Venue & Supplier Sourcing + Evidence Pack (Professional Association)

For professional associations, the venue and supplier set-up has direct impact on:

• Delegate experience (queues, wayfinding, accessibility, room flow)

• Sponsor delivery (exhibition logistics, power, build/break, visibility)

• Governance and claims risk (what can be proven vs what is marketing language)

• Procurement scrutiny (why one venue was selected over another)

• Reporting burden (data that is requested after the event but not planned early)

​​

Common pain points addressed:

• Inconsistent venue responses and sales-led claims

• Late operational surprises (loading, storage, resets, sound bleed)

• Accessibility requirements not confirmed early enough

• Sustainability statements without evidence

• No clear ownership for reporting inputs

A repeatable sourcing framework was used to compare options fairly and raise standards without adding unnecessary admin.

​

1) Set non-negotiables 

​

Non-negotiables were agreed before contacting venues so the shortlist stayed realistic.

• Capacity by room (plenary + breakouts) and exhibition footprint

• Step-free access, accessible toilets, hearing support, quiet room

• Loading access, delivery windows, storage, room reset times

• Contract terms: cancellation, payment schedule, force majeure, attrition

• Travel access: rail/tube proximity, coach drop-off, hotel walkability

​​

2) Standardise the venue RFI 

​

​​Every venue received the same RFI plus evidence requests.​

Operational questions (examples):

• Plenary: max theatre capacity, sightlines, stage size, rigging limits

• Breakouts: number of rooms, sound bleed risk, built-in screens/projectors

• Exhibition: ceiling height, power drops, loading route, build/break times

• Catering: service style options, queue management, water service

​​

Accessibility & inclusion questions (examples):

• Step-free routes from entrance to all rooms (with map)

• Hearing loop availability and where it works

• Quiet room availability and location

​​

Sustainability questions (examples):

• Energy: renewable tariff confirmation (and provider), building controls

• Waste: back-of-house separation, contamination controls, reporting available

• Catering: allergen process, plant-forward options, surplus food handling

• Materials: signage/print options, reuse/storage, digital alternatives

​​

Evidence requested (examples):

• Waste contractor details + what they can report

• Energy tariff confirmation or building spec summary

• Sample sustainability report (if available)

• Catering sourcing policy or menu approach

​​

3) Score the shortlist 

​

A weighted scorecard was used to document trade-offs and justify the final selection.​

Example weighting (adjustable):

• 40% Operational fit (flow, exhibition, AV, loading, resets)

• 20% Commercial/contract (terms, cost clarity, attrition/cancellation)

• 20% Accessibility & inclusion

• 20% Sustainability & evidence (what can be proven and reported)

Delivery (what was done)

1. Requirements capture (programme, rooms, exhibition, accessibility, sponsor needs)

2. Longlist build (location, access, capacity, availability)

3. Venue RFI issued + evidence requests

4. Shortlist scoring + trade-off review
    

​Site inspection (in-person or structured virtual walkthrough)

1. Supplier alignment to minimum standards (catering, AV, print/signage, logistics)

2. Evidence pack set-up + reporting data capture plan

3. Site inspection focus (what was actually checked)

4. Delegate journey: arrival, registration, cloakroom, wayfinding, queue space

5. Room flow: plenary to breakouts, pinch points, lift capacity

6. Exhibition logistics: loading route, storage, build schedule, power

7. Catering operations: service points, queue space, water stations

8. Back-of-house: waste area, separation, signage, staff briefings

​​

Evidence pack (how it was structured)

Folder structure (example):

1. 01_Venue_Contract_and_Terms

2. 02_Venue_RFI_and_Responses

3. 03_Site_Inspection_Notes_and_Photos

4. 04_Suppliers

   • 04A_Catering

   • 04B_AV

   • 04C_Print_Signage

   • 04D_Logistics_Freight

5. 05_Sustainability_Evidence

   • Energy

   • Waste

   • Catering

   • Materials

6. 06_Reporting_Data_Capture

​​

Naming convention (example):

• YYYY_EventName_Venue_RFI_Response_VenueName.pdf

• YYYY_EventName_Waste_Report_VenueName.pdf

​​​

Outcomes (what changed)

• Shortlist decisions were defensible (clear trade-offs documented)

• Fewer late-stage surprises (loading, storage, room resets, exhibition build)

• Supplier standards aligned early, reducing last-minute rework

• Reporting faster because evidence was collected during sourcing

• If a venue cannot evidence waste processes or provide any reporting capability, it is a governance risk.

• For ~500 attendees, queue space and pinch points matter more than aesthetics.

• Accessibility works best as a scored category, not a checkbox.

• Reporting is easiest when evidence requirements are written into briefs and deadlines are set early.

• Keep 5–7 non-negotiables; everything else is a documented trade-off.

​​

Practical tips (quick wins)

• Ask venues: “Can you report waste weights by stream?” If not, do not promise numbers in reporting.

• Require one-page supplier confirmations (what they will evidence, by when).

• Build the evidence pack during sourcing, not after the event.