1. 1
EVALUATING EVENT CONCEPTS SURVEY
Introduction
Events can help non-profit and profit organizations to raise substantial funds around the
world. There is a gap in data collected on successful event concepts for non-profit
organizations held in Kingston, ON, resulting in an opportunity for research.
This proposal will provide insight that will help in determining the attractiveness and
probability of success of event concepts for the Canadian National Institute for the Blind
held in the Kingston region. The research will be completed through a Market
Opportunity Analysis.
Background
During the 1990s, development of infrastructure and government cooperation with
private coordinators resulted in strong growth in the number of special events held in
Canada (Government of Canada, 2013). Since 2003 there has been steady growth in
smaller events and sustained growth in large scale events, due to the expansion of
hospitality infrastructure.
In this industry, festivals, exhibitions, and specialty trade shows are a growing event
trends (Government of Canada, 2013). Core trends are anticipated to continue into the
future, but at a slightly slower rate than in the past, due to the steady growth in the
industry, it is expected that the number of event planning occupations will significantly
increase in time (Government of Canada, 2013).
Some of Canada’s most well-known non-profit organizations, including the Canadian
Cancer Society, the Canadian Red Cross, the United Way Toronto, and the Heart &
Stroke Foundation of Canada, utilize events as a vehicle for fundraising (Charity
Intelligence Canada, 2013). One of the notable largest events held in the past year was
the Red Cross Annual Fundraising event which took place in Montreal in May 2014 and
raised $1.02 million (Charity Intelligence Canada, 2013).
The Canadian National Institute for the Blind is a Canadian non-profit organization
devoted to providing personalized rehabilitation support for Canadians who are blind or
partially sighted (CNIB, 2015). In 2014, CNIB held a successful fundraising event in
Kingston, ON called Dining in the Dark with Clark. (CNIB, 2015)
Research Objectives
 To discover and evaluate past events executed by the organization and similar
organizations
 To discover success rates of current event trends
 To determine if there is any significance found in the correlation between the
event budget allocated and funds raised

2. 2
 To discover patterns of success factors for event execution
 To determine benchmarks of costs for event execution
Research Framework
The research framework below outlines the focus of questions and data needed to draw
conclusions about the problem. The data from each method will be analyzed together to
determine the best results.
 What are the top event trends in the Kingston region?
 Does the event budget impact amount of funds raised?
 What are the key success factors in successful event planning?
 What event concepts have been completed by CNIB and similar Canadian
organizations?
 What are some industry cost benchmarks of event execution?
 What are the most common marketing tactics used in the Canadian event
industry?
 What are the most common obstacles encountered by professional event
planners?
 How many people are needed for event planning and execution based on
size of event?
 What is the average reach of people from city-wide events held in
Kingston, ON?
 What types of venues are most commonly used in the Kingston, ON and
surrounding areas for event execution?
 What types of organizations regularly hold fundraising events?
 How common are event concepts executed annually in Kingston, ON?
Research Methods
The research will take place in the form of two methods. The first method of research
will be conducted through formal interviews with ten professionals working in event
management. The research is targeted to event management professionals working for
organizations similar to CNIB in Kingston, ON and surrounding areas.
The formal interviews will take place in person at the location most convenient to the
participant, it is expected the interviews will be held at the participants place of work.
Interviews will be held for no longer than 30 minutes and all interviews will be scheduled
previous to beginning research. If participants are unable to be formally interviewed in
person, the interview subject will be contacted over the phone or via a web
communication service such as Skype.
The interviews will be scheduled directly by initially communicating with prospective
participants verbally or in writing. Prospective participants contact information will be

3. 3
collected by contacting organizations or prospects directly, research from company
websites and social media sites such as LinkedIn. A list of prospective participants for
formal interviews will be complied by the researcher prior to the research being
executed.
The second method of research will be a survey of 100 workers in event management
across Ontario. The chosen sample size is expected to have a 10% margin of error
(Science Buddies, 2015).The survey will be made available online via social network
sites including Facebook and LinkedIn. Promotion of the survey will outline the pre-
requisite of a desired participant as having an experienced professional in the event
management industry. Executing the survey online will ensure randomness of the
sample.
The research is expected to take a total of one month, with three weeks collecting
survey data with scheduled formal interviews throughout this period and the remaining
week dedicated to analysis and preparation of research findings. The data will be
collected and input into an Excel database for analysis. The research is estimated to
cost approximately $50.00 to cover travel costs to interview locations and material
supplies including paper and pens.
Anticipated limitations of research include unrealistic time frame due to scheduling
limitations and ensuring an accurate sample because contact information for ideal
prospective participants may not be readily available. As well, we will not be able to fully
verify the characteristics of online participants such as employment experience or
demographic characteristics.
Method
Overall Design
This researched was gathered in an anonymous survey format. Various question types
were used, including text response, yes/no answers, multiple choice, dropdown menu,
sliders, and a multiple-choice grid. The survey was distributed to 38 event
planners/managers through student e-mail, social media including Facebook and
Twitter and in person.
To ensure significance in the statistical tests, at least 30 surveys were required. Given
the specific parameters of the survey, and time limitations, the results of the sample
were accurate and representative of the population. For the purposes of this research
project, both qualitative and quantitative data were captured, and the analysis of said
data was interpreted through SPSS and Microsoft Excel. This analysis provided the
researchers with key insights about event planning and effective event concepts.

4. 4
Survey Variables
The dependant variables used in this survey included funds raised; time taken to plan
the event; obstacles encountered during planning; theme of the event; event
advertising/promotion; type of venue; event cost; people involved in execution of the
event; length of the event; and effectiveness of the event.
The question methods used a nominal technique and were captured through
questionnaire types such as multiple choice, slider, drop down and text response. The
independent variables used in this survey included area the organization operates in;
type of organization being operated (e.g. profit or non-profit); how long the organization
has been in existence; and the main purpose of the event.
Survey Construction
All questions in the survey were created by the researchers to determine the
effectiveness of event concepts, and how each factor can affect the outcome and
success of an event. The following factors were considered when the survey was being
constructed:
 How should the question be positioned to gain the most insightful answer?
 What types of questions would demonstrate the research objective in a clear and
concise manner?
 How to avoid bias and maintain anonymity in the questions.
 What demographic questions were necessary to create more effective and
usable results?
The researchers constructed the survey with the intention of creating 20 questions that
covered all factors of the event planning process. The survey questions were positioned
to allow a wide variety of event planners, to be capable to complete it with ease. This
was to ensure that all answers would be accurate and reliable. Before the survey was
deployed Market Research Professor, Melanie Christian reviewed and approved the
questions.
Sampling Execution
Once the survey was submitted and approved, it was deployed onto FluidSurvey.com.
Initially, the survey was distributed on social media platforms including LinkedIn,
Facebook and Twitter. This involved both researchers disbursing the survey on event
planning pages, posting statuses and communicating with their network to produce a
large reach by having the members of the network like, share and repost the survey.
The researchers then contacted the Dean of the School of Business, John Conrad, who
then shared the survey with the faculty of St. Lawrence College via e-mail. Finally, the
researchers directly contacted event planners in person and by e-mail and requested
that they do the survey one-on-one.

5. 5
Results – Primary
Description of Respondents in Sample
The survey sample consisted of 38 participants, representing more non-profit than for-
profit organizations as shown in Figure 1.1. The sample includes a range of
organization sizes from local to international; operating across various industries.
Survey Results
Figure 1.1 Types of Organizations

6. 6
Figure 1.2 Outreach of Organizations
Of the organizations sampled, approximately 55% operate in their local area. Provincial
organizations were the least common type sampled.

7. 7
Figure 2.1 Event Costs by Industry
As shown in Figure 2.1, the sample is highly skewed to represent organizations in non-
traditional areas as outlined in the research survey.
The graph indicates that the cost associated with executing the event by type of
organization. The Business sector appears to spend the least amount of money, on
average, to execute non-profit events among the categories defined. In contrast, events
executed in non-traditional industries appear to have higher costs associated with event
execution. (*Due to the skewedness of the sample, and not having an appropriate
number of participants from each industry, this conclusion cannot be determined as
representative of the Canadian event industry population. This can only be used based
on the data provided for the purposes of this analysis.)

8. 8
Figure 2.2 Primary Event Purpose
Once the sample collected had been defined, the data were analyzed to conclude the
main purpose of each event described. The research shows the majority of events were
executed with the primary goal of raising funds. Beyond the other category, the next
most common reason for executing an event was engaging the public.

9. 9
Figure 2.3 Average Event Length
Based on the research collected, the average length of events executed is between 4
and 6 hours, as shown in Figure 2.3.

10. 10
Figure 2.4 Most Popular Event Themes
Figure 2.4 outlines the themes used for events described in the sample. The data
shows the “Other” category (defined in this graph as not a Holiday, Dinner, Gala,
Fundraiser, Celebration, Sport, Conference, or School event) to be the most common
event theme. This analysis shows that unique or non-traditional event themes are the
most commonly executed. The second most common theme is the Sports theme.

11. 11
Figure 2.5 Most Popular Event Venues
The data collected provided some insight into the popularity of venues used by event
planners. As shown in Figure 2.5, the most common event venues used fall into the
categories of educational institutions and other, while the least popular venue was
Restaurants.

12. 12
Figure 2.6 Event Occurrence
The research outlines a pattern in the occurrence of events described by survey
respondents. In Figure 2.6, over 75% of the respondents surveyed executed annual
events. These data provided a consideration for analyzing the research, as the events
described are executed yearly. This means the event could already have strong
connections with attendees, influencing the marketing efforts required.

13. 13
Figure 2.7 Most Common Obstacles
To understand the influencing factors of successful event planning in Canada, the
research had to include data on obstacles encountered by event planners. The analysis
determined that the most common obstacle faced was RSVPs/Attendance, as show in
figure 2.7. This seems logical, as a challenging part of a successful event is generating
attendance, and confirming that attendees will show up.
The second most common obstacle encountered was the budget for the event. For
example the budget allocated was insufficient. The budgeting portion of event planning
was shown to include more challenges than other obstacles such as lack of
organizational skills or legal requirements.
0
5
10
15
20
25
MostCommon Obstacles Encountered by EventPlanners

14. 14
Figure 2.8 Most Common Event Marketing Tactics
According to the research collected, the most common marketing tactics used in the
Canadian event planning industry are word of mouth, digital/online, and public relations.
The least common marketing tactic used for event planning was out of home advertising
with almost one quarter of the participants exclaiming they did not use out of home as a
marketing tactic.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Digital/Online Exclusive Other Out of Home Public Relations Word of Mouth
NumberofRespondents
Marketing Tactics
MostCommon Marketing Tactics Used in the Canadian Event
Industry
Yes No None

15. 15
Figure 3.1 How much of the funds raised were explained by the total cost of the
event and the event theme?
Model Summary
Mode
l R
R
Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .705a .497 .466 72704.992
a. Predictors: (Constant), What was the theme of the
event? How much did the event cost in total?
ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 172220365015.966 2 86110182507.983 16.290 .000b
Residual 174438523872.923 33 5286015874.937
Total 346658888888.889 35
a. Dependent Variable: In the previous question if you chose Fundraising as the main
purpose, how much funds were raised
b. Predictors: (Constant), What was the theme of the event? How much did the event
cost in total?
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardize
d
Coefficients
t Sig.B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 57747.842 25977.320 2.223 .033
How much did the event
cost in total?
.461 .081 .716 5.657 .000
What was the theme of
the event?
-8665.260 4387.184 -.250 -1.975 .057
a. Dependent Variable: In the previous question if you chose Fundraising as the main
purpose, how much funds were raised
As shown in figure 3.1, the combination of the cost and the theme of the event
explained 46.6% of the variation in total funds raised. The cost of the event shows a
significant correlation with the amount of funds raised as described further in Figure 3.2
below. The theme of the event is not a statistically significant predictor of the funds
raised but, with a significance level of .057, it is close to being statistically significant.
This suggests that with the inclusion of additional survey respondents, a significant
relationship could be found and conclusions drawn on the most successful event
themes based on funds raised.

16. 16
Figure 3.2 Correlation between Event Cost and Funds Raised
The research was analyzed with the hypothesis of finding a statically significant
correlation between the cost of the event and the amount of funds raised. As shown
above in Figure 3.2, 43.7% of the funds raised can be explained by the variation in the
total event cost. This analysis outlines a strong, positive, and statistically significant
relationship between the cost of the event and the amount of funds raised. This means
the amount allocated for the budget of the event impacts the amount of funds that will
be raised by the event. There is a strong positive relationship, meaning that the higher
the cost of an event (or budget allocated), the more funds will likely be raised.

17. 17
Figure 3.3 Correlation between Attendance and Funds Raised
Model Summary
Model R
R
Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .195a .038 .010 808.217
a. Predictors: (Constant), In the previous question if you chose
Fundraising as the main purpose, how much funds were raised
ANOVAa
Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 875816.668 1 875816.668 1.341 .255b
Residual 22209327.638 34 653215.519
Total 23085144.306 35
a. Dependent Variable: How many people attended the event?
b. Predictors: (Constant), In the previous question if you chose Fundraising as the
main purpose, how much funds were raised
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardize
d
Coefficients
t Sig.B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 459.922 142.250 3.233 .003
In the previous
question if you chose
Fundraising as the
main purpose, how
much funds were
raised
.001 .001 .195 1.158 .255
a. Dependent Variable: How many people attended the event?
The research was analyzed with the hypothesis of finding a statistically significant
correlation between the attendance and funds raised in events. The research results do
not provide enough evidence to support the hypothesis with a significance level of .255;
resulting in the hypothesis being rejected. Therefore, the number of people in
attendance cannot be concluded as a significant predictor of the funds raised at events.

18. 18
Figure 3.4 Relationship between the Number of People Involved in Execution and
the Number of People in Attendance
Model Summary
Model R
R
Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .407a .165 .141 752.746
a. Predictors: (Constant), How many people were
involved in the execution of the event?
ANOVAa
Model
Sum of
Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
1 Regression 3819826.047 1 3819826.047 6.741 .014b
Residual 19265318.259 34 566627.008
Total 23085144.306 35
a. Dependent Variable: How many people attended the event?
b. Predictors: (Constant), How many people were involved in the execution of the
event?
Coefficientsa
Model
Unstandardized Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.B Std. Error Beta
1 (Constant) 341.383 141.780 2.408 .022
How many people
were involved in
the execution of
the event?
2.828 1.089 .407 2.596 .014
a. Dependent Variable: How many people attended the event?
The research does not reject the hypothesis of a statistically significant relationship
between the number of people involved in the execution of an event and the number of
event attendees. The analysis shows 16.5% of the variance in the number of people
involved in the execution is explained by the number of attendees. This provides
valuable insights into the industry, as event planners can estimate the number of people
needed for execution based on the number of expected attendees.

19. 19
Figure 3.5 Funds Raised between Different Industries
ANOVA
In the previous question if you chose Fundraising as the main purpose,
how much funds were raised
Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.
Between
Groups
296554096428.572 3 98851365476.190 3.329 .032
Within Groups 950350903571.429 32 29698465736.607
Total 1246905000000.000 35
The analysis shown in Figure 3.5 determined a significance level of .032. This
concludes that there is a significant difference in the amount of funds raised between
the industries sampled. As shown in Figure 3.6, the sample is representative of the
population based on industries sampled. This ensures the data collected was reliable
enough to draw conclusions from.
Figure 3.6 Industry Groupings Sample for Analysis

20. 20
Figure 3.7 Funds Raised between Profit and Non-Profit Organizations
As shown in Figure 3.7 the hypothesis tested for a statistical significance of the amount
of funds raised being determined by the type of organization (for-profit or non-profit).
The results found did not provide enough evidence to support the hypothesis with a
significance level of .061 found. The result is close to the required significance level of
0.05, meaning with an increased sample size the research has a high probability to find
statistical significance in this analysis.
Independent Samples Test
Levene's
Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
F Sig. t df
Sig.
(2-
tailed)
Mean
Difference
Std. Error
Difference
95% Confidence Interval
of the Difference
Lower Upper
In the previous
question if you
chose Fundraising
as the main
purpose, how much
funds were raised
Equal
variances
assumed
6.988 .012 -1.475 34 .149 -95016.722 64420.688 -225935.312 35901.868
Equal
variances
not
assumed
-1.973 22.100 .061 -95016.722 48163.351 -194875.078 4841.633
What type of
organization? N Mean
Std.
Deviation
Std. Error
Mean
In the previous
question if you chose
Fundraising as the
main purpose, how
much funds were
raised
Profit 13 2461.54 8292.722 2299.987
Non-Profit
23 97478.26 230719.797 48108.403

21. 21
Limitations
In this research project certain limitations created constraints on the accuracy of results.
If more time had been available to this project, the researchers would have been able to
implement a stronger communication process to connect with prospective participants.
This would have allowed the researchers to reach out to communities outside of
Kingston, and it would have given participants more time to fill out the survey and share
it with their friends, family, and co-workers.
Another limitation the researchers faced was the specific requirements of the
participants needed to achieve accurate results. This limited the number of possible
participants because few known event planners were in the researchers’ networks.
Surveying more subjects would have created more accurate and reliable data. In the
future, the researchers plan to implement a strong communications plan, go directly to
organizations, and create focus groups to find more subjects and create a stronger data
set. The researchers must gather a broader sample of participants by focusing on
geographic segmentation, meaning that there must be a representative sample from
each Canadian province. The researchers will also survey participants by industry (e.g.
veterinary/animal industry, restaurant/hospitality industry, etc.), as well as by venue.
In this research project, the “other” category was a limitation that was not recognized
until the data had already been collected. This caused discrepancies and did not allow
the researchers to ascertain additional understanding of event concepts such as
themes, venues, and event functions. In the future, the survey questions will include
more inclusive categories to avoid this obstacle.
Conclusions and Recommendations
In conclusion, the hypothesis of a significant correlation between the event cost and
funds raised has been proven to be highly statistically significant with less than 0.0001%
chance of error. The hypothesis of a significant relationship between the event theme
and funds raised was rejected, due to not enough evidence to support the relationship.
These findings support our recommendations for the research.
We recommend that Canadian event planners determine their event budget with strong
consideration of the desired amount of funds to be raised. With higher fundraising goals,
event planners can anticipate higher event costs associated. Also, when determining
the anticipated success of an event, the theme itself is not a significant predictor.
Including an analysis of multiple factors in planning - such as marketing tactics and
outreach of the number of people involved in planning - can assist event planners to
anticipate and drive desired outcomes.

22. 22
Appendices
Table #1: Survey
Evaluating Event Concepts
The ideal participant for this survey is a person with experience working in event
planning, or has planned a professional event. All data collected in this survey will be
confidential, by completing this survey you provide your consent to participate and any
participant is able to withdraw at any time.
What area does your organization operate in?
 Business
 Health (I.E. Cancer charities)
 Education/Child Welfare
 Animal/Wildlife Natural Resources
 Cultural
 Other
What type of organization?
 Profit
 Non-Profit
How long has your organization been in existence?
Describe the outreach of your charitable organization.
 Local
 Provincial
 National (Canadian)
 International
What was the theme of the event?
Describe in 5 words or less.
What was the main purpose of the event?
 Fundraising
 Brand Awareness

23. 23
 Engaging the Public
 Celebration
 Other
In the previous question if you chose Fundraising as the main
purpose, how much funds were raised?
If you chose a different purpose please ignore this question.
How much funds were raised?
If you chose a different purpose please ignore this question.
What is the occurrence of the event?
 Annual
 One-time
 Monthly
 Semi-Annual
 Other
How long did it take to plan the event?
Answer in hours.
How many people were involved in the planning of the event?
What obstacles did you encounter during planning?
Choose all that apply.
 Time management
 Budget allocation
 Logistics
 RSVP/Attendance
 Advertising/promotions
 Organization
 Legal constraints
 Other

24. 24
How did you advertise/promote the event?
Please provide an answer for each row.
Yes No
Digital/Online (eg. Social
Media)
Exclusive (advertised to
invited guests only)
Other
Out of Home (eg. billboard,
posters)
Public Relations (eg. Press
Release, Radio)
Word of Mouth
What type of venue was the event held at?
Choose the option that best describes the venue.
How much did the event cost in total?
How many people were involved in the execution of the event?
How long was the event?
 1 hour
 2-3 hours
 4-6 hours
 6-12 hours
 1 day

25. 25
How many people attended the event?
In your opinion, what went well?
In your opinion, what went poorly?
Based on your experience with charitable events (runs for cancer,
charitable galas, etc.) how effective do you feel these are at raising
necessary funds/awareness?
Not at all effective - 0 Extremely effective - 100

26. 26
References
Charity Intelligence Canada. (2013). Canada's 10 largest charities . Retrieved from:
http://www.charityintelligence.ca/canadas-top-10-largest-charities
CNIB. (2015). About us. Retrieved from: http://www.cnib.ca/en/about/Pages/default.aspx
CNIB. (2015). Kingston visions gala - Dining in the dark with clark. Retrieved from:
http://cnib.ca/en/ontario/events/Pages/kingston-visions-gala.aspx
Government of Canada. (2013). Conference and event planners. Retrieved from:
http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/qc/job_futures/statistics/1226.shtml
Science Buddies. (2015). Sample size: how many survey participants do i need? . Retrieved
from: http://www.sciencebuddies.org/science-fair-
projects/project_ideas/Soc_participants.shtml