AIM University Group

Learning Outcome 1: REFERRED

AC 1.1 — Q1 Event Planning Concepts. You name the four concept map elements (objectives, stakeholders, lifecycle, evaluation) but do not explain how they work together. Kingston Manor is mentioned but not used in detail. REFERRED

AC 1.2 — Q2 Applying Theory to Practice. You give a boutique event example but do not walk through the lifecycle stages or show how decisions at each stage shape the guest experience. The example is named, not worked. REFERRED

AC 1.2 — Q3 Analysis of Planning Failure. You pick "staffing" as your failure point, but staffing is not one of the five elements the brief lists (Objectives, Stakeholders, Lifecycle, Guest Experience, Evaluation). The question is not answered as set. REFERRED

AC 1.3 — Q4 Professional Reasoning on Evaluation. Your closing line — "without it we'd just guess" — is opinion, which the brief tells you to avoid. Evaluation needs to be shown as a planned, evidence-based process. REFERRED

Learning Outcome 2: REFERRED

AC 2.1 — Outline the event planning timeline and stages; identify key milestones and deadlines. Your event-day schedule (3:00 pm setup through 9:00 pm close) is realistic and properly sequenced, and on the page the staging is sound. The planning run-up is thin, with no milestone schedule for the weeks before the event, and under questioning you were unable to account for how the timeline would be managed in practice. (REFERRED)

AC 2.2 — Set SMART event goals and align them with the organisation's mission and vision. Your written SMART objective is well constructed, specifying audience size, a satisfaction target, a three-course standard, a budget, and a lead-time, and the brand-alignment paragraph is appropriate. The budget figure is unbroken-down and in the wrong currency convention, and in the defence you could not justify the figures or explain how the objectives drove your planning. (REFERRED)

AC 2.3 — Develop strategies to measure and evaluate event success using KPIs. Your written evaluation framework is broad and each KPI is tied to an observable measure, which reads well on the page. The reflection is framed as though the event had already occurred, and you were unable to defend the measurement logic when questioned. (REFERRED)

Justification & Integration — Justify planning decisions; integrate the Kingston Manor context; demonstrate professional reasoning. The written plan describes roles, service, logistics, and contingency competently, but description is not justification. This criterion is assessed primarily through your ability to defend your decisions, and in the oral you were unable to justify your planning choices, which is the core of this requirement. (REFERRED)

Overall Feedback
On the page your plan shows real strengths: a clear SMART objective, a sequenced event-day timeline, a defined stakeholder and roles structure, and a broad evaluation framework. The unit is Referred because LO2 is assessed across the written plan and the oral defence as one whole, and in the defence you were unable to justify the planning decisions behind your work. A strong document cannot substitute for being able to stand behind it under questioning. To clear LO2, you will need to defend your planning choices, the budget basis, and the evaluation logic in a re-sit of the Q&A.

Learning Outcome 3: REFERRED
AC 3.1 — Analyse and evaluate an event concept using critical thinking and problem-solving. The concept is well justified against Kingston Manor's experiential model and garden setting, with measurable objectives covering satisfaction, service timing, food cost, safety, and conversion, each paired with a risk and mitigation. The analysis is strong and applied. Met. (PASS)

AC 3.2 — Design and apply suitable event marketing strategies using digital channels. You set a clear digital strategy across Instagram and WhatsApp Business with defined success measures and market-control decisions. The strategy is sound, though the promotional sample and layout diagram the plan refers to are not included in the appendix. Met. (PASS)

AC 3.3 — Develop a realistic event budget and financial plan. The budget is itemised across seven categories, totals JMD 15,000, and is supported by three detailed cost-control decisions. The plan states a food-cost target as a percentage of ticket price but does not show a ticket price or revenue figure to support it. Met. (PASS)

AC 3.4 — Take part actively in practical planning and demonstrate competence in live execution. The practicum was completed on campus and the décor and setup were a reasonable attempt, but the delivery was unorganized and unprepared, so competence in coordination and live execution was not adequately demonstrated. Not met. (REFERRED)

Overall: the written plan is strong across concept, marketing, and budget, and the process records are complete. The unit is referred on the practicum: the live delivery was unorganized and unprepared, which is where AC 3.4 is assessed. Tightening rehearsal, role readiness, and coordination for a re-attempt would address it.

Learning Outcome 4: PASS
AC 4.1 — Risks anticipated and missed; safety and security controls (Q1, Q2). You set out anticipated and missed risks and complete two safety and security controls. Met. (PASS)

AC 4.2 — Retrospective risk assessment matrix (Q3). You provide a six-risk matrix with likelihood, severity, score, and priority band, plus the supporting reflection. Met. (PASS)

AC 4.3 — Real decision moment (Q4). You analyse one decision under pressure with its constraint. Met. (PASS)

AC 4.4 — Post-event analysis and improvements (Q5, Q6). Q5 restates the objectives, sets three KPIs (check-in time, food delay, schedule adherence), assesses each against what you observed, and names schedule adherence as the objective not met. Q6 gives two improvements, each with practicum evidence, the planning-stage placement, and a measure of success. Met. (PASS)