36C26226Q0286 0003.docx

5. PROJECT NUMBER (if applicable)

CODE

7. ADMINISTERED BY

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NUMBER

CODE

6. ISSUED BY

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NUMBER

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NUMBER

9B. DATED

PAGE OF PAGES

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NUMBER

10B. DATED

BPA NO.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

FACILITY CODE

CODE

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers

E. IMPORTANT:

is extended,

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning __________ copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or electronic communication which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY is not extended.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

(REV. 11/2016)

is required to sign this document and return ___________ copies to the issuing office.

is not, A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO:

Specify authority)

THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

15C. DATE SIGNED

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by letter or electronic communication, provided each letter or electronic communication makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER

Contractor

16C. DATE SIGNED

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

STANDARD FORM 30

PREVIOUS EDITION NOT USABLE

Prescribed by GSA - FAR (48 CFR) 53.243 (Type or print) (Type or print) (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

(Number, street, county, State and ZIP Code) (If other than Item 6) (Specify type of modification and authority) (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.)

(If required)

(SEE ITEM 11)

(SEE ITEM 13)

(X)

CHECK

ONE

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

(Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer) 02-25-2026 644-26-4-223-0020 None 36C262

NCO 22

Department of Veterans Affairs Mesa Annex 4135 S. Power Rd #103 RM 116 Mesa AZ 85212 36C262

NCO 22

Department of Veterans Affairs Mesa Annex 4135 S. Power Rd #103 RM 116 Mesa AZ 85212 To all Offerors/Bidders

36C26226Q0286 01-26-2026

X X X ** HOUR & DATE for Receipt of Offers is EXTENDED to: 03-05-2026 1:00 MST See CONTINUATION Page x The purpose for this amendment is to extend the closing date and to respond to the questions that were received from industry.

All offers are due NLT March 5, 2026, at 1:00 PM MST. Offerors shall be submitted via email to: Felicia Simpson, Contract Specialist at Felicia.Simpson@va.gov.

Contractor shall sign clause 852.219-75 VA NOTICE OF LIMITATIONS ON SUBCONTRACTING-CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE FOR SERVICES AND CONSTRUCTION (JAN 2023) (DEVIATION) pg 33 of the solicitation.

ALL OFFERS SHALL SUBMIT ALL DOCUMENTATION UNDER SECTION E and all AMENDMENTS, failure to provide any required document and acknowledgment of all amendments will result in the offer not being accepted and will not be evaluated.

CONTINUATION PAGE

Question and Answers 36C26226Q0286

1. Is there a desired “Go-Live” date?

ANSWER: January 1, 2027

1. Does the VA currently utilize an existing Computer-Aided Facility Management (CAFM) system? If yes what is the current CAFM system?

ANSWER: No

1. What is the motivation for replacing this system?

ANSWER: No such system is currently implemented, making this the first of its kind to the Carl T Hayden Medical Center.

1. What is the area (sq. ft.) and the number of buildings to be surveyed?

ANSWER: The main medical center and its community-based outpatient clinics estimated square footage is 1.4 million sq. ft.

1. Is there a budget for the new CAFM? Can you release the budget?

ANSWER: There is no budget that we can release for this action. Give an accurate pricing according to industry standards.

1. Does the CAFM PaaS system need to be FedRAMP certified? If yes, at what level?

ANSWER: Yes, and at a level of Moderate to High.

1. What is the form and format of existing asset data to be migrated into the new platform (Work Order information, photos, related data)?

ANSWER: Excel exported from the CAI database Work order form the AEMS-MERS (Vista), pdf’s, jpeg photos, AutoCAD

1. Are there existing workflows that define business processes related to the maintenance of various asset types?

ANSWER: Databased dependent, various.

1. How many assets are managed in the current system?

ANSWER: No current GIS program is online, currently 36 Buildings (assets) managed and could vary over time.

1. How many asset types are included/or will be included in the new system?

ANSWER: 36 Bldgs (assets), currently managed and could vary over time.

1. Does the PVAHCS maintain As-Built drawings for the floor plans? The AS-Builts are maintained by the Phx VA but the requirement is also to inventory the current space to ensure accuracy.

1. Are “As-Buit” CAD drawings available for all floors? Yes

1. Are the drawings Updated and Current in the DWG Format? No

1. Are the current AutoCAD / DWG drawings layers standardized and consistent throughout the drawings to show space and asset locations?

ANSWER: No

1. Are BIM models available for all buildings?

ANSWER: No

1. Is Uniformat II the standard for the FCA data? If not, what standard is used to structure the FCA data?

ANSWER: Not currently standardized please refer to the VA Technical Information Library (TIL) https://www.cfm.va.gov/til/

1. When was the last FCA conducted?

ANSWER: 2023

1. What is the 3D visualization standard format?

ANSWER: Not currently standardized please refer to the VA Technical Information Library (TIL) https://www.cfm.va.gov/til/

1. What PVAHCS business systems would you need the new CAFM to integrate with? Are the integrations bi-directional?

ANSWER: The CAI, SCIP direction databases will be only one direction.

1. What is the current Inventory Management system for supporting Work Orders?

ANSWER: AEMS-MERS (Vista). New system in the near future.

1. Is there any need to integrate the inventory system?

ANSWER: Yes

1. What is the expected (existing) volume of ad-hoc and PM work orders?

ANSWER: The request is not related to equipment management, but more specific to space management.

1. Does the PVAHCS plan to implement new or existing workflows?

ANSWER: N/A, unknown.

1. Does the PVAHCS have an existing library of PM procedures to be loaded into the system? Are they available for all asset classes?

ANSWER: Yes, but it is very outdated. The request is not related to equipment management, but more specific to space management

1. Is on-line training acceptable?

ANSWER: Yes, some facilitation is expected.

1. What is the expected number of users for the CAFM system?

ANSWER: Read only access to all employees, edit access to 30 people or less.

1. Can you provide the expected number of users by User Roles

· System Administrators – Users responsible for System Administration including System configuration, Audits, access control, User ID, and Authorizations etc.

· Primary Named users - with Read / Write privileges to access the entire system, exercise all functional capabilities, retrieve, and update data, and generate reports and analysis.

· Executive users – focused on performance information access, Key performance indicators, dashboards, reports, and analysis.

· Technicians – field maintenance staff

· Requestor / Limited Access Users – Users just submitting and tracking work orders.

ANSWER: System Admin-10, Primarily Users-20, Exec Users-10, and Tech Users-10 Limited read only access users, would be all employees 4k+

28. Are there expectations of reports required by the VA?

ANSWER: The reports should be functional and user friendly for all the end-users

29. Do you have an IT team that will work with the vendor on the ArcGIS Integration?

ANSWER: The request is for a web-based system and should be on its own servers. There should be no need for the use of the VA Network.

30. Will you require a Facilities Conditions Assessment to be completed?

ANSWER: Yes detailed in the SOW.

31. For a go-live date of 1/1/2027, when does the VA plan to award the contract?

ANSWER: The award date is set for some time in March, with the period of performance of April 1, 2026, start. It also depends on the number of offers that will have to be reviewed.

32. Our CAFM PaaS platform is currently used in over 40 VA facilities. Please confirm that FedRAMP LOW will meet the VA requirements.

ANSWER: VA policy (VA Directive 6517) requires that cloud services, especially those managing sensitive infrastructure data, adhere to strict security controls. The VA generally requires at least a Moderate authorization level to protect sensitive personal or organizational information (PII/PHI).

33. Could you please confirm whether there is a required page limit or specific formatting guidance for the Technical and Experience sections?

ANSWER: No page limit or specific formatting is required. You must also state whether you will have a subcontractor and if the past experience is the same or similar to the requirement.

34. Would the Government consider specifying the required number of experience project write-ups or a preferred length for the technical narrative to ensure consistency among offerors?

ANSWER: No. The instructions to offers states at least three (3) years of past experience.

35. The VA Form 10091, W-9, and FMS Vendor File Update documents appear to be post-award forms. Can you confirm whether these forms are expected with the proposal submission or only after award?

ANSWER: Yes, these forms must be submitted with your offer.

36. The solicitation references both email and fax submission for VA Form 10091. Would the Government consider allowing email submission only for this form?

ANSWER: Yes, you can use email submission for your offer.

37. If email submission is acceptable, could the Government please provide the specific email address for sending the VA Form 10091?

ANSWER: Per the instructions to offers you must submit to this link https://www.cep.fsc.va.gov

38. Will the govt provide a current breakdown of total rooms and functional spaces, by building and CBOC, to be included in the space and personnel audit (beyond the GSF figures already stated).

ANSWER: More specified prints are to be shared post award.

39. Are there any facilities, off‑campus administrative spaces, leased sites, or other areas that are explicitly excluded from the survey scope?

ANSWER: Off campus areas are captured in the SOW under Scope and CBOC gsf size.

40. Will the Government provide escorts and coordinated access to clinical and restricted areas so that survey crews can maintain planned daily production rates?

ANSWER: Yes, alone with the requirement of contractors being badged. Which may include background checks.

41. Are there specific areas (e.g., behavioral health, secure research, pharmacy, radiology, or other sensitive areas) that will require special procedures, clearances, or after‑hours work?

ANSWER: Yes

42. How does the Government envision the Service Chiefs and other leadership reviewing and concurring with survey data (e.g., batch reports by building, via a review tool, other mechanism), and what review/turnaround time should offerors assume?

ANSWER: A review tool from the program is how leadership would view. Offerors should expect 30 days for review to determine who to award the contract to.

43. If changes to survey data are requested after concurrence due to internal VA decisions (and not contractor error), will such revisions be considered within scope of the fixed price, or handled via contract modification?

ANSWER: The VA will take this case-by-case request to determine if a modification is needed.

44. For the full system‑wide re‑audits in option years 2 and 4, does the Government expect the same level of detail and 100% physical verification as in the base year, or will a sampling/variance‑based approach be acceptable where no changes are known?

ANSWER: Years 2 and 4 will require physical verification.

45. Does the Government anticipate any major capital projects, relocations, or expansions prior to option years 2 and 4 that would materially increase the level of effort required for those re‑audits?

ANSWER: Yes

46. Does the Government have a preference for a specific commercial platform (e.g., ESRI‑based) or is any commercially available solution acceptable, provided it meets the requirement to be “equal to or comparable to ArcGIS Pro”?

ANSWER: The VA is considering all solutions. ESRI-based is preferred.

47. Are there any mandated VA enterprise platforms, APIs, or hosting environments that must be used, or should offerors assume a contractor‑hosted PaaS solution that integrates to VA systems?

ANSWER: Contractor-hosted PaaS solution that integrates to VA Systems

48. The SOW references 15 user licenses. Are these expected to be named users, concurrent users, or another model, and does the Government anticipate growth beyond 15 users over the contract term?

ANSWER: These users will be named, and the VA does not anticipate growth beyond the requested user request.

49. Are there existing VA enterprise licenses (e.g., GIS/BIM/CAFM tools) that the contractor may leverage, or should offerors assume that all software licensing will be provided and priced under this contract?

ANSWER: The Phx VA would like to consider the use of the existing VA enterprise licenses that are available.

50. Which systems does the Government require to be integrated at contract award (e.g., CAI, work order / FMS system, wayfinding system, real‑time sensors), and which integrations are considered future‑state or optional?

ANSWER: Part 1 of this question has already been answered. Future expansion is to include Wayfinding at this time.

51. For CAI integration and updates, should offerors assume existing, Government‑furnished interfaces with write access, or should we assume the need to design, develop, and obtain approval for new integration mechanisms?

ANSWER: There should be integration tools already in place.

52. The SOW specifies precise positional tolerances (e.g., ±0.5 inch for the building envelope, and 95% confidence for room locations). Will the Government furnish existing survey control (e.g., USGS markers, control points) sufficient to meet these tolerances?

ANSWER: This request is within the rooms of the building, assume using means of laser measurements and measuring devices like tape measures.

53. If existing survey control is incomplete or inconsistent, how does the Government envision handling the additional effort required to reconcile or re‑establish survey control?

ANSWER: The Phx VA will take this request into consideration and review the SOW with contracting to establish the need for modification of the contract.

54. Can the Government provide historical or projected annual volumes of renovations, new construction, and space reassignments (e.g., approximate number of projects or square footage per year) that will drive updates to floor plans and CAI ANSWER: As-builts can be reviewed but in the end the contractors are responsible for ensuring accuracy.

55. Does the Government foresee any large capital projects or campus expansions during the contemplated contract period that offerors should explicitly factor into pricing?

ANSWER: Yes

56. What is the anticipated monthly volume and typical nature of technical support requests (e.g., access issues, data corrections, configuration questions)?

ANSWER: The Phx VA cannot forecast this request.

57. Are there specific service level expectations (e.g., response and resolution times, escalation paths) beyond support during regular working hours (07:00–15:30 Arizona time)?

ANSWER: Yes, expectation of support should be of the highest level.

58. For data updates, diagram changes, and new floor plans “as needed upon request,” will the Government employ a governance process (e.g., COR‑approved backlog or prioritization) to manage scope and volume?

ANSWER: A COR will be assigned to the contract to review.

59. In the event that the volume of requested updates materially exceeds reasonable baseline assumptions, does the Government anticipate using equitable adjustments or contract modifications to address that additional level of effort?

ANSWER: COR and Contracting will review on a case by case basis.

60. Approximately how many end users does the Government anticipate needing initial training (basic and, if applicable, administrator/advanced) during the base period?

ANSWER: Previously answered.

61. How many new users per year does the Government anticipate requiring initial training during each option year?

ANSWER: We cannot predict new users.

62. Does the Government prefer in‑person training at the main campus, virtual training, or a combination, and should offerors plan to deliver in‑person sessions at CBOCs as well?

ANSWER: Virtual training would be the most requested form.

63. Are there preferences or constraints regarding class size, session length, or the number of repeated sessions per topic to accommodate different shifts and locations?

ANSWER: The classes should be recorded for reference for users that are not available to attend at the time of training

64. The SOW provides for one year of “unlimited telephone or online support” per student after training. How does the Government envision this being delivered (e.g., help desk, office hours, email), and are there any expectations regarding response times or hours of availability?

ANSWER: Whatever the normal business hours are of the awarded vendor and however the current vendor is set up for this requirement should be adequate.

65. Should offerors assume that updating training materials and recordings for future platform enhancements or new versions is included within the fixed price, or will major version changes be addressed via contract modification?

ANSWER: The VA will review this requirement on a case by case basis while working with contracting parties.

66. Will the new solution be replacing ArcGIS Pro or required to integrate with ArcGIS Pro?

ANSWER: The requirement is to implement a system.

67. What database is used to maintain space data today? Are they within the CAD drawings or maintained outside of the CAD drawings?

ANSWER: Space data is maintained in AutoCAD drawings and CAI Excel exports.

68. What types of compliance reports will be required?

ANSWER: Reports include CAI, SCIP alignment, and FCA reporting, exportable for VA compliance.

69. Is there a requirement to provide a PaaS or would a SaaS solution also be acceptable?

ANSWER: PaaS is required; SaaS may be considered if it meets all functional and security requirements.

70. May you please provide a few examples of what type of environmental reports will be required?

ANSWER: Hazardous materials, asbestos, lead paint, and environmental compliance documentation.

71. What is the wayfinding program in use today?

ANSWER: No current Wayfinding program is in use.

72. Can the Government clarify if the table provided in Section B.2 is required as the exact format for price submission, or are offerors permitted to submit a different cost/price proposal format as long as all requested information is included?

ANSWER: Per the basis for award on page 62 of the solicitation Offerors must complete the provided price/cost schedule.

73. Is the offeror required to provide a price breakdown by task (e.g., Task 1 – Space Study, Task 2 – Implementation, etc.), or is a single total price covering all required CAFM system services sufficient?

ANSWER: Offers may submit a single price covering all required CAFM.

74. If offering alternate pricing (e.g., for different technical approaches or software platforms), should the alternative offer be submitted as a separate schedule within Section B.2, or as a distinct attachment?

ANSWER: The government is not accepting any alternate pricing.

75. Does the Government require offerors to include any specific pricing for licenses, support, or training in Section B.2 Price/Cost Schedule, or should these be included as part of the overall system price?

ANSWER: If licenses, support or training is part of your price then include it.

76. Given that successful completion of this project will require multiple site survey trips (TDY) to the Phoenix VA Healthcare System and CBOC locations, can the Government confirm that all anticipated travel/TDY costs should be included in the single firm-fixed price line item for each contract period in Section B.2, and there is no requirement to separately break out or propose travel as a separate line item?

ANSWER: The delivery schedule is not for site visit but where items should be delivered.

77. Can the Government confirm whether the “Delivery Date” in Section B.3 represents the completion of all services for that contract period, or are there milestone or phased deliverables due during the performance year?

ANSWER: The dates on page 11 of the solicitation are the period of performance for the contract and no there are no milestones or phases that will be followed.

78. Will the Government provide formal acceptance criteria or completion documentation to signify the end of each period of performance/delivery, and if so, who is the designated accepting official (COR, or other)?

ANSWER: No, The Government will provide formal acceptance criteria and completion documentation for each period of performance and/or delivery. These criteria will be clearly defined in the contract or task order and will serve as the basis for determining successful completion. Upon meeting these criteria, the Government will issue written acceptance or other completion documentation to signify the end of the respective performance period or delivery milestone. This is a firmed fixed contract and not cost plus fix fee.

79. Please clarify the role of the “Mark For” contact, Patrick Garcia. Should all delivery-related correspondence and deliverables be directed to this individual?

ANSWER: Patrick Garcia is the POC for this requirement, but all questions and concerns regarding this requirement shall be directed to contracting POC Felicia Simpson.

80. The SOW states “All Tasks must be completed within one-hundred-eighty (180) days of Contract award.” However, ongoing and recurring tasks (maintenance, updates, training) appear to extend into the option years. Can the Government confirm that only Task 1 (Space Audit and Personnel Utilization Study) is required within 180 days, and that Tasks 2–4 are to be performed throughout the life of the contract according to the period of performance schedule? Page 45 of the solicitation

ANSWER:

Task 1 must be completed within 180 days; Tasks 2–4 occur throughout the contract term.

81. Are the current AutoCAD/DWG drawing layers standardized and consistent throughout the drawings to show space and asset locations? Are the drawings updated and current in DWG format, or is additional file format conversion required prior to upload to the new CAFM system? Page 45 of the solicitation

ANSWER: Drawings are not standardized; expect normalization and conversion.

82. Does the Government require the final site survey deliverable to be submitted in a specific file format (e.g., Excel/CSV for tabular data, PDF for reports), and are there required templates or data dictionaries to follow for space and asset data submission, or is it sufficient that the deliverables are ready for direct upload to the CAFM and CAI systems? Page 46 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Deliverables should be ready for CAFM upload and CAI integration; use VA standards where provided.

83. Does the PVAHCS maintain existing and updated as-built drawings for all floor plans and facilities covered by this contract? If so, are as-built CAD drawings available and current in DWG format, and are their layer standards consistent and suitable for space and asset location mapping? Page 46 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: As-builts exist but are not uniformly current or standardized.

84. Are BIM models currently available for all buildings, or is the creation/generation of BIM models expected as part of the survey and field verification task? Page 46 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: BIM models are not available for all buildings; creation is expected.

85. Is it required that the personnel occupancy data break down all categories by telework, in-person, and remote arrangements for each individual and space, or is summary-level data sufficient? Page 47 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Room-level occupancy details are required

86. For personnel working in hybrid or variable arrangements, what is the preferred method for documenting their presence and service allocations—should this be based on their primary assigned desk/location, self-reported usage, or an average presence metric over a designated period? Page 47 of the solicitation.

ANSWER:

87. What PVAHCS business systems will the new CAFM platform be required to integrate with? Are these integrations expected to be bi-directional, and are there specific interface standards or APIs the Government wants the contractor to use? Page 48 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Use primary assigned desk/location with declared work pattern.

88. What is the form and format of the existing asset data (such as work order information, photos, and related data) to be migrated into the new CAFM system? Does the Government have a list or inventory of the expected number and types of assets to be managed in the new system? Page 48 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Excel, PDFs, JPEGs, AutoCAD; 36 buildings currently managed.

89. Does the Government expect the CAFM platform to include real-time monitoring or analytics dashboards as a core requirement, and if so, what specific metrics and business processes must be supported or visualized at go-live? Page 48 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Dashboards for space utilization, NSF/GSF, and planning are required at go-live.

90. Please confirm if all existing CAD floor plans and related facilities files are available in an updated and consistent DWG format, or will additional CAD file conversion or re-layering be required prior to uploading into the new CAFM solution? Page 49 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Not standardized or current; expect cleanup and updates.

91. What is the 3D visualization standard format that the Government requires for spatial and floor plan data—does the solution need to deliver models in a specific, documented format (such as IFC, RVT, or others) compatible with GIS/BIM workflows? Page 49 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Support BIM objects per VA BIM Standard v2.2; IFC/RVT acceptable.

92. Is Uniformat II used as the standard for FCA (Facility Condition Assessment) data within PVAHCS, or is another asset classification standard required for structural and system attribution? When was the last FCA conducted, and in what data structure is it currently housed? Page 49 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Not standardized; refer to VA TIL. Last FCA was in 2023.

93. For ongoing CAI data updates, does the Government require direct, live data uploading by the contractor into the VA’s CAI application, or is periodic batch file submission acceptable? Please confirm any required interface protocols, user roles, or data validation/acceptance steps for CAI integration. Page 50 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: For CAI data, this will be a read only format that updates when that data is updated.

94. What is the expected total number of users for the CAFM system, and does this number include all employees, contractors, and occasional users, or only those requiring direct access for system administration or advanced report. Page 51-52 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Read-only for all employees; edit access for ≤30 users.

95. Can the Government confirm that all training sessions (initial, refresher, administrator, and advanced) may be delivered virtually unless in-person training is specifically requested by the COR? Is there any minimum number or frequency of required on-site sessions, or is a fully virtual training program acceptable if it meets all other requirements for content and recordkeeping? Page 53 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Virtual training is acceptable; recordings required.

96. The SOW states that all training "will need to be recorded and become the property of the VA." Can the Government clarify if there are specific technical requirements (file formats, storage method, naming conventions) for the training recordings, and whether they need to be uploaded to a particular VA system? Page 53 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Use MP4/MP3 and PDF; upload per COR instructions.

97. Does the Government require all written training materials (manuals, handbooks, etc.) to be provided in both hard copy and electronic formats, or will electronic-only delivery (for download or email) be sufficient as long as all materials are available for any employee who completes a training session? Page 53 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Electronic delivery is sufficient unless hard copies requested.

98. Should certificates of training be issued in hard copy, electronic format, or both to each participant? Are there required templates, data fields, or VA branding standards for such certificates, or can the contractor use its own format if all required information is included? Page 53 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Electronic certificates acceptable; include required fields, Contractors format is acceptable.

99. Is online training, including webinars and on-demand e-learning modules, fully acceptable to meet the training requirements for all user categories, provided sessions are recorded and made available for VA staff accession and review? Page 55 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Yes, including webinars and on-demand modules.

100. Is there any page limitation for the proposal response document? If a page limit applies, does it govern the Technical Approach (Factor 1) and Relevant Experience (Factor 2) sections combined, or does each factor/section have a separate page limit? Page 55 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: There are no page limitations for the proposals.

101. As an existing vendor registered and active in VA systems, are we required to complete and re-submit VA Form 10091 and the FMS Vendor File Update Form with our proposal submission, or may these be omitted if our information is already current and on file with the Department of Veterans Affairs? Page 55 of the solicitation.

ANSWER: Yes, all documents are required to be submitted.

102. For purposes of limitations on subcontracting compliance under the Veterans Affairs Acquisition Regulation (VAAR) 852.219-75, should the 50% calculation be based on total contract value, labor value only, or total amount paid excluding pass-through software licensing and hosting costs?

ANSWER: The calculation is based on the total contract value that the Prime must do the work.

103. The SOW requires a system "equal to or comparable to ArcGIS Pro." Please clarify whether the Government will evaluate equivalency based on defined functional criteria (e.g., 3D visualization, geospatial precision, dashboard analytics), and whether a feature comparison matrix is preferred.

ANSWER: Based on functional capabilities: GIS integration, visualization, dashboards, CAI mapping.

104. The SOW specifies building envelope accuracy of +/- one-half inch from absolute position. Please confirm whether this precision applies to all facilities, including leased Community-Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOCs), and whether existing survey control data will be provided by the Government.

ANSWER: ±0.5 inch applies to all facilities; laser measurement recommended. This is also required at all leased facilities.

105. Will the implemented Platform as a Service (PaaS) solution require Authority to Operate (ATO) under Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) cybersecurity policies, and if so, what level of accreditation is required?

ANSWER: VA ATO required; FedRAMP Moderate/High compliance.

106. For option years two and four full re-audits, please confirm whether the scope includes full re-measurement of all spaces or validation sampling against updated records.

ANSWER: Only remeasurements are required if space has been altered since the last audit.

107. The SOW states the contractor will update data directly within the VA Capital Asset Inventory (CAI) application. Please confirm whether write-access credentials will be provided and whether updates require Government validation prior to submission.

ANSWER: Integration to the CAI database requires read only access.

108. Will the Government provide escorted access and scheduling coordination for all clinical and administrative spaces during Task 1 site surveys?

ANSWER: VA will provide escorts and coordinate access.

109. Is the Capital Assets and Facilities Management (CAFM) Platform as a Service required to be hosted within a VA-controlled environment, a Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program (FedRAMP)-authorized cloud, or a contractor-managed cloud environment?

ANSWER: Contractor-hosted FedRAMP-authorized cloud required.

110. In the event of discrepancies between field-collected data and existing CAI records, which dataset will be considered authoritative?

ANSWER: Field-verified data reviewed by COR will be authoritative.

111. Are there existing VA enterprise systems (e.g., ServiceNow, Maximo, IBM TRIRIGA, etc.) that the CAFM platform must interface with?

ANSWER: No additional CMMS integrations mandated; future expansion possible.

112. Does the Government anticipate requesting a live system demonstration or technical presentation as part of the evaluation process?

ANSWER: Not required initially

113. The SOW requires integration into a 3D visualization capable of displaying departments, services, specialties, and room types across the campus. Please clarify whether this visualization must be natively generated within the CAFM platform or may leverage integrated third-party 3D visualization tools.

ANSWER: Native or integrated third-party tools acceptable.

114. The SOW requires utilization analytics dashboards and monitoring of Facilities Management Service (FMS), Office of Information Technology (OI&T), and Interior Design (ID) installation requests. Please clarify whether real-time integration with existing VA systems is required, and if so, which specific systems and data interfaces must be supported.

ANSWER: Not mandated; API-based ingestion recommended.

115. The SOW states the system will utilize Google Earth with a location precision of 95% confidence. Please confirm whether Google Earth integration must be embedded within the CAFM platform or whether geospatial data exchange via standard formats (e.g., KML, KMZ) is acceptable.

ANSWER: KML/KMZ exchange acceptable; embedded not required.

116. Please define how the Government will evaluate compliance with the stated 95% confidence spatial precision requirement and whether independent survey validation will be required.

ANSWER: Through documented QA/QC and COR review; independent validation possible.

117. The SOW requires access through the VA website and mobile devices. Please clarify whether mobile access must be browser-based only or whether native mobile applications are expected.

ANSWER: Browser-based acceptable; native apps optional.

118. The SOW requires compatibility with a veteran and staff accessible wayfinding platform available healthcare system-wide. Please identify the current wayfinding platform and confirm required integration method (e.g., API, data export, shared GIS layer).

ANSWER: Support API or shared GIS layers for future compatibility.

119. The SOW references providing information to authorized users via "normalized means" and "low friction" access. Please clarify whether specific user authentication, single sign-on (SSO), or role-based access control standards are required.

ANSWER: Role-based access; SSO preferred if feasible.

120. For Task 3 – PaaS Maintenance, please clarify whether on-site personnel presence is required during the base period and option years, or whether maintenance and data updates may be performed remotely except when physical site verification is required.

ANSWER: Remote maintenance acceptable except for physical verification.

121. If on-site presence is required for Task 3, please specify the expected frequency (e.g., full-time, part-time, as-needed, or milestone-based visits) and whether a minimum staffing level must be maintained at the Phoenix VA Health Care System.

ANSWER: As-needed; no full-time requirement.

122. For updates to floor plans and architectural drawings resulting from renovations or construction, please confirm whether the Government will provide finalized as-built drawings, or whether the contractor is expected to perform on-site verification prior to updating the system.

ANSWER: VA will provide as-builts; contractor must verify changes during those option years of on-site audits.

123. Please clarify the expected response time and service level requirements for technical support requests submitted by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) or designated representative under Task 3.

ANSWER: VA will provide as-builts; contractor must verify changes.

124. For Task 2 – Integration and Implementation, please identify what existing data sets will be provided by the Government at contract award (e.g., AutoCAD files, BIM models, CAI exports, FCA data, GIS layers), and in what formats.

ANSWER: VA will provide as-builts; contractor must verify changes.

125. Please confirm whether existing floor plans and architectural drawings are considered complete and accurate, or whether the contractor should anticipate reconciliation and correction of legacy discrepancies.

ANSWER: Expect reconciliation and correction of discrepancies.

126. For occupant data (position and service), please clarify whether this information will be provided by the Government in structured digital format or must be collected and validated by the contractor.

ANSWER: Provided by VA; contractor validates and coordinates.

127. For Statement of Condition (SOC) drawings, utilities, data drops, and key core lock numbers, please confirm whether authoritative digital records currently exist and whether they are centrally maintained or distributed across multiple systems.

ANSWER: Some records exist; contractor consolidates and verifies.

128. Please clarify the availability and format of real estate permits, Space Committee approvals, environmental reports, safety data, and historic preservation documentation, and whether these records are digitized.

ANSWER: VA provides available records; contractor digitizes as needed.

129. For site plan, topography, seismic, and historic data, please confirm whether survey-grade base maps and geotechnical or seismic reports will be provided, or whether additional field validation may be required.

ANSWER: VA provides where available; field validation may be required.

130. Please confirm whether there are known data gaps, incomplete records, or legacy systems currently under transition that may impact data ingestion during Task 2 implementation.

ANSWER: Expect gaps; reconciliation part of Task 1 and Task 2.

131. Please confirm whether any data to be collected, managed, or displayed under this contract will be designated as Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), and if so, what CUI categories apply.

ANSWER: Certain spatial/security data may be CUI; handle per VA policy.

132. If CUI is involved, please clarify whether compliance with National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-171 or 800-53 controls is required.

ANSWER: Yes; FedRAMP alignment implies NIST SP 800-53 and 800-171 compliance.

133. Please clarify whether occupant data, personnel position data, or service assignments will be considered Personally Identifiable Information (PII) or Protected Health Information (PHI) under VA policy.

ANSWER: Occupant identity may be PII; PHI not expected but handle per HIPAA if present.

134. If PHI may be present in maintenance requests, facilities records, or room assignments, please confirm whether the contractor will be required to comply with Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) requirements.

ANSWER: Required if PHI is processed.

135. The current size standard for this solicitation is 541512 at $34 Million. Alvarez is an SDVOSB under 541519 having fewer than 150 employees. Would you be willing to change the NAICS code to 541519 so that Alvarez may respond?

ANSWER: Market research has shown that the current NAICS code is the best one for this requirement.

136. Does utility collection include subsurface (below ground) surveys?

ANSWER: Major utilities only

137. Does interior mapping require removal of drop ceiling tiles and scanning/modeling detail above the drop ceiling?

ANSWER: No, just the working space

138. Can the VA confirm that utility mapping indoor does not include mapping features in walls. Can we assume we map only what is visible in the scans, and are not required to perform any intrusive determination behind walls and or above ceiling?

ANSWER: Nothing behind walls

139. The SOW lists positioning relative to Google Earth, but also an absolute position within a half inch for the building envelope and 3 inches for floors within the building. What if the absolute position derived from survey techniques does not align with Google Earth withing the precision stated, realizing the google earth position is not as precise as the survey techniques? Should the contractor maintain the survey accuracy or align with google earth?

ANSWER: Align with google earth

140. Reference: Section D.1 SOW, §4.2.2 Subtask 2-2 (Data and CAD Drawings Creation/Upload) The SOW states that the current format of existing floor plans is "AutoCAD and PDF's."

Could the Government provide an approximate breakdown of the existing floor plan inventory by format? Specifically:

This directly affects our Year 1 pricing for the 908,271 GSF main campus and 438,000 GSF CBOC upload effort under this subtask, as well as the Year 2 and Year 4 re-audit cycles under Task 3 (§4.3).

ANSWER: Base pricing only with square footage that is provided.

141. Reference: Section D.1 SOW, §3 Scope (Task 2 description) and §4.2.3 Subtask 2-3 (GIS Integration) The SOW appears to establish two different geolocation precision standards for building positioning.

The Task 2 scope states the system will "utilize Google Earth with a location precision of 95% confidence," which is consistent with standard GIS overlay positioning using publicly available satellite imagery and is typically accurate to within 1–5 meters depending on location and imagery source. However, the same section also states: "The building envelope itself must be located to industry standard survey grade precision +/- one half inch from absolute position." Subtask 2-3 further requires all models be georeferenced to a permanent USGS Survey Marker using NAD 1983 (2011) State Plane coordinates.

These are significantly different precision standards. The ±½ inch requirement tied to USGS monuments and State Plane is geodetic survey work that typically requires a licensed Professional Land Surveyor, survey-grade GPS equipment, and either an existing campus control network or the establishment of a new one. The Google Earth integration at 95% confidence is a standard GIS task with significantly less field effort and cost.

Could the Government clarify which geolocation precision standard governs for building envelope placement? If survey-grade ±½ inch accuracy is the requirement, does PVAHCS have an existing geodetic control network the contractor can tie into?

ANSWER: No

142. Reference: Section D.1 SOW, §3 Scope The SOW references Community-Based Outpatient Clinics (CBOCs) associated with PVAHCS totaling approximately 438,000 GSF, but does not identify the individual facilities included in this requirement. The scope encompasses these locations across multiple tasks — the on-site survey (Task 1, §4.1), the drawing upload and GIS integration (Task 2, §4.2), and ongoing maintenance (Task 3, §4.3).

To develop an accurate firm-fixed-price proposal, we need to understand the geographic spread and individual facility sizes. Could the Government please provide:

ANSWER: All CBOC’s are within the Phoenix metro area and suburbs with the exception of Show Low, Globe, and Payson. When contract is awarded more specific dwgs sets can be distributed. Offerors should utilize the aggregate CBOC square footage and apply their standard estimating methodologies.

143. Reference: Section D.1 SOW, §3 Scope; Section B.2 Price/Cost Schedule (CLIN 0001); Section B.3 Delivery Schedule

The SOW states that all tasks must be completed within 180 days of contract award, and the delivery schedule shows POP begin of 04-01-2026. This contract requires contractor personnel to access all areas of all PVAHCS facilities, including clinical and restricted spaces, which requires PIV credential issuance.

Based on our experience with VA PIV processing for contractor personnel, the credentialing process typically takes several weeks at minimum before personnel can gain full facility access.

Does the 180-day clock start from the date of contract award, or from the date PIV credentials are issued and personnel have facility access? If it starts from award, will the Government consider adjusting the timeline to account for the PIV processing period, or will control points and facility access be expedited?

ANSWER: Yes

AMENDMENT THREE IS TO EXTEND THE CLOSING DATE AND TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS