SAQA All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.
SOUTH AFRICAN QUALIFICATIONS AUTHORITY 
REGISTERED UNIT STANDARD THAT HAS PASSED THE END DATE: 

Evaluate an event to ensure sustainable events 
SAQA US ID UNIT STANDARD TITLE
13483  Evaluate an event to ensure sustainable events 
ORIGINATOR
SGB Hospitality,Tourism,Travel, Leisure and Gaming 
PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QUALITY ASSURANCE FUNCTIONARY
-  
FIELD SUBFIELD
Field 11 - Services Hospitality, Tourism, Travel, Gaming and Leisure 
ABET BAND UNIT STANDARD TYPE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL CREDITS
Undefined  Regular  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  3 
REGISTRATION STATUS REGISTRATION START DATE REGISTRATION END DATE SAQA DECISION NUMBER
Passed the End Date -
Status was "Reregistered" 		 2018-07-01  2023-06-30  SAQA 06120/18 
LAST DATE FOR ENROLMENT LAST DATE FOR ACHIEVEMENT
2026-06-30   2029-06-30  

In all of the tables in this document, both the pre-2009 NQF Level and the NQF Level is shown. In the text (purpose statements, qualification rules, etc), any references to NQF Levels are to the pre-2009 levels unless specifically stated otherwise.  

This unit standard does not replace any other unit standard and is not replaced by any other unit standard. 

PURPOSE OF THE UNIT STANDARD 
The learner achieving this unit standard in combination with context expertise standard(s) will be able to evaluate the success of an event against the stated objectives. The learner will be able to monitor progress to achieve high standards and quality expected by the industry to ensure a sustainable event. The learner will be able to make recommendations to improve future practice and learning.

In addition they will be well positioned to extend their learning and practice into other areas of hospitality or tourism industry, or to strive towards professional standards and practices at higher levels.

Complexity: Under guidance of an event manager.
Scope: Limited to context such as hospitality, corporate meetings and workshops, social life cycle events, sport events, conferences. 

LEARNING ASSUMED TO BE IN PLACE AND RECOGNITION OF PRIOR LEARNING 
It is assumed that the learner has workplace communication and workplace numeracy either at NQF 5, or is currently obtaining these standards. 

UNIT STANDARD RANGE 
Range statements are described by SAQA as "a general guide to the level, scope and complexity". These are provided in the modifiers under each specific outcome. 

Specific Outcomes and Assessment Criteria: 

SPECIFIC OUTCOME 1 
Conduct effective evaluations to measure successful operations. 
OUTCOME RANGE 
  • The success of the event against set objectives
  • Client satisfaction levels
  • Post event reviews
  • Emphasise the highlights 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The assessment of co-ordinators against this standard should meet the requirements of established assessment principles.

    It will be necessary to develop assessment activities and tools that are appropriate to the contexts in which practitioners are working. These activities and tools may include an appropriate combination of self-assessment and peer assessment; formative and summative assessment; portfolios and observations etc.

    The assessment should ensure that all the specific outcomes, critical cross-field outcomes and essential embedded knowledge are assessed.

    The specific outcomes must be assessed through observation of performance. Supporting evidence should be used to prove competence of specific outcomes only when they are not clearly seen in the actual performance.

    Essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in its own right, through oral and written evidence. It cannot be assessed only through seeing the knowledge being applied.

    The specific outcomes and essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in relation to each other. If a practitioner is able to explain the essential embedded knowledge but is unable to perform the specific outcomes, they should not be assessed as competent. Similarly, if a practitioner is able to perform the specific outcomes but is unable to explain or justify their performance in terms of the essential embedded knowledge, they should not be assessed as competent.

    Evidence of the specified critical cross-field outcomes should be found both in performance and in the essential embedded knowledge.

    Performance of the specific outcomes must actively affirm target groups of practitioners and not unfairly discriminate against any practitioners. Practitioners should also be able to justify their performance in terms of these values. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 2 
    Reflect on, measure and evaluate performance in order to improve future practice and learning. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
  • Own performance
  • Staff performance 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The assessment of co-ordinators against this standard should meet the requirements of established assessment principles.

    It will be necessary to develop assessment activities and tools that are appropriate to the contexts in which practitioners are working. These activities and tools may include an appropriate combination of self-assessment and peer assessment; formative and summative assessment; portfolios and observations etc.

    The assessment should ensure that all the specific outcomes, critical cross-field outcomes and essential embedded knowledge are assessed.

    The specific outcomes must be assessed through observation of performance. Supporting evidence should be used to prove competence of specific outcomes only when they are not clearly seen in the actual performance.

    Essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in its own right, through oral and written evidence. It cannot be assessed only through seeing the knowledge being applied.

    The specific outcomes and essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in relation to each other. If a practitioner is able to explain the essential embedded knowledge but is unable to perform the specific outcomes, they should not be assessed as competent. Similarly, if a practitioner is able to perform the specific outcomes but is unable to explain or justify their performance in terms of the essential embedded knowledge, they should not be assessed as competent.

    Evidence of the specified critical cross-field outcomes should be found both in performance and in the essential embedded knowledge.

    Performance of the specific outcomes must actively affirm target groups of practitioners and not unfairly discriminate against any practitioners. Practitioners should also be able to justify their performance in terms of these values. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 3 
    Evaluate effectiveness of systems and processes supporting the event. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
  • Administration
  • Communications
  • Support services
  • Documentation
  • Event management process 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The assessment of co-ordinators against this standard should meet the requirements of established assessment principles.

    It will be necessary to develop assessment activities and tools that are appropriate to the contexts in which practitioners are working. These activities and tools may include an appropriate combination of self-assessment and peer assessment; formative and summative assessment; portfolios and observations etc.

    The assessment should ensure that all the specific outcomes, critical cross-field outcomes and essential embedded knowledge are assessed.

    The specific outcomes must be assessed through observation of performance. Supporting evidence should be used to prove competence of specific outcomes only when they are not clearly seen in the actual performance.

    Essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in its own right, through oral and written evidence. It cannot be assessed only through seeing the knowledge being applied.

    The specific outcomes and essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in relation to each other. If a practitioner is able to explain the essential embedded knowledge but is unable to perform the specific outcomes, they should not be assessed as competent. Similarly, if a practitioner is able to perform the specific outcomes but is unable to explain or justify their performance in terms of the essential embedded knowledge, they should not be assessed as competent.

    Evidence of the specified critical cross-field outcomes should be found both in performance and in the essential embedded knowledge.

    Performance of the specific outcomes must actively affirm target groups of practitioners and not unfairly discriminate against any practitioners. Practitioners should also be able to justify their performance in terms of these values. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 4 
    Conduct mid-event evaluations. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
  • Monitoring and evaluation procedures
  • Ensure quality and high standards of event. 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The assessment of co-ordinators against this standard should meet the requirements of established assessment principles.

    It will be necessary to develop assessment activities and tools that are appropriate to the contexts in which practitioners are working. These activities and tools may include an appropriate combination of self-assessment and peer assessment; formative and summative assessment; portfolios and observations etc.

    The assessment should ensure that all the specific outcomes, critical cross-field outcomes and essential embedded knowledge are assessed.

    The specific outcomes must be assessed through observation of performance. Supporting evidence should be used to prove competence of specific outcomes only when they are not clearly seen in the actual performance.

    Essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in its own right, through oral and written evidence. It cannot be assessed only through seeing the knowledge being applied.

    The specific outcomes and essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in relation to each other. If a practitioner is able to explain the essential embedded knowledge but is unable to perform the specific outcomes, they should not be assessed as competent. Similarly, if a practitioner is able to perform the specific outcomes but is unable to explain or justify their performance in terms of the essential embedded knowledge, they should not be assessed as competent.

    Evidence of the specified critical cross-field outcomes should be found both in performance and in the essential embedded knowledge.

    Performance of the specific outcomes must actively affirm target groups of practitioners and not unfairly discriminate against any practitioners. Practitioners should also be able to justify their performance in terms of these values. 

    SPECIFIC OUTCOME 5 
    Compile a report in user friendly format. 
    OUTCOME RANGE 
  • Record proceedings and evaluations
  • Communicate report to all appropriate role players
  • Make necessary recommendations to achieve sustainable events 
    		•

    ASSESSMENT CRITERIA     

    ASSESSMENT CRITERION 1 
    The assessment of co-ordinators against this standard should meet the requirements of established assessment principles.

    It will be necessary to develop assessment activities and tools that are appropriate to the contexts in which practitioners are working. These activities and tools may include an appropriate combination of self-assessment and peer assessment; formative and summative assessment; portfolios and observations etc.

    The assessment should ensure that all the specific outcomes, critical cross-field outcomes and essential embedded knowledge are assessed.

    The specific outcomes must be assessed through observation of performance. Supporting evidence should be used to prove competence of specific outcomes only when they are not clearly seen in the actual performance.

    Essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in its own right, through oral and written evidence. It cannot be assessed only through seeing the knowledge being applied.

    The specific outcomes and essential embedded knowledge must be assessed in relation to each other. If a practitioner is able to explain the essential embedded knowledge but is unable to perform the specific outcomes, they should not be assessed as competent. Similarly, if a practitioner is able to perform the specific outcomes but is unable to explain or justify their performance in terms of the essential embedded knowledge, they should not be assessed as competent.

    Evidence of the specified critical cross-field outcomes should be found both in performance and in the essential embedded knowledge.

    Performance of the specific outcomes must actively affirm target groups of practitioners and not unfairly discriminate against any practitioners. Practitioners should also be able to justify their performance in terms of these values. 


    UNIT STANDARD ACCREDITATION AND MODERATION OPTIONS 
    1. Anyone assessing a practitioner against this unit standard must be registered as an assessor with the relevant ETQA.
    2. Any institution offering learning that will enable achievement of this unit standard or will assess this unit standard must be accredited as a provider with the relevant ETQA.
    3. Moderation of assessment will be overseen by the relevant ETQA according to the moderation guidelines in the relevant qualification and the agreed ETQA procedures.

    Therefore anyone wishing to be assessed against this unit standard may apply to be assessed by any assessment agency, assessor or provider institution which is accredited by the relevant ETQA. 

    UNIT STANDARD ESSENTIAL EMBEDDED KNOWLEDGE 
    The practitioner is able to demonstrate a basic knowledge and understanding of:

    1. Importance of continuous monitoring (pre-, mid- and post-event)
    2. Methods of evaluation such as
  • written surveys,
  • mail surveys
  • pre- and post-event surveys
    3. Monitoring methods
    4. Pros and cons of timing of evaluations such as immediately following the event or with some time lapse
    5. Role and advantages of event monitors
    6. Expressions of client satisfaction/dissatisfaction
    7. Feedback loops
    8. How to take immediate action
    9. User friendly methods of report writing
    Methods of feedback and communication on evaluation. 
    		•


    Critical Cross-field Outcomes (CCFO): 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO ORGANISING 
    Self organisation and management relates to the following specific outcome:

    Evaluate effectiveness of systems and processes supporting the event. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING 
    Information evaluation relates to all specific outcomes. 

    UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING 
    Communication relates to all specific outcomes. 

    REREGISTRATION HISTORY 
    As per the SAQA Board decision/s at that time, this unit standard was Reregistered in 2012; 2015. 

    UNIT STANDARD NOTES 
    As a general indication, the knowledge and insight expected at this level is unlikely to be obtained without at least one year of active participation in the field.

    Values:

    Demonstration of the knowledge and skills outlined in this unit standard must be consistent with the principles of:

    Accepting and maintaining a non-discriminatory attitude towards diversity including, for example, differences in gender, race, religion, physical ability and culture. 

    QUALIFICATIONS UTILISING THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
      ID QUALIFICATION TITLE PRE-2009 NQF LEVEL NQF LEVEL STATUS END DATE PRIMARY OR DELEGATED QA FUNCTIONARY
    Core  20613   National Diploma: Event Co-ordination  Level 5  NQF Level 05  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  CATHSSETA 
    Elective  58820   National Certificate: Advertising  Level 5  Level TBA: Pre-2009 was L5  Passed the End Date -
    Status was "Reregistered"     		 2023-06-30  MICTS 


    PROVIDERS CURRENTLY ACCREDITED TO OFFER THIS UNIT STANDARD: 
    This information shows the current accreditations (i.e. those not past their accreditation end dates), and is the most complete record available to SAQA as of today. Some Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionaries have a lag in their recording systems for provider accreditation, in turn leading to a lag in notifying SAQA of all the providers that they have accredited to offer qualifications and unit standards, as well as any extensions to accreditation end dates. The relevant Primary or Delegated Quality Assurance Functionary should be notified if a record appears to be missing from here.
     
    1. College Africa Group (Pty) Ltd 
    2. Digital School of Marketing (Pty) Ltd 
    3. Eshybrand Pty Ltd 
    4. EYETHU NATIONAL COMPUTER COLLEGE PTY LTD 
    5. Metanoia Ratings PTY LTD 
    6. Mufuka Business and Technical 
    7. Richfield Graduate Institute of Technology Pty Ltd 
    8. The Finishing College (Pty) Lt 
    9. Training B2B CC 


    All qualifications and part qualifications registered on the National Qualifications Framework are public property. Thus the only payment that can be made for them is for service and reproduction. It is illegal to sell this material for profit. If the material is reproduced or quoted, the South African Qualifications Authority (SAQA) should be acknowledged as the source.