ESBD_510884_1782507684579_SP QA -Lottery Operations and Services 2026 Round 5 - final.pdf

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND

REGULATION

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR

LOTTERY OPERATIONS AND SERVICES

#452-2026-0007

RESPONSES TO PROPOSERS’

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN QUESTIONS

June 26, 2026

RESPONSES FOR PROPOSALS

FOR

LOTTERY OPERATIONS AND SERVICES

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN QUESTIONS

Note to All Prospective Proposers:

The following responses include Subcontracting Plan questions submitted in writing prior to the deadline for Proposals. This document will be updated as necessary to respond to additional questions.

Proposers must review Part 5 of the RFP along with this document to ensure a complete understanding of the Subcontracting Plan requirements.

1. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, Pg., 150

Question: The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts has adopted amended VetHUB program rules at 34 TAC Sections 281–298, including substantive revisions to 34 TAC 20.285 and a new subcontracting plan form effective May 12, 2026. The bulletin states that agencies may, but are not required to, amend existing solicitations closing on or after May 12 to incorporate the new subcontracting plan.

Will the Lottery please clarify whether TDLR intends to incorporate the new VetHUB subcontracting plan and revised Section 20.285 requirements for this solicitation, or respondents should continue to comply with the subcontracting plan requirements currently included in the solicitation?

Response: The Lottery Operations and Services RFP was amended on May 8, 2026, to incorporate the adopted Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Veteran Heroes United in Business (VetHUB) program rules at 34 Texas Administrative Code (TAC) Sections 281-298.

2. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, Pg 150, Question: Under the amended VetHUB rules at 34 TAC §20.285.2(b)(1), agencies are instructed that:

“If no certified VetHUBs can be identified to fulfill subcontracting opportunities — rendering the good faith effort ineffective — the agency should document that and not require a subcon-tracting plan.”

Could the TDLR please clarify the expected method and level of documentation required to demonstrate that no certified VetHUB vendors are available for a specific subcontracting opportunity?

For example, for the shipping and distribution of Scratch Ticket products, if it is determined that no certified VetHUB vendors are capable of meeting the contractual requirements for secure, high-volume lottery ticket transportation and logistics services, how should we document that determination to support not requiring the Good Faith Effort?

Response: Currently, the adopted rule 34 TAC §20.285.2(b)(1) regarding the VetHUB program does not state “If no certified VetHUBs can be identified to fulfill subcontracting opportunities — rendering the good faith effort ineffective — the agency should document that and not require a subcontracting plan.”

Proposers who identified subcontracting opportunity descriptions in Section 4: Respondent’s Subcontracting Opportunities of the revised Subcontracting Forms, shall submit a copy of Section 5: Subcontracting Plan – Good Faith Effort form for each identified subcontracting opportunity. For opportunities in which no certified VetHUB subcontractors are identified, Proposers shall also submit copies of the “Search For Vendors” results page from the CMBL demonstrating that no certified VetHUB vendors exist for that particular subcontracting opportunity, along with the applicable Subcontracting Plan.

There is no waiver of the good faith effort requirement based on the capability of VetHUB vendors. Proposers are expected to make a good faith effort to identify VetHUB vendors for subcontracting opportunities as outlined in 34 TAC §20.285.

3. Question: Attachment N lists the potential subcontracting opportunities identified by the agency for this RFP #452-2026-0007, some of those items identified include office furniture and facility leasing and more, as a respondent, should we consider these needs as our subcontracting opportunities?

Response: Office furniture should be considered as a subcontracting opportunity. The direct purchase or lease of a facility is not a subcontracting opportunity. In addition, if a Proposer uses a brokerage service to locate properties in preparing a Proposal, such brokerage service would not be considered a subcontracting opportunity, and the HUB Good Faith Effort (GFE) requirements therefore do not have to be met. However, if the Successful Proposer intends to use a brokerage service after Contract Award to locate properties, such brokerage service would be considered a subcontracting opportunity, and the HUB GFE requirements must be met.

4. Question: If any of these potential subcontracting opportunities identified in this RFP, have vendors with contracts through the DIR Coop, as a respondent, could we use the DIR contract vendor through that process or would we request a GFE bid as subcontracting need under this

RFP?

Response: Although VetHUB vendors are listed on the Texas Department of Information Resources (DIR) IT contracts, a GFE bid must be requested.

5. Question: If a vendor can provide several item numbers within the same class, can we send one email with one Notification Form listing the class-item numbers needed? Or do we need to send individual notification forms for each item needed?

Response: No. Each identified subcontracting opportunity email must have its own specific Subcontracting Opportunity Notification form which identifies the applicable scope of work, required qualifications, and other relevant details.

6. Question: If the Proposer selects a non-VetHUB vendor, where should the written justification for the selection be placed documented?

Response: No written justification is required for the selection of any non-VetHUB vendors.

7. Question: Are Proposers required to provide "Other contract requirements" in Section C: Due Date and Description on Subcontracting Opportunity Notification Form?

Response: Yes, if using the Subcontracting Opportunity Notification Form, the Proposers must identify any additional specific contracts requirements needed in the "other contract requirements" section if applicable, to fulfill the specific identified subcontracting opportunity.

If providing solicited VetHUB vendors an email detailing the Scope of Work, the "other contract requirements" will need to be included.

8. Question: Are Proposer allowed to solicit VetHUB vendors whose geographic delivery zones and districts do not include the requested region?

Response: Yes, if no VetHUB vendors are located in the geographic delivery zones and districts.

9. Question: Can proposer solicit VetHUB vendors that do not have the specific business description listed in their CMBL/VetHUB Vendor Detail or their Commodity Description, but it is listed on the company website?

Response: Yes.

10. Question: How to document NIGP Codes when space availability becomes an issue?

Response: In the event when there is not enough space to enter all applicable NIGP codes, add the additional NIGP Codes in Section 5.1 Subcontracting Opportunity in the Subcontracting Plan GFE form.

11. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: When searching the CMBL by NIGP code, we often receive VetHUB/Vendors who cannot perform the actual scope. How should we document these mismatches in our Good Faith Effort (GFE) and do they still get a GFE notification?

Response: Yes. The GFE notification is required. As part of the GFE, the Proposer must identify VetHUB vendors that have listed in either their business description or in the commodity description that they are capable of performing the specific subcontracting opportunity being solicited by the Proposer.

12. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg.

Question: If a vendor appears in the CMBL search results under a specific NIGP code but their profile or website shows they do not perform that service, does TDLR consider this a valid “no availability” finding?

Response: No. Vendors registered on the CMBL are generally expected to maintain NIGP Class/Item codes within their vendor profile that identify the goods and services they are capable of providing. If a vendor does not have an applicable NIGP code or business description that aligns with the subcontracting opportunity, the vendor may not be considered capable of performing the solicited scope based on the information contained in its CMBL/VetHUB profile. Therefore, the Proposer should notify an alternative VetHUB Vendor whose profile indicates the capability to perform the subcontracting opportunity.

13. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: What level of documentation is required to demonstrate that a vendor listed under an NIGP code cannot perform the scope?

Response: A copy of the VetHUB vendor’s response to the solicitation is sufficient documentation to demonstrate that the vendor listed under the applicable NIGP code is unable to perform the required scope of work.

14. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: We are seeing vendors appear in CMBL search results for NIGP codes they do not list on their profile. How should we treat these VETHUB/Vendors in our outreach and availability analysis?

Response: Refer to Question 12 response.

15. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: If a VETHUB/Vendor appears in search results but does not list the code on their profile, can that VETHUB/Vendor be used under the code not listed?

16. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: How should we document situations where a VETHUBs/Vendor appears under a NIGP code but the NIGP code is not listed on their profile?

17. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: Many subcontracting opportunities require multiple NIGP codes to fully capture the scope. How does TDLR recommend we handle situations where one scope maps to several codes with inconsistent vendor results?

Response: Proposers shall notify a minimum of two VetHUBs with business or commodity descriptions that come closest to the actual product or service the proposer is soliciting.

18. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: When multiple NIGP codes apply to a single scope, does TDLR expect outreach to all vendors across all codes, or can outreach be consolidated based on capability?

Response: Refer to Question 17 response.

19. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: For highly specialized scopes with limited VetHUB availability, what is TDLR’s preferred method for documenting “no availability”?

Response: For “limited VetHUB availability,” list two VetHUBs vendors that were notified of the subcontracting opportunity identified in Section 5.1. If no VetHUB vendors listed in the CMBL – VetHUB Directory for the applicable subcontracting opportunity, indicate in Section 5.3, in the space provided for the notified VetHUB vendors, “No VetHUB vendors currently listed in the CMBL – VetHUB Directory”.

20. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: When questions occur during solicitation process, please provide instruction process to get VETHUB questions answered?

Response: Refer to RFP Section 5.3.3 for instructions to get VetHUB questions and answers.

21. Reference: RFP Reference Number, 5. Historically Underutilized Business (HUB)

Participation, RFP Page Number, 150, Question: Within the NIGP code section of the Subcontracting Plan Form, will TDLR accept the three-digit NIGP class code, or would it prefer that Proposers provide the full, five-digit NIGP class and item code? If the latter is required, will TDLR accept the three-digit commodity code in situations wherein there are limited VetHUB vendors available?

Response: Proposers are required to provide the full five-digit NIGP Class/Item Codes to ensure accurate identification for goods and services being solicited.

22. Reference: RFP Reference Number, .5 Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, RFP Page Number, 150.

Question: Within the NIGP code section of the Subcontracting Plan Form, will TDLR accept the three-digit NIGP class code, or would it prefer that Proposers provide the full, five-digit NIGP class and item code? If the latter is required, will TDLR accept the three-digit commodity code in situations wherein there are limited VetHUB vendors available?

Response: Refer to Question 21 response, as this is a duplicated question.

23. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: How should Respondents address subcontracting requirements when they are legally and contractually obligated to use a specific vendor whose goods or services are proprietary or exclusive company-wide? In situations where an existing contract restricts the Respondent from substituting another provider without violating legal terms or disrupting core operations, how does TDLR want Respondents to document Good Faith Effort (GFE) and VetHUB compliance within the Subcontracting Plan?

Response: Proposers are advised to provide TDLR advance notice prior to submission of its Proposal regarding any proprietary goods or services and obtain a response from the TDLR regarding the applicability of the GFE requirements.

24. Reference: Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, Part 5, pg. 150-151

Question: How should Respondents address subcontracting expectations when a critical service, system, or product used throughout the company contains proprietary or integrated elements, and replacing that provider would reduce value, increase risk, or compromise operational continuity? Specifically, how does TDLR want Respondents to document Good Faith Effort (GFE) and HUB/VetHUB compliance when the proprietary nature of a solution limits the feasibility of substituting another vendor without negatively impacting performance or cost?

Response: Refer to Question 23 response.

25. Reference: 5. Historically Underutilized Business (HUB) Participation, RFP Page Number

Question: For purposes of identifying subcontracting opportunities and conducting the HUB Good Faith Effort, would TDLR be willing to accept use of NIGP commodity code 615-00 (Office Supplies, General) for everyday office consumables?

More specifically, would TDLR be willing to consider this code appropriate and compliant with the requirement to provide full, five-digit NIGP Class/Item Codes within the Subcontracting Plan?

Response: No. The NIGP commodity 615-00 will not display any vendors in the search results because this code is not appropriate nor compliant with the requirement to provide full, five-digit NIGP Class/Item Codes within the Subcontracting Plan. For more effective searches, use either the 3-digit NIGP Class Code, which represents a general description of the goods or services vendors may provide, or the 3-digit NIGP Class Code combined with a 2-digit Item Code, which provides a more specific description of the goods or services vendors can offer.

26. Question: In response to the responses to questions 23 and 24 published in the Round 4 responses on June 19, TDLR requests that we provide prior notice of subcontracting opportunities where we have Preferred Vendors (based on proprietary, contractually-exclusive, critical service limitations that would limit ability to use a VetHUB vendor.

How should the Proposer present/submit this information to TDLR, considering the confidential nature of our Preferred vendor list?

Response: If a proposer intends to use a proprietary or sole source vendor in the performance of the contract, the proposer must submit a proprietary or sole source exemption request email or memo to TDLR prior to submission to its proposal. The exemption request must demonstrate that the commodity or service is available from only one source and that no equivalent alternative exists. However, the existence of a pre-existing or exclusive subcontracting relationship does not waive the Good Faith Effort requirements. Proposers are still required to perform the applicable GFE outreach for all identified subcontracting opportunities, including those for which the proposer intends to utilize an existing or exclusive subcontractor relationship with the performance of the contract.