Attachment 1 Scope of Project.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1: SCOPE OF PROJECT

1.1 BACKGROUND

Montana State University – Northern seeks a contractor to create and implement a feasibility study for the development of a meat processing program at the undergraduate level. This study should achieve the following:

1. Evaluate Montana-based meat processing market labor needs and employment sustainability.

2. Evaluate student demand and enrollment sustainability based on Montana demographics and expressed interest.

3. Critically evaluate best practices with respect to meat processing education in other states to identify strategies for maximizing student interest and employer demand for a formal meat processing program in Montana.

1.2 SCOPE OF PROJECT

All Offerors must be able to provide the following scope of services. Describe in detail how you will provide the services listed below. Also identify any relationships with vendors necessary to provide the services.

Phase I: Market-Based Return on Training in Montana Phase II: Local Student Interest Phase III: Benchmarking and Best Practices

Project deliverables will include a series of updates to the Steering Committee from each project phase which will culminate in a full feasibility study with actionable recommendations and a program development timeline.

Timeline: This scope of work is expected to commence upon contract execution with completion expected by late summer/early fall 2026. However, it is understood that the exact timeline will be developed with the successful offeror. Offerors shall provide a proposed timeline to complete each of the phases and an estimate of completion of the total scope of work.

Phase I: Market-Based Return on Training in Montana

Contractor will evaluate current trends in the Montana meat processing industry related to:

• open positions,

• required skills/qualifications,

• pay premiums associated with specific training,

• sustainable job placement for newly credentialed workers,

• and estimated return on investment in training for students.

Both qualitative and quantitative data should be used. Findings and recommendations must be specific to Montana

Phase II: Local Student Interest

Contractor will identify and evaluate student populations in Montana most likely to enroll in a meat processing program along with:

• the size and demographic characteristics of these populations,

• program characteristics that are most appealing to potential students,

• and the long-term sustainability of cohort enrollment based on student demand.

Phase III: Benchmarking and Best Practices

a. Contractor will identify and evaluate the success of other Montana-based meat processing training programs in terms of:

• enrollment history,

• mode of delivery,

• program structure,

• sustainability,

• and profitability.

Active efforts by the Montana Department of Labor and Industry, or other in-state entities, to develop meat processing education programs should be thoroughly explored.

b. Contractor will identify and evaluate successful meat processing training programs across the country; comparing and contrasting:

• mode of delivery,

• program structure,

• credential structure,

• credential pay premiums,

• state-level incentives,

• and other student and industry characteristics that impact program success.

c. Contractor will evaluate and determine which program, market, and state-level circumstances/characteristics examined throughout Phase III are applicable to the success of a meat processing training program in north-central Montana and make recommendations for maximizing the profitable sustainability of a new program.

1.3 MANDATORY SPECIFICATIONS

Proposals should be as thorough and detailed as possible to allow the steering committee to properly evaluate the Offeror’s capabilities and approach toward providing the required services as listed in Section 1.2

Offerors are also required to submit the following items as part of the proposal:

a. Offeror Qualifications

• Expertise and past experience in providing services as it relates to Section 1.2 of this

RFP

• Evidence of ability to provide detailed, independent analysis and review under tight schedules.

• Demonstrated familiarity with Higher Education planning processes.

• Demonstrated experience working with public/private partnerships and universities.

b. Previous Feasibility Study Experience

• Demonstrate experience conducting feasibility studies and compiling research, analysis, best practices and trends for development as it relates to this RFP.

• Demonstrate ability to engage stakeholders in an interactive process that leads to gathering highly relevant qualitative and quantitative data.

• Demonstrate experience developing a decision-making framework to guide phasing or future implementation efforts relating to feasibility study recommendations

• Demonstrate experience in the preparation of narrative/ graphics for feasibility analysis.

• Provide evidence of the ability to perform work, to produce documents with superior quality and to meet the completion schedule.

c. Other

• Detailed data collection plans that include in-person contact with stakeholders across the state, including brick and mortar on-site visits.

• Proposals must be original work, specific to the goals of this study, and foundationally developed without the use of generative artificial intelligence tools.