocation process" reading as transcription failure rather than as professional risk analysis. Third, the Implementation stage on slide 10 reads as descriptive prose listing roles rather than as a sequenced execution plan with named coordination mechanisms or hand-off points. The underlying logic on weather backup, staffing, and emergency protocols is sound, but the delivery does not communicate it. (REFERRED)

Overall Feedback
Your LO2 submission shows genuine strength in the SMART objective on slide 4 and credible KPI thinking in the Evaluation stage, with appropriate Kingston Manor brand alignment throughout. However, the submission is Referred because the PLC timeline does not extend beyond the event day itself, the Concept Map deliverable on slide 9 is presented as prose rather than as a visual map, and the Risk and Contingency section contains voice-to-text transcription errors so significant that the SWOT analytical intent cannot be assessed. To pass on resubmission, rebuild the timeline to include two-month, one-month, and three-week lead-in milestones, replace slide 9 with an actual visual concept map, and rewrite the Risk and Contingency section in clean prose so the SWOT logic reads clearly.

Learning Outcome 3: REFERRED

AC 3.1 — Analyse and evaluate an event concept using critical thinking and problem-solving. You justify the reunion concept against Kingston Manor's residential layout, location, and capacity, and you set SMART objectives with four planning challenges and solutions. The reasoning is clear and applied. Met. (PASS)

AC 3.2 — Design and apply suitable event marketing strategies using digital channels. You select WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook with a stated rationale for each, target a nostalgia message at the alumni audience, and provide invitation, Instagram, and WhatsApp samples. Met. (PASS)

AC 3.3 — Develop a realistic event budget and financial plan. The budget is itemised with cost-control logic, but it does not reconcile: the stated objective is JMD 100,000 while the table totals JMD 135,000, the figures differ across documents, and the plan does not show the practicum-scale spend against the JMD 10,000 ceiling the brief asks for. Not met. (REFERRED)

AC 3.4 — Take part actively in practical planning and demonstrate competence in live execution. The practicum was not completed, so live execution is not demonstrated. Not met. (REFERRED)

Overall: the concept and marketing are strong on paper. The unit is referred because the practicum was not completed, which is a mandatory fail, the mandatory process records are missing (no team meeting dates, attendance, or agendas, and no client consultation record), and the budget does not reconcile internally or across documents

Learning Outcome 4: REFERRED

Your LO4 submission has been referred. The LO4 Event Planning assessment is an individual written exam that must be completed in person under the scheduled exam conditions. You did not attend the exam, and the typed document you submitted in its place cannot be accepted as a substitute. Work produced outside the supervised exam setting does not meet the conditions required for this assessment and cannot be authenticated as exam evidence, so it cannot be marked.

This is a procedural referral and is not a judgement of the content you submitted. To clear it, you must sit the LO4 written exam at the next scheduled sitting.
Outcome: Referred.