Research Services RFR.v.9.3 6-14-2019.docx

Request for Responses (RFR) For Research Services

BD-19-1068-1700-1-40973

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

This Request for Response (RFR) is issued by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) with advice and guidance from the Public Health Trust Fund Executive Committee.

The purpose of this RFR is to solicit bid proposals for research services to support of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (“MGC” or “Commission”), the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (MDPH) and other stakeholders interested in the successful implementation of casino gambling and mitigation of related harms. The MGC is responsible for implementing the expanded gaming law (chapter 194 of the Acts of 2011, M.G.L. chapter 23K, or “the Gaming Act”) of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The act was signed into law in November 2011.

The intent of this RFR is to award a contract, or contracts, to responsible bidder(s) whose bid proposal conforms to this RFR and is most advantageous to the Commonwealth, price and other factors considered.

The Commonwealth, reserves the right to separately procure individual requirements that are the subject of the contract during the contract term, when deemed by the MGC to be in the Commonwealth’s best interest.

The Commonwealth’s Standard Terms and Conditions will apply to all contracts or purchase agreements made with the MGC. These terms are in addition to the terms and conditions set forth in this RFR and should be read in conjunction with them unless the RFR specifically indicates otherwise. The Commonwealth’s Standard Terms and Conditions can be found at www.mass.gov/osc/docs/forms/contracts/comm-termsconditions.pdf.

1.2 General procurement requirements

· This RFR is being issued in accordance with 801 CMR 21.00, which governs the procurement of services by state agencies. MGC reserves the right to cancel or modify the procurement scope and/or process at any time and without notice.

· 801 CMR 21.00 requires a competitive procurement process, including the issuance of a RFR for acquisitions of all commodities and services. Words used in this RFR shall have the meanings defined in 801 CMR 21.00. All responses must be submitted in accordance with the specific terms of this RFR.

· MGC makes no guarantee that a contract, or any obligation to purchase any commodities or services, will result from this RFR.

· MGC reserves the right to amend this RFR at any time prior to the date the responses are due. Any such amendment will be posted to the Commonwealth’s procurement web site, Comm-BUYS. Bidders are cautioned to check this site regularly, as this will be the sole method used for notification of changes (See Section 5.7)

· All responses must be submitted in accordance with specifications in Section 3. Response Requirements.

1.3 Procurement Characteristics

· Acquisition method: Time and Materials with a Not To Exceed, or Fixed Price

· Single or multiple vendor(s): Single or Multiple

· Scoring Criteria: See Appendix C for criteria and weight

· Use of Procurement by single or multiple agencies: Multiple (MGC, MDPH and the Executive Office of Health and Human Services(EOHHS) in partnership)

· Anticipated Duration of Contract: The initial duration of the contract that results from this RFR shall be three (3) years from the date on which it is awarded. The contract may be extended in any increment at the discretion of MGC up to a maximum term, including all contract extensions, of three (3) one year extensions for maximum contract duration of six (6) years.

· Anticipated Payment Structure: The contractor will be paid for services rendered, after submission and approval of invoices.

· Anticipated funding: Funding is contingent on the availability of funding and approval by the Public Health Trust Fund Executive Committee

· Data Sharing: Data collected through this procurement shall be made publicly available for research purposes.

SECTION 2: BACKGROUND

The Massachusetts Gaming Commission is responsible for the creation of a fair, transparent, and participatory process for implementing the expanded gaming law passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor in November, 2011. In creating that process, the Commission will strive to ensure that its decision-making and regulatory systems engender the confidence of the public and participants, and that they provide the greatest possible economic development benefits and revenues to the people of the Commonwealth, reduce to the maximum extent possible the potentially negative or unintended consequences of the new legislation, and allow an appropriate return on investment for gaming providers that assures the operation of casino-resorts of the highest quality.

The Gaming Act requires that the Commission establish an “annual research agenda” in order to understand the sociological and economic effects of expanded gaming in the Commonwealth. The key section from the Gaming Act is found in Appendix A. For a full text of the Gaming Act please visit www.mass.gov/gaming.

A Public Health Trust Fund Executive Committee (PHTFEC) has been established to oversee the funds expended from the Public Health Trust Fund. Specific information about this fund can be found at: https://malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleII/Chapter23K/Section58. As it relates to the annual research agenda, the PHTFEC is responsible for:

· Establishing research priorities.

· Approving the budget for expenditures from the Public Health Trust Fund in order to conduct necessary research studies and evaluation, including those identified in the annual research agenda as defined by Section 71.

· Directing use of findings in all strategies and programs related to enhancing responsible gambling and mitigating problem gambling.

2.1 MGC Research Goals

· Understand the social and economic effects of expanded gambling and use findings to inform evidence-based policy and regulation

· Obtain scientific information relative to the neuroscience, psychology, sociology, epidemiology and etiology of gambling

· Inform best practice strategies and methods for responsible gaming and problem gambling treatment and prevention

· Evaluate all responsible gaming initiatives developed by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. (NOTE: Although evaluating these initiatives is a goal for MGC, it is not the focus of this RFR.)

2.2 Current Research Program

In 2013, the Commission engaged a team at the University of Massachusetts Amherst to conduct a comprehensive, multi-year study of the “Social and Economic Impacts of Gambling in Massachusetts” (SEIGMA) to understand the impacts of expanded gaming in the state. The study established baselines for social and economic variables that may be affected by expanded gaming. Table 1 below provides an overview of the MGC research goals and methods of the current MGC research program. Additional information and links to full reports can be found at: https://massgaming.com/about/research-agenda/. The current RFR seeks to procure research services to understand the social and economic effects of expanded gaming (in bold below).

Table 1. Research Goals and Projects

Social Impacts

· Gambling & Problem Gambling: Baseline surveys (General population + Online panel)

· Gambling and Problem Gambling: Impact surveys (General Population + Online Panel)

SEIGMA

Economic Impacts

· Patron Survey

· Operations period impacts

· Construction

· Employment

· Lottery revenue

· Real Estate

· Community Economic Profiles

· Impact: Plainville (6m, 1y, 2y)

· Impact: Springfield (4m)

· Changes in Problem Gambling Status

· Incidence of Problem Gambling

· Transitions, stability and change

· Implications for PG Prevention and Treatment

· Implications for PG Prevention and Treatment

· Helpline call data

· Focus group with MH&A treatment providers

Table 2 below provides historical funding of the Social and Economic Research by year from the 2013 to present.

Table 2. Historical Funding for Social and Economic Research

Before applying, all potential applicants are encouraged to visit the sites below for background information.

· SEIGMA Reports (https://massgaming.com/about/research-agenda/)

· Other reports that fall under the MGC Gaming Research Agenda (https://massgaming.com/about/research-agenda/)

· MGC Research Strategy for Gaming in Massachusetts (https://massgaming.com/about/research-agenda/)

· Description of the information available in the Massachusetts Public Health Data Warehouse (https://www.mass.gov/public-health-data-warehouse-phd)

· Description of social determinants of health in the Health of Massachusetts report (https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/11/03/2017%20MA%20SHA%20final%20compressed.pdf )

· Massachusetts Responsible Gaming Framework (https://massgaming.com/wp-content/uploads/MGC-Responsible-Gaming-Framework-2.0.pdf)

2.3 MGC Research Strategy for Gaming in Massachusetts

In 2018 the MGC and Public Health Trust Fund Executive Committee engaged in a strategic planning process to create a multi-year plan for the evolution of a comprehensive research program to serve the needs of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission, Massachusetts Department of Public Health and Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services, as collaboratively represented in the Public Health Trust Fund. The plan envisions a Research Program for Massachusetts that:

· Builds on the commissioned research to understand the social and economic impacts in Massachusetts;

· Provides research results that will inform programming to prevent and mitigate gambling-related harm;

· Helps host and surrounding communities to understand the impacts of casinos in their communities and to develop policy and programs that maximize benefits while minimizing negative impacts.

· Helps at-risk populations and the organizations that serve them to understand the effects in their communities and develop programs and strategies to minimize gambling-related harm. At-risk populations are characterized by groups or subgroups of the population who experience a disproportionate level of gambling related harm due to social factors, historical injustices, or other contributors.

· Supports other research to examine the effectiveness of responsible gaming programs and problem gambling interventions across the State.

2.4 Data Ownership

All right, title and interest in all data, records, and reports in all form and in all media relating to the research outlined and procured through this RFR (collectively, "Records"), gathered, created or obtained from inception of the project shall be the exclusive property of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (“MGC”). The Contractor shall have a non-exclusive license to use the Records for its work under this agreement and for its research and academic purposes, including, but not limited to utilization by students of the Records towards their thesis or dissertation.

2.5 Subcontractors

Any subcontract entered into by the selected vendor for the purposes of fulfilling the obligations under an ISA must be approved in advance by the MGC.

2.6 Research Review Committee

The MGC has put in place a Research Review Committee to further a process of quality assurance, enhance the public understanding of research findings and advice the Commission on future research scope and methodology. The research team is comprised of independent third party individuals with expertise in the fields of gambling, public health, sociology, research methods and other associated disciplines. The successful bidder(s) will be expected to present findings to the Research Review Committee, before those findings are presented to the MGC. The Research Review Committee is not meant to substitute the role of an IRB for conducting research or a Peer Reviewer for academic publication of those research findings.

SECTION 3: DETAILS OF THE RFR

3.1 Objective of the RFR

The objective of this RFR is to select and contract with a multidisciplinary research team, including but not limited to experts in survey research, econometrics, informatics, psychology, economics, community engagement, and other social sciences who are knowledgeable about the gambling industry and/or its impacts, who will commit to detailing and implementing the research agenda which builds on existing research and is prescribed in the gaming act. Specifically:

· The selected respondent(s) will collaborate to oversee, evaluate and/or perform discreet tasks of a multi-year, multi-method, multi-disciplinary, multi-phase comprehensive research project on the economic and social impacts of the introduction of casino gambling in Massachusetts as described in this RFR.

· The selected respondent(s) should employ a public health approach.

· The Commission expects that some of the research will be published in reputable academic journals and its data will be available to other researchers and academics. Respondents are asked to take this into account when formulating the proposed methodology and approach.

3.2 Number of awards

The MGC acknowledges that there are many highly skilled individuals and organizations that provide capabilities for some, but not all the requirements set forth in this RFR. The Commission strongly encourages organizations to collaborate in responding to this RFR. The Commission invites proposals from organizations that can only conduct the social or economic research or a single organization or a consortium of organizations that is capable of coordinating and conducting all of the required research. However, since there must be strong coordination between research groups executing the social and economic research plans, the MGC prefers that a single organization or consortium of organizations receive the award.

3.3 Vendor qualifications

The preferred vendors or teams will have the capacity to commit personnel and resources necessary to provide high quality services in a timely and responsible manner.

The preferred vendors and/or specific teams and individuals providing responses will have the following qualifications and experience;

· In depth knowledge of research and quantitative methods in the related subject areas

· Experience and expertise in survey research

· Experience and expertise in the analysis of factors and covariant indicators of problem gambling, and other sociological variables

· Experience and expertise in the analysis of factors and covariant indicators of economic development

· Experience in informatics and the use of large data sets

· Understanding of the Massachusetts Gaming Act

· Understanding the mission and goals of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission

· Demonstrated experience in knowledge translation for audiences of different background and diverse skills

· Knowledge of community-engaged research and/or demonstrated experience garnering community input and understanding for research impacting communities

· Understanding the associations and influence of social determinants of health on behaviors, behavioral outcomes, and health outcomes

· Knowledge of other bodies of research work in the areas of problem gambling and economic development

· Demonstrated experience designing, managing and coordinating complex, multi-disciplinary research projects like the one proposed in this RFR

· Demonstrated experience working in partnership with state government agencies in planning, designing, and implementing population surveys.

· Office locations in the state of Massachusetts for one or more of the principal investigators.

Additional Desirable Assets

· Experience in other gaming markets with similar characteristics world-wide

· Experience with all forms of gaming, including lotteries, pari-mutuel and charitable gaming

· Experience in working with regulatory agencies to understand the relationship between regulations and licensing, and the overall impacts of the industry

· Expertise in estimation methods for small populations

3.4 Procurement timetable

Unless otherwise specified, the time of day for the following events shall be between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Eastern Standard Time. All other times specified in this RFR are Eastern Standard Time. Responses and attachments received after this deadline date and time will not be evaluated.

RESPONSES ARE DUE NO LATER THAN 3:00 PM ON August 28, 2019.

MGC may adjust this schedule as it deems necessary. Notification of any adjustment to the RFR Timetable shall be posted on COMMBUYS.

LATE RESPONSES WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED

SECTION 4: SCOPE OF SERVICES

4.1 General

The purpose of this RFR is to engage one or more professional research organizations to manage a multidisciplinary research team and implement and maintain a program related to the economic and social impacts of casino gaming in Massachusetts. Bidders must have a reputation for integrity, professionalism, intellectual rigor, and independence in this research role.

All bidders must be willing to abide by any regulatory requirements established by the MGC whether currently in place, yet to be approved, temporary or permanent. The MGC is seeking solutions that provide the MGC with maximum flexibility and scalability in the research scope.

Specifically, the research scope includes the following.

· The MGC seeks to engage one or more research organizations in order to maintain and enhance a program to conduct research related to the social and economic impacts of casino gambling in the geographic areas of operation.

· Research services procured through this contract will build upon existing research led by the University of Massachusetts, Amherst School of Public Health and Health Sciences, Social and Economic Impacts of Gaming in Massachusetts (SEIGMA) project. (https://massgaming.com/about/research-agenda/)

· Research results are intended to inform programs and policies to prevent and mitigate gambling related harm.

· The research should help at-risk populations and the organizations that serve them to understand the effects in their communities and develop programs and strategies to minimize gambling related harm. At a minimum, this research should estimate problem gambling prevalence by gender, race (minimum of Black, White and Hispanic ethnicity), and age (minimum of four age groups).

· The research team is expected to coordinate with MGC in finalizing the research program and to provide regular updates. The proposal should include plans for coordination and reporting with MGC.

4.2 Social Impacts research

The organization awarded the contract for social impacts research is expected to address the major elements listed below.

Social Impacts - The social component of the research examines the social impacts of gambling related harm to individuals, families and communities. Social research should also seek to measure impact on vulnerable and at-risk populations. This research must include:

· A general population survey of the Massachusetts adult population to measure prevalence of gambling behavior including problem gambling, persons at risk of problem gambling, and recreational gambling. At a minimum, the survey design plan and data analysis framework should support prevalence estimates by gender, race, and age. Oversampling of subpopulations and geographies as well as small area and small domain estimation methods or other techniques may be proposed to provide more precise estimates for any population of interest.

· Estimates of secondary impacts of problem gambling such as unfulfilled treatment seeking for problem gambling, financial problems, bankruptcy, employment issues, housing, marital and relationship problems, mental health issues, substance use issues, changes in leisure activities, and crime related directly or indirectly to problem gambling.

· Measurements of the associations and influence of social determinants of health on problem gambling, and persons at risk of problem gambling. See description of social determinants of health in the Health of Massachusetts report (https://www.mass.gov/files/documents/2017/11/03/2017%20MA%20SHA%20final%20compressed.pdf )

· Assessments of the impact of casinos in the areas surrounding the three casinos on individuals, families and communities.

The proposal for social impacts research should include the following.

· A plan for how the general population survey could be used as a baseline for future cohort follow-up like the MAGIC study, including follow-up of demographic sub-groups.

· The applicant should feel free to suggest how they would do the follow-up survey differently from the original study but must also include why they feel this is not only an improvement in some manner, but also preserves accurate measurement of changes in the general population. Any significant change in methodology should be explained in terms of the impact of the proposed changes on the continuity of statistical measurements over time. Significant differences in methodology from the original survey may include additional variables of interest, sample frames, data collection procedures, weighting or estimation procedures or even ways of measuring critical survey variables.

· All applicants must measure levels of problem gambling, persons at risk of problem gambling, and recreational gambling. While measures of disordered gambling as defined by the DSM 5 are not required, the applicant should explain why this measure is not included along with explanations of the advantages and disadvantages of doing so.

· A power analysis where change in the primary outcome of problem gambling can be detected 80% of the time when compared to the baseline study

· An explanation for how other gambling data collected in Massachusetts would be incorporated into its reports (e.g., Massachusetts Department of Public Health for its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) and Youth Health Surveys (YHS), public safety data and reporting). In general, use of secondary data in the application and the research plan is encouraged. These data can be obtained from the state of Massachusetts or from other parties.

Deliverables for the state-wide general population survey (GPS)

· It’s expected that this survey will be conducted in summer/fall of 2020 and will serve as a follow-up to the Baseline General Population Survey that was done in 2013/14. A full report of this work is required.

· Unless approved in writing by MGC, all reports submitted to the Commission are expected to adhere to the following requirements. They shall include:

· An Executive Summary of no more than five pages

· An Introduction of no more than ten pages

· A Results section and/or an Appendix that covers all results where key findings presented in the Executive Summary are highlighted

· A Limitations section of not more than five pages that addresses issues that constrain or knowledge or the generalizability of the research findings

· A Conclusion or Discussion section of no more than three pages

· The report of the GPS should include estimates of secondary impacts of problem gambling listed in the section above.

· The report of the GPS should include measurements of the associations and influence of social determinants of health.

Springfield Targeted Follow-up Survey analysis and reporting.

· A targeted survey of Springfield and surrounding communities will be conducted in the Summer and Fall 2019 by the UMASS SEIGMA team. The successful applicant will analyze and report on the raw data collected by this team.

· The targeted survey roughly mirrors the Baseline General Population Survey but is intended to provide a closer look at communities where casinos are located.

Future targeted survey research

· Future targeted research will be required in regions that host casinos in order to measure changes in social and economic conditions.

· Future research should consider new ways of looking at past variables that might be better for future comparisons and new methodologies that are likely to be more available in future data collections. This might mean the introduction of new important variables not measured in the past.

· The Commission does not intend to suppress any applicant’s creativity and encourages recommendations to make improvements on prior methodology with eyes towards the future. However, the Commission greatly values the opportunity to ascertain casino-related impacts given all the research efforts prior to the introduction of casinos in Massachusetts. The follow up General Population Survey is not to be looked as a total reset moving into the future but both as a connection to the past with a look toward the future.

· The applicant may propose additional studies that measure the social effects of casinos and other forms of gambling in Massachusetts. Of particular interest are methods that engages the community to better understand impacts to specific at-risk groups (as defined above).

· As with the general population survey, the applicant may propose alternative methods to accomplish the same results of a targeted survey. (e.g. an oversample in host communities during the cross-sectional general population survey or small area estimation methodology)

4.3 Economic Impacts Research

The economic component of the research examines the potential impact of casinos on economic growth and development of casino host and surrounding communities as well as government revenue, and demands on state and municipal public services. Economic research should intersect with social research in terms of economic impacts on individuals and communities, and in particular vulnerable and at-risk communities.

Sources of data for the economic impacts should include economic data at an individual level as part of the general population survey, and primary and secondary data sources for economic impacts at the individual, community and State level.

The Commission invites applicants to propose a scope of research that accomplishes this objective. Much like the social research, the commission hopes to build upon existing research efforts on economic impacts. Data should be reported on an bi-annual to annual basis. This research must address the following areas:

· Direct casino impacts

· Employment, including:

· Participation,

· Unemployment

· Category (i.e. Exec, Supervisor, Frontline)

· Minority, women, veteran, Massachusetts resident, local resident

· Full-time, part-time, on-call

· Revenue

· Expenditure

· Personal income

· Wages

· Poverty rate

· Gambling participation as a function of income

· Business establishments

· Total number

· Minority, women, veteran owned

· Employment impacts

· Bankruptcies

· Changes in industry mix

· Business starts and closures

· Impacts on other types of gambling, including

· Impacts on Massachusetts State Lottery

· Real estate and housing

· Property values

· Rent

· Residential building permits

· Government and fiscal

· Expenditure

· Revenue

Economic impacts must be collected and analyzed to provide detailed reports on MGC designated host and surrounding community, including the following:

School enrollment

Business Sales

Leisure & hospitality

School enrollment

Unemployment

Income & poverty

Property values

Property tax revenue

The economic impacts research should include:

· Research activities to gather and analyze data collected by other state entities that help to determine economic impacts. Researchers should detail the secondary data sources and planned analyses.

· The applicant should feel free to suggest how they would conduct the economic research differently from the original study but must also include why they feel this is not only an improvement in some manner, but also preserves accurate measurement of changes in the economic indicators. Any significant change in methodology should be explained in terms of the impact of the proposed changes on the continuity of statistical measurements over time. Significant differences in methodology from the original research may include datasets, sample frames, data collection procedures, weighting or estimation procedures, additional variables of interest and ways of measuring critical economic variables.

Deliverables for the economic impacts research It is expected that the economic research will cover the period beginning January 2020 and will provide continuity with the previous economic impacts research.

Unless approved in writing by MGC, all reports submitted to the Commission are expected to adhere to the following requirements. They shall include:

· An Executive Summary of no more than five pages

· An Introduction of no more than ten pages

· A Results section and/or an Appendix that covers all results where key findings presented in the Executive Summary are highlighted

· A Limitations section of not more than five pages that addresses issues that constrain or knowledge or the generalizability of the research findings

· A Conclusion or Discussion section of no more than three pages

· Tables included in reports should utilize a cell suppression standard where values between 1 and 4 are suppressed unless the MGC develops superseding standards

· The report of the economic impacts should include measurements of the social determinants of health, such as employment, income, education and housing, as well as understanding of the interaction between gambling and problem gambling and these determinants.

· Deliverables should be delivered on a bi-annual to annual basis.

4.4 Coordination and Data sharing with other MGC research

Ownership of data derived from the research shall be the exclusive property of the MGC. The MGC intends for this data to be widely available for use across MGC research initiatives and other research conducted in the interest of the MGC.

The MGC shall be the custodian and will respond to requests for data including public records requests. The vendor selected from this RFR should account for time to accomplish this level of coordination when planning.

4.5 Community Engagement

The research should be envisioned as part of the Commission’s efforts to engage communities regarding the social and economic impacts of gambling, especially those communities most directly impacted by the expansion of gambling in Massachusetts. To that end, researchers should incorporate community engagement in order to generate research that best equips host and surrounding communities and at-risk population groups to understand the social and economic impacts of casinos in their communities and develop policies and programs that maximize benefits while minimizing negative impacts.

The term “community-engaged research” (CER) is the term selected by MGC for its emphasis on engaging the community, while allowing for a range of methods, relationships and roles within a collaborative framework.

Some examples of community engagement include:

· Outreach to community groups and at-risk population groups to explain the goals of the research

· Outreach to community groups and at-risk population groups to explain the findings of the research before they are released to the public

· Inclusion of survey questions of interest to the host of surrounding communities

· Inclusion of a community response section in reports to the MGC

· Inclusion of a community advisory board or other groups to solicit community input into the overall planning and implementation of statewide as well as targeted surveys Additionally, the MGC will fund a separate program for community driven research initiatives. The research plan should include ways to both honor the principles of CER, and to connect with these community-engaged research projects and teams in order to maximize and coordinate research efforts.

Community partnerships and community involvement are important considerations in the applicant’s response.

4.6 Knowledge Translation

Knowledge translation (KT) is one term used to describe the process of putting research findings to practical use. Terms such as implementation science, knowledge mobilization, translational research and research utilization are used to describe similar approaches. These concepts refer to the process and steps needed to ensure that new research findings are made known to the right people and used to inform the relevant policies, programs and services. The Massachusetts Gaming Commission is committed to fully understand the impacts of expanded gaming in the Commonwealth and to use the principles of KT to ensure the deeper understanding by the broadest audience. Therefore, the research findings should be presented in a way to maximize utility in developing a strategy to minimize gambling-related harm and bring the greatest possible benefit to the people of the Commonwealth. Findings produced through research should:

· Inform how monies from the Public Health Trust Fund (m.g.l. c.23K Section 58) are expended;

· Assist in assessing community-level impacts and inform decisions about expenditures from the Community Mitigation Fund (m.g.l. c.23K Section 61);

· Improve problem gambling prevention;

· Advance the quality, effectiveness and efficacy of treatment of gambling disorders;

· Inform the ongoing MGC research agenda;

· Provide quantitative and qualitative assessments of a broad range of impacts of expanded gaming; and

· Provide all of the stakeholders in Massachusetts with a neutral database for strategic analysis and decision-making.

4.7 Supplier Diversity

Massachusetts Executive Order 524 established a policy to promote the award of state contracts in a manner that develops and strengthens Minority and Women Business Enterprises (M/WBEs) that resulted in the Supplier Diversity Program in Public Contracting. M/WBEs are strongly encouraged to submit responses to this RFR, either as prime vendors, joint venture partners or other type of business partnerships. All bidders must follow the requirements set forth in the SDP section of the RFR, which will detail the specific requirements relating to the prime vendor’s inclusion of M/WBEs. Bidders are required to develop creative initiatives to help foster new business relationships with M/WBEs within the primary industries affected by this RFR. In order to satisfy the compliance of this section and encourage bidder’s participation of SDP objectives, the Supplier Diversity Program (SDP) Plan for large procurements greater than $150,000 will be evaluated at 10% or more of the total evaluation. Once an SDP Plan is submitted, negotiated and approved, the agency will then monitor the contractor’s performance, and use actual expenditures with SDO certified contractors to fulfill their own SDP expenditure benchmarks. M/WBE participation must be incorporated into and monitored for all types of procurements regardless of size; however, submission of an SDP Plan is mandated only for large procurements over $150,000.

This RFR will contain some or all of the following components as part of the Supplier Diversity Program Plan submitted by bidders:

· Sub-contracting with certified M/WBE firms as defined within the scope of the RFR,

· Ancillary use of certified M/WBE firms,

· Growth and Development activities to increase M/WBE capacity.

A Minority Business Enterprise (MBE), Woman Business Enterprise (WBE), M/Non-Profit, or W/Non-Profit, is defined as such by the Supplier Diversity Office (SDO). All certified businesses that are included in the bidder’s SDP proposal are required to submit an up to date copy of their SDO certification letter. The purpose for this certification is to participate in the Commonwealth’s Supplier Diversity Program for public contracting. Minority- and Women-Owned firms that are not currently certified but would like to be considered as an M/WBE for the purpose of this RFR should submit their application at least two weeks prior to the RFR closing date and submit proof of documentation of application for consideration with their bid proposal. For further information on SDO certification, contact their office at (617) 502-8851 or via the Internet at mass.MGC/SDO.

Supplier Diversity Program Subcontracting Policies. Prior approval of the agency is required for any subcontracted service of the contract. Agencies may define required deliverables including, but not limited to, documentation necessary to verify subcontractor commitments and expenditures with M/WBEs for the purpose of monitoring and enforcing compliance of subcontracting commitments made in a bidder’s SDP Plan. Contractors are responsible for the satisfactory performance and adequate oversight of their subcontractors.

Section 5 Response Requirements Provide a single PDF electronic copy of the technical proposal in electronic form. The technical proposal must include the following elements:

· Separate cover letter or transmittal letter (1 page)

· 2 pages maximum summary statement describing the composition of the research team and qualifications to carry out the research project. The applicant may include 2-page maximum for CVs (suggest using condensed Biosketch style ~2 pages each)

· 20 pages maximum for each section (i.e., Social and Economic)

· 40 pages of appendices allowed

· 3 pages maximum plan for community engagement

· 3 pages maximum plan to use the principles of knowledge translation to ensure the deeper understanding by the broadest audience.

· Supplier Diversity Program (Appendix B)

Provide a single PDF electronic copy of the financial proposal in electronic form. The financial proposal must include a budget summary and narrative to support proposed costs (no page restriction)

Response should be single-spaced with 1-inch margins and use 12-point Times New Roman type font. Provide a single PDF electronic copy of the financial proposal in electronic form

Appendix A

Section 71. The commission, with the advice of the gaming policy advisory committee, shall develop an annual research agenda in order to understand the social and economic effects of expanding gaming in the commonwealth and to obtain scientific information relative to the neuroscience, psychology, sociology, epidemiology and etiology of gambling. The secretary of health and human services, with the advice and consent of the commission, may expend funds from the Public Health Trust Fund established in section 58 to implement the objectives of the research agenda which shall include, but not be limited to:

(1) a baseline study of the existing occurrence of problem gambling in the commonwealth; provided, however, that the study shall examine and describe the existing levels of problem gambling and the existing programs available that prevent and address the harmful consequences of problem gambling; provided further, that the commission shall contract with scientists and physicians to examine the current research as to the causes for problem gambling and the health effects of problem gambling and the treatment methods currently available in the commonwealth; provided further, that the commission shall report on the findings of the baseline study and provide recommendations to the house and senate committees on ways and means, the joint committee on economic development and emerging technologies, the joint committee on mental health and substance abuse and the joint committee on public health relative to methods to supplement or improve problem gambling prevention and treatment services;

(2) comprehensive legal and factual studies of the social and economic impacts of gambling in the commonwealth on: (a) state, local and Indian tribal governments; and (b) communities and social institutions generally, including individuals, families and businesses within such communities and institutions; provided, however, that the matters to be examined in such studies shall include, but not be limited to:

(i) a review of existing federal, state, local and Indian tribal government policies and practices with respect to the legalization or prohibition of gambling, including a review of the costs of such policies and practices;

(ii) an assessment of the relationship between gambling and levels of crime and of existing enforcement and regulatory practices intended to address any such relationship;

(iii) an assessment of pathological or problem gambling, including its impact on individuals, families, businesses, social institutions and the economy;

(iv) an assessment of the impact of gambling on individuals, families, businesses, social institutions and the economy generally, including the role of advertising in promoting gambling and the impact of gambling on depressed economic areas;

(v) an assessment of the extent to which gaming has provided revenues to other state, local and Indian tribal governments;

(vi) an assessment of the costs of added infrastructure, police force, increased unemployment, increased health care and dependency on public assistance;

(vii) an assessment of the impact of the development and operation of the gaming establishment on small businesses in host communities and surrounding communities, including a review of any economic harm experienced and potential solutions to mitigate associated economic harm; and

(viii) the costs of implementing this chapter.

(3) individual studies conducted by academic institutions and individual researchers in the commonwealth to study topics which shall include, but not be limited to: (i) reward and aversion, neuroimaging and neuroscience in humans, addiction phenotype genotype research, gambling-based experimental psychology and mathematical modeling of reward-based decision making; (ii) the sociology and psychology of gambling behavior, gambling technology and marketing; and (iii) the epidemiology and etiology of gambling and problem gambling in the general population; provided, however, that when contracting with researchers to study such issues, the commission shall encourage the collaboration among researchers in the commonwealth and other states and jurisdictions.

The commission and the committee shall annually make scientifically-based recommendations which reflect the results of this research to the house and senate committees on ways and means, the joint committee on economic development and emerging technologies, the joint committee on mental health and substance abuse and the joint committee on public health. The commission shall consider any such recommendations, research and findings in all decisions related to enhancing responsible gambling and mitigating problem gambling.

Appendix B

Supplier Diversity Program (SDP) Plan Commitment SDP Plan Form #1 (To be submitted with Bid Response)

Contract/RFR Document Number:

Instructions: Completing all parts of this form is mandatory. Please read instructions in the SDP section of the solicitation. Complete one form and submit with Bid.

Part I Bidder/Contractor Information (Required)

Business Name:

Contact Name:

Part II Financial Commitment (Required)

Provide a specific percentage committed (as a percentage of Bidder/Contractor sales derived from this contract for the life of the contract) to be spent with all certified SDP Partners that the Bidder will propose if awarded a Contract. Please note that prime bidders who are SDO-certified must also submit an SDP Plan Form.

Supplier Diversity Program (SDP) Resources:

· Resources available to assist Prime Bidders in finding potential Minority Business Enterprises (MBE) and Women Business Enterprises (WBE) partners can be found on the Supplier Diversity Program Webpage (www.mass.gov/sdp).

· Resources available to assist Prime Bidders in finding potential Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Business Enterprise (SDVOBE) partners can be found on the Supplier Diversity Office Webpage (www.mass.gov/sdo).

· The Supplier Diversity Program offers training on the SDP Plan requirements. The dates of upcoming trainings can be found on the OSD Training & Outreach Webpage. In addition, the SDP Webinar can be located on the Supplier Diversity Program Webpage (www.mass.gov/sdp).

Appendix C

Scoring

Social Impacts Research Strategy

20%

Economic Impacts Research Strategy

20%

Plan for Knowledge Translation

5%

Technical sub-Total