[Solved] week 8 hosp640

Assignment Prompt & Instructions

[>Operations Management homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/business-finance-operations-management)

You were hired as the new Meetings and Events Director for a particular hospitality organization.

**files (2)**

– ## 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

**## 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

**## 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

**## 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