Research Facility Design: A Procurement Guide to Design Firms and Consultants

Research facility design is the process of translating a lab’s scientific program — the work it will actually do, at what scale, under what containment and regulatory conditions — into a built space: room layout, ventilation and pressure relationships, casework, utilities, and life-safety systems. For a lab manager, procurement officer, or research administrator, it is rarely a single purchase. It is a multi-vendor engagement spanning architectural, engineering, and specialty lab-planning consultants, evaluated and contracted much like any other major capital procurement — on documented qualifications, comparable project experience, and compliance capability, not on aesthetics alone.

This guide covers what research facility design actually involves, the main types of laboratory design projects, who the relevant consultants and firms are, the standards that govern design decisions, and how to run a defensible selection and procurement process.

What research facility design actually involves

A research or laboratory facility design project typically bundles several distinct disciplines under one project, even when a single firm serves as prime consultant:

• Programming — documenting the science: what procedures happen where, what equipment needs to be accommodated, adjacency requirements between spaces, and projected headcount and throughput.
• Architecture — room layout, circulation, egress, materials, and casework coordination.
• Mechanical, electrical, and plumbing (MEP) engineering — ventilation and air-change rates, pressure relationships between zones, gas and vacuum services, emergency power, and specialty utilities (RO/DI water, compressed air, process gases).
• Laboratory equipment planning — fume hood and biosafety cabinet selection and placement, casework and fixed-equipment coordination, and integration of large instruments (autoclaves, ULT freezers, imaging equipment) into the floor plan.
• Code and regulatory review — confirming the design meets applicable building/mechanical codes plus the regulatory framework the lab operates under (biosafety level, GLP, clinical accreditation, radiation safety, etc.).

Because these disciplines interact — a change in ventilation strategy affects room pressurization, which affects containment classification, which affects egress requirements — research facility design is coordinated as an integrated project, not a sequence of independent purchases.

Types of laboratory design

“Types of laboratory design” generally refers to a few overlapping ways to categorize a lab design project, and it’s worth being explicit about which one you mean when scoping a project or briefing a consultant:

• By spatial strategy: open-plan/modular labs (shared benching, flexible utility drops, designed to be reconfigured as programs change) versus closed, fixed-room labs (dedicated rooms per group or function, less flexible but easier to isolate for containment or specialized utilities).
• By function: wet lab (bench chemistry, biology, wet processes requiring plumbed utilities and fume hoods) versus dry lab (computational, data, and instrumentation-heavy work with different power, cooling, and vibration-control needs). See CASRAI’s guide on wet lab vs. dry lab space planning for how this distinction drives layout decisions.
• By containment/biosafety level: BSL-1 through BSL-4 facilities have progressively stricter requirements for airflow direction, filtration, access control, and effluent treatment — see CASRAI’s dictionary entries on biosafety level (BSL) and the guide on BSL-3 laboratory requirements.
• By regulatory regime: GLP-compliant research facilities (nonclinical safety studies under Good Laboratory Practice, 21 CFR Part 58) have documentation, archive, and quality-unit space requirements that a non-regulated academic research lab does not.
• By discipline: core/shared-instrument facilities, cleanroom and vivarium spaces, and clinical or diagnostic laboratories each carry their own design conventions and code requirements on top of the general lab-design baseline.

A design brief that specifies which of these categories applies — rather than just “we need a new lab” — produces materially better proposals from prospective design firms, because it tells them which code sections, containment strategy, and precedent projects are actually relevant.

Laboratory design firms and consultants: who’s actually involved

“Laboratory design firm,” “lab design consultant,” and “laboratory design consultant” are often used interchangeably in search and in practice, but a research facility project typically involves several distinct roles, sometimes from one firm and sometimes from several under a single prime contract:

• Architecture firm — holds overall design responsibility and licensure; may or may not have deep laboratory-specific experience. Ask specifically about lab project volume, not just total portfolio size.
• Laboratory planning consultant — a specialist (sometimes an independent consultant, sometimes a group within a larger AE firm) focused on programming, adjacencies, and lab-specific layout logic; often engaged before or alongside the architect of record.
• MEP/lab engineering consultant — designs the ventilation, pressurization, and utility systems that make containment and safety requirements actually work; this is frequently where the technical risk in a lab project concentrates, so their portfolio of comparable-containment projects matters as much as the architect’s.
• Code/life-safety and biosafety consultant — reviews the design against applicable building and fire codes and, for regulated facilities, against the biosafety, GLP, or clinical-accreditation requirements the lab must meet before occupancy.
• Commissioning agent — independently verifies, once built, that airflow, pressure relationships, and containment systems perform to the design intent — a step that is often separately procured and is worth keeping independent of the design firm itself.

For a straightforward renovation, one firm may cover several of these roles. For a new-build biocontainment or GLP facility, expect a multi-firm team, and confirm in the proposal stage exactly who is responsible for which deliverable — ambiguity here is a common source of coordination failures and change orders later in the project.

Medical laboratory planning and design

Medical (clinical) laboratory planning and design adds requirements on top of general research-lab design, because a clinical lab’s physical space is itself part of what regulators and accreditors evaluate:

• Accreditation-linked space requirements. Programs such as CLIA certification and CAP accreditation, and internationally, quality-management frameworks like ISO 15189, expect the facility to be assessed as part of the lab’s quality system — environmental conditions, space adequate for safe workflow, and separation of incompatible activities (for example, pre- and post-amplification PCR areas) are typically reviewed, not just equipment and personnel.
• Workflow-driven layout. Specimen receiving, accessioning, testing benches, and result reporting are typically sequenced to minimize cross-traffic and specimen handling errors — a different optimization target than a research bench lab, where flexibility for changing experiments usually dominates.
• Biosafety and waste handling. Clinical labs handling patient specimens generally operate at minimum BSL-2 practices, which sets baseline requirements for handwashing stations, biosafety cabinet placement, and regulated medical waste segregation and storage.
• Point-of-care and satellite testing. Facilities that support point-of-care testing in addition to a central lab need design provisions (secure storage, connectivity, proximity to care areas) that a central-lab-only design does not.

Because these requirements are tied to accreditation and licensure, it’s worth confirming during consultant selection whether the firm’s team has specific experience designing to CLIA/CAP or ISO 15189 requirements, not just general healthcare or research-lab experience — the two are related but not interchangeable.

Standards and regulatory frameworks that shape design decisions

A competent design firm should be able to speak fluently to how these apply to your specific project; treat this as a screening question, not background reading:

• ANSI/ASSP Z9.5 — the American National Standard for Laboratory Ventilation, covering fume hood performance, exhaust system design, and air-change-rate guidance. See CASRAI’s Laboratory Design for Compliance and Safety guide for how ventilation and containment zoning requirements drive layout.
• NFPA 45 — the fire protection standard for laboratories using chemicals, covering fire-rated separations, storage limits, and ventilation-related fire safety provisions.
• CDC/NIH Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories (BMBL) — the primary US reference for biosafety-level facility requirements referenced in most institutional biosafety committee reviews; see also CASRAI’s entry on the Institutional Biosafety Committee (IBC), which typically reviews new or renovated containment space before occupancy.
• 21 CFR Part 58 (Good Laboratory Practice) — for nonclinical safety-testing facilities, sets requirements for archive, quality-unit, and study-storage space as part of facility adequacy.
• ISO 15189 — for medical laboratories, includes facility and environmental-condition requirements as part of the overall quality-management assessment.
• Applicable state/local building and mechanical codes — these govern baseline life-safety, egress, and mechanical-system requirements and generally take precedence procedurally, even where a biosafety or GLP standard sets a stricter technical bar.

Ask any prospective firm which of these apply to your project and how their proposed design addresses each — a vague or generic answer here is a legitimate reason to screen a firm out before it reaches the interview stage.

Selecting and procuring a design firm or consultant

Treat design-firm selection as a formal procurement process, not an informal referral. A workable process for institutional or lab-capital projects generally includes:

1. Written program/brief. Document the space types (per the “types of laboratory design” categories above), containment or regulatory level, projected headcount, and known equipment before soliciting proposals — this is what lets firms respond with a real fee and schedule rather than a placeholder estimate.
2. Qualifications-based shortlisting (RFQ). Request project lists specifically for comparable lab type and containment/regulatory level, not general portfolio size. Ask for the specific project team members who will actually staff your project, not just firm-level credentials.
3. Reference checks on comparable projects. Ask prior clients specifically about schedule and budget performance, change-order history, and how the firm handled code or containment issues discovered mid-project — these are more predictive of outcome than a portfolio review alone.
4. Delivery method decision. Design-bid-build, design-build, and CM-at-risk carry different risk allocation, schedule, and cost-certainty tradeoffs; for containment or highly regulated facilities, many institutions favor delivery methods that keep the design and construction teams collaborating early, given how design changes late in construction can affect containment performance.
5. Fee structure and scope clarity. Confirm whether MEP/lab engineering, code consulting, and commissioning are included in the prime fee or procured separately, and get this in writing before contract execution — this is the most common source of scope disputes on lab projects.
6. Independent commissioning. Where feasible, keep commissioning verification (confirming built performance against design intent for airflow, pressure, and containment) as a separate engagement from the design firm being verified.

Due-diligence questions to ask a prospective design firm

• How many completed projects has your team delivered at this specific containment or regulatory level (not just “laboratory projects” generally)?
• Who on your team will be the actual day-to-day contact, and what is their specific lab-design experience?
• Can you provide references from clients whose facility type and regulatory requirements match ours?
• How do you handle code or biosafety-committee review comments that surface after design development is underway?
• Is commissioning included in your scope, or will it be procured independently?
• What is your change-order history on comparable projects, and what typically drives it?

Frequently asked questions

What is research facility design?

Research facility design is the process of planning and engineering a laboratory or research building so its physical space — layout, ventilation, utilities, and safety systems — supports the specific scientific work, containment level, and regulatory requirements the facility must meet.

What do laboratory design firms actually do?

Laboratory design firms translate a lab’s scientific program into a built space, typically coordinating architecture, mechanical/electrical/plumbing engineering, lab equipment planning, and code/biosafety review, either within one firm or across a team of specialty consultants under a prime contract.

What’s the difference between a lab design consultant and an architecture firm?

An architecture firm typically holds overall design responsibility and licensure for the project. A lab design (or laboratory planning) consultant is a specialist — sometimes independent, sometimes part of a larger firm — focused specifically on lab programming, adjacencies, and containment/ventilation logic, and may be engaged alongside or ahead of the architect of record.

What are the main types of laboratory design?

Labs are commonly categorized by spatial strategy (open/modular vs. closed/fixed), function (wet lab vs. dry lab), containment level (BSL-1 through BSL-4), and regulatory regime (GLP-compliant, clinical/CLIA-CAP, non-regulated research). Which categories apply to a given project should be defined in the design brief before soliciting proposals.

What’s different about medical laboratory planning and design?

Medical (clinical) laboratory design must account for accreditation-linked facility requirements (CLIA, CAP, ISO 15189), specimen-workflow sequencing to minimize handling errors, minimum BSL-2 biosafety provisions, and regulated medical waste handling — requirements that go beyond general research-lab design.

How should we evaluate laboratory design consultants before hiring one?

Run a qualifications-based process: shortlist on project experience specifically at your containment/regulatory level, check references on schedule/budget performance and change-order history, confirm which team members will actually staff the project, and get scope (including code consulting and commissioning) documented in writing before signing.

This guide provides general procurement and planning information. It is not a substitute for review by a licensed architect, professional engineer, or your institution’s biosafety, environmental health and safety, or facilities office, all of whom should be involved in any actual research facility design project.