| ASSESSMENT BRIEF | |
| Subject Code and Title | EVN203 – Event Financing and Sponsorship |
| Assessment | Assessment 3: Sponsorship Proposal |
| Individual/Group | Group (with 2‐3 members) |
| Length | 1,600 words per group member |
| Learning Outcomes | e. Analyse collaborative techniques for the mutual financial benefit of stakeholders |
| Submission | By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Module 6.1 (Sunday of week 11) |
| eighting | 40% |
| Total Marks | 100 marks |
Context:
Working in a small group of 2 to 3 people, you are to create an exciting event, and find a company who can be a potential major sponsor for the event. You are then to develop a formal sponsorship proposal.
Instructions:
This assessment is to be in a proposal format. In doing so, the proposal should include, but not be limited to, the following:
- Background of the event
- How does the sponsor’s value/goals align with that of the event?
- What is the potential sponsor/company sponsoring? (eg, goods, services, monetary etc.)
- What are the benefits for sponsoring your event?
- Why should they sponsor?
- Finance report of the event including the different financial components (e.g. investment, grants, ticketing, sponsorship etc.). The report should include revenue items, expense items and then derive at a net income which might be profit or loss.
You should also consider, while selecting sponsors for your event, to avoid direct competitors (e.g. Coca‐Cola and Pepsi)
Despite the fact that the assessment is a proposal that would typically be presented to the decision maker of the sponsoring company, it should contain the appropriate references. It should contain a minimum of 10 references.
Submission Instructions:
Submit the assessment via the Assessment link in the main navigation menu.
Learning Rubric: Assessment 1
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Unacceptable) | Pass (Functional) | Credit (Proficient) | Distinction (Advanced) | High Distinction (Exceptional) |
| Grade Description (Grading Scheme) | Fail grade will be awarded if a student is unable to demonstrate satisfactory academic performance in the subject or has failed to complete required assessment points in accordance with the subject’s required assessment points. | Pass is awarded for work showing a satisfactory achievement of all learning outcomes and an adequate understanding of theory and application of skills. A consistent academic referencing system is used and sources are appropriately acknowledged. | Credit is awarded for work showing a more than satisfactory achievement of all learning outcomes and a more than adequate understanding of theory and application of skills. A consistent academic referencing system is used and sources are appropriately acknowledged. | Distinction is awarded for work of superior quality in achieving all learning outcomes and a superior integration and understanding of theory and application of skills. Evidence of in‐depth research, reading, analysis and evaluation is demonstrated. A consistent academic referencing system is used and sources are appropriately acknowledged. | High Distinction is awarded for work of outstanding quality in achieving all learning outcomes together with outstanding integration and understanding of theory and application of skills. Evidence of in‐ depth research, reading, analysis, original and creative thought is demonstrated. A consistent academic referencing system is used and sources are appropriately acknowledged. |
| Provide thorough background of event (10%) | Limited description of event. | Basic background information provided with some of the key information addressed. | Thorough background information provided with value or mission of the event presented. | Highly descriptive background with all key information addressed as well as mission and vision of event stated. | A sophisticated description of the event with all key information, mission and vision statement. |
| SLO addressed: | |||||
| (c) Evaluate and apply available revenue sources to events |
| Identification of potential sponsor and analysis of benefits (30%) | Demonstrates no awareness of context and/or purpose of the sponsorship. | Demonstrates limited awareness of context and/or purpose of the sponsorship | Demonstrates consistent awareness of context and/or purpose of the sponsorship. | Demonstrates an advanced and integrated understanding of context and/or purpose of the sponsorship. | Consistently demonstrates a systematic and critical understanding of context and purpose of the sponsorship. |
| SLO addressed: | |||||
| (e) Analyse collaborative techniques for the mutual financial benefit of stakeholders | |||||
| Sponsor’s fit with event and sponsorship structure (30%) SLO addressed: | Limited synthesis and analysis. | Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge with application. | Well‐developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. | Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested models and / or independently developed models and justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis | Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge |
| (d) Evaluate managerial processes which enhance event financial viability |
| Evaluation of information selected to support the proposal (20%) SLO addressed: | Difficult to understand for the audiences, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence | Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. | Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. | Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented, the presentation is logical clear and well supported by evidence. | Expertly presented, the presentation is logical, persuasive and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments. |
| Evaluate managerial processes which enhance event financial viability | |||||
| Correct citation of key resources and evidence (10%) | Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. | Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. | Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. | Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence | Demonstrates use of high‐ quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence |
Get expert help for Event Financing and Sponsorship and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!
