Dear Ministry of Health,

I wish to receive information regarding your decision to not renew your contract with the PGF or Problem Gambling Foundation (except their Asian peoples service).

1. What is the names and professional backgrounds of the members of the panel that made the decisions around the proposals which included the PGF's proposal?
2. What is the background of the panel members in terms of treatment of problem gambling?
3. What information did the panel members take into account besides the proposals that the various organisations submitted?
4. I found a document on your website about outcomes for people with gambling problems. Did the panel members compare the typical outcomes of clients in PGF 's service with the Salvation Army? with the other services that put proposals in ? Was there a difference?
5. Did the Ministry of Health provide information on outcomes for problem gambling clients to the panel members to assess the proposals?
6. I found out you have contracted the Auckland University AUT to evaluate your problem gambling services. Has findings from this evaluation been provided to the panel members? if not why not? When did this evaluation start? why did you not finish this evaluation before you made your decision to not renew PGF's contract? why are you evaluating your service if you have already made your decisions about which service you will have a contract with?
7. What were the key reasons why you chose to renew your contract with the Salvation Army but not the PGF?

Yours faithfully,

Mrs J. Simpson
Auckland

Dear Ministry of Health,

Thank you for your reply. I would prefer that you send the documents to me in electronic form.

Yours faithfully,

J Simpson