week 8 hosp640
You were hired as the new Meetings and Events Director for a particular hospitality organization.
2 months ago
10
week8hosp640.docx
Week8FinalProject-HOSP640D001Winter2026-APEI.pdf
week8hosp640.docx
You were hired as the new Meetings and Events Director for a particular hospitality organization. The number of events in your destination has declined for the past two years. Your first task in your new position is to propose an event that you think could contribute to the local economy’s development and help your host destination have a competitive advantage over other destinations. For your proposal, you should consider the following questions:
· What does your destination have to offer to visitors?
· How big a role event tourism plays in your local economy?
· How many events happen annually?
· What types of events happen annually?
· What time of the year do you see most events?
· Provide a brief description of the event you plan to propose.
· Explain the reason for proposing this particular event over others
· What are some organizational challenges you will face for executing this event?
· What strategies would you implement to mitigate these challenges?
· What are some practices you would include to contribute to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)?
· What are some practices you would implement to make this event sustainable? Please consider the greening of your event (such as food and beverage sourcing, vendors, etc.)
· How would you ensure that diversity and inclusion are incorporated throughout the planning of the event?
· What recruiting strategies would you implement for staffing the event, and why?
· What are some potential negative impacts of this event, and what solutions would you implement to mitigate them?
· Which of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) would this event contribute to? Please discuss how you would measure the event’s contribution.
· Create an event evaluation form that you would use to evaluate the performance of the event. You should have at least six (6) criteria. Criteria must have brief descriptions and a rating scale.
· Please be advised that you can be creative in organizing your proposal. You do not need to write in the format of the questions.
Your proposal should be 10-15 pages (not counting the cover page and references) in length and the APA format. Make sure to include a table of contents. You must support your proposal with a minimum of 5 references, you may not include sources from Wikipedia. You will be graded based on your knowledge and understanding of the proposed event, analysis of your destination, language, and your proposal's layout and organization.
Week8FinalProject-HOSP640D001Winter2026-APEI.pdf
HOSP640 Final Project Course: HOSP640 D001 Winter 2026
Criteria Exemplary Accomplished Developing Beginning Did Not Attempt
Criterion Score
Overall
Compreh
ensive
Project
/ 2020 points
Proposal
contains all
elements re-
quired, pre-
senting a
complete,
cohesive
analysis of
the consid-
erations
noted in the
instructions.
Includes an
event evalu-
ation form.
17 points
Proposal
contains
most, but
not all re-
quired ele-
ments.
Presents a
somewhat
complete
and cohesive
analysis. Two
to three re-
quired ele-
ments not
included in
analysis of
considera-
tions OR
missing
event evalu-
ation form.
15 points
Proposal con-
tains most, but
not all required
elements.
Presents a
somewhat
complete and
cohesive analy-
sis. Two to
three required
elements not
included in
analysis of con-
siderations
AND missing
event evalua-
tion form.
13 points
Proposal is
clearly miss-
ing several
required ele-
ments. The
proposal
does not en-
compass
more than
four of the
considera-
tions noted
in the in-
structions.
The evalua-
tion form is
either miss-
ing, incom-
plete, or not
relevant to
the de-
scribed
event.
0 points
Proposal is
unclear and
lack of con-
sideration to
the required
elements is
evident.
Does not
meet the re-
quirements
of the
assignment.
Criteria Exemplary Accomplished Developing Beginning Did Not Attempt
Criterion Score
Focus &
Sequenci
ng
/ 2020 points
Proposal
clearly sup-
ports the
main goal of
proposing a
relevant
event to
contribute
to local
economy
and provide
a competi-
tive advan-
tage.
Analysis
demon-
strates com-
plete under-
standing of
the various
elements
and consid-
erations
necessary.
Includes in-
depth sug-
gestions and
recommen-
dations for
success &
sustainabil-
ity, over-
coming an-
ticipated
challenges,
recruiting
strategies,
17 points
Proposal
mostly sup-
ports the
main goal of
proposing a
relevant
event to
contribute to
local econ-
omy and
provide a
competitive
advantage.
Analysis
demon-
strates
strong un-
derstanding
of the vari-
ous ele-
ments and
considera-
tions neces-
sary.
Includes
some sug-
gestions and
recommen-
dations for
success &
sustainabil-
ity, overcom-
ing antici-
pated chal-
lenges, re-
cruiting
strategies,
15 points
Not always
clear how the
proposal sup-
ports the main
goal a relevant
event to con-
tribute to local
economy and
provide a com-
petitive advan-
tage. Analysis
lacks explana-
tion of some
elements and
considerations
necessary.
Includes few
suggestions
and recom-
mendations for
success & sus-
tainability,
overcoming an-
ticipated chal-
lenges, recruit-
ing strategies,
and incorpora-
tion of diver-
sity. Some ma-
terial closely
related to the
main topic and
subtopics.
Material may
not be orga-
nized within
the subtopics
13 points
Proposal is
not well
thought out
and rele-
vance of the
event to the
local area is
not evident.
Does not ad-
dress four to
six of the re-
quired con-
siderations
Little evi-
dence mate-
rial is logi-
cally orga-
nized into
topics,
subtopics, or
related com-
ponents.
Many transi-
tions are un-
clear or
nonexistent.
0 points
Project sub-
mitted is not
in proposal
format and
not devel-
oped for a
specific
event or lo-
cation.
Severely
lacking focus
and clarity
throughout.
Presentation
of ideas
lacks smooth
transitions
and ideas
jump from
concept to
concept
without a
clear link.
Ideas bul-
leted rather
than written
as a
narrative.
Criteria Exemplary Accomplished Developing Beginning Did Not Attempt
Criterion Score
Event
Evaluatio
n Form
/ 10
and incorpo-
ration of di-
versity.
Strong tran-
sitions link-
ing
subtopics
and main
topic.
and incorpo-
ration of di-
versity. Most
material
clearly re-
lated to
subtopic,
main topic
and logically
organized
within
subtopics.
Clear, varied
transitions
linking
subtopics,
and main
topic.
clearly.
Attempt to
provide a vari-
ety of
transitions.
10 points
Event evalu-
ation form is
relevant to
the event.
Includes six
(6) criteria
for evalua-
tion with
brief de-
scriptions
and rating
scale.
Worthy of
industry use
for post-
event
evaluation.
8.5 points
Event evalu-
ation form is
relevant to
the event.
Includes five
(5) criteria
for evalua-
tion with
brief de-
scriptions
and rating
scale.
Worthy of
industry use
for post-
event
evaluation.
7.5 points
Event evalua-
tion form is not
relevant to the
event. Includes
fewer than four
(4) criteria for
evaluation, or
descriptions or
rating scale are
lacking.
Professionalism
could be
improved.
6.5 points
Event evalu-
ation form is
not relevant
to the event.
Includes
fewer than
four (4) cri-
teria for
evaluation,
and descrip-
tions or rat-
ing scale are
lacking or
missing.
0 points
No evalua-
tion form
provided.
Criteria Exemplary Accomplished Developing Beginning Did Not Attempt
Criterion Score
Support / 20
Conclusi
on
/ 10
20 points
Strong peer-
reviewed re-
search
based sup-
port for pro-
posal and
details. All
claims are
backed up
by scholarly
references.
Use of re-
quired
sources ex-
ceeds ex-
pectations
of five (5)
resources.
17 points
Sources well
selected to
support the-
sis with
some re-
search in
support of
the proposal.
Most all
sources are
from the
scholarly lit-
erature. Use
of required
sources
meets ex-
pectations (5
sources).
15 points
Sources are
generally ac-
ceptable but
not peer-re-
viewed re-
search (evi-
dence) based.
References
Wikipedia or
other unreli-
able websites
regularly.
13 points
Few sources
supporting
proposal.
Sources in-
significant or
unsubstanti-
ated. Fails to
meet mini-
mum re-
quired
source
expecta-
tions.
0 points
No refer-
ences
incorpo-
rated.
10 points
Strong re-
view of key
conclusions.
Strong inte-
gration with
thesis state-
ment.
Insightful
discussion
of impact of
the research
material on
the topic
presented.
8.5 points
Strong re-
view of key
conclusions.
Strong inte-
gration with
thesis state-
ment.
Discusses
impact of re-
searched
material on
the topic
presented.
7.5 points
Review of key
conclusions.
Some integra-
tion with thesis
statement.
Discusses the
impact of the
researched ma-
terial on the
topic
presented.
6.5 points
Does not
summarize
evidence
with respect
to thesis
statement.
Does not
discuss the
impact of re-
search mate-
rial on the
topic
presented.
0 points
No clear
conclusion
provided.
Criteria Exemplary Accomplished Developing Beginning Did Not Attempt
Criterion Score
Grammar
&
Mechani
cs
/ 1010 points
The paper is
free of
grammatical
errors, spell-
ing errors
and punctu-
ation errors.
8.5 points
Grammatical
errors or
spelling and
punctuation
errors are
rare and do
not detract
from the
paper.
7.5 points
A few gram-
matical, spell-
ing, or punctu-
ation errors are
made and in-
terfere with
the reading of
the paper.
6.5 points
Grammatical
errors or
spelling and
punctuation
substantially
detract from
the paper.
0 points
Not written
at the gradu-
ate level.
Total / 100
Criteria Exemplary Accomplished Developing Beginning Did Not Attempt
Criterion Score
Writing
Style and
Commun
ication -
APA
Format
/ 1010 points
No errors in
writing style
are made.
Scholarly
writing is
maintained
throughout.
Writing is
flowing and
easy to fol-
low. All ref-
erences and
citations are
correctly
written and
present.
8.5 points
Minor errors
in writing
style are
made, but
they do not
detract
from the pa-
per.
Scholarly
writing style
is main-
tained
throughout.
Writing has
minimal
awkward or
unclear pas-
sages.
One refer-
ence or cita-
tion missing
from paper
or reference
list,
or errors are
made on ref-
erence list.
7.5 points
Errors in writ-
ing style are
noticable.
Word choice
occasionally
uses an infor-
mation tone of
voice. Writing
has a few awk-
ward or un-
clear passages.
Two references
or
citations are
missing from
the paper or
references list.
Errors are
made on the
references list.
6.5 points
Errors in
writing style
detract sub-
stantially
from
the paper.
Word choice
is informal in
tone.
Writing is
choppy, with
many awk-
ward or un-
clear
passages.
References
and citation
errors de-
tract
significantly
from the
paper.
0 points
A consistent
writing style
is not used
within
paper.
Writing is
choppy and
unclear.
Referencing
and citation
errors se-
verely
detract from
the presen-
tation of the
paper.
Overall Score
Exemplary 90 points minimum
Accomplished 80 points minimum
Developing 70 points minimum
Beginning 60 points minimum
Did Not
Attempt 0 points minimum
- Technologies and Methodologies Evaluation
- Prof Dan
- Week 3 Assignment
- MCQ Final exam Corporate Financial and Managerial Accounting
- Managerial Accounting Week 1 Assignment Complete: Case 2B (Mendel Paper Company). In this case, you are provided information regarding selling prices and costs of several products offered by Mendel Paper Company. In addition, management has concerns abo
- Ethics week 2 individual project
- Private.
- Looking for help with homework with Statistics for Health Care Research practical workbook Chapters 13 and 14 graded questions, all...
- English 14
- 12 ANGRY MEN - THE MOVIE