4. Will the 'Needs and Barriers' assessment specifically weigh the climate resilience of transportation modes—specifically their ability to operate during extreme weather events like the 2015 Boston snowfalls?
Climate resilience may be used as a point of discussion throughout engagement with stakeholders and may be identified as a barrier to accessing clean transportation.
5. Will the consultant be able to use the MassCEC website to post assessment-related information, or should we consider developing a separate project site?
Yes, the Consultant will be able to use the MassCEC website for Assessment-related content.
6. Is MassCEC interested in understanding how regional barriers and needs compare with those of other States and/or regions?
MassCEC is primarily interested in needs and barriers specific to Burdened Areas in Massachusetts.
CBO Partners and RFI
7. Would it be possible to share the CBO RFI? So we can understand in our planning 1) the types of organizations who might be applying and 2) their expectations around compensation.
MassCEC anticipates releasing the RFI after the close of this RFP; respondents will be shared with the awarded Applicant. MassCEC aims to take an intersectional approach and welcomes any nonprofit/CBO that serves Burdened Areas to respond to the RFI regardless of focus area (not just clean energy or transportation). Compensation will be up to the Applicant to propose potential rates, but specific instances where compensation will likely be needed could include CBOs hosting events or focus groups, CBOs using staff time to give feedback or review engagement/educational/final materials, CBOs distributing materials and recruiting participants for surveys/focus groups, and participation stipends for attendees of focus groups.
8. Will MassCEC allow the selected consultant to make adjustments to its proposed scope and task-level budgets based on the capabilities of the CBOs that respond to the RFI?
Yes, the Consultant will be able to make adjustments during contract negotiations.
9. If MassCEC receives no responses to the RFI from CBOs from one or more MA regions, is the consultant expected to independently recruit additional CBOs?
Yes; in this scenario, MassCEC will also be able to support with identification of CBO partners.
10. Can MassCEC please elaborate on how the selection process for CBOs that respond to the RFI will work? Will selections be made collaboratively between the consultant and MassCEC?
The CBO selection process will depend on the volume of responses to the RFI, but will be done collaboratively. The selected Consultant will work with MassCEC to develop a process for bringing on CBOs in different capacities. Please see Tasks 2B-2C in the RFP.
11. Does MassCEC have any precedent for a similar engagement in which the consultant pays CBOs for their participation in the project? If yes, can you share the project information and the payment rates established? If no, has a specific rate schedule been contemplated by MassCEC?
MassCEC does not have prior rate schedules to share at this time. Please see Question 7 for information on what types of activities will likely be compensated under the Assessment.
12. Does MassCEC have guidance on the anticipated number of CBO partners?
MassCEC expects at least 6 CBO partners to be heavily engaged (e.g. hosting events/focus groups, conducting robust recruitment, directly providing feedback to the Consultant, etc.), with approximately 10-20 more engaged at a lighter, low/no compensation capacity (e.g. participating in focus groups, distributing information to community members through newsletters, etc.).
13. Can you share how the RFIs for CBOs will be distributed?
The RFI will be shared via email through MassCEC's mailing list, as well as through state partners and existing CBOs/nonprofits in MassCEC's network who can share with their own networks.
14. Should applicants plan to work with all CBOs identified through the RFI, or is it acceptable to select a subset and engage them at different levels based on their roles and capacity?
Ideally, MassCEC would like to engage all respondents, but depending on the volume of responses received, MassCEC will work with the Consultant to establish a process for selecting a subset. Applicants should note that not all CBOs will require compensation depending on roles and capacity.
15. The RFP page states that MassCEC will release a separate RFI in May 2026 for CBOs interested in partnering on this Initiative. In light of that RFI, should applicants refrain from recruiting or naming CBO partners before award, and instead describe a proposed method for identifying, selecting, contracting with, and compensating CBOs after award? How should applicants balance named consultant/subcontractor team members with CBO partners that may be identified through the RFI process?
Yes, Applicants should refrain from identifying CBOs who are intended to fill the role of conducting outreach and representing each MA region in their application; this process will be completed through the forthcoming RFI. That said, CBOs are eligible Applicant partners if they are filling alternative roles such as translation, development of educational materials, coordination with CBOs identified through the RFI.
16. Would MassCEC welcome an approach that begins by reviewing and synthesizing prior public engagement records, comments, survey responses, working group materials, listening sessions, grant applications, and reports from MassCEC, EEA, MassDOT, DOER, DPU, utilities, regional planning agencies, and related proceedings, before conducting new direct engagement with CBOs and residents? Are there particular prior planning or engagement processes MassCEC expects the consultant to review?
MassCEC would welcome this approach in an application, but has not identified specific content that Applicants should review.
Assessment Design
17. For Task 2A: can you please share the number of onboarding calls that are expected of this task?
MassCEC expects to need about 3-4 calls for onboarding.
18. Are you able to provide more details on what a Theory of Change deliverable is? In the webinar recording, it included this description: "This will culminate in a high-level theory of change that the consultant will produce. It's really just a gut check for us...if you understand our programming, do you understand the goals of this program, the assessment itself and where we're trying to go in the future." Is there anything more concrete that you're willing to provide regarding this deliverable?
MassCEC does not have a preferred Theory of Change template and encourages the applicant to recommend a Theory of Change template that works best for capturing MassCEC's transportation equity programs.
19. Does MassCEC see value in the selected consultant reviewing prior MassCEC clean transportation programs, including ACTNow, ACT4All, e-bike-related programs, Mass Fleet Advisor, or other relevant grant applications, reports, deliverables, and closeout materials, to understand what models worked, what barriers emerged, and what lessons should inform future programming? If so, what materials would MassCEC expect to make available to the selected consultant?
Yes: MassCEC expects to provide the selected Consultant with past RFPs, award decision documents and memos, and reports/final deliverables.
Outreach and Engagement
20. Do you have a goal for total individuals engaged?
MassCEC does not currently have a numeric goal for engagement; the primary goal is to achieve a geographic spread across the six (6) regions of Massachusetts and engage a wide range of Burdened Areas for feedback. Applicants are welcome to propose potential goals/metrics for engagement.
21. Within the communities defined by the Burdened Areas across the 6 MA regions, are there specific audience groups (demographic or psychographic) that are of especially high priority and interest for engagement to the MassCEC?
MassCEC is particularly interested in income-eligible communities per the Burdened Areas criteria, but is open to approaches that use any combination of characteristics/eligibility criteria under the Burdened Areas umbrella.
22. One of the groups referred to as part of the CECP is "neighborhoods with high percentages of residents with limited English proficiency." Given the current anxiety in these communities of government agencies and those working with them, what has been MassCEC's approach for engaging with them (including for the RFI)?
MassCEC is cognizant of potential anxiety around working with government agencies, which has been identified through other outreach initiatives as well. Our approach has been to engage through trusted organizations and community partners. We encourage Applicants to propose approaches for stakeholders with different barriers to engagement.
23. Has MassCEC developed educational resources for this type of outreach in the past and if so, will it be available to the selected team to build on for this effort?
MassCEC has developed educational content on clean transportation through its Clean Energy Lives Here and EV Webpages initiatives (see here for the commercial/dealer/resident-directed EV Webpages); however, these initiatives have not specifically been targeted at Burdened Areas. Applicants are welcome to use these resources in the development of educational content.
24. Can MassCEC provide guidance on the expected scale of engagement (e.g., approximate targets for number of surveys, interviews, and focus groups per region) to ensure our proposal is appropriately scoped?
Please refer to Question 20.
25. How should applicants balance broad, representative engagement across regions with deeper, more intensive engagement in specific communities or populations?
MassCEC aims to achieve both types of engagement through this Assessment through the use of mixed engagement methods; e.g., a survey could be distributed more broadly for wider geographic coverage, while a focus group could more accurately capture feedback for a specific community. Applicants should propose various engagement methods that balance these approaches.
26. What expectations does MassCEC have for participant support (for example stipends, childcare, transportation, and language access), and should applicants assume these costs will be managed directly by the consultant team or in partnership with CBOs?
Participant support needs will vary depending on the CBOs onboarded and the communities that they serve and can be provided by either the Consultant or CBO depending on their capacity. The selected Consultant will use responses to the RFI to determine what this approach will look like for each CBO.
Development of Draft and Final Findings
27. What level of structure and rigor is MassCEC expecting for data synthesis (for example, formal coding frameworks, cross-regional comparisons, or demographic segmentation) to ensure findings are actionable and consistent?
MassCEC anticipates the Consultant will complete coding of qualitative data to identify relevant themes and findings using a grounded or “bottom-up” coding approach. MassCEC is also interested in cross-regional comparisons to ensure findings are relevant for different geographic regions.
28. Should final deliverables be designed primarily for internal use by MassCEC and state partners, or for broader external audiences, and what level of polish and accessibility is expected?
Final deliverables should primarily be designed for use by MassCEC, but will likely be made available publicly, and thus should be polished and written accessibly for a public audience.
29. Should the Assessment seek to document transportation needs and barriers broadly, including issues outside MassCEC’s direct authority such as transit service, land use, roadway safety, and affordability, or should it prioritize needs and barriers that MassCEC clean transportation programming could realistically help address? Would MassCEC value an approach that distinguishes between broader systemic transportation burdens and specific MassCEC-actionable program opportunities?
Final needs and barriers should primarily be within MassCEC’s jurisdiction and addressable through the types of programming MassCEC implements; however, if transportation needs and barriers outside of its scope are commonly discussed, MassCEC would like these trends to be collected and identified. MassCEC is open to an approach that distinguishes the two types of needs/barriers.
Budget
30. Will the CBO compensation come from the consultant RFP budget or another source?
Yes: the $300k allocated to this Assessment is intended to cover both Consultant costs and CBO compensation.
31. Does the CEC have an idea of the value of the budget % going to the CBOs?
The amount of the budget allocated to CBO compensation is up to the Applicant to propose; please refer to Question 7 for information on what types of activities should be compensated under the Assessment. MassCEC expects CBOs to be compensated at market rate for their work under the Assessment.
Timeline
32. Is there a desired number of months or a target date for completion of the assessment?
No hard target is set for the duration or completion of the Assessment, as MassCEC wants to ensure enough time is allocated to conduct robust engagement; MassCEC estimates that the Assessment should be completed by the end of 2027.
Eligibility/Applicant Team
33. Would the selected team be eligible for future MassCEC/ACT4All work as an outcome of this?
Yes; future MassCEC/ACT4All work will be conducted through separate, competitive solicitations, thus the selected Consultant/Team will still be eligible.
34. Will conducting this needs and barriers assessment prevent consultants from bidding on or implementing future clean transportation programs that this assessment may inform?
Please refer to Question 33.
Application
35. Do the cover page and table of contents count towards the 20-page limit for proposal?
The cover page and table of contents do not count towards the page limit.
36. There is no page limit for the References section of the proposal - do references count toward the 20-page limit?
No; references should only consist of the reference’s name and contact information, and thus MassCEC anticipates they will take up about a page in an application, but they don’t count towards the limit.
37. How do you prefer bidders submit recommendation letters?
If Applicants would like to submit supplementary recommendation letters, they may include them in a separate PDF document attached to the application email.
