RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion Phase 1 FINAL.pdf

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 1 of 36

REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS (RFQ)

Architectural Predesign and Concept-Design Services

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1

Published as a Workday Strategic Sourcing Event https://university-of-washington.public-portal.us.workdayspend.com/ bid-details/1254649

Statement of Qualifications Due: Friday, September 25, 2026 3:00 PM Pacific Time

I. Solicitation Information, Instructions & General Terms

1. Purpose The University of Washington (UW or University) is soliciting Statements of Qualifications (SOQs) from qualified architectural, planning, engineering, or similarly qualified firms to provide predesign, programming, feasibility, concept planning, or related professional services for the South and West Campus Expansion Phase 1 Project. The selected consultant will develop the information necessary to define and validate project scope, program, alternatives, cost, schedule, risks, and implementation strategy and to support University and State capital planning decisions.

The University of Washington is soliciting Statements of Qualifications from qualified architectural firms to serve as the lead design and integration consultant for Phase 1 of the South & West Campus Expansion. The engagement advances prior feasibility work into concept-level design, needs-based programming, site and massing studies, phased implementation planning, and pricing-grade documentation sufficient to support UW decision-making, capital planning, and future procurement of subsequent phases.

2. Background The UW is a widely recognized leader in education, research, innovation, and public service. UW Facilities supports the planning, design, construction, operation, and stewardship of University facilities and infrastructure.

The South & West Campus Expansion responds to UW Medicine’s need to expand UW Medical Center–Montlake capacity by approximately 300–400 inpatient beds, with corresponding growth in operating rooms, emergency, diagnostic-and-treatment, research, and innovation space. Expanding on Site C requires partial demolition of the Magnuson Health Sciences Center and decanting of approximately 560,000–880,000 square feet of Health Sciences research and administrative programs before demolition and construction can proceed. A new electrical substation is a critical enabling dependency, and the program spans an approximately 8–10 year horizon. Prior feasibility work established the site direction and a demand-based hospital program; this Phase 1 engagement advances that work into an executable predesign roadmap.

3. Work Eligibility / Future Project Participation The selected consultant performing the Phase 1 predesign and concept-design services described in this RFQ would not be precluded from participating in future work related to the South & West Campus Expansion, provided such participation is permitted under applicable law, UW policy, the final agreement, and any applicable organizational conflict of interest review.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 2 of 36

This approach reflects the limited predesign scope of this engagement. The Architect’s Phase 1 role is to provide concept-level planning, programming, technical coordination, and decision-support services and does not include final design, construction documents, construction management, or implementation services. Future eligibility will be determined based on the requirements of any future procurement and the services performed under this engagement.

4. Point of Contact and Procurement Communications The Solicitation Coordinator is the sole point of contact for this procurement.

This is a public solicitation. Respondents must be registered in Workday Strategic Sourcing ("WSS") and added to the solicitation event to submit questions or communications through the WSS message portal.

Access to the WSS message portal is available only through a bidder login for the solicitation event. Respondents must click "Bid" in WSS to access the message portal. Clicking "Bid" does not obligate an Respondent to submit a response to the solicitation, but it does provide access to the message portal for solicitation-related communications.

Except for WSS access or login issues as expressly stated below, all questions, requests for information, requests for clarification, and other communications regarding this solicitation must be submitted through the WSS message portal.

This includes questions from Respondents and any University requests for clarification, supplemental information, or corrections related to submitted responses.

Exception for WSS access issues: the Solicitation Coordinator may be contacted by email only for issues related to accessing or logging into WSS, including obtaining access to an existing supplier profile. If WSS indicates that a supplier profile already exists for the Respondent's firm, the Respondent should not create a duplicate profile and should instead contact the Solicitation Coordinator for assistance with access to the existing profile.

Communications sent outside of WSS, except for WSS access or login issues as described above, may not be reviewed or considered by the University.

From issuance of this RFQ through contract award and execution, all communications concerning this solicitation, its evaluation, and negotiations are formal. Firms are not permitted to communicate directly with other UW personnel, project stakeholders, or members of the evaluation team regarding this solicitation.

Solicitation Coordinator:

Tricia Olsen Demarest Assistant Director Procurement Services triciaod@uw.edu

5. Questions, Interpretation, and Addenda All questions requesting clarification of the requirements should be submitted in writing through the WSS message portal no later than the deadline identified in the RFQ schedule.

Important: all questions should cite the applicable solicitation section and paragraph number.

Should respondents discover any discrepancies in, or omissions from, the specifications of this solicitation, or if there is doubt as to their meaning, the respondent shall notify the Solicitation Coordinator in writing through WSS. The Solicitation Coordinator will issue written instructions or addenda, as required, to all Respondents.

Only written addenda issued by the University are binding. Oral statements, interpretations, or clarifications are unofficial and non-binding.

The University may elect not to respond to vendor inquiries received after the question deadline. Questions received less than five (5) business days before the proposed due date for SOQ submission may not be answered.

Any addenda issued for this RFQ will be published in WSS. Responding firms are responsible for checking WSS for addenda, question responses, clarifications, or updates before submitting their SOQ.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 3 of 36

6. Selection Process The University will appoint an evaluation team to review responsive SOQs and, if applicable, participate in interviews.

The composition of the evaluation team will not be published in this RFQ.

The SOQs will be evaluated based on the project-specific criteria set forth in this solicitation. The highest-ranked firm, following the applicable selection process, will be invited to enter into negotiations with the University in accordance with Chapter 39.80 RCW.

As an option, the University may invite the top-ranked firms to an interview or presentation. If so, the University may use interview results to identify the highest-ranked consultant. If the University and the highest-ranked firm(s) cannot agree on fair and reasonable terms, the University may enter negotiations with the next-ranked firm(s).

7. Anticipated Selection Schedule Activity Date / Time Release of RFQ Monday August 10, 2026 Project Information Meeting (optional) Virtual via Zoom Friday, August 14, 2026 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM Pacific

Deadline for Questions Friday, August 28, 2026 3:00 PM Pacific Statement of Qualifications Due Friday, September 25, 2026 3:00 PM Pacific Shortlist Notification Anticipated Week of October 5, 2026 Interviews (if applicable) Estimated Late October 2026 Highest-Ranked Firm Notification Estimated end of October 2026

The University reserves the right to adjust the timetable as necessary. Responding firms are responsible for checking notifications and updates in WSS for any changes to the RFQ schedule.

Access Information: Optional Informational Meeting Via Zoom:

Join Zoom Meeting URL:

https://washington.zoom.us/j/99167898793?pwd=hH8XQci7p4MINtvs6N41gDF4khp0Fo.1&from=addon

Meeting ID: 991 6789 8793

Passcode: 084303

One tap mobile: US: +12532158782,,99167898793# or +12063379723,,99167898793#

Join by Telephone For higher quality, dial a number based on your current location.

+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)

+1 206 337 9723 US (Seattle)

+1 602 753 0140 US (Phoenix)

+1 669 219 2599 US (San Jose)

+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)

+1 720 928 9299 US (Denver)

+1 971 247 1195 US (Portland)

+1 213 338 8477 US (Los Angeles)

+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)

+1 646 518 9805 US (New York)

+1 646 876 9923 US (New York)

+1 651 372 8299 US (Minnesota)

+1 786 635 1003 US (Miami)

+1 267 831 0333 US (Philadelphia)

+1 301 715 8592 US (Wash. DC)

+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)

+1 470 250 9358 US (Atlanta)

+1 470 381 2552 US (Atlanta)

Meeting ID: 991 6789 8793

Passcode: 084303 https://washington.zoom.us/j/99167898793?pwd=hH8XQci7p4MINtvs6N41gDF4khp0Fo.1&from=addon

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 4 of 36

SIP: 99167898793@zoomcrc.com

Passcode: 084303

8. SOQ Submission Requirements Respondents are asked to submit one (1) PDF/electronic format of the Statement of Qualifications to WSS no later than the published submittal deadline, or as modified by any subsequent addenda. Consultants are responsible for ensuring receipt of the SOQ by the deadline and should take into account delays or technical issues that may occur when using electronic submissions. Submittals received after the deadline may not be considered.

The SOQ must include a Table of Contents and be organized and labeled to correspond to the numbered evaluation criteria in Section III (Q1–Q8).

The scored portion of the SOQ (Q1–Q8) may not exceed 15 pages in total. Excluded from the 15-page limit are the cover letter, table of contents, section dividers, Minimum Qualifications Matrix, resumes, and required UW forms and certifications. Minimum 11-point font, standard margins, 8.5 × 11-inch format.

All required questions in the online Supplier Questionnaire must be completed in order for the SOQ to be considered responsive. Respondents are responsible for ensuring timely upload in WSS and for accounting for technical issues that may occur with electronic submissions.

9. University Rights and General Considerations All responses shall become the property of UW and will not be returned.

Costs incurred in preparing and presenting the SOQ, or incurred in any other manner by the respondent in responding to this solicitation, are not reimbursable and may not be charged to the University.

The University reserves the right to change the acquisition schedule or cancel the solicitation at any time; to make corrections or amendments due to errors identified in the solicitation by the University or a respondent; to reject any or all SOQs; to waive informalities or irregularities; and to contract in the best interests of the University.

All changes to this solicitation must be coordinated in writing with, authorized by, and made by the Solicitation Coordinator. Any changes will be dated and attached to, and made a part of, the solicitation.

The respondent's SOQ must remain valid for a minimum of 120 business days from the due date for receipt of SOQs, unless a different period is stated in the project-specific RFQ.

The University is subject to RCW 42.56 (Public Records Act). SOQs and any subsequent contract may be public records.

Respondents must clearly identify specific information claimed to be confidential or proprietary. Marking an entire response or entire sections as proprietary may not be honored. If a public disclosure request is made for information a respondent has properly identified as confidential and exempt from disclosure, the University will provide notice consistent with applicable law.

The University may conduct reference checks, request clarification, verify information provided in the SOQ, and use information obtained in responsibility determinations.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 5 of 36

II. Scope of Work and Project Requirements

1. Purpose, Background & Role

1.1 Background & Context

The South & West Campus Expansion is triggered by UW Medicine’s need to expand UW Medical Center–Montlake

(UWMC-ML) capacity by 300–400 inpatient beds — with corresponding growth in operating rooms, emergency, and diagnostic-and-treatment functions — and by the need for approximately 300,000–400,000 sf of new research and innovation space. Expanding on Site C requires partial demolition of the Magnuson Health Sciences Center (MHSC) and the decanting of 560,000–880,000 sf of Health Sciences research and administrative programs before demolition and construction can proceed. A new electrical substation is a critical enabling dependency, and the program spans an 8–10 year horizon. A prior feasibility study (NBBJ, 2024–2025) established the site direction and a demand-based hospital program; this Phase 1 engagement advances that work into concept-level design, programming, and pricing capable of carrying the project forward.

1.2 The Architect’s Role

The University of Washington (“UW”) is issuing this Scope of Work as part of a Request for Qualifications for a lead architectural consultant to provide predesign services including concept-level design and programming for Phase 1 of the South & West Campus Expansion. Any resulting contract will be between UW and the selected firm.

The Architect serves as the lead design and integration consultant for the Phase 1 physical assessment and concept programming engagement. In this role, the Architect leads concept design and programming for the hospital expansion and for the displaced academic, research, and administrative programs, and integrates the work of the structural, civil, mechanical/electrical/plumbing (MEP), parking consultants, Marx Okubo and other separately retained specialty consultants that UW may engage into a single, coordinated concept package. The Architect collaborates with UW, UW

Medicine, and the Development Advisory Team (“DAT”), and coordinates with UW’s separately retained Project Team throughout the engagement.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 6 of 36

The predesign engagement is intended to establish the programmatic, planning, technical, sequencing, and concept-level basis for UW’s decisions regarding subsequent phases of the project. This predesign engagement is scoped as the front end of a project intended to move forward eventually into Schematic Design, Design Development, Construction

Documents and construction. Every deliverable must be resolved enough to carry directly into an executable plan. See section 2.1 for the definition of an executable plan.

2. Governing Documents & Framework Alignment This Scope of Work is informed by and should be read in conjunction with the procurement documents issued under

RFP-1243728-PLD UW Development Advisory Team Services South & West Campus Development, which are publicly available at:

https://university-of-washington.public-portal.us.workdayspend.com/bid-details/1243728

Respondents should review the procurement record, with particular attention to the following documents:

• RFP 1243728-PLD Development Advisory Team Services FINAL.pdf

• Exhibit 5 SW_Phase1_Engagement_Framework_Roadmap v2026.0806.pdf, and

• Addenda 4 - Questions Clarifications FINAL2026.0807.pdf.

2.1 Roadmap and Framework Directives

The Roadmap’s Framework Directives Register (directive IDs A1–F4) records the anticipated controlling decisions for the engagement. The table below maps each area of this Scope of Work to its governing directives; if a directive changes, the corresponding provision here must be updated as necessary to maintain consistency and coordination among the related consultant scopes of work.

Scope of Work Section Governing Roadmap Directive(s)*

1 Purpose, Background & Role E1 · F1

3.1 Existing-Conditions Integration B1 · B2 · D1 · D2

3.2 Hospital Concept Programming & Design A2 · B1 · E1

3.3 Displaced-Unit Needs-Based Programming A1 · A3 · A4 · A5

3.4 Site, Massing & CMP Navigation B1 · B2

3.5 Schedule Authorship & Affordability F2 · E3 · F4

3.6 Innovation Hub (IPD/BBI) Integration A3 · A5 · B2

3.7 Stakeholder Engagement Approach F2 · F3

https://university-of-washington.public-portal.us.workdayspend.com/bid-details/1243728

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 7 of 36

Scope of Work Section Governing Roadmap Directive(s)*

4 Coordination & Interfaces F1 · C1

5 Deliverables E1 · E2 · E4

7 Recommendations Beyond Scope D3

*The Roadmap reflects UW’s current intended framework for the engagement and is expected to guide the work;

however, it may be modified or refined as the engagement progresses.

2.2 Definition of Executable Plan

Executable Plan means a Phase 1 predesign-level planning, sequencing, and capital-strategy roadmap that helps UW evaluate options, understand dependencies, integrate concept-level planning and technical inputs, develop order-of-magnitude cost, budget, cash-flow, and schedule assumptions, identify potential future procurement or transaction packages, and determine recommended next steps for UW consideration. It may include capital-source analysis, financial modeling, capital-stack scenarios, funding considerations, and financial decision points consistent with the

DAT advisory scope. It does not include Schematic Design or final design, construction documents, permit-ready documents, final financing approval, commitment to a specific transaction or delivery structure, or authorization to proceed with future phases without separate UW approvals and procurements.

3. Scope of Services

The Architect’s services are organized into seven interdependent workstreams, as detailed in Sections 3.1 through 3.7 below. Throughout, the Architect collaborates with the DAT, UW, and UW Medicine, and coordinates with the Project

Team and UW’s separately contracted specialty consultants, so that programming, design, sequencing, and pricing advance together and are a part of an Executable Plan.

3.1 Existing Conditions Integration & Baseline

Establish a baseline of existing conditions for all buildings and infrastructure for use in future phases of planning and design. Review all UW-provided as-built drawings and existing documentation and, in collaboration with the specialty consultants, validate their accuracy and impacts in achieving the intended output. In addition to providing the initial set of documents, UW will grant access to its facilities records online. Consultants are responsible for determining which documents are pertinent. Consolidate the structural, civil, MEP, and parking findings and the Marx Okubo condition narratives into a single baseline that informs concept design, programming, and pricing. The buildings and infrastructure within scope are those identified in the Roadmap, assessed across the superset of all four C variants.

The integrated baseline consolidates, at concept level:

1. Structural condition and capacity, including seismic-screening flags and any ASCE 41 items carried as priced options

2. Condition of building envelope and infrastructure of the wings proposed for retention

3. MEP systems condition, available capacity, and utility load hand-offs for demolished, retained, and new buildings

4. Civil and below-grade utility capacity, condition, and conflicts keyed to the demolition footprint

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 8 of 36

5. Hazardous-materials records and screening flags

6. Existing parking supply and condition

7. Reconciliation of facility as-built documentation against observed conditions, with gaps identified

3.2 Hospital Concept Programming & Design

Revalidate — not rebuild — the hospital clinical program established in the NBBJ feasibility study, in collaboration with

UW Medicine. Confirm and refine the bed count (300–400 beds), operating rooms, emergency department, Cath/EP, interventional radiology, endoscopy, imaging, and diagnostic-and-treatment (D&T) support. Develop concept-level architectural design — massing, floor stacking, and the Level 2 connection to the existing Montlake Tower to form a continuous surgical platform — and locate the required helipad. Test the concept across the viable Site C variants (C1, C1 West, C2, C2 West) and produce drawings and associated narrative sufficient to convey the concept and support concept-level pricing.

In developing the hospital concept, the Architect honors the mandatory program requirements, including:

1. Efficient connection to the existing hospital, with Level 2 of Montlake Tower as the priority surgical-platform connection; a helipad is required

2. Continuous emergency-department ambulance access, with no disruption to emergency patient care during construction

3. Maintenance of existing healthcare services throughout all phases — the “empty-chair” principle: replacement capacity exists before any space is taken offline

4. Adequate, accessible patient parking during all phases of construction and in the future state

5. Clinical programs at or above grade for sites south of Columbia Road, per the water-table constraint

6. Modern floor-to-floor heights (not the existing 12-foot constraint); evaluation of a single-floor OR plate (~48,000– 52,000 DGSF, sized for 12–13 ORs) and an interstitial MEP floor

7. Centralized, co-located diagnostic-and-treatment functions (Imaging, Surgery, ED) and optimally located support services (Lab, Pharmacy, Sterile Processing, Materials Management)

8. No impact to accreditation for the affected Health Sciences schools and programs

9. Preservation of the Haring Center and The Glade

3.3 Displaced-Unit Needs-Based Programming

Retire the feasibility study’s 1:1 replacement placeholder and assess and program the true future need of displaced academic, research, and administrative units. In collaboration with the DAT and UW, lead structured needs and visioning sessions with each affected school, unit, and research group; UW convenes and validates, and UW Medicine validates clinical assumptions. Test each displaced program against the six reduction levers:

1. Current utilization and vacancy resulting from remote and hybrid work

2. Shared workspace/hoteling opportunities

3. Shared and consolidated research cores

4. Real growth projections versus today

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 9 of 36

5. Backfill capacity in retained MHSC wings

6. Lease versus build

Deliver a program-by-program disposition matrix classifying each program as retain in rebuilt MHSC, new South

Campus building, new West Campus building, on or off-campus leases. Test the RFP’s starting hypotheses: clinical

Dentistry remains connected to the tower research and innovation (including IPD and BBI) locate to West Campus and office and administration are the readiest movers.

Schools and programs to be engaged through the visioning sessions include the Schools of Medicine, Dentistry, Nursing, Pharmacy, Public Health, and Social Work; laboratory and research groups; Employee Health; and UWMC administrative programs. Space needs must be programmed to reflect future growth, and clinical programs that must remain connected to the hospital environment (for example, School of Dentistry clinical programs) are integrated into the new tower’s clinical planning rather than relocated to West Campus.

3.4 Site, Massing & CMP Navigation

Develop site planning and building massing studies across the superset of all four C variants and navigate the Campus

Master Plan (CMP) parameters — height limits, view corridors, pedestrian connectors, tower separation, and the shoreline overlay — for both South and West Campus. Integrate West Campus strategies as a strategic extension of the approach: evaluate West Campus development sites (including W27 and the S1-partial site) as relocation destinations, coordinating with the civil and parking consultants. Protect The Glade and the Haring Center from displacement, consistent with the CMP and the Roadmap.

CMP navigation accounts, at minimum, for: the 200-foot height limit on the preferred S44/S48 sites, with potential for

240 feet in the northern portion via minor CMP modification (to be minimized); preservation or mitigation of the

Pacific-corridor pedestrian connector; view corridors from Pacific Street toward Portage Bay; and the 200-foot shoreline overlay. West Campus development sites evaluated as relocation destinations include W27 (approximately

320,000 rsf, designed and permitted under 2018 code), W24, and W33, coordinated with the W37/Northlake substation site and its enabling relocations.

3.5 Schedule Authorship & Real-Time Affordability

In collaboration with the DAT and UW, co-author a rigorous, detailed meeting and working schedule for both the hospital concept programming and the displaced unit needs assessment. The Architect and the specialty consultants coordinate their sequencing and programmatic requirements into this schedule so that it serves every discipline and the end product is credible. Run concept design and programming concurrently with the DAT’s real-time cost testing:

provide information for pricing in increments, flag cost drivers as concepts develop, and — where a direction exceeds

UW’s budget — surface it early and develop affordable alternatives before the direction is approved. The engagement must align with the RFP schedule, including first-90-day critical-path items and the roughly ten-month window.

Within the first 90 days, the Architect and DAT prioritize the critical-path items that gate later work, including establishing the needs-assessment schedule, initiating department visioning, confirming the existing-conditions baseline scope, and identifying the decisions UW must make, validate, or de-risk early. The schedule includes decision gates and the conditions under which the Architect would advise UW that the aggressive schedule is no longer achievable.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 10 of 36

3.6 Innovation Hub (IPD / BBI) Programming Integration and potentially an additional ~70,000 sf lab space for School of Public Health Program the approximately 300,000–400,000 sf of new research and innovation space, predominantly on West

Campus, required for UW’s innovation hub. Account for the Institute for Protein Design (IPD) co-location model

(approximately 60% wet laboratory / 40% office, with lab-office suites for external partners) and the Brotman Baty

Institute (BBI) consolidation (approximately 33,000 asf, relocating eight existing labs), and coordinate parallel planning to allow IPD/BBI co-location given their research intersection. Account for the specialized laboratory infrastructure assumptions provided by UW and the Project Team with technical validation of laboratory requirements, utility loads, and code compliance performed by UW’s separately retained consultants and integrated by the Architect.

In addition, account for an additional 70,000 sf of new lab space to move the School of Public Health out of 4225

Roosevelt into the innovation hub.

3.7 Stakeholder Engagement Approach

The Architect designs and leads a structured engagement sequence for the needs-based programming and clinical revalidation, coordinated with the DAT and UW. This includes kickoff and visioning sessions with each affected school, unit, and research group; clinical programming sessions with UW Medicine service-line leadership (transplant, cardiac, oncology, surgery, and emergency); and working sessions addressing patient access, ED and EMS flow, parking and public entrances. Sessions are scheduled and tracked within the jointly-authored program schedule, with outcomes documented to support the space programs and the disposition matrix.

4. Coordination & Interfaces The Architect integrates and coordinates the design disciplines into one concept package. The Architect collaborates and coordinates with the following parties; it does not direct or assume responsibility for the professional services of

UW’s separately retained licensed consultants.

Party Nature of Collaboration / Coordination

Development Advisory Team (DAT) Collaborate on program strategy, sequencing, affordability testing, and schedule authorship; provide concept and programming outputs for real-time cost testing.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 11 of 36

Party Nature of Collaboration / Coordination

UW Real Estate / UW Coordinate stakeholder convening, program validation, and the governance and approval cadence.

UW Medicine Collaborate on revalidation of the hospital clinical program and validation of clinical assumptions.

UW Project Team (licensed A/E, cost, parking, substation)

Coordinate to incorporate physical assessment of buildings and above/below-grade infrastructure, cost, and substation inputs. The Architect integrates these inputs but does not direct or assume responsibility for the Project Team's professional services.

Structural Engineer Coordinate existing structural findings, connection feasibility, demolition cutlines, and new construction structural concepts.

Civil Engineer Coordinate above- and below-grade utility baselines, the conflict and relocation matrix, and connection-point analysis.

MEP Engineer Coordinate systems capacity, load hand-offs, and utility interfaces for demolished, retained, and new buildings.

Parking Consultant Coordinate parking supply and demand, the phased balance, and West Campus and CMP-driven reductions.

Marx Okubo Coordinate facility condition and deficiency narratives and align concept outputs to the agreed pricing framework.

Substation interface. The new electrical substation (governing basis: 180 MW total capacity, 120 MW N+1, at the W37

/ Northlake Building site) is designed by UW’s separately retained consultant. The Architect coordinates the substation interfaces into the concept package and reconciles any conflicting figures in the record to this governing basis; it does not perform substation design.

5. Deliverables Each deliverable must be structured to support dependable concept-level pricing and a developable solution. Drawings are required where indicated. A cost-narrative format such as UniFormat/CSI is suggested; the DAT will confirm the controlling format early so a cost estimate can be produced to build the capital strategy.

Definition of a complete concept package. A complete Phase 1 concept package includes the revalidated hospital concept program and design across the viable C variants; needs-based space programs and the disposition matrix for all displaced programs; site, massing, and CMP-compliance studies for South and West Campus; the integrated existing conditions baseline; and pricing-grade drawings and narratives for every component. Recommendations must be sufficient to support UW decision-making, governance approvals, and any subsequent design or procurement without avoidable rework.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 12 of 36

# Deliverable Description Format Ref

D-1 Existing-Conditions Integration Summary

Consolidation of the specialty baselines and validated as-built information into a single design-usable baseline.

Narrative + reference drawings

D1 · D2

D-2 Hospital Concept Program

Revalidated clinical program — beds, ORs, ED, Cath/EP, IR, endoscopy, imaging, and D&T support — confirmed with UW Medicine.

Program document + tables

A2

D-3 Hospital Concept Design Massing, floor stacking, Level 2 Montlake Tower connection, and helipad, tested across the viable Site C variants.

Drawings A2 · B1

D-4 Displaced-Unit Space Programs

Needs-based space program for each affected school, unit, and research group, developed through the visioning sessions.

Program documents

A3 · A4

D-5 Program Disposition Matrix

Program-by-program classification: retain in rebuilt MHSC, new South, new West, lease, or consolidate.

Matrix A5

D-6 Site & Massing Studies C-variant site and massing options with CMP compliance and West Campus integration.

Drawings B1 · B2

D-7 Integrated Concept Package

Coordinated architectural concept and programming, resolved sufficiently to carry into design development.

Drawings + narrative

E1

D-8 Pricing-Grade Narratives Deliverable narratives structured so the cost estimator can attach unit costs at concept level.

Narrative E2 · E4

D-9 Recommendations Memo Recommendations for what else UW should do, beyond this scope, to reach the intended output.

Memo D3

D-10 Innovation Hub Program & Concept

Needs-based program and concept for the IPD/BBI innovation hub (~300–400K sf), predominantly on West Campus and an additional 70,000 sf of lab space for School of Public Health.

Program + drawings

A3 · B2

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 13 of 36

# Deliverable Description Format Ref

D-11 CMP Compliance & Modification Assessment

Assessment of CMP compliance across the variants and any minor modifications required, with entitlement-risk flags.

Narrative + drawings

B1 · B2

D12 Demolition strategy and plan

Balance ongoing operations/academic work with minimum to no disruption and addressing enabling work, temporary conditions, demolition sequencing and interim structural or infrastructure measures required to maintain operations during implementation.

Narrative + drawings

A3 - A4

Deliverable cadence. Consistent with the real-time affordability approach, deliverables are issued in progressive increments aligned to the concept gates, not as a single end-of-engagement submission, so programming, design, and pricing can be tested and adjusted as they develop. Each increment is versioned and accompanied by the pricing-grade narratives the DAT and cost estimator need to update the capital picture.

6. Team & Key Personnel Expectations UW expects the Architect to dedicate, and maintain continuity of, the key personnel necessary to deliver this scope. At a minimum, the team is to include the following members:

• Principal-in-Charge / Design Principal accountable to UW;

• Healthcare Programming Lead,

• Medical Planner experienced in acute-care diagnostic-and-treatment, OR, and ED planning

• Academic and Research Laboratory Planner

• Project Architect responsible for day-to-day coordination and production.

The Statement of Qualifications should identify these individuals, their committed time, and the plan for continuity and surge capacity if a key person becomes unavailable. One individual may hold more than one role where the proposal demonstrates adequate capacity.

7. UW-Provided Inputs, Assumptions & Recommendations

1. UW-provided inputs. UW will provide the RFP and the Engagement Framework & Roadmap; the NBBJ feasibility study and Acute Care Expansion Master Deck, available as-built drawings and existing documentation; Project Team physical assessment, infrastructure, and cost inputs; and substation cost, schedule, and technical assumptions.

2. Assumptions. Concept-level resolution is the target for this phase. Licensed engineering, code-compliance determinations, and technical feasibility validations are performed by UW’s separately retained consultants and

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 14 of 36 integrated by the Architect. The Architect and UW’s separately retained consultants will incorporate the applicable requirements of UW’s Facility Design Standard (FDS) within their respective scopes of work. The Architect will coordinate and integrate the consultants’ inputs into the concept package. UWM also has its own standards which must be incorporated.

3. Site access & working conditions. Assessment and engagement occur within an active hospital and academic campus; the Architect coordinates access, infection-control (ICRA) constraints, after-hours needs, and sensitive-area protocols with UW and UW Medicine.

4. Recommendations beyond scope. With each deliverable set, the Architect recommends to UW what should be done, beyond this specified scope, to reach the intended output including any studies, validations, or de-risking steps the Architect considers advisable.

8. Schedule, Meetings & Reporting The engagement timeline aligns to the schedule in RFP No. 1243728-PLD, including first-90-day critical-path items and the roughly ten-month window; the DAT-and-Architect-authored working schedule sits within that envelope. The

Architect participates in the recurring working sessions established under that schedule and provides program status reporting in a consistent format suitable for use by the project team, UW executive leadership, and the Board of

Regents. The engagement will include, at a minimum, the following recurring meetings and reporting milestones:

1. Recurring working sessions with the DAT, UW, and the specialty consultants, per the jointly authored schedule

2. Concept-gate reviews at each major programming and concept design milestone, incorporating the DAT’s affordability testing

3. Periodic executive status reporting for UWRE, UW Medicine, and executive leadership, in a consistent format suitable for use by UW executive leadership and Board of Regents

9. Standard of Care & Independence The Architect provides independent, objective advice in UW’s best interests, discloses any actual or potential conflicts of interest, and maintains the confidentiality and professional standards established in the final UW agreement. The

Architect coordinates extensively with the DAT, UW Medicine, the Project Team, and the specialty consultants

(contracted between UW and the Architect) and the Architect’s role and standard of care are governed by that agreement.

10. Exclusions The following are outside this Scope of Work: Schematic design, Design Development, and Construction Documents;

permit-ready documents and other architectural or engineering design services beyond the predesign phase; licensed engineering and technical-feasibility work performed by UW’s separately retained consultants; design of the electrical substation; direction or supervision of the Project Team’s professional services; production of the cost estimate itself

(the Architect provides pricing-grade drawings and narratives from which the estimate is produced); and construction or construction management.

Predesign Level of Development. Pricing-grade drawings and narratives required under this Scope of Work are concept-level predesign documents intended to support cost estimating, alternatives evaluation, capital planning, and UW decision-making. They are not required to be developed to Schematic Design-level resolution and are not intended to establish the final architectural or engineering design solution.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 15 of 36

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 16 of 36

Exhibit 1

Buildings and Areas in Scope

Current Area Current Function Planning Role / Disposition Notes

BB & RR Wings Offices, lab, employee health (250k+ sf) Primary decant / demolition target

CC & SW Wings Clinical support functions Potential decant target

Pacific Tower Oldest inpatient beds (94) Long-range replacement

Cascade Tower Surgery, ED, Oncology (221 beds) Future phased replacement

S1 Parking Garage + CUP 900 stalls; chiller plant, water, critical infrastructure

Demolish and rebuild

Haring Center (S54) Sensitive population served Preserve — avoid displacement

Montlake Tower Newest hospital portions; Level 2 connection point

Connection / retained

W37 / Northlake Building New electrical substation site (180 MW;

120 MW N+1)

Interface only — designed by UW consultants

West Campus W27 / W24 / W33 Relocation-candidate development sites Evaluate as relocation destinations

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 17 of 36

III. Statement of Qualifications Requirements and Evaluation

1. Statement of Qualifications – Submittal Requirements

Respondents must first satisfy every minimum qualification in Section 2. Minimum qualifications are evaluated on a pass/fail basis: failure to meet or demonstrate any minimum qualification may result in rejection as nonresponsive without further evaluation. Respondents that satisfy the minimums will then be scored in accordance with the weighted evaluation criteria in Section 3. Section 4 identifies preferred and differentiating qualifications, which are not pass/fail but may be considered in scoring where relevant.

Each numbered evaluation criterion in Section 3 specifies the matters to be addressed, the required supporting information, and the maximum page allocation for that section. Section 3 page limits are maximums only and may not be exceeded; Respondents may use fewer pages and distribute their available pages among the evaluation criteria as they deem appropriate, subject to the total SOQ page limit. SOQs should be organized and labeled to correspond to the numbered evaluation criteria (Q1–Q8).

Total page limit. The scored portion of the SOQ (Q1–Q8) may not exceed 15 pages in total. The page limits stated for individual sections are maximum page allocations only, are not cumulative, and do not increase the 15-page total limit.

Material exceeding an individual section page limit or the 15-page total limit may not be evaluated. Excluded from the 15-page limit are the cover letter, table of contents, section dividers, Minimum Requirements Matrix, resumes, and required UW forms and certifications. Minimum 11-point font, standard margins, 8.5 × 11-inch format.

2. Minimum Qualifications (Pass / Fail) Respondents must meet and demonstrate all minimum qualifications identified below. To demonstrate compliance, Respondents must download Minimum Qualifications Matrix, complete the Matrix in Microsoft Excel, and identify the specific project, client, proposed team member(s), dates, and Respondent's role that demonstrate each applicable minimum qualification. The completed Matrix must be uploaded in Excel format (.xlsx) to the designated file upload section of the solicitation.

Attachment A is separate from the SOQ and does not count toward the 15-page SOQ limit. UW may request additional information or documentation to verify any minimum qualification.

Minimum Qualification Threshold

M1 Licensure The firm is licensed, or able to be licensed, to practice architecture in the State of Washington, and will provide licensed professionals for all work requiring licensure.

M2 Architectural Practice Minimum 15 years of professional architectural practice in complex, multi-phased institutional, healthcare, or comparable projects.

M3 Acute-Care Hospital Design

Demonstrated experience designing and programming acute-care hospital facilities, including inpatient bed towers and diagnostic-and-treatment (D&T) platforms — operating rooms, emergency departments, and imaging.

M4 Active-Hospital Environments

Demonstrated experience delivering projects on active, operating hospital campuses where clinical services, emergency access, and patient care were maintained without interruption.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 18 of 36

Minimum Qualification Threshold

M5 Academic / Institutional Clients

Experience with large research universities, academic medical centers, health systems, or comparably complex institutional clients with multiple stakeholder groups.

M6 Programming & Needs Assessment

Demonstrated capability to conduct needs-based programming and space-needs assessment with end-user departments, producing validated space programs.

M7 Decanting & Phased Occupancy

Documented experience with large-scale decanting, phased occupancy, relocation planning, or enabling-project sequencing in active campus or institutional environments.

M8 Research & Laboratory Planning

Demonstrated experience programming and planning wet-laboratory and research facilities, including biosafety, vivarium, or specialized lab infrastructure.

M9 Multidisciplinary Integration

Demonstrated capability to lead and integrate structural, civil, MEP, parking, and condition-assessment consultants into a single coordinated concept package.

M10 Pricing-Grade Documentation

Demonstrated capability to produce concept-level drawings and narratives of sufficient resolution to support dependable cost estimating and capital planning.

3. Scored Qualifications The following qualifications are scored and weighted as shown below. Respondents must address each one. The evaluation category and page limit for each are stated with the question.

# Scored Qualification Weight

Q1 Acute-Care Hospital Design & Programming 20%

Q2 Needs-Based Programming & Decanting Methodology 15%

Q3 Multidisciplinary Integration & Pricing-Grade Output 15%

Q4 Institutional & Campus Master Plan Experience 15%

Q5 Key Personnel & Continuity 10%

Q6 Challenges to UW's Current Framing 10%

Q7 Approach to the Work, Stakeholder Engagement & Schedule Adherence 10%

Q8 References & Comparable Case Studies 5%

Total 100%

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 19 of 36

Q1 Acute-Care Hospital Design & Programming EVALUATES: Relevant Experience · Technical Capability · PAGE LIMIT: 3 pages max

Describe the firm's experience designing and programming acute-care hospital facilities, with emphasis on inpatient bed towers and consolidated diagnostic and treatment platforms. Address how you have approached bed-tower stacking and nursing unit configuration; operating-room platform planning, including single-floor OR plates and interstitial mechanical floors; emergency-department and imaging planning; and connection of new towers to existing hospital facilities to create continuous surgical platforms. Describe how you have delivered projects on active hospital campuses while maintaining clinical services, emergency-department ambulance access, and patient parking without interruption, and how you applied an 'empty-chair' or equivalent principle, so replacement capacity existed before space was taken offline. In addition, describe the team's ability to balance operational continuity without compromising the project or long-term redevelopment goals. This is an important consideration as ongoing operations/academic work cannot be disrupted. This includes addressing enabling work, temporary conditions, demolition sequencing and interim structural or infrastructure measures required to maintain operations during implementation.

Required Supporting Material. Identify at least three acute-care hospital projects identifying client, bed count, program scope, construction value, delivery dates, and the respondent's role. Name the individuals proposed for this engagement who worked on each. For at least one, describe the specific measures used to maintain clinical operations during construction.

Q2 Needs-Based Programming & Decanting Methodology EVALUATES: Technical Approach & Methodology · PAGE LIMIT: 3 pages max

This engagement replaces a 1:1 replacement placeholder with true needs-based programming. Describe your methodology for determining what a displaced department actually needs going forward, rather than replacing the area it currently occupies. Address how you inventory and classify occupants; how you structure and lead needs and visioning sessions with academic, clinical, research, and administrative units; and how you test programs against reduction levers including current utilization and vacancy, hybrid and remote work, shared and consolidated cores, real growth projections, backfill capacity in retained space, and lease-versus-build. Explain how you determine whether a program is retained in a rebuilt facility, relocated to a new building, leased, or consolidated — and how you keep clinical programs that must remain hospital-connected from being misplaced. Provide a worked example from a prior program in which needs-based programming produced a materially different — and defensible — result than replacement-in-kind.

Required Supporting Material. Provide the worked example with the client, the starting assumption, the method applied, the resulting program, and the measurable outcome (area, cost, or schedule effect). Include a redacted sample of a space program or disposition matrix produced for a comparable client.

Q3 Multidisciplinary Integration & Pricing-Grade Output EVALUATES: Technical Approach · Program Management · PAGE LIMIT: 2 pages max

Describe how you will integrate the structural, civil, MEP, and parking consultants and the facility-condition assessor into a single coordinated concept package, and how you will collaborate with a separately retained Development Advisory Team and UW Project Team over whom the Architect does not have contractual authority. Explain how you produce concept-level drawings and narratives resolved enough to support dependable cost estimating — not order-of-magnitude placeholders — and how you structure documentation so a cost estimator can attach unit costs cleanly.

Describe how you work within a real-time affordability loop: pricing in increments, flagging cost drivers as concepts develop, and pivoting to affordable alternatives before a direction is locked in.

RFQ-1254649-PD Architectural Consultant South and West Campus Expansion, Phase 1 Page 20 of 36

Required Supporting Material.