THIS IS AN NOTICE TO CLARIFY THE BELOW PRESOLICITATION NOTICE PRESOLICITATION NOTICE The Department of Veterans Affairs, Network Contracting Office 4, Lebanon VA Medical Center will be soliciting a Request for Proposal (RFP) in accordance with Revolutionary Federal Acquisition Regulations Overhaul (RFO) 36 to request for Architectural and Engineering Firm s SF330 s for the following project: Lebanon Master Plan 2026 for Architectural and Engineering Design Services to 1700 S Lincoln Ave, Lebanon, PA 17042. NAICS: 541330 Architectural Services SMALL BUSINESS SIZE STANDARD: $25.5 million PRODUCT/SERVICE CODE: C1DA Architect and Engineering Construction: Hospitals and Infirmaries PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Lebanon VA Medical Center is seeking professional architect/engineering firms, AE shall provide all necessary architectural and engineering services as required to develop the overall strategy to meet the scope and achieve the goals of the master plan for the Lebanon VA Medical Center. The consultant will review information provided by the VA, such as but not limited to, population demographics, penetration rates, productivity measures, projected growth, current health care delivery systems, patient demographics, physical structures, strategic and operational plans, etc. to develop a clinical service delivery and master plan. The Period of Performance is 365 Calendar Days. SET-ASIDE: This requirement is a 100% set-aside for Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) concerns under the authority of 38 U.S.C §8127 (d). Only those SDVOSB s listed and viewable in the SAM.gov database located at https://sam.gov/. The database will be checked at the time of offer submission as well as prior to award. All offers must also have an active listing in the System for Award Management (SAM) database https://sam.gov/. The awarded contractor must also submit evidence of enrollment with VETS4212. THIS ANNOUNCEMENT IS NOT A REQUEST FOR AN AE FEE PROPOSAL. NO FEE PROPOSAL SHALL BE NEEDED UNTIL AFTER EVALUATIONS HAS BEEN MADE ON THE PROVIDED SF330 AND THE TOP-RATED FIRM SELECTED. ONLY THE AE FIRMS RESPONDING TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT BY SUBMITTING AN SF330 PACKAGE ON TIME WILL BE CONSIDERED FOR INITIAL EVALUATION. FOLLOWING INITIAL EVALUATION OF THE AE FIRMS AND THEIR SF330S, A SOLICITATION FOR A PRICE PROPOSAL WILL BE SENT TO THE HIGHEST TECHNICALLY RATED AE FIRM TO PROVIDE THE TYPE OF SERVICE(S) REQUIRED. Interested firms should submit their current SF330 to kaitlyn.szlachta@va.gov and elijah.mcintosh@va.gov. The SF330s are due on Wednesday, December 17, 2025, at 4:00 PM Eastern Time via email. See Electronic Submission Requirements for instructions on submitting your SF330. The selection of the most qualified contractor will follow the guidance provided in FAR Part 36.102 Architect-Engineer Services, except as provided in FAR Part 36.202-4 Short Selection Process for Contracts Not to Exceed the Simplified Acquisition threshold. The Government will not pay, nor reimburse, any costs associated with responding to this request. The Government is under no obligation to award a contract as a result of this announcement. Firms will be selected based on demonstrated competence and qualifications for the required work. Important Notice: Apparent successful offerors must be registered in the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) site at the time of submission of proposal. Failure to be both VERIFIED by the SBA and VISIBLE at the time of proposal submission, time of interview, and at time of award will result in the offeror s proposal being deemed non-responsive. All offerors are urged to contact the SBA DSBS (https://dsbs.sba.gov/search/dsp_dsbs.cfm) and submit the required documents to obtain verification of their SDVOSB status if they have not already done so. Contract Award Procedure: Before a small business is proposed as a potential contractor, they must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM) website located at https://sam.gov. Failure of a proposed SDVOSB to be VERIFIED by SBA and VISIBLE in SBA DBSB and registered in SAM at the time the SF330 is submitted shall result in elimination from consideration as a proposed contractor. The proposed services will be obtained by a Negotiated Firm-Fixed Price Contract. The review/design of architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, civil, or other engineering features of the work shall be accomplished by architects or engineers registered in a State or possession of the United States, or in Puerto Rico or in the District of Columbia. The project drawings/design shall follow applicable standards and codes described in VA Program Guides and design materials. Master Construction Specifications Index, VA Construction Standards Index, VA Standards Index, and Criteria are available in the Technical Information Library (TIL) on VA Website address: http://www.cfm.va.gov/til/. The submitted SF330s will be evaluated with the following five (5) criteria. Then a minimum of three (3) of the most highly qualified firms will be selected to hold discussions regarding concepts and relative utility of alternative methods of furnishing the required services. A fee proposal will be requested from the top-rated firm chosen. 1. The initial evaluation of the packages should determine which firms are the most highly qualified firms. The Selection Board shall produce a list in the order of preference with a narrative explanation supporting the order of preference. Where firms are rated the same adjective, credence will be given to the descending order of importance. The Source Selection Authority will then select no less than two but no more than five firms for interviews, unless a logical break in the rankings occur. For example, if six firms are rated GOOD, the sixth firm will be given an interview. Upon completion of interviews, the Selection Board will then rank the interviewed firms from most highly qualified to least highly qualified. Negotiations will begin with the most highly qualified firm. 2. The Professional Qualification, Specialized Experience and Past Performance factors are significantly more important than the other two factors which are listed in descending order of importance. 3. Recency/Relevance: Evaluators will grade the ten projects that the firms submitted in part F of the SF Form 330. If a firm submitted more than ten projects, only the first ten shall be evaluated, the additional projects shall be ignored. Each of the ten projects will be assigned a grade of relevant if the project s professional services completion year (F25) is within the past five years AND the evaluator believes that the project is similar in size and scope to the statement of work for this solicitation. A project that is only partially similar in size and scope AND has been completed in the past eight years may received a grade of somewhat relevant . A project that is not similar in size and scope OR has not been completed in the last eight years will be assigned a grade of not relevant . Relevancy is a judgement call made by the evaluator. Typical items that influence the relevancy decision include function (exact, similar, not-similar), size/purpose, and new construction vs renovation. 4. FACTOR 1: Professional Qualifications necessary for satisfactory performance of required services: This is intended to evaluate the personal experience and qualifications of firm members who work in the firm's project office and are scheduled to be assigned to the design team and who are listed in section E. a. The number of key positions will vary based on the scope of work of the project. Key positions include Project Manager(s), Quality Assurance, and technical staff that are important to the successful outcome of the project. A complex multi-disciplined project may have many key technical staff, including Architects, Civil Engineers, Electrical Engineers, Environmental Engineers, Fire Protection Engineers, Health Care Planners, Interior Designers, Mechanical Engineers, Structural Engineers and Surveyors. A simpler parking lot project may only have Civil Engineers and Surveyors as key technical staff although all assigned personnel are required to be qualified to practice in their field. b. Of the personnel listed in section E, each board member shall determine which individuals are actually key individuals. c. For an individual in a key position to count as experienced, they must have experience in relevant projects as documented in Sections E or F/G, and they must have the appropriate professional qualifications for their role. i. All lead engineers must have a Professional Engineers license (PE) (per Federal Law, they do not need to be licensed in PA, just in one of the 54 states or territories as we are not in PA). Best approach is to have at least one PE per discipline ii. Lead Architect must be a registered architect, this is normally indicated by NCARB, RA or AIA. Associate AIA are not registered and therefore do not count. iii. Interior Designer registration is preferred (NCIDQ) iv. Surveyors must be licensed (PLS) v. Other qualifications include (each board member shall determine the requirement for and relevancy of additional credentials) 1. Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LED AP or LEED AP BD+C) 2. Project Management Professional (PMP, PgMP) 3. Constructions Specifications Institute (CSI, CCS, CCCA, CDT) 4. Other industry qualifications d. Determination of what personnel are sub-contractor personnel and what personnel are in branch offices versus the main office shall be made based on Section C and D, and Part II e. The larger proportion of key personnel who have the required experience/qualifications and work for the Prime Contractor, the higher the grade as shown on the chart below. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions do not appear to have any experience in designing the type of facilities and systems anticipated in this contract or, none of the key personnel listed appear to work in the firm s designated project office. MARGINAL The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience on one or fewer of the type anticipated in this contract ACCEPTABLE The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience on one to three projects of the type anticipated in this contract or at least four of the key personnel are subcontractor personnel GOOD The majority of personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience on at least three projects of the type anticipated in this contract or any of the key personnel are subcontractor personnel OUTSTANDING All personnel assigned to the key positions appear to have experience with more than three projects of the type anticipated in this contract and are employees of the prime A-E firm. 5. FACTOR 2: Specialized Experience and Technical Competence in the type of work required. This factor evaluates the experience of the firm in completing projects relevant to this contract. a. Firms provided sample projects as part of section F. Each board member determines which projects are relevant, some what relevant and not relevant. b. Extra consideration may be given for experience designing projects for Department of Veterans Affairs Facilities. c. For a project to count as relevant for this section, the offeror must have completed the project as the prime contractor. Projects completed by the firm as a sub-contractor or projects completed by key personnel while employed by another firm are not relevant for this section. d. Board members may use their judgement in providing some credit for projects that are only somewhat relevant but must be consistent. e. The more projects that the firm has completed, the higher the grade as shown below. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE The firm does not have experience completing any projects of the type anticipated for this contract MARGINAL The firm's experience completing projects of the type anticipated for this contract is limited to one project or only projects that do not include a majority of the skills required ACCEPTABLE The firm has experience completing at least two projects of the type anticipated for this contract or primarily projects that do not include the majority of the skills required GOOD The firm has experience completing at least four projects of the type anticipated for this contract or includes projects that do not include the majority of the skills required OUTSTANDING The firm has experience completing at least six projects of the type anticipated for this contract including the majority of the skills required 6. FACTOR 3: Past performance on contracts with Government agencies (Particularly Department of Veterans Affairs) and private industry in terms of cost control, quality of work and compliance with performance schedules. a. Sources of past performance information include CPARS and personal knowledge. b. The VA is solely responsible for accessing CPARS data. c. Board members may give as much weight to contractor provided performance data as they feel appropriate. This data, when provided, is in section H. d. The more favorable the information, the higher the grade as shown below. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE Past performance evaluation reports indicate significant negative information or board members have firsthand knowledge of significant poor performance MARGINAL Past performance evaluation reports indicate minor negative information or board members have firsthand knowledge of minor poor performance ACCEPTABLE Past performance evaluation reports contain some favorable information with few instances of unfavorable information or board members have predominantly favorable firsthand knowledge of past performance GOOD Past performance evaluation reports contain several instances of favorable information or board members have firsthand knowledge of several instances of favorable past performance with few to no instances of negative past performance. OUTSTANDING Past performance evaluation reports indicate multiple instances of favorable information or board members have firsthand knowledge of multiple instances of favorable past performance. No negative past performance information was found If there is no CPARS data available, Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) will be accepted. Please utilize the attached PPQ document. Complete PPQs should be incorporated into the SF330 directly. The PPQs will be counted towards the page limitations for this submission. 7. FACTOR 4: Capacity to accomplish the work in the required time: this factor evaluates the ability of the A-E firm, given their current projected workload and the availability of their key personnel, to accomplish the project in the required time. a. Each A/E firm should address their capacity in part H. This is typically expressed as a firm having a percentage of their resources available for additional work. b. A firm whose part II section 11 shows a large revenue number likely needs a lower percent capacity in order to perform our project then a firm with a small revenue number. Typically, a design firm will bill 70% of the design fee over the first year and then 30% over the next two years. c. Rating a firm to have unacceptable capacity requires positive knowledge that they are unable to perform or have had substantial difficulty performing in the past. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE The firm's past history or current/projected work load indicates that the firm does not have the capacity to accomplish work in accordance with standard design schedules ACCEPTABLE The firm's past history indicates problems with meeting schedules but the current/projected workload indicates that the firm should have the capacity to accomplish the work in accordance with the standard design schedules OUTSTANDING The firm's past and the current/projected workload indicate that the firm has the capacity to accomplish the work in accordance with standard design schedules 8. FACTOR 5: Location in the general geographic area of the project and knowledge of the locality of the project: This factor evaluates the distance from the A-E firms design office from the location of work (Lebanon VA Medical Center). The personnel identified as the design team staff are expected to work in the design office identified for evaluation of this factor. a. Distance shall be measured from the Lebanon VA Medical Center, Lebanon, PA b. Sections C, D, E and Part II shall be used to determine what project office the majority of key personnel are operating from. Adjectival Rating Definition UNACCEPTABLE Majority of key personnel and designated project office are over 400 miles from the project location ACCEPTABLE Majority of key personnel and designated project office are between 200 and 400 miles from the project location OUTSTANDING Majority of key personnel and designated project office are less than 200 miles from the project location The awarded AE firm will prepare drawings and specifications in enough detail such that qualified outside General Contracting companies can prepare accurate and timely proposals for the desired work. The awarded AE firm is responsible for ensuring that the specifications and drawings supplied fully represent all the work described in the Request for Proposal (RFP). The Medical Center must remain operational throughout the construction period and a detailed sequence of work will be provided by the AE to minimize impact of the construction. The SF330 can be downloaded through the GSA Forms Library at: https://www.gsa.gov/portal/forms/type/TOP, type in SF330 in the Find a Form block and click on search. No contract for the construction of a project shall be awarded to the firm that designed the project or its subsidiaries or affiliates, except with the approval of the head of the agency or authorized representative. ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS: Unless paper offers are specifically authorized in an individual solicitation, all responses to solicitations must be submitted electronically as described below. Responses submitted in a paper form are unacceptable and will be returned. Failure to comply with this requirement may jeopardize the possibility of receiving an award for the contract due to noncompliance with the terms of the solicitation. You must submit your electronic offer, and any supplemental information (such as spreadsheets, backup data, technical information), using any of the electronic formats and media described below. In addition, contractors are notified of the award via an electronic Notice of Award e-mail. The award document will be attached to the Notice of Award e-mail. Acceptable Electronic Formats (Software) for Submission of Offers: Files readable using the current Microsoft* Office version Products: Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Please see security note below for caution regarding use of macros. When submitting construction drawings contractors are required to submit one set in AutoCAD and one set in Adobe PDF (Portable Document Format) (purpose: contracting can open the PDF version and engineering can open AutoCAD files). Files in Adobe PDF Files: When scanning documents scanner resolution should be set to 200 dots per inch, or greater. Other Electronic Format: If you wish to submit an offer using another format other than described in these instructions, e-mail the Contracting Officer who issued the solicitation. Please submit your request at least ten (10) calendar days before the scheduled closing date of the solicitation. Request a decision as to the format acceptability and make sure you receive approval of the alternate format before using it to send your offer; and please note that we can no longer accept .zip files due to increasing security concerns. E-mail Submission Procedures: For simplicity in this guidance, all submissions in response to a solicitation will be referred to as offers. Subject Line: Include the solicitation number, name of company, and closing date of solicitation. Size: Maximum size of the e-mail message shall not exceed five (5) megabytes. Only one email is permitted unless otherwise stated in this paragraph or in writing by a Contracting Officer. Submitted SF330 s are not to exceed a total of fifty (50) pages INCLUDING cover page and any other submitted documents. The offer will be date and time stamped by the Microsoft Email system and will be the official record of receipt for the submission. SECURITY ISSUES, LATE BIDS, UNREADABLE OFFERS: Late submission of offers is outlined at FAR Parts 52.212-1(c), 52.214-7, and 52.215-1(c). Particular attention is warranted to the portion of the provision that relates to the timing of submission. Please see FAR Part 15.108(c) for a description of the steps the Government shall take regarding unreadable offers. To avoid rejection of an offer, vendors must make every effort to ensure their electronic submission is virus-free. Submissions or portions thereof submitted and which the automatic system detects the presence of a virus, or which are otherwise unreadable will be treated as unreadable pursuant to FAR Parts 14.302 and 15.108(c). The virus scanning software used by our e-mail systems cannot always distinguish a macro from a virus. Therefore, sending a macro embedded in an e-mail message or an e-mail attachment may cause the e-mail offer to be quarantined. You may send both the spreadsheet and the spreadsheet saved in PDF format to ensure that your proposal is readable. Password protecting your offer is not permitted. The Contracting Officer will file the offer electronically which will allow access only by designated individuals.
