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: |
Plan an event |
SAQA US ID | UNIT STANDARD TITLE | |||
13485 | Plan an event | |||
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 | 10 |
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 plan and structure an event which meets the expectations of the client. They will demonstrate an understanding of all the elements of the event and the inter-relatedness of the elements, events, context and external factors which might influence the event and the impact there-of. They will demonstrate an ability to supply appropriate alternatives to problems, constraints and risks. They will monitor and improve the event based on critical reviews of evaluation. Learners competent in event planning will construct a professional, feasible and creative event.
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, national 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. The learner should be competent in, or concurrently complete the unit standard "Understand the inter-relatedness of Event Elements". |
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 pre-event planning. |
OUTCOME RANGE |
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 |
Identify potential challenges which might influence the success of an event. |
OUTCOME RANGE |
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 |
Develop a site plan and site diagrammes. |
OUTCOME RANGE |
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 |
Construct a contingency plan. |
OUTCOME RANGE |
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 |
Select the desired team members. |
OUTCOME RANGE |
Allocate roles & responsibilities. |
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. Setting of goals and objectives. 2. Time/Space/Tempo laws 3. Methods of scenario planning 4. Methods of gap analysis 5. Risk assessment techniques 6. Organisational charts 7. Interviewing techniques 8. Public liability 9. Communication techniques 10. Planning methodologies 11. Site plans and diagrammes 12. Legislation and regulations 13. Types of clients, events and related expectations 14. Varied techniques of operating teams and the role of the individual. 15. People management techniques. 16. Methods of conducting: Leases, contracts, agreements. |
Critical Cross-field Outcomes (CCFO): |
UNIT STANDARD CCFO IDENTIFYING |
Problem solving relates to the following specific outcomes:
Conduct pre-event planning. Identify potential challenges which might influence the success of an event. Develop a site plan and site diagrammes. Construct a contingency plan. |
UNIT STANDARD CCFO WORKING |
Team work relates to all specific outcomes. |
UNIT STANDARD CCFO COLLECTING |
Information evaluation relates to all specific outcomes. |
UNIT STANDARD CCFO COMMUNICATING |
Communication relates to all specific outcomes. |
UNIT STANDARD CCFO DEMONSTRATING |
Inter-relatedness of systems relates to the following specific outcomes:
Conduct pre-event planning. Identify potential challenges which might influence the success of an event. Develop a site plan and site diagrammes. Construct a contingency plan. |
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. | ATTI Nelspruit Pty Ltd |
2. | College Africa Group (Pty) Ltd |
3. | Digital School of Marketing (Pty) Ltd |
4. | Eshybrand Pty Ltd |
5. | EYETHU NATIONAL COMPUTER COLLEGE PTY LTD |
6. | Metanoia Ratings PTY LTD |
7. | Mufuka Business and Technical |
8. | Richfield Graduate Institute of Technology Pty Ltd |
9. | The Finishing College (Pty) Lt |
10. | 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. |