In a recent post on its website, the AGCO noted that its regulatory model places accountability on operators to actively shield players from gambling-related harm. The agency said its guidance helps clarify its expectations of operators in meeting their regulatory expectations.
In the updated guidance, the AGCO stressed that, based on players’ risk profiles, operators are required to intervene in timely fashion and in a manner that is commensurate with the level of risk and likely to have the desired effect of reducing that player’s risk of harm.
How to identify players who may be experiencing harm
In its guidance for Standard 2.10, the AGCO emphasizes that operators must have an effective mechanism for monitoring player behaviour and proactively identifying those who may be at risk of harm, enabling timely support once signs of risk emerge. The mechanism should address the different ways in which gambling-related harm can occur and draw on all available data sources to assess risk on a player-by-player basis.
The AGCO expects operators to use both automated and manual tools to monitor players’ behaviour and to utilize available information from various sources to effectively identify indicators such as:
Chasing losses, playing multiple products, choosing higher-risk products or erratic betting patterns.
Amounts wagered and lost
“Binge” gambling, changes in session duration or time-of-play patterns or late-night gambling
Failed deposits, cancelled withdrawals, higher-risk forms of payment or multiple payment methods
Expressions of financial or emotional distress, use of keywords associated with harm or indicators of vulnerability such as bereavement or job loss
Refusal to use tools after operator intervention, frequent increases or removals of bet limits, repeated use of play break tools or previous use of self-exclusion
In addition, operators are expected to regularly assess and evaluate the effectiveness of risk monitoring methods to ensure that players at risk of experiencing harm are accurately identified, as well as to promptly to correct and improve methods.
The AGCO specifically notes that having effective systems and processes in place to continually monitor, identify and promptly address high-risk player activity is important for operators that contract with one or more third-party providers.
How to help those in need
Meanwhile, the AGCO’s guidance for Standard 2.11 concerns helping gamblers who may be experiencing harm once they have been identified.
Operators should use tools to immediately identify potential player harm, intervene according to the severity of the situation, provide support for all players who may be at risk of experiencing harm, not just those already identified as high-risk and use technology to scale tailor interventions to more players, rather than relying solely on individual interactions for only highest-risk players.
The AGCO lists several examples of current practices for tailored and escalating interventions, including:
Interacting with a player to help inform the player’s risk profile
Conducting player self-assessment surveys
Sending reminder emails highlighting available resources, support services and responsible gambling tools
Personalizing communications of potential responsible gambling concerns identified by the operator through channels such as phone calls, email alerts or interactive nudges and pop-ups
Requiring active acknowledgement or response from the player
Providing players with information about their play, such as the duration of their play session since the last break
Restricting gameplay through measures such as operator-imposed breaks and limit-setting, or suspending or closing accounts
Following the execution of each intervention, operators are expected to take the necessary steps to assess the impact on the player’s behaviour and whether evidence of potential harm persists that necessitates further action, as well as to proactively and carefully monitor new players to identify early signs of concerning behaviour and provide immediate assistance.
The AGCO also stresses the importance of employee training, documentation of such training and continuous assessment in upholding these standards.
“We recognize that the ongoing evaluation of these expectations may indicate the need for adjustments to AGCO’s guidance,” adds the regulator. “As operators uncover such insights, we encourage open information sharing with AGCO to support future updates.”
