    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                              [H.A.S.C. No. 117-6]

                      PRIVATIZED MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING:

                  UPDATE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF HOUSING REFORMS

                                   __________

                                 JOINT HEARING

                                   before the

                           SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS

                            meeting jointly with the

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                                     of the

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD

                                 MARCH 10, 2021

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                 _________

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    48-570                   WASHINGTON : 2023

                           SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS

                      JOHN GARAMENDI, California, Chairman

    JOE COURTNEY, Connecticut            DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado
    JACKIE SPEIER, California            JOE WILSON, South Carolina
    JASON CROW, Colorado                 AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
    ELISSA SLOTKIN, Michigan, Vice       JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
        Chair                            MIKE JOHNSON, Louisiana
    JARED F. GOLDEN, Maine               MARK E. GREEN, Tennessee
    ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia            LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan
    KAIALI'I KAHELE, Hawaii              BLAKE D. MOORE, Utah
    MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington

                   Jeanine Womble, Professional Staff Member
                     Ian Bennitt, Professional Staff Member
                               Sean Falvey, Clerk

                                     ------

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                     JACKIE SPEIER, California, Chairwoman

    ANDY KIM, New Jersey                 JIM BANKS, Indiana
    CHRISSY HOULAHAN, Pennsylvania       STEPHANIE I. BICE, Oklahoma
    VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas, Vice Chair  LISA C. McCLAIN, Michigan
    SARA JACOBS, California              RONNY JACKSON, Texas
    MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington       JERRY L. CARL, Alabama
    MARC A. VEASEY, Texas                PAT FALLON, Texas

                   David Giachetti, Professional Staff Member
                     Glen Diehl, Professional Staff Member
                               Sidney Faix, Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Banks, Hon. Jim, a Representative from Indiana, Ranking Member,
      Subcommittee on Military Personnel.............................     5
    Garamendi, Hon. John, a Representative from California, Chairman,
      Subcommittee on Readiness......................................     1
    Lamborn, Hon. Doug, a Representative from Colorado, Ranking
      Member, Subcommittee on Readiness..............................     3
    Speier, Hon. Jackie, a Representative from California,
      Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Military Personnel.................     4

                                   WITNESSES

    Aycock, MG Al USA (Ret.), Military Partnership Executive, Corvias     6
    Taylor, Rick, President, Facilities, Operation and Construction,
      Balfour Beatty Communities.....................................     9
    Tregarthen, Carolyn, Managing Director, Lendlease Americas.......     7

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Aycock, MG Al................................................    39
        Garamendi, Hon. John.........................................    37
        Taylor, Rick.................................................    62
        Tregarthen, Carolyn..........................................    49

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        [There were no Documents submitted.]

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        [There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        Mr. Garamendi................................................    71
        Ms. Houlahan.................................................    84
        Ms. Speier...................................................    77
        Ms. Strickland...............................................    88

                      PRIVATIZED MILITARY FAMILY HOUSING:
                  UPDATE ON IMPLEMENTATION OF HOUSING REFORMS

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
           Subcommittee on Readiness, Meeting Jointly with the
                            Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
                             Washington, DC, Wednesday, March 10, 2021.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 4:49 p.m., in
    room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Garamendi
    (chairman of the Subcommittee on Readiness) presiding.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN GARAMENDI, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
            CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS

        Mr. Garamendi. The committee will come to order. I am
    required to read, but all of us have heard several times. So in
    case you weren't listening to previous times, you are going to
    get to hear it again, because I have been told I have to do it.
        I would like to welcome the members who are joining today's
    markup remotely. Those members are reminded that they must be
    visible, on screen, within the software platform for the
    purposes of identity verification when joining the proceeding,
    establishing and maintaining a quorum participating in the
    proceeding, and voting.
        Members participating remotely must continue to use the
    software platform's video function while attending the
    proceedings, unless they experience connectivity issues or
    other technical problems that render the member unable to fully
    participate on camera.
        If a member who is participating remotely experiences
    technical difficulties, please contact the committee staff for
    assistance and they will get you reconnected.
        When recognized, video or remotely attending members
    participating will be broadcast into the room via the
    television internet feeds. Members participating remotely are
    asked to mute their microphone when they are not speaking.
    Members participating remotely will be recognized normally for
    asking questions, but if they want to speak at another time,
    they must seek recognition verbally.
        In all cases, members are reminded to unmute their
    microphone--unmute your microphone--don't fall out of your
    chair and please don't hurt yourself.
        Members should be aware that there is a slight lag of a few
    seconds between the time you start speaking and the camera will
    switch to you. Members who are participating remotely are
    reminded to keep software platforms, video functions on for the
    entirety of the time they attend the proceeding. Those members
    may leave and rejoin the proceedings. If members depart for a
    short period for reasons other than joining a different
    proceeding, they should leave the video function on.
        If members will be absent for a significant period or
    depart to join a different proceeding, they should exit the
    software platform entirely and then rejoin when they return.
    Members are also advised that I have designated a committee
    staff member to, if necessary, mute unrecognized members. Yes,
    I can shut you down. Microphones to conceal any inadvertent
    background noise that may disrupt the proceedings. Members may
    use the software platform's chat function to communicate with
    staff regarding technical or logistical issues only.
        Finally, remotely participating members should see a 5-
    minute clock countdown on the software platform's display, but,
    if necessary, I will hit your remote button and you will lose
    connectivity or at least voice.
        Jackie, we got to do something about this. Why should we
    take time to do that, I don't know.
        So having said that, ladies and gentlemen, I call to order
    this joint hearing of the Readiness Subcommittee and Military
    Personnel Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee.
    Over the course of the past 2 years, the Readiness Subcommittee
    has been heavily engaged in oversight of the private military
    family housing program through several formal committee events,
    numerous meetings with families, advocacy groups, private
    partners, and the Department of Defense personnel, we have been
    at work to improve the quality of housing provided to our
    service members and their families.
        The National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2020
    contained a substantial housing reform package that included,
    among other things, a tenant's bill of rights that serves as
    the foundation of enhanced accountability for the quality of
    privatized military family housing.
        Over the last year, we have been heavily focused on
    implementation of those reforms. And while there is still work
    to be done, we have made some progress. However, we just heard
    from family housing advocates and there is a whole lot more
    that needs to be done. And this hearing is to move in that
    direction.
        I would like to thank those three partners who are with us
    today for joining us and for participating in the hearing. I
    suspect it has not been easy and certainly we have not always
    agreed with what you have accomplished thus far and, of course,
    we want more to be done. But at least you have shown up for the
    discussion and you are prepared to answer what are undoubtedly
    going to be tough questions from the members of the committee.
        Unfortunately, another partner--I don't want to call him a
    partner--but Clark Realty Capital has declined our invitation
    to join this hearing. I am really upset about this. In fact, I
    am gravely disappointed by their decision and it raises
    concerns about their willingness and their ability to be
    transparent and to be responsive not only to Congress, but far
    more importantly, to the families that are in their homes.
        So as we conduct our oversight of the privatized military
    housing program, Clark Realty, you are clearly in the sights of
    this committee and we will be assessing which of our oversight
    tools might be brought to bear to get answers from your
    organization. We have heard from advocates at Fort Belvoir in
    the previous meeting before this committee commenced, and we
    heard some very disturbing testimony.
        So since Clark, you won't come to us; we are going to go to
    you, and I invite my colleague, Ms. Speier, to join us on a
    little sashay down the river to find out what is going on at
    Fort Belvoir and why Clark has had such bad review. So heads
    up, we are coming your way and we may not give you much time to
    know when we arrive.
        Another thing that we heard in the previous meeting was
    that the bill of rights is good, but lacks teeth. So we are
    going to see if we can find some teeth in how we might find it
    to be enforced. So with that, just a couple of final words.
        Military families deserve quality housing and they deserve
    responsive property management and this committee will continue
    to use all of the tools at our disposal to make sure that those
    families get both quality housing and responsive answers to
    whatever concerns they may have. So with that, my Ranking
    Member, Doug Lamborn, it is your turn, then I am going to turn
    to Ms. Speier and her ranking member.
        Mr. Lamborn.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Garamendi can be found in
    the Appendix on page 37.]

    STATEMENT OF HON. DOUG LAMBORN, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM COLORADO,
               RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON READINESS

        Mr. Lamborn. Thank you, Chairman Garamendi.
        Today, we will hear testimony from three of the four
    invited partner companies that participate in the privatized
    military housing initiative. I want to echo the chairman's
    comments about today's witnesses. I very much appreciate the
    engagement by the companies present today and am disappointed
    that not all attended.
        Over the past two and a half decades, the military housing
    private public venture has been utilized to provide housing
    options for our military families. Unfortunately, the program
    has also experienced serious management, health and safety, and
    oversight concerns. As someone whose district is home to 48,000
    Active Duty military members, I know that our military families
    deserve better. And I will not stop fighting to ensure that
    these issues are resolved.
        In 2018 and 2019, largely the result of our Reuters
    investigative series, military families from across the country
    came forward to share problems about their living conditions
    under the program. This subcommittee held numerous hearings in
    response to concerns about mold, rodents, poor customer
    service, and poor management. It became clear that there were
    systemic issues within the privatized military housing
    initiative that required significant attention.
        Both the NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] for
    Fiscal Year 2020 and the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2021 contained
    bipartisan provisions to reform and strengthen oversight of the
    program. One such provision was the requirement for the
    Department of Defense, in coordination with the private
    partners, to develop and promulgate a tenant's bill of rights.
        The NDAA mandated 18 rights and since 2019, 15 have already
    been implemented and available to military families. But I look
    forward to hearing from our witnesses today on their
    perspective of why the remaining three--universal lease,
    dispute resolution, and 7-year maintenance history--have not
    yet been made available to all of our military families.
        I am also concerned with the financial stability of some of
    the housing projects within the military housing program. The
    military privatization initiative began as a way to modernize
    family housing, improve efficiency, and grow reserves for
    future improvements. Today, many of the agreements are roughly
    at the midpoint of their 50-year term. While we are aware of
    some significant new investments, the fact remains that old
    housing units inherited into the program will need to be
    recapitalized.
        We must continue to assess the financial condition of the
    agreements to ensure that new investments and improvements can
    be made. I welcome ideas today from the witnesses on how to
    find solutions in cases where projects are not receiving
    adequate cash flow to sustain home quality for our service
    members.
        According to the military housing advocacy network, despite
    the progress made in the past two NDAAs, thousands of military
    families are still living in substandard housing. We just left
    a briefing where we heard complaints from various family
    advocacy groups, so we know that problems persist and we know
    how important Congress' continued oversight is.
        Two years ago at another hearing with program partners, I
    made it clear that reform was needed and in a way that
    preserves the sound financial footing of each project so that
    military families receive housing commensurate with the
    sacrifices that they make for each of us. Today I am committed
    to seeing this through.
        I want to thank the witnesses for your engagement, and I
    look forward to learning more about your perspectives on the
    program, your progress implementing congressional reforms of
    the past two NDAAs so far, as well as your ideas to improve the
    quality and experience of privatized military housing for our
    service members and their families.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Lamborn.
        Ms. Speier.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JACKIE SPEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
       CALIFORNIA, CHAIRWOMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all for
    joining us today. I want to welcome our witnesses. I appreciate
    your attendance to these critical issues.
        I want to call out the irresponsible conduct of Clark
    Realty Capital and convey to them, you can run, but you cannot
    hide and we will, in fact, be visiting Fort Belvoir. And I just
    realized that five out of the nine installations in which they
    have contracts are in California and I intend to see many of
    those and hope, Mr. Chairman, you will join me in that as well.
        I had wanted to ask them questions about lagging
    implementation of the tenant bill of rights and resident
    dissatisfaction at Fort Belvoir due to shoddy maintenance and
    improper remediation of environmental hazards.
        Our military families face unacceptable health and safety
    issues every single day, and of all places, their homes. Taking
    care of one of the most basic needs of our families, their
    housing is something we must get right every time. And some of
    you have failed in too many instances.
        We have heard and seen firsthand the horror stories in
    these houses from mold, to water leaks, to incorrect lead
    abatement that has directly affected the health and safety of
    these families. I have visited Fort Hood and met military
    families that have been living in these unacceptable housing
    conditions who have seen their children suffer health problems
    after mold consumed their homes and belongings, even a baby's
    crib.
        You are solely responsible for the correction of these
    defects and the management of these properties, so I want to
    hear what you have done to make this right for the affected
    families and why it took congressional action to get it done.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman, and I will have to excuse
    myself very briefly to go make a presentation on the floor.
        Mr. Garamendi. Ms. Speier, thank you very much for your
    participation. Your responsibility on the personnel committee
    is [inaudible] and I look forward to working with you
    [inaudible] basis of California that would be good too.
        Thank you so very much and when you return we will carry
    forward. Thank you.
        Mr. Banks.

      STATEMENT OF HON. JIM BANKS, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM INDIANA,
           RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to welcome
    our privatized military housing partners that are attending
    today's hearing. Unfortunately, Clark Realty, one of the
    housing partners we wanted to hear from declined the
    committee's invitation. I would like to note that Clark is the
    privatized military partner managing Fort Belvoir, an area
    where a group of our military families are reporting
    significant concerns.
        I think you all will all agree that our military families
    deserve the best housing experiences that we can provide them.
    They should not have to worry about excessive mold, pest
    infestation, asbestos, open sewage, radon gas, and other
    environmental health conditions in some of the housing units.
        They also should not have to worry about cumbersome
    property management issues regarding lagging response times,
    withholding work, and in some instances retribution for
    bringing housing problems forward. We have got to do a lot
    better.
        Over the last couple of NDAAs, we have made extensive
    reforms in military privatized housing to include the tenant
    bill of rights. We also know some things have improved, but
    what I would like to understand today is why we continue to
    hear from some of our military families that things are not
    improving. I would also like to understand from your
    perspective what challenges still persist and why.
        Thank you, again, for your attendance today.
        And I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Mr. Aycock, if you will join us.
        General Aycock. I have joined, sir.
        Mr. Garamendi. Very good. Let's hear from you, your
    testimony. We have your written testimony, so please proceed.

      STATEMENT OF MG AL AYCOCK USA (RET.), MILITARY PARTNERSHIP
                      EXECUTIVE, CORVIAS GROUP LLC

        General Aycock. Thank you very much, sir.
        Chairwoman Speier, Chairman Garamendi, Ranking Member
    Banks, Ranking Member Lamborn, subcommittee members, it is my
    privilege to provide testimony about the implementation of
    housing reforms for privatized military family housing.
        Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
    My name is Al Aycock. I am a military partnership executive
    with Corvias as well as a retired major general having served
    more than 37 years on Active Duty with United States Army.
        I am directly and personally familiar with the Military
    Housing Privatization Initiatives. My family and I have lived
    in on-post housing managed by the Army and in multiple homes
    managed by three different MHPI [Military Housing Privatization
    Initiative] private partners. Twelve of my last thirteen years
    of service focused on leading and operating Army installations
    from garrison level to the Pentagon taking care of service
    members and their families. I have joined Corvias in May of
    2019 because I am strongly compelled to ensure the highest
    standards of customer service are provided to our service
    members and families. I can attest that Corvias and Corvias
    Property Management share this commitment as we serve more than
    84,000 residents across 13 installations.
        Today, I would like to talk to you about the progress that
    has been made, the results, and the ways in which we, in
    partnership with the services, continue to support our service
    members and families. I will focus these comments on the
    support of the tenant bill of rights and the emphasis on
    customer service.
        We actively advocated for the development of the tenant
    bill of rights. We worked closely with the Department of
    Defense and the services on the specific wording and quickly
    agreed on the way ahead. We have been issuing our 7-year
    maintenance history reports to our current and prospective
    residents at all our installations since last December.
        We will work closely with the Department of Defense and the
    services to participate in their informal dispute resolution
    process at the garrison level through the military housing
    offices, as well as the formal process to higher installation
    command.
        We agree with the wording of the common lease template and
    we have worked with the Department of Defense to ensure the new
    leases will meet Federal and State requirements. Importantly,
    Corvias continues to upgrade and replace aging housing
    infrastructure to over $525 million invested over the last 2
    years, $325 million in private funding, and $200 million from
    the reinvestment funds.
        This increases the more than 17,000 homes we have renovated
    and the more than 9,500 homes built. We are listening to our
    residents and we provide multiple opportunities for residents
    to tell us how we are doing. This includes third-party surveys.
    Last month Corvias Property Management received a national
    award from SatisFacts for resident satisfaction based directly
    on resident input.
        We are analyzing those results in depth to ensure we
    continue this success and also to determine the areas where we
    can improve. Together, with our service partners, we make
    ourselves available to residents through regular communication,
    including town halls so that we can handle any issues brought
    forward. We have maintained close communication with the
    leaders in the Department of Defense and the services from the
    Pentagon through the chain of command to the installation level
    to ensure transparent, and fully accountable working
    relationships.
        We share this same information with a number of
    congressional offices on a regular basis. In addition to our
    emphasis on preventive maintenance and future improvements at
    all our locations, we have responded to multiple natural
    disasters, hurricanes, heavy rains, unseasonably cold winter
    storms with an emphasis on ensuring the safety and standard of
    living for each of our residents.
        We have brought on the additional staff to handle these
    issues while also ensuring a close working relationship with
    the installation leadership and our response. I am here today
    because this mission to support our service members and their
    families is deeply personal.
        I look forward to answering your questions and engaging in
    dialogue on the way forward and serving our service members and
    military families.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of General Aycock can be found in
    the Appendix on page 39.]
        Mr. Garamendi. I thank you very much.
        I will now move to Lendlease and Carolyn Tregarthen.

     STATEMENT OF CAROLYN TREGARTHEN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, LENDLEASE
                                AMERICAS

        Ms. Tregarthen. Thank you. Chairwoman Speier, Chairman
    Garamendi, Ranking Member Banks, Ranking Member Lamborn, and
    distinguished members, my name is Carolyn Tregarthen. I am the
    managing director of Lendlease Americas Communities Business
    and have direct oversight for all Lendlease work with the U.S.
    Department of Defense. Thank you for inviting me to appear
    before you today.
        Lendlease has the privilege of managing approximately
    40,000 single-family homes and approximately 200 apartments
    across 28 installations in 12 States. Over 123,000 military
    personnel and dependents call the Lendlease community home.
        Distinguished chair and ranking members, you should be
    proud of your role in reforming and improving military housing
    in the fiscal year 2020 NDAA. This bill included many critical
    provisions perhaps the most important of these is the tenant
    bill of rights, which includes a dispute resolution procedure
    to ensure residents' grievances are solved fairly and with
    finality.
        I would note that Lendlease was one of the first to agree
    to every provision in the tenant bill of rights, and we were
    the first to provide 7-year history of the home to all
    prospective tenants. We have reviewed all aspects of our
    customer service, resident engagement, and operational
    activities. We reached out to our residents and appreciate
    their feedback.
        We consulted with advocacy groups such as the Safe Military
    Housing Initiative and we worked extensively with our various
    military partners to review all aspects of our operation. We
    have made broad ranging improvements, including more frequent
    inspections by Lendlease and their military partners, more
    property management services performed by more highly trained
    personnel, and more options for our residents to communicate
    with us, including online and via our smartphone app.
        With that backdrop, I would like to address some of the
    concerns you heard from current or former residents at Fort
    Hood. We are aware that certain families are not satisfied, and
    that concerns me very much. Let me be clear: Fort Hood is a top
    priority for me personally and for every member of my team. We
    take all feedback seriously and we also believe that the issues
    of the few do not represent the experience of the vast majority
    who live in the Lendlease community.
        To date, across our portfolio, Lendlease has invested more
    than $7.4 billion to build over 15,000 new homes and renovate
    more than 25,000 existing homes. As many of you know, with the
    Army we recently announced a new private financing that will
    bring an additional $1.1 billion to make further housing
    improvements across several installations in our portfolio.
        We expect that nearly half of these new funds will be used
    at Fort Hood with the remaining funds to be spent at Fort
    Campbell, Fort Wainwright, Fort Drum, Fort Knox, and our Army
    installations in Hawaii. This has always been part of our
    improvement strategy across all bases to ensure that we are
    improving or replacing older homes. This new private capital
    will expedite the renovation of more than 12,000 existing homes
    and construction of more than 1,200 new homes across these
    communities.
        As part of our efforts to better manage the issues related
    to older homes, and improve the housing experience for our
    residents, we have instituted environmental plans at eight
    installations, including Fort Hood which include the following:
    Enhanced lead-based paint inspections; new mold inhibiting
    paint and primer; utilization of enhanced HVAC [heating,
    ventilation, and air conditioning] filters; expanding our
    change of occupancy maintenance and improvement program,
    including inspections by our military partner, improved
    moisture testing to pinpoint the source of moisture in any
    home.
        I recently traveled to Fort Hood and met with the
    leadership of the Fort Hood resident advisory board and the III
    Corps command group. The 11 members of the Fort Hood resident
    advisory board, who were chosen by their neighbors to represent
    them, continue to give us invaluable feedback and will guide us
    as we work together to improve housing on the installation. We
    recognize that despite these positive advancements not everyone
    will be satisfied.
        As is their right, a small number of families have chosen
    litigation rather than working with us through the dispute
    resolution process, which is part of the tenant bill of rights.
    If our residents have any concerns, there are many options
    available to them. We would prefer to work directly with our
    residents to resolve their concerns as we do on a daily basis.
    We do not want to be litigants in a courtroom against our own
    customers. We are eager to be partners, working together to
    solve problems.
        Lendlease shares this committee's steadfast commitment to
    our military families. We have over 1,600 team members across
    our portfolio working each day to provide the best service
    possible. Our goals and yours remain the same. We both want our
    military families to have a first-rate housing experience. They
    expect as much and they deserve no less.
        Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Tregarthen can be found in
    the Appendix on page 49.]
        Mr. Garamendi. About the mute button, it is my turn to also
    listen to myself.
        We now turn to Mr. Taylor, president, facility, operations,
    renovations construction, for the Balfour Beatty Communities.

    STATEMENT OF RICK TAYLOR, PRESIDENT, FACILITIES, OPERATION AND
                CONSTRUCTION, BALFOUR BEATTY COMMUNITIES

        Mr. Taylor. I am here, sir. Can you hear me okay?
        Mr. Garamendi. Yes, we can.
        Mr. Taylor. Great. Thank you.
        Good afternoon, Chairman Garamendi, Chairwoman Speier,
    Ranking Member Lamborn, Ranking Member Banks, and members of
    the subcommittee. My name is Rick Taylor as you heard.
    President of facility operations, renovations, and construction
    for Balfour Beatty Communities, and I thank you for the
    opportunity to testify before you today.
        As I have indicated in previous testimony, Balfour Beatty
    Communities takes the responsibility of serving those who serve
    our country very seriously. Over the past 2 years, we have
    heard your concerns and those of our residents loud and clear,
    and we have taken several actions to improve the residential
    living experience for our military residents.
        Today, I would like to provide you with an update on the
    status of our MHPI projects and highlight our shared commitment
    to supporting the safety, health, and well-being of our service
    members and the families that we serve.
        First, Balfour Beatty Communities is fully committed to
    implementing the housing reforms that were included in the
    National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal years 2020 and
    2021. Regarding the tenant bill of rights, we are working
    closely with the military services towards implementing the
    outstanding rights and completing the actions necessary to
    administer those rights within our project legal documents. We
    have already initiated 7-year maintenance history, processed a
    number of our sites through a pilot program until the universal
    lease is fully implemented, and we will continue to roll that
    out as we approach that date.
        Second, we have made significant investments to improve our
    maintenance services and our operations, strengthened quality
    assurance and compliance, and developed enhanced environmental
    related policies and procedures, including those for mold and
    moisture issues to deliver the highest level of responsive
    customer service to residents.
        My statements are backed up by both our own metrics and
    customer satisfaction scores. During COVID [coronavirus
    disease], our staff worked every day to provide uninterrupted
    service to our residents. We instituted robust safety protocols
    to limit any possible exposure to the virus and worked hard to
    accommodate military members disrupted by COVID. We often
    extended leases or short-term leases for those that lost
    housing in the community.
        During the recent extreme weather in Texas, Oklahoma, and
    the surrounding area, our teams worked diligently on pre-storm
    preparations, worked around the clock to respond to heating and
    plumbing issues, accommodated impacted families in alternative
    lodging, and rapidly deployed our national restoration and
    repair resources. We were able to quickly resolve issues across
    numerous bases while maintaining quality and kept residents and
    installation command regularly briefed on our efforts and the
    progress we were making throughout.
        Third, we are doing our part to create more resilient,
    sustainable communities in concert with the Department of
    Defense's energy security goals. We are leveraging the latest
    technologies to reduce energy costs and improve energy
    resilience of domestic military installations.
        We have more than 39 megawatts of solar across our military
    housing portfolio, offsetting on average 25 percent of each
    community's energy consumption. We are installing upgraded
    energy efficient appliances and systems, including hot water
    heaters, furnaces, air-conditioning units, lighting, and
    plumbing fixtures. We are also leveraging energy savings
    performance contracts at some of our sites.
        Most recently at Fort Eustis and Fort Story in Virginia, we
    are projecting savings of at least $12.2 million and making
    energy efficiency improvements to over 1,000 homes. These
    savings are invested right back into the housing project for
    making other housing and community improvements.
        Lastly, I want to briefly mention the financials for these
    projects. In some cases, especially the case for older legacy
    units that were not programmed for replacement up to this
    point, the revenue stream is often inadequate to fund the
    needed improvements. One of the most significant challenges we
    face is the uncertainty of basic allowance for housing rates.
    Other challenges stem from aging infrastructure and utilities,
    sometimes owned by DOD [Department of Defense] or a third-party
    utility provider.
        We are not, however, waiting for others to address these
    issues. We are evaluating a wide variety of alternative
    financing options and collaborating with the services to find
    new and innovative ways to generate funding for needed
    replacements and renovations. These improvements to homes and
    communities will help ensure the long-term viability of this
    important program.
        Thank you, again, for the opportunity to testify before you
    today, and I look forward to your questions.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Taylor can be found in the
    Appendix on page 62.]
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Taylor.
        I will now turn to questions. I have one question for Mr.
    Aycock, former major general.
        Mr. Aycock, is the base commander responsible for the well-
    being of all of the personnel on the base, families, enlisted
    officers?
        General Aycock. Yes, sir. Absolutely.
        Mr. Garamendi. Can we then use the base commander as the
    individual responsible for the housing issues?
        General Aycock. Sir, yes. I believe that the chief of staff
    of the Army said that very well in his testimony in our earlier
    time.
        Mr. Garamendi. It seems to me we have heard testimony today
    that there are some base commanders that do not understand
    their responsibility. We intend to take that up in the upcoming
    NDAA.
        All right. I would like now to yield the remaining time
    that I have, which is 5 minutes, to Mrs. Luria.
        Mrs. Luria. Well, thank you, Chairman Garamendi and
    Chairwoman Speier for hosting this joint hearing and to our
    witnesses for appearing today, and for yielding me this time. I
    wanted to address my questions to Mr. Taylor.
        Balfour Beatty Communities has several housing communities
    in the Hampton Roads area, including the two you already
    mentioned near Fort Eustis/Fort Story and then also near Joint
    Base Little Creek-Fort Story and so I just wanted to talk to
    you because we frequently hear from those residents who are not
    pleased with their situation in housing and you have described
    different efforts, as well as the efforts that were implemented
    within NDAA last year to try to improve some of those
    processes, but as a company, what steps are you taking to
    improve and earn back the trust of those residents in the
    communities with these processes and make them feel comfortable
    and safe in their homes?
        Mr. Taylor. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for the question. I think
    if you refer to earlier testimony, I was before this
    subcommittee about a year and a half ago almost now and at the
    time, you know, we were undertaking a really thorough review of
    all of our internal operations. We were asked in response to an
    Air Force request to put together a performance improvement
    plan that really allowed for us to look, you know, internally
    in our organization at everything that we were doing.
        We undertook significant changes, including a significant
    reorganization. We enhanced our training programs. We looked
    at, you know, ways of addressing some of the systemic issues
    that the industry was facing. You know, we certainly weren't
    immune to that. You know, we brought in a lot more internal
    resources to address a lot of the environmental concerns that
    were being discussed by residents and the services alike.
        We engaged a lot of, you know, across the board
    professional service providers to help us diagnose issues, why
    they were occurring, and engaging professional firms to help us
    with restoration efforts where those were necessary.
        One of the key things that we did as an organization was,
    if you think about the most complex system in any of our homes,
    it is the HVAC systems.
        Mrs. Luria. I understand your testimony that you have used
    a single contractor throughout all of your properties. To try
    and fix that.
        Mr. Taylor. Yes, ma'am.
        Mrs. Luria. Since we have limited time, I appreciate you
    sharing the internal processes that you have implemented to try
    to improve quality of life in the housing units that you manage
    and I was curious about what barriers you have. Are there any
    institutional barriers, any things within the law, you know, or
    the contracts under which you currently operate that prevent
    you from providing the best quality housing?
        And before you answer, just anecdotally, something I have
    heard from multiple housing units around the Hampton Roads area
    and their management, not just Balfour Beatty, but others is
    really a challenge to find a qualified maintenance workforce to
    actually maintain these properties.
        So is there anything that can be done there? You know, we
    are always looking for opportunities for veterans to have good
    quality employment when they leave the service. I know that we
    have technical schools and community colleges in our area that
    specifically have training programs for building maintenance.
        Is there anything that can be done to tie this all
    together? You can't go fix the houses if you really are
    struggling just to find a workforce to do that.
        So do you have any comments on anything that we could do to
    help on that front?
        Mr. Taylor. Yeah, sure. I will address your first issue. In
    terms of are there any legal impediments to us doing the right
    thing? Absolutely not. We are not constrained by anything of
    that nature. You raise an interesting point in terms of, you
    know, our ability to attract and retain quality workforce
    because that is our lifeblood and that is one of the reasons
    why we employed this third-party national contractor to assist
    us with the most complex system in our units.
        That has allowed for us to free up our workforce to address
    all the other issues. One of the other important things that we
    did this past year that we just invented in the organization at
    the beginning of this year was, we looked at the level of
    turnover that we see in our blue collar workforce and it was
    alarming. And I am certain that all of the project owners face
    a lot of the same issues.
        So, you know, important for us is trying to stem the
    flowing tide of folks that leave us. So we instituted a new way
    to we called it a maintenance tech job family. And what it does
    is, it has various steps within the organization, allows for
    them to grow as their qualifications and certifications grow as
    well. That will help to ensure that our maintenance workforce
    sees a path for growth within the organization. If they are
    willing to invest, we are willing to invest in them to improve
    their skill set, then they can rise up the ladder.
        That is a new change that we instituted that we are
    confident are going to yield results that we want to create
    more stability. It is hard to run an organization if you have
    constant turnovers. So, you know, we are doing our best in
    finding creative ways to stem the outflow of our staff.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you very much for your testimony.
        Mrs. Luria. Thank you for the insight into this issue and
    my time is expired.
        So I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Mrs. Luria, your time is expired. Thank you
    so very much.
        I am now going to turn to Mr. Lamborn.
        Mr. Lamborn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can you hear me okay?
        Mr. Garamendi. Yes.
        Mr. Lamborn. Okay. Thank you, and thanks for having this
    hearing.
        Mr. Taylor of Balfour Beatty Companies, Fort Carson is
    located in my district and it is the home to over 25,000
    military service members as well as their families. Back in
    2018 and 2019, Fort Carson family homes was subject to the same
    concerns about substandard living conditions we heard about
    with privatized housing throughout the country. Since that
    time, how have you worked with your Army partners to implement
    the reforms and requirements of the past two NDAAs and what
    initiatives has Balfour undertaken to improve maintenance
    responsiveness, ensure that service members are receiving the
    information they need, and having issues promptly resolved to
    their satisfaction?
        Mr. Taylor. Congressman, thanks for the question. I think
    in terms of what we have done to improve the relationship at
    the installation, you know, certainly the Army has, you know,
    put a keen focus on this ensuring that there is very active
    engagement from the garrison commander on down regarding
    housing issues.
        We enjoyed a very close-knit relationship there. I say
    close-knit in terms of we are rowing in the same direction,
    ensuring that we are keeping, first and foremost, the quality
    of life of our residents, the responsiveness that is necessary
    for us to meet the needs of our residents. We have adopted a
    lot of technological advancements that make it much easier for
    our residents to communicate issues with us.
        They have access to our online portal. They have an app
    that is at their fingertips that allows for them to communicate
    regularly, you know, with our staff if they have got an issue.
    That online portal allows for them to track, you know, their
    maintenance issue from cradle to grave. They get frequent
    updates if it changes in status.
        One of the other things that I heard one of the other
    individuals mention was the satisfaction scores, and we have
    seen increasing satisfaction scores. Those are conducted by a
    third-party company that give us that feedback, but we are only
    capturing a very small percentage of residents because,
    generally, if we are in a resident's home doing their work, we
    generally are only capturing 15 to 20 percent of those
    residents.
        What we moved to this past year was another way to
    ascertain whether or not a resident's satisfied with the
    quality of work. So we moved to something we call key texting.
    Any time we complete, in our minds, the work order that the
    resident required, they automatically get a system generated
    text message asking them regarding their satisfaction with the
    work performed.
        It is a very binary response. They either text ``Y'' for
    yes if they are satisfied, ``N'' for no if they are not. Any Ns
    we can immediately follow up with to find out what we need to
    do to rectify their situation. I share with you the concerns
    about some of the older housing stock at Fort Carson, and I can
    tell you that is, first and foremost, on our minds.
        We have been working in close coordination with the Army
    for the past several months to look at ways to identify
    additional funding so that we can address the legacy issues
    that are really causing us a lot of concern.
        Bear in mind, a lot of those aging housing units are
    sitting on very old aging infrastructure that further
    complicate issues for us and that is certainly an area that I
    think Congress could lend a hand in identifying additional
    funding to address, you know, some of the systemic underlying
    infrastructure needs of the installation.
        Mr. Lamborn. Now along those lines, Mr. Taylor, you
    announced--your company announced $400 million to recapitalize
    housing projects that you obtained and are able to invest. Will
    that include any units at Fort Carson or is it for other parts
    of the country?
        Mr. Taylor. Well, sir, I don't know that--I don't believe
    we have made a public announcement of that. I can tell you
    that, you know, Fort Carson, in addition to many of our
    installations, we are working in close coordination with
    military leadership to identify the opportunities for us to
    either refinance or, you know, recapitalize the funding streams
    that exist inside the projects.
        With regard to Fort Carson, we are pretty far down the road
    with the Army and we hope to be in a position to be able to
    announce something very soon. It is just too early for me to
    make an official comment on that, but certainly as that
    develops, we would be happy to come and brief you on the status
    of that effort.
        Mr. Lamborn. Okay. Yeah. Please keep me and my office
    informed on that issue. My notes said a little differently, but
    maybe we were jumping the gun or assuming something, but I
    await your announcement.
        And Mr. Chairman, thank you for having this hearing, again,
    and back to you.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Lamborn.
        I now turn to Ms. Speier.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you all for
    participating, again. I have a series of questions that I would
    like each of you to answer and we will start with you, Major
    General Aycock, then to Ms. Tregarthen, and then to Mr. Taylor.
        Are you privately held companies?
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am, we are a privately held
    company.
        Ms. Speier. Ms. Tregarthen.
        Ms. Tregarthen. We are a public company listed on the
    Australian Stock Exchange.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Taylor.
        Mr. Taylor. We are publicly traded in the U.K.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your revenues are ascribed
    to overhead?
        General?
        General Aycock. So, ma'am, I believe--I will have to get
    back with you about the exact percentage that are ascribed to
    overhead, but we are a very small company and the overhead is
    extremely small at the headquarters level. To give you a
    precise answer, I would like to get back with you with your
    staff.
        [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Ms. Speier. That is fine. How many employees do you have?
        General Aycock. So, ma'am, we had it broken down into a
    grouping of each individual garrison has a separate grouping of
    folks. They are in separate LLCs and within the headquarters we
    are still a very small company and, again, I can give you the
    precise numbers across the entire board.
        Ms. Speier. All right. So you will provide us the number of
    employees in each of the garrisons and also your overhead as
    compared to revenue.
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am. Absolutely.
        [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Ms. Speier. All right.
        Ms. Tregarthen?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, I don't have that
    information to hand today, but I am very happy to follow-up
    with that and submit it to the committee in writing.
        [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Ms. Speier. All right. We appreciate that.
        And Mr. Taylor?
        Mr. Taylor. Unfortunately, ma'am, same for me. Rather than
    give you a misleading number, we would be happy to follow up
    for the record. In terms of number of employees, our military
    housing division employs a little over 1,200 employees
    nationwide.
        [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Ms. Speier. Okay. And Ms. Tregarthen, do you have the
    number for number of employees?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, we have approximately 1,600
    employees working across our military housing portfolio.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Do each of you recognize your
    responsibility to comply with State and local laws concerning
    habitability of housing?
        General Aycock?
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am, we do.
        Ms. Speier. Ms. Tregarthen?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Yes, Congresswoman, we do.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Taylor?
        Mr. Taylor. And I would just offer up that we and I think
    other project owners recently responded to an inquiry from
    Senators Warren and Tillis and we have a more fulsome response
    around our approach to these issues and we would be happy to
    submit it to the record to the committee.
        [The information was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Ms. Speier. Well, regardless of your fulsome explanation,
    the truth of the matter is that you are, in fact, responsible
    to comply with the laws of cities and States as it relates to
    your housing conditions and it is my understanding through
    talking with some of the advocates that some of your employees
    like to hide behind some argument that somehow local laws do
    not apply, which is a falsehood.
        Okay. You may not be able to answer this as well, so if you
    would provide this to the committees when you provide the other
    answers, how many of your homes are offline at each of your
    installations during a 6-month period of time and how many of
    your families move before the lease is up? Do each of you pay
    for damaged personal property when a unit becomes
    uninhabitable?
        General Aycock?
        General Aycock. Ma'am, I will start with the offline. That
    is a flexing number, and we will give you an average of a 6-
    month timeline that will tell you about how many houses we have
    offline. That is also not just affected by environmental
    conditions; sometimes affected by the renovations on those
    post.
        So we will try to set that so it is very clear when we
    provide that. And in terms of damages, if there is something
    that happened as a housing condition and we go through the
    process with the tenant and it is our fault, yes, the answer is
    yes, we will make sure that that is taken care of.
        Ms. Speier. Ms. Tregarthen?
        Ms. Tregarthen. So Congresswoman, we will provide the
    information in terms of units online, units vacant, et cetera.
    That is something we track on a very regular basis, so we will
    provide that to you to the committee in writing. And in terms
    of damaged household goods, again, if the damage is due to a
    condition in the house, then yes, we do pay for those goods.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Taylor?
        Mr. Taylor. Yes, ma'am. My responses would be identical to
    the prior two.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Mr. Taylor, following the 2019
    revelation that some of your projects were falsifying
    maintenance records, what steps has your company taken to hold
    those responsible accountable?
        Mr. Taylor. As I previously testified, Congresswoman, you
    know, we are actively still involved in discussions with the
    Department of Justice. I can assure you that we are making
    progress there and we provided regular updates to the
    professional staff of Chairman Garamendi's committee in terms
    of how that is progressing. Unfortunately until they conclude
    their investigation, I am not at liberty to discuss that issue.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Can you at least explain for those
    of us who may not have been aware of this before how was it
    first uncovered that there was falsification of maintenance
    records?
        Mr. Taylor. We identified the issue, ma'am, and we
    undertook hiring a third-party law firm to help us investigate
    and we took that issue forward to the Department of Justice and
    have been sharing our progress with our own internal
    investigation along the way.
        Ms. Speier. All right. I thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Ms. Speier.
        Mr. Banks.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Concerns over
    environmental health exposures in some of these units have
    prompted NDAA's 2020 section 3053, which requires DOD to
    establish a process to identify, record, and resolve
    environmental health hazards in housing. My question for all
    three of you, has the DOD provided any direction to you and
    where in the process are you in implementing these reforms?
        I will start with General Aycock.
        General Aycock. Thank you, sir. That is a great question,
    and we concern ourselves every day with safe living conditions.
    That is the thing that we have to do. As you know, we have gone
    through several natural disasters and so that sometimes
    introduces environmental effects around the house and we take
    care of the families immediately when those things happen.
        We have our own internal processes. You asked me the
    specific question, has DOD provided a specific guidance and
    while we are working with DOD on that, we have not yet been
    giving the precise implementation of that directive.
        Mr. Banks. Okay. Thank you.
        Ms. Tregarthen?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Thank you, Congressman. We also have been
    working with the services consistently since the fiscal year
    2020 NDAA to ensure that those measures are implemented
    appropriately.
        Mr. Banks. Okay. And Mr. Taylor?
        Mr. Taylor. Likewise, Congressman. I can tell you that, as
    I mentioned in my brief opening remarks, we have taken a lot of
    additional steps to enhance our own internal environmental
    staff so that we can provide good oversight and direction to
    our site teams. And, you know, we exclusively use third-party
    agencies to help us assess where those conditions exist and
    then likewise engage expert third parties to help us with
    remediation efforts. It is a significant issue for the industry
    and one that we certainly don't take lightly.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you for that.
        You know, I got to say--it has already been said, but I and
    the others who participate are very disappointed and surprised
    by what we heard in the last panel--in our first panel of
    housing advocates at various military installations. These
    families are relying on all of you and they are relying on us
    as well to provide proper oversight.
        So I have a more general question for you: How do you
    believe that military families that you are serving measure
    your performance and what are you doing to get better at
    listening to them? Tell us about your internal processes to
    improve the way that you listen to them.
        I will start, General, with you.
        General Aycock. Sure, again. Thank you. We are taking extra
    time to communicate with our residents. We make sure that we
    have folks in town halls who can be held accountable. They are
    transparent with what they can do. If there is an issue that
    comes up, they deal with the resident on the spot as quickly as
    possible.
        We have open communication through a number of surveys.
    When we move somebody in, we immediately ask them how well that
    process went and we get graded on it. When somebody does a work
    order, we ask them to give us the same kind of feedback.
        When we move somebody out, we ask them for feedback at that
    particular time also. We maintain communication up and down the
    chain of command.
        Even going back to the initial question that Chairman
    Garamendi asked me. We have great relationships with the senior
    commanders and the garrison commanders on the Army
    installations and the [inaudible] commanders and the mission
    support commanders on the Air Force installations. And when we
    have a problem, we work together as a team to make sure that
    the chain of command understands what the issue is and how we
    can work together to resolve it.
        Mr. Banks. Ms. Tregarthen?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Thank you, Congressman.
        Thank you for the question. We have a number of areas that
    we use [inaudible] and have the right conversation. We think
    about [inaudible] maintenance experiences [inaudible] points.
    We do receive we have establishes [inaudible] at all of our
    regular basis that helps additionally, we have [inaudible]
    allows us to get better communication, better messaging, better
    information, understand what is going on and what our residents
    are thinking, feeling, and what they would like to influence
    about the installation that they live on.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you.
        Mr. Taylor?
        Mr. Taylor. Congressman, very similar response. Surveys are
    certainly of great use, satisfaction is I think a great tool.
    As I mentioned, unfortunately, we are only capturing generally
    15 to 20 percent of our residents.
        So we have decided to move forward with our key texting
    program so that we can get broader coverage so that we get more
    instantaneous feedback from our residents. That has been
    extremely successful whereas satisfaction may only be capturing
    15, 20 percent of residents.
        Statistically, we are getting 70 to 80 percent response
    rates where we rolled out the key texting. So we are encouraged
    by the fact that we are hearing more frequently from residents
    in terms of their satisfaction.
        We, like others, encourage our site team members to make
    warm calls. It doesn't have to be in response to a work order.
    Just trying to stay in touch with what our residents want,
    desire, what their needs are.
        So there is a lot of that that happens. We engage in
    frequent town halls with our installation command leadership
    and our housing partners and that, you know, that has been a
    really useful forum for us to hear at the same time issues that
    residents are facing so that we can collectively address the
    issues time and again.
        We do utilize other forms of technology that gives us
    really instantaneous feedback on how we are tracking on these
    key performance metrics. You know, we utilize a tool that we
    invested in last year that gives us clear visibility of what
    those scores look like and the comments that we hear from
    residents.
        Beyond that, you know, if a resident is unsatisfied with
    any performance issue, there is a process by and which they can
    go about having their issue addressed.
        First and foremost, they are encouraged to meet with one of
    our managers on the site. If their issue is not resolved, we
    invite them to submit a request through our--what we call BB
    [Balfour Beatty] Cares hotline. I can tell you that that
    reaches the corporate office.
        I see 100 percent of those issues that have not been
    resolved by our local leadership team and to the extent that we
    can't still satisfy the resident's issues, then they have an
    outlet through their housing management office as well.
    Anything that reaches their desk, we collectively engage to
    figure out what we need to do to resolve any issues.
        Mr. Banks. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mr. Banks.
        I am going to call on Ms. Houlahan if she is still with us.
    There are votes going on, so it is possible that members will
    vote and return.
        Ms. Houlahan.
        Ms. Escobar, you are next, then. Five minutes.
        Ms. Escobar. Mr. Chairman, thank you so much, and Madam
    Chair. I really just have a very simple question, and this is
    based on an idea that was floated by some of our advocates, and
    their stories, by the way, were just so heartbreaking.
        To each one of our panelists, can you tell me, do you--so
    you have a lease with the Federal Government, and if so, how
    long is that lease?
        General Aycock. So ma'am, I will start. There is a ground
    lease that all the military housing privatization initiative
    groups run. There may be some variation in that, but it is for
    the length of the partnership. And in most cases, it is going
    to probably be about 50 years.
        There is a key with that particular lease. It is actually
    operated through the Army Corps of Engineers, and there is a
    consistent check on that lease to make sure that the right land
    is being used for the right purpose. There is an accountability
    chain for that particular ground lease.
        Ms. Escobar. And, Mr. Aycock, before I move on to the next
    panelist, how long into your lease are you?
        General Aycock. That would depend on the property, ma'am.
    Each of the properties came online at different times, so each
    lease would be contingent upon the LLC that runs that
    particular installation.
        Ms. Escobar. Okay. Thank you.
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, I have a very similar
    answer. Our ground leases are 50 years, and we are
    approximately 20 years into those--each of those ground leases.
    But similar to the previous panelist, it does depend on the
    date when the project actually started.
        Ms. Escobar. Okay. Thank you.
        Mr. Taylor. And a similar answer for me, ma'am. With
    respect to Fort Bliss which I know sits in your district. We
    reached financial close on that project I believe in 2004, so
    that will give you a sense of, you know, how far we are along
    in your back yard.
        Ms. Escobar. Okay. Thank you so much. I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Ms. Escobar.
        Mrs. Bice.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        So I am curious. You talked just briefly about the length
    of these contracts. Why a 50-year contract?
        General Aycock. So, ma'am, I will start. This is Major
    Aycock, retired. It is the time it takes to do the financing of
    the actual redevelopment. The challenge that you had with the
    old system is you had appropriated funds, and the appropriated
    funds were just one year long. You really can't redevelop up
    front.
        And so the partners take some risk by going into an area
    and putting money into it early, and then they count on payback
    later on. And so most of the organizations are going to reach a
    crossover time sometime about--you know, the halfway point of
    the actual ground lease would be common. It is not going to be
    the same at every place because each one has a different
    dynamic in terms of the income, but that is what it takes to
    get private investors to put their money into the program.
        Mrs. Bice. Just in follow-up, is there more than one
    developer on a specific base? Are you signing these 50-year
    leases, and you are the only provider on those bases?
        General Aycock. So, ma'am, again, I will start that
    process. In general, yes. That is the common way that it was
    done. I am not 100 percent familiar with all the other
    developments, but I don't know of one where there is more than
    one military housing privatization partner on those particular
    installations. There was actually a competition at these bases,
    and there were multiple partners who would provide an estimate
    to the team on the base, and the team on the base would pick
    the partner that they thought had the best overall bid.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you for answering that.
        Congresswoman Speier mentioned earlier about municipalities
    or cities and counties having oversight. Who is reviewing the
    actual construction or renovation projects and approving the
    habitability of these particular homes?
        And maybe Rick or Carolyn may be able to speak to that.
        Mr. Taylor. Carolyn, would you like to take it?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Sorry, Rick. Certainly.
        So, Congresswoman, thank you for the question. Oversight of
    any development work or building is subject to an independent
    construction consultant who is independently appointed and has
    oversight of both the design process and the construction
    process. And our service--the services as our services partner
    are also part of that process.
        Mrs. Bice. And if I can follow up. Who appoints that
    independent inspector?
        Ms. Tregarthen. We appoint that inspector in conjunction
    with the military service partner, so either the Army, the Air
    Force, or the Navy.
        Mrs. Bice. Mr. Taylor, do you have anything you want to add
    to that?
        Mr. Taylor. The same answer on that issue. I will say in
    response to one of your earlier questions, is there any
    installation where we have got two project owners, the only one
    that I am aware of is one that we are a party to is Moody Air
    Force Base in Georgia because that was awarded separately. The
    on-base housing was awarded earlier. They identified a deficit
    of housing, and so the second part of that was a project that
    we won that was combined with Dyess Air Force Base in Texas.
        If I could, I would like to just kind of go back to your
    earlier question regarding the length of these ground leases
    and why 50 years. And I think it is kind of important to kind
    of reflect on what was the state of military housing when this
    initiative was started. You know, OSD [Office of the Secretary
    of Defense] estimated it was going to take $30 billion, plus or
    minus, to restore housing. So that is why--you know, that was
    one of the motivations for the program.
        But turning to a private sector entity, what was important
    was to fix the amount of time at the right spot such that we
    could get long-term financing. That long-term financing enabled
    for us to go to the bond markets, the financing markets, and
    identify as much up front cash as we could possibly get.
        The tenure of those agreements is what allowed for us to
    raise the amount of money that we did. It is no different than
    in simplistic terms, if we are buying a house, you are buying a
    house, I am buying a house, you can afford more house on a 30-
    year mortgage than you can on a 15-year mortgage. So having the
    length of time on these ground leases enabled for us to really
    raise significant amounts of capital on the front end.
        Mrs. Bice. Okay. My time has expired. I want to thank you
    all for your willingness to participate in today's hearing.
        And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Mrs. Bice.
        There are votes going on. I am going to leave in a few
    moments, but I will take one more. I think Mr. Johnson--wait a
    minute. I am going to pass the gavel to Ms. Jacobs, and she
    will continue with some questions.
        Ms. Speier will be back in a few moments, and I will see
    how fast I can run the 300 yards. So, Ms. Jacobs, please
    continue. Our next witness will be Mr. Johnson.
        Ms. Jacobs [presiding]. Perfect. Mr. Johnson, 5 minutes.
        Mr. Johnson. Thank you. Can you hear me okay?
        Ms. Jacobs. Yes.
        Mr. Johnson. Great.
        General Aycock, thank you so much and all of you for your
    testimony. My district is home to Fort Polk and the Joint
    Readiness Training Center. And, of course, Fort Polk is one of
    the installations serviced by your company. I am curious if you
    could provide us with an update on where things currently stand
    on implementing all the provisions of the tenant bill of rights
    and include dispute resolution and rent segregation and the 7-
    year maintenance history.
        General Aycock. Absolutely, sir. We have been a leader,
    along with the other companies that are here, in making sure
    that the tenant bill of rights is on board. We support the
    dispute resolution process, and we will be a part of it, and
    that is where the rent sidebar comes in. That will be decided
    at that particular level. We are issuing our 7-year maintenance
    history in advance, and I believe the other companies are doing
    the same. That is where we are going.
        We have been working very carefully with the Department of
    Defense to make sure that the common lease template is up. We
    have said that was good. We are trying to help to make sure
    that the State and Federal parts of that both work. We are a
    full advocate behind that particular effort, sir.
        Mr. Johnson. I appreciate that. And that diligence, as you
    know, the community there is deeply vested, and they are big
    supporters of the base and all of that, and everybody works
    together. Fort Polk Progress is one of the big groups that
    advocates, and I know you have interacted with all of them, so
    they are all watching closely. We appreciate the progress.
        What are some of the challenges that you have come across
    in implementing some of those specific items?
        General Aycock. Sir, we believe that there haven't been any
    real problems internal to our company about implementing all of
    this. John Picerne, our CEO [chief executive officer], has
    completely done a relook at the entire company, and he has made
    sure that the right people are in the right places and has
    gotten on board with where we need to direct themselves. And so
    we are behind the Congress' directive and the DOD's
    implementation.
        Mr. Johnson. That's great. Shift gears just a little bit in
    my remaining time. Louisiana had a tough year, as I know you
    are probably aware. We got hit pretty hard with the pandemic,
    and then we had a record hurricane season, and then we had this
    winter storm, kind of a once-in-a-lifetime event that just
    happened. We feel like Job in the Old Testament. We are just
    getting beat up all over.
        But I just wonder if there have been issues related to
    those weather events and the natural disasters and how your
    company has been addressing those issues. Have you had big
    problems with that?
        General Aycock. Sir, thank you for the question. We have
    had the normal challenges and issues that anybody would have in
    dealing with two hurricanes and a major winter storm. I think
    the difference has been the positive attitude and the go-get-
    it-done type approach that the garrison and the senior
    commander have taken.
        We had a large session at the end of October where we had a
    lot of people travel there, and we all sat down. Myself and Mr.
    Sims from my company sat down with General Doyle and his team
    to make sure that he was happy. We have created a common
    dashboard that tells him every day what is going on on a day-
    by-day basis. We went and did initial triage and emergency
    repair. We did the assessment of non-emergency repairs.
        We are now in the scope and schedule development piece. And
    as you know, we have done all of the mitigations that we are
    required to do. We have none required left. We have got--728 of
    the homes required interior reconstruction. We only have 3 in
    progress and only 14 remaining to reach completion.
        In terms of roof repairs, we are working hard on that;
    2,652 roof repairs required. We have got 187 in contract, 50 in
    progress, and 1,605 completed. We are going to go to the
    quality assurance piece as we walk along the way, and then
    after those two hurricanes came, we had this winter storm.
        At Fort Polk, there were 215 homes affected. 56 of those
    were homes that had been previously damaged in the hurricanes.
    We had to take care of 16 families who got displaced
    temporarily, but we have been working on those.
        So we have got 123 mitigations required, 31 complete, 13 in
    progress, and the repair work goes on. And we are clasped at
    the hand with the garrison and the senior commander.
        Mr. Johnson. That is a great update. I appreciate the
    details there. And, General, I just want to thank you for your
    service and appreciate you being with us today, and I yield
    back.
        Ms. Jacobs. Thank you. I will now yield myself 5 minutes
    for the purpose of questioning.
        My first goes to all of you. Do you agree that military
    families should be treated as paying customers while living in
    your military housing facilities since they give up their BAH
    [Basic Allowance for Housing] in order to utilize this military
    housing?
        General Aycock. So, ma'am, we treat our residents as though
    they are ours. They are the folks who came to us and asked to
    live in our houses. They had other choices to go to, and so we
    treat them as we would treat a resident anywhere else in the
    portfolio. We try to take care of the military families and
    their soldiers.
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, I think we all agree that
    our military families expect and deserve quality housing, and
    we are firm in our commitment to provide that for them. We
    drive to continuously improve so that the military families are
    provided with that level of housing that they expect and
    deserve.
        One of the things that is extremely important to us is
    working with our families as partners to make sure that they
    are getting what they need, and we are there hand in hand with
    them to deliver what they expect.
        Mr. Taylor. And I will just add, we certainly understand
    that our military residents have a choice, and we want to be
    their housing option of choice. And so, you know, it is quite
    disappointing to any of us in our organization, I am sure I
    speak for everyone, that if we find that we have lost the trust
    of our residents because we are not addressing their daily
    needs, then we ought to be held to account and make sure that,
    you know, we figure out what we need to do to improve.
        We have great admiration for the sacrifices that our
    service members and their families make, and they shouldn't
    suffer from substandard housing. So it is down to us to make
    sure that we are providing first-class service, and where we
    fall short, it is down to us to make sure that we diagnose why
    and where we need to improve.
        We do that in close collaboration, I can tell you, with our
    service partners, more so today than ever in the history of
    this program. And I think that is a benefit that is going to
    pay dividends long term.
        Ms. Jacobs. Well, thank you. And I am glad we all share the
    sentiment because I just want to share with you some of the
    complaints that I have heard from my constituents very
    recently.
        So I heard recently from one family where the military
    spouse was pregnant, and their home suffered severe water
    damage, resulting in the ceiling collapsing into the kitchen,
    all because maintenance had not been kept up on this home.
        Another constituent said that when mold was found, instead
    of fixing the problem, it was painted over. Another family was
    forced to live with black mold in the ventilators for weeks
    while they waited for a response.
        I have also heard from an active military member who has
    seen four of his neighbors' cars stolen because of the lack of
    security and others who have old and outdated refrigerators
    that are too small to support their families. And I am sure I
    don't need to tell you that old appliances means they have
    higher costs for energy and electricity.
        I was wondering if you could speak to what you are
    specifically doing to prevent these kinds of issues from
    occurring, and if you could talk about why it has taken so long
    to implement many of these reforms that have already been
    discussed today.
        General Aycock. So, ma'am, I will step in. We take every
    complaint, every issue that a resident may have seriously. We
    have multiple ways for those issues to be communicated to us.
    We have checks that go in behind and make sure that quality
    control is done on work orders.
        Each time that we have a resident contact, we try to make
    that a positive effort to ensure that the resident has what
    they need, what they deserve, and what we should provide.
        Ms. Jacobs. Thank you, Major General Aycock.
        Ms. Tregarthen.
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, thank you for your question.
    Obviously, I can't comment on the specific cases that you have
    listed, but let me talk about some of the things we do with our
    residents.
        So I will start from our change of occupancy process. When
    a resident moves out of a house, before we make that home
    available to our next resident, we do maintenance on it as
    required, and that may include replacing appliances. It may
    include painting. It may include a number of things.
        That home is then inspected by our property managers. It is
    then we have a follow-up inspection by our military partner.
    And after the home passes those two inspections and is said to
    be ready for a resident to move into, it is made available to a
    prospective resident to inspect before they sign a lease.
        When that resident does sign a lease and move into that
    home, we then do an orientation with that resident of that
    home, and that includes things like how does the HVAC work? How
    do you change your filters? Where is the exhaust fan in the
    bathroom to make sure that the resident understands the home.
        We are also very interested in making sure they understand
    how to contact us if they have any issues, and that may be by
    our phone number, it may be by our app, it may be by our
    portal, or it may be by their local resident advisory board
    member.
        Additionally, we provide that resident with a resident
    guide which outlines a lot of the information they will have
    been told both on the orientation but also, more broadly, how
    to contact us how different things work.
        So we try and make sure when that resident moves into that
    home, they do understand firstly the home, how everything
    works, and also how to contact us should they have any
    questions or follow-ups. We then----
        Ms. Jacobs [interrupting]. Thank you. Sorry. I appreciate
    all of your work. My time has expired.
        I will now yield 5 minutes to Dr. Jackson. I think you
    might be muted.
        Dr. Jackson. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. I appreciate it.
        I just want to say thank you to the people that are
    testifying today for being here today. The military housing
    privatization is an issue that was created in 1996. That was
    actually while I was on Active Duty in the United States Navy.
    Congress started this initiative because the Department of
    Defense does not need to be in the business of housing, which I
    agree with, and we can utilize our private sector partners to
    provide service members and their families with suitable living
    conditions.
        In 2018, it came to light that military families were
    experiencing issues with their homes. Much of that I listened
    to today and am sympathetic to. Subsequently, my colleagues in
    both the House and the Senate held a series of hearings and
    briefings and passed new guidance to raise the standards for
    the quality of housing for our service members to experience.
        Everything I have heard about privatized housing over the
    last few years has been negative for the most part. I will say
    that. But today I want to talk about at least one good-news
    story based on my brief time in Congress which happened in my
    home district of Sheppard Air Force Base. The installation
    commander, General Bell, has already been a great teammate for
    me.
        He has taken me out. He showed me all over the base. He has
    gone into lots of detail about the housing issue. He and his
    team have operated with their private partner to provide the
    airmen there with what appears to me to be really good
    conditions.
        By no means has Sheppard been perfect. And we talked about
    a lot of the problems there, but they are trending in the right
    direction, and they are working hard to make things better. I
    think that we should give credit to General Bell and to his
    leadership at Sheppard Air Force Base in particular, and I
    think that is a big part of the solution here.
        Mr. Taylor, I wanted to thank you and all of your witnesses
    for appearing before this committee today and for the
    transparency you provided to me and my staff on privatized
    military housing. I just wanted to point out that in my
    opinion, a partnership only works if both parties are involved
    and willing to work together.
        Sheppard Air Force Base I think is an example of how an
    installation commander and a private company can and should
    work together hand in hand to provide the best possible housing
    and the best possible services to our service members who have
    earned that.
        From everything I have seen and heard from General Bell and
    from Balfour Beatty, they have worked together to solve a lot
    of these problems and to engage the community. Mr. Taylor, I
    just wanted to know if you could speak to what has been done at
    Sheppard Air Force Base to foster this strong relationship
    between the leadership and your company and the community and
    where could we improve this and how can others use this
    example.
        Mr. Taylor. Thank you, Congressman. I really appreciate the
    kind remarks. We do have a very good team on the ground there
    that we are extremely proud of. There have been some bumps in
    the road, but we have been working through issues of the past
    together with our military partners, and it is just testament
    to, you know, the good things that can happen when we align our
    interests and focus our energies in the right areas.
        You know, with respect to, you know, how were we able to
    get there at Sheppard, it is not unique to Sheppard. I am
    confident to say that, you know, this is really the outcome of
    the significant efforts that we have put forward over the last
    2 years to really look hard at the way that we are running our
    business.
        There are many things that I mentioned, a performance
    improvement plan in the past. There are so many elements of our
    business that are embedded in that that really have been
    transformative in the way that we are approaching our business,
    you know.
        And so, you know, the fruits of that labor are really
    starting to show with your own personal experiences and what
    you are hearing at Sheppard.
        So we are proud of that effort. We are not there yet. We
    know that we still have room to improve, but clearly, based
    upon the key performance metrics that we are tracking, I can
    confidently say we are tracking in the right direction.
        We still have room to improve, but thankfully, you know,
    with the dedication of our teammates and, you know, the
    outreach and support that we are getting from installation
    commanders, it yields the type of result that you just
    described, so thank you.
        Dr. Jackson. Yes, sir. Thank you. I will be the first to
    say some of the stories we heard today are truly horrifying,
    and we have to fix these problems, but I will say I just wanted
    to point out at least from my brief experience that I think
    there are areas, a few areas around like the one I cited where
    we are moving in the right direction when it comes to housing.
        And I am really looking forward to working with my
    colleagues here on the Armed Services Committee to make sure
    that we stay on the right track and we do the right thing and
    take care of our service members. So with that, thank you,
    Chair, and I yield back the rest of my time.
        Ms. Jacobs. Thank you. And with that, I will pass the gavel
    back to Chairman Garamendi.
        Mr. Garamendi [presiding]. And you will also tell me where
    we are in the order.
        Ms. Speier, it is your turn.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Chairman, I will yield and refrain from
    asking my questions until the end if other members would like
    to go ahead.
        Mr. Garamendi. Okay. I believe that everybody that is still
    with the committee on the screen, I think they have all asked
    questions, so we can do one more round of questions here with
    those that are still with us. I see Ms. Escobar is still here.
    Are there other members that want to ask another round of
    questions?
        Ms. Speier, if you have another round, and then I will take
    my turn, and we will wrap this thing up.
        Ms. Speier. Okay. Thank you again, all, for being here. It
    has been a little truncated because we have had votes on the
    floor, so I apologize for being in and out.
        I would like to ask you. Have you ever not received
    incentive pay at one of your installations, and we will just go
    down the list. General Aycock?
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am. There have been occasions where
    that was reduced.
        Ms. Speier. Reduced or just withheld until you complied
    with the requirement?
        General Aycock. There wasn't an initial requirement to
    reply--I mean, to comply with a requirement. There was a case
    that happened immediately right after the 2019 issues happened
    where senior commanders decided that it was the right thing to
    do on their part to withhold. And so we have had that happen to
    us, yes.
        Ms. Speier. And so what percentage was withheld?
        General Aycock. Ma'am, I will have to get back with you on
    the precise places and amounts that that was in.
        Ms. Speier. All right. So you will respond to the committee
    by providing us where the locations where and what the
    percentage was. Is that correct?
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. And the amount, if you will. Okay.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Ms. Speier. Ms. Tregarthen. I am sorry if I have been
    slaughtering your name.
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman Speier, you are pronouncing--
    it is very well pronounced. Thank you.
        We have had situations on different installations where our
    incentive pay has been not awarded or reduced. And similar to
    the previous witness, I can commit to provide you that detailed
    information in writing after the hearing.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Ms. Speier. And Mr. Taylor.
        Mr. Taylor. Likewise, Congresswoman, we have had many
    instances where the incentive fees have been reduced, not
    earning the full potential. You know, one of the things that I
    know that all of us in the industry are working closely with
    the services on is revised metrics to make sure that they are
    more appropriate for, you know, the environment that we are in.
    And I know that we and Corvias and Lendlease are in lockstep
    with adopting what those revised metrics look like.
        Ms. Speier. And it is my understanding that this
    decisionmaking is exclusively with the commander at the
    installation. Is that correct? [Inaudible] if you are trying to
    negotiate the incentive.
        Mr. Taylor. The incentive metrics are being negotiated at
    headquarters for each of the service branches, and they look
    quite similar. I will say that the installation commander has a
    role in recommendations in terms of what the level of incentive
    fees that ought to be received, but ultimately, you need to go
    to higher headquarters for ultimate adjudication.
        Ms. Speier. Is that your understanding, each of you? You
    can just nod your heads. All right.
        One of you had referenced having a town hall with the
    officers at a particular installation which I found curious
    because it would make sense to me that you should have town
    halls with the residents of your various homes that you have on
    the facility.
        So I guess my question to each of you is will you commit to
    having a town hall in the next year at each of your
    installations and be present for it?
        General Aycock. Ma'am, this is General Aycock. The town
    halls are orchestrated by the installation and senior
    commander, and we participate in those. If there was any
    reference meant to officers, it meant those two are the ones
    who actually run the town hall and make sure that it goes with
    the right way because those are their people on there, and we
    support them.
        So we make sure that there is always somebody there from
    our company who can answer questions and take responsibility
    for anything that a resident would bring to them.
        Ms. Speier. So I guess I am asking a very specific
    question. Would you commit to participating in a town hall at
    each of your installations?
        General Aycock. So, yes, ma'am. So, yes, ma'am. We have
    already committed--I am sorry.
        Ms. Speier. I want you to. I am not talking about persons
    under your control. I want to know if you will commit to
    participating in a town hall with residents at each of your
    installations.
        General Aycock. If you are asking me specifically, yes,
    ma'am. I will commit to attending a town hall at the
    installations that we have underneath Corvias' partnership with
    the military.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you.
        Ms. Tregarthen.
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, yes. I will commit to
    attending town halls at our installations. And I would note
    that we do already hold regular town halls where all residents
    are welcome.
        I would also add that with our resident advisory boards, I
    have been--as I am able to visit different installations given
    COVID travel restrictions, I have actually been meeting with
    our resident advisory board members as well. But I will
    absolutely commit to continue doing that and to attending the
    town halls.
        Ms. Speier. All right, but not just with your advisory
    board. I want to make sure it is open to the residents. Thank
    you.
        Mr. Taylor?
        Mr. Taylor. As will I, ma'am. As was stated, we are already
    conducting town halls typically on a quarterly basis at nearly
    all of our installations, so there is a lot of dialogue. But
    for me personally, I would be delighted to participate. I can
    tell you that over the past year since I have been in the seat,
    we certainly have had a lot of travel restrictions that have
    prevented a lot of personal interaction.
        Ms. Speier. All right. I have one last question, Mr.
    Chairman.
        The bill of rights for tenants. My understanding is that
    you will be compliant with that by June or July of this year.
    Is that correct? General Aycock?
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am. We are on track with all of the
    Department of Defense suspenses for the final parts that are
    involved with the tenant bill of rights.
        Ms. Speier. So all of them.
        General Aycock. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you.
        Ms. Tregarthen.
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, we have implemented a number
    of the requirements of the tenants bill of rights, and we are
    on track to have the final pieces in place before the summer
    PCS [permanent change of station] season.
        Ms. Speier. Including the history of previous tenants?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Congresswoman, we have been providing the
    7-year history of maintenance to our residents since the summer
    of 2020. And we have, in fact, provided over 11,000 histories
    to prospective residents, and we have only had 16 residents
    choose to take a different home with us.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Even at Fort Hood?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. Well, there were a lot of concerns at Fort
    Hood, so I am surprised to hear that. I intend to return to
    Fort Hood, so maybe we can plan a town hall that you could be
    available for when I go.
        All right. Mr. Taylor.
        Mr. Taylor. Congresswoman, we are likewise tracking
    according to OSD's stated timeline by the summer PCS season.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Ms. Speier.
        We have two additional members still with us, Ms. Jacobs
    and Mr. Johnson.
        Mr. Johnson, do you have another question? If you do, you
    are going to have to hit your mute button.
        I will give you a chance to hit your mute button. In the
    meantime, we will move on.
        Mr. Johnson? Okay. Apparently no further questions. I see.
        Dr. Jackson and Mrs. Bice, you are both with us. You have
    come back from voting. We started a second round of questions.
    Dr. Jackson? Ms. Brice?
        This is one of the things about remote hearings.
        Mrs. Bice. Mr. Chairman, I am happy to yield to my freshman
    colleague from Texas, Dr. Jackson, if he wishes to go first in
    asking additional follow-up questions.
        Mr. Garamendi. That is very kind of you.
        Dr. Jackson.
        Mrs. Bice. I don't think Dr. Jackson can hear us, though.
        Mr. Garamendi. Your turn, Mrs. Bice.
        Mrs. Bice. Thank you so much.
        Mr. Taylor, as you know, I represent the Oklahoma City
    metro area, and Tinker Air Force Base is just outside of my
    congressional district, but I did serve as an honorary
    commander at Tinker Air Force Base during my time in the
    Oklahoma State Senate, so I got to know the base well.
        It is my understanding that you have put significant
    efforts into righting this ship as far as the issues that we
    have discussed tonight go, but my question is, at one point you
    had occupancy rates as high as 95 percent, and they have
    fallen--and that was in 2019, but they have fallen to as low as
    70 percent.
        What are you doing to address this issue and build
    confidence in our service members so that they can count on
    your organization and the others on the call that they are
    going to receive quality housing from your entities.
        Mr. Taylor. Yes, ma'am. A great question. You know, if you
    look at what the historical occupancy had been at Tinker prior
    to those having a lot of systemic issues with broken water
    lines that led to a lot of the environmental concerns that
    received a lot of attention, we have remediated those issues.
        I can tell you that we are slowly building back the trust
    of Tinker residents. We are working in lockstep with the wing
    commander and his staff. We have done a lot to have really kind
    of turn the corner there.
        I can tell you that we are somewhat the victim of a lack of
    a PCS season over this past year because of the global
    pandemic, but we have been slowly growing occupancy. All
    indications are from Air Force leadership that we are going to
    see a really robust PCS season.
        And so I think all of the controls that we have put in
    place, the differences in the way that we are managing the
    installation housing, like I said, in close coordination with
    our military housing partner I think is putting us in a much
    better position.
        We track really closely what resident satisfaction rates
    look like, both on move in and on work order performance. And
    we track it through, you know, a unique tool called Power BI
    that gives us an instantaneous look at how--you know, whether
    or not those scores are trending in the right direction or not.
        Tinker Air Force Base is among--on both of those accounts
    among the highest in our entire inventory which I think has
    been a significant sea change in terms of where we were 2 years
    ago versus today.
        Mrs. Bice. Mr. Taylor, let me interject here for just a
    moment, though. You mentioned earlier this particular platform
    that you are utilizing to text and get, you know, feedback
    information from the residents. And while I think that is
    incredibly important, I get the impression that it is either a
    yes or no answer.
        And if it is a yes answer, you are giving yourself a five
    star. There is no yes, but this is still happening, or yes, but
    I still have additional concerns.
        So I want to be clear. Having a background in marketing and
    data that we are looking at all the data correctly to ensure
    that every issue for these residents is being addressed.
        Mr. Taylor. Right. And, yeah, maybe I misspoke, but those
    text messages that we are sending is just validation for the
    residents that don't complete a resident satisfaction survey
    through SatisFacts. So the raw data is the third party survey
    that gets sent to the residents.
        So we are not taking any credit for, you know, those yes
    answers being a five. That is only affirmation for us that the
    resident is satisfied whether or not they chose to fill out
    that SatisFacts survey.
        Mrs. Bice. Great.
        Mr. Garamendi. Mrs. Bice, we are running out of time. We
    are going to lose----
        Ms. Bice [interrupting]. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield
    back.
        Mr. Garamendi. Thank you so very much for your question.
        Ms. Speier, you had one more question.
        Ms. Speier. Actually, it is just a clarification. I wanted
    to make sure that you are going to be complying with the tenant
    bill of rights for all your existing contracts in addition to
    any new contracts.
        Ms. Tregarthen says yes.
        Mr. Taylor.
        Mr. Taylor. Yes.
        Ms. Speier. General Aycock.
        General Aycock. Yes.
        Ms. Speier. All right. Thank you. I yield back.
        Mr. Garamendi. A little bit of house cleaning, but first, a
    question. All right. I want to make sure that the base
    commanders are held responsible for the well-being of all of
    the personnel on their base. I don't know any other way to
    enforce the bill of rights and to hold the base commanders
    responsible.
        So as we look at this coming NDAA, I will be looking at how
    that might be accomplished. If a base commander wants his next
    assignment, he better be sure that the base housing is not an
    issue in his record. And that is based upon General Aycock's
    response to my question that the base commander is responsible
    for the well-being of all of the personnel on his base or her
    base, so we will be looking at that.
        I want to make sure that the information that we received
    from the prior sessions with the advocates becomes part of our
    record. Ms. Speier and I asked for specific information from
    those advocates. When that is received, I would like that, with
    unanimous consent, to become part of the record. Without
    objection, that will be ordered.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Garamendi. Also, written statements from the advocacy
    groups to be added to the record. Without objection, so
    ordered.
        [The information referred to was not available at the time
    of printing.]
        Mr. Garamendi. I believe we have run through this. I have
    committed 2 years ago to stay with this. And I suspect that
    means as long as I am here and as long as there is a Readiness
    Committee and a Personnel Committee, we will be at this.
        So we will be doing periodic hearings and briefings and
    questions. And we have already committed--Ms. Speier has
    committed to go back to Fort Hood. Maybe she will invite me to
    go with her. And we are going to traipse on down to Fort
    Belvoir and see if Clark has an explanation for the problems
    there as well as why they decided to disrespect this
    committee--excuse me--disrespect these two committees.
        So with that, I want to thank our witnesses, Mr. Aycock,
    Ms. Tregarthen, and Mr. Taylor. Thank you so very much for
    participating. This committee is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 6:29 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                                 March 10, 2021

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                                 March 10, 2021

    =======================================================================

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    =======================================================================

                  QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MEMBERS POST HEARING

                                 March 10, 2021

    =======================================================================

                      QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MR. GARAMENDI

        Mr. Garamendi. What do you need from the Department of Defense to
    implement the window fall retrofit requirement contained in the FY20
    NDAA?
        General Aycock. The 2020 NDAA required DOD to ensure that new
    construction homes and homes subject to substantial renovation be fit
    with window fall protection devices. The 2020 NDAA also authorized the
    DOD to implement a grant program to support retrofitting existing homes
    with these devices. We continue to install these devices on new and
    substantially renovated homes and look forward to retrofitting existing
    homes once DOD makes funding available to do so via an authorized grant
    program.
        Mr. Garamendi. How are you reconciling auditing the maintenance
    work order system to ensure that work orders are closed out only when
    work has been done well? What are your accountability measures?
        General Aycock. Corvias maintains a work order policy that assigns
    responsibility to a Service Center Coordinator (SCC) to properly enter
    each work order into the Property Management Software (``PM Software'')
    database and assign a priority to the work order based on the work that
    needs to be performed. The priorities are Emergency, Urgent, and
    Routine. The information contained on the work order includes start and
    stop times and begins when the technician arrives at the home.
        Following the completion of the work order, the SCC ensures that
    there are sufficient closing notes and all appropriate information has
    been entered on the work order. The technician who completed the work
    enters notes as well.
        We are upgrading our property management software. Those locations
    where it has been implemented, the technician utilizes a mobile
    application to upload photographs to accompany the work order. All work
    orders completed during any given day are required to be closed out in
    the PM Software by the end of each day. All emergency work orders are
    followed up with a call to the resident to verify the work was done
    appropriately and discuss next steps, if applicable.
        The military housing office (MHO) also follows up on all emergency
    work orders to gauge resident satisfaction. A percentage of the urgent
    and routine work orders are also selected for follow-up, including a
    call to the resident to validate the work was completed correctly. A
    survey is sent to every resident following the completion of a work
    order to measure resident satisfaction. These results are tracked
    carefully and reviewed weekly and monthly.
        Any resident that submits a survey that falls below the benchmark
    requirements is contacted (if they indicate they want to be contacted)
    to discuss what caused the dissatisfaction, and this may trigger
    another work order to be opened to complete the work satisfactorily. As
    we continue to upgrade our PM Software, we are finding new ways to
    reach out to residents to ensure that work has been completed
    consistent with our standards and meets our residents' expectations.
        Mr. Garamendi. What quality assurance measures do have you in place
    at installations for maintenance staff, customer service, and property
    management staff? How do you know your headquarters policies are being
    carried out?
        General Aycock. All Corvias employees are required to attend
    specific training on customer service and developing the skills
    necessary to better serve our customers. Maintenance technicians'
    skills are assessed, and the technicians are rated based on their
    skills as either a level I, II, or III Technician (level III being the
    highest rating). All work is intended to be assigned to the level of
    technician required to complete the work satisfactorily the first time.
        Corvias has consistently scored Superior to Excellent on SatisFacts
    surveys. Employees that perform well are acknowledged for their
    excellent customer service and those that fall short are coached to
    perform better. When coaching is not successful, we work to help those
    technicians find opportunities elsewhere.
        Another source of measuring the satisfaction of our residents is
    via the CEL Survey that DOD issues directly to the resident. There are
    three Satisfaction Indexes that serve as an immediate indicator of how
    well the installation and property manager are performing. Corvias has
    consistently performed well on the Service Satisfaction Index. Policies
    are consistently reviewed and updated.
        Over the last year, we have rewritten policies to encompass various
    new initiatives aimed at implementing the provisions of the FY2020
    NDAA, including the tenant bill of rights. When we review and update
    our Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), new training is rolled out
    via our online training platform (Corvias Classroom) to ensure that all
    employees implement the latest standards, and we maintain a record that
    employees have taken this required training.
        Our leaders at each installation reinforce training through regular
    hands-on application, toolbox talks, and other opportunities to
    communicate one-on-one with our employees. In addition to these
    initiatives, Corvias has dedicated resources to focus on the `resident
    experience'. The resident experience has been mapped out to identify
    each opportunity when a property management team member may interact
    with a resident. This approach is designed to ensure that we are
    working to improve residents' experience throughout their tenancy,
    rather than just during the move-in and move-out process.
        Quarterly property reviews are held with our Asset Management and
    Senior Property Management leadership to assess adherence to our
    policies and the satisfaction of our residents.
        Mr. Garamendi. At the hearing, you stated that state law applies to
    privatized military housing. However, we have heard from tenants that
    they are often told that state law does not apply because of the
    federal enclave doctrine. Can you explain when state law applies and
    when it does not?
        General Aycock. The federal enclave doctrine is constitutionally
    mandated and applies to all federal enclaves, including lands on which
    many MHPI projects are located. It is not relinquished when the federal
    government partners with private parties to provide military housing.
    Nor can it be waived by the private MHPI partner.
        Simply put, and explained in further legal detail below, any state
    law enacted after the land was ceded to the federal government has no
    legal force or effect in the federal enclave. Our Residential Occupancy
    Agreements (``ROA'') with tenants generally state that the ROA will be
    governed by the laws of the state where the home is located to the
    maximum extent that the state law applies to the premises, and we abide
    by those terms.
        Generally, this means that a claim based on breach of the ROA will
    be interpreted under state law. On the other hand, a claim based on a
    particular state statute, such as a specific state consumer law, may
    not be applicable if the state law was enacted after the land on which
    the home is located became a federal enclave.
        The federal enclave clause of the United States Constitution,
    Article I, Sec. 8, Clause 17, provides that Congress shall have the
    power ``To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over
    such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by Cession of
    particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of
    the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority
    over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the
    State in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines,
    arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings[.]'' U.S. Const., art
    1, Sec. 8, cl. 17. MHPI projects are often located on federal enclaves.
    When ``the United States acquires with the `consent' of the state
    legislature land within the borders of that State . . . the
    jurisdiction of the Federal Government becomes `exclusive.''' Paul v.
    U.S., 371 U.S. 245, 264 (1963). ``This exclusive jurisdiction is
    `legislative,' meaning the laws and statutes applied to these locations
    must be supplied by the federal government, not the states.'' Allison
    v. Boeing Laser Tech. Serv., 689 F.3d 1234, 1236 (10th Cir. 2012)
    (quoting Pac. Coast Dairy v. Dep't of Ag. of Cal., 318 U.S. 285, 294
    (1943)). Under the federal enclave doctrine, any state statute adopted
    after the transfer of sovereignty is without force in the enclave. Pac.
    Coast Dairy, 318 U.S at 294 (``It follows that contracts to sell and
    sales consummated within the enclave cannot be regulated by the
    California law.''); Paul, 371 U.S. at 268 (``only state law existing at
    the time of the acquisition remains enforceable, not subsequent
    laws''). The federal government does not relinquish exclusive
    jurisdiction by partnering with private parties to provide military
    housing. Atl. Marine Corps Cmtys., LLC v. Onslow Cty., N. Carolina, 497
    F. Supp. 2d 743, 758 (E.D.N.C. 2007).
        Mr. Garamendi. What do you need from the Department of Defense to
    implement the window fall retrofit requirement contained in the FY20
    NDAA?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Lendlease does not need anything from the
    Department of Defense (DOD) at this time. Before Evan's Law was passed,
    Lendlease had collaborated with industry experts to develop a ``safety
    strong screen'' that meets the requirements in the FY20 NDAA and still
    allows egress in a fire emergency. Since then, we have been
    retrofitting second story windows in homes across our portfolio.
        Mr. Garamendi. How are you reconciling auditing the maintenance
    work order system to ensure that work orders are closed out only when
    work has been done well? What are your accountability measures?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Lendlease has invested in 360-degree touchpoints
    for resident maintenance service requests to ensure our residents
    receive timely updates with useful information and are afforded
    multiple opportunities throughout the experience to provide feedback,
    ask questions or identify issues or challenges before a service order
    is closed out. All residents have access to our quality surveys through
    SatisFacts.
        Each time a service order or other service is delivered to our
    residents, they can utilize the system to inform us how satisfied they
    were with the work on a scale of 1-5 by simply using the star ratings.
    Any surveys less than 3.5 stars are proactively responded to by our
    property management team to assess how we can resolve any outstanding
    issues and better serve our residents. The below graphics represent the
    processes we implement across our portfolio to ensure quality
    maintenance work:
        Mr. Garamendi. What quality assurance measures do have you in place
    at installations for maintenance staff, customer service, and property
    management staff? How do you know your headquarters policies are being
    carried out?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Lendlease has significantly enhanced and modernized
    our customer service. We hired new staff, engaged new suppliers and
    subcontractors, and instituted new, mandatory training for all
    employees. We have added new reviews and tools for use by our
    leadership teams to ensure internal policies and procedures are carried
    out at each installation. This includes a new Business Intelligence
    (BI) Dashboard reported to senior Lendlease executives on a monthly
    basis. This provides transparency and visibility to the most senior
    levels of the organization around work order response and completion
    times and resident satisfaction. We have also strengthened reporting by
    developing exception reporting utilizing the BI Dashboard.
        Mr. Garamendi. At the hearing, you stated that state law applies to
    privatized military housing. However, we have heard from tenants that
    they are often told that state law does not apply because of the
    federal enclave doctrine. Can you explain when state law applies and
    when it does not?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Whether state law applies to a particular MHPI
    development depends on a number of factors, including, but not limited
    to, when the area became a federal enclave, whether the law existed at
    the time the area became a federal enclave, whether the pre-existing
    state law is inconsistent with current federal law, and whether any
    exceptions to the federal enclave doctrine apply.
        The Constitution grants Congress exclusive legislative jurisdiction
    over federal enclaves, like certain private military housing
    developments. U.S. Const. art. I, Sec. 8, cl. 17. ``[T]he grant of
    exclusive legislative power to Congress over enclaves . . . bars state
    regulation without specific congressional action.'' Paul v. United
    States, 371 U.S. 245, 263 (1963) (internal quotation marks and citation
    omitted). However, ``in the absence of applicable federal legislation
    displacing state law, those state laws that existed at the time that
    the enclave was ceded to the federal government remain in force.''
    Allison v. Boeing Laser Tech. Servs., 689 F.3d 1234, 1237 (10th Cir.
    2012) (emphasis added). Put differently, generally state laws that were
    in place at the time the area became a federal enclave continue to
    apply unless they are inconsistent with applicable federal laws, while
    ``state law that is adopted after the creation of the enclave generally
    does not apply on the enclave.'' Id. at 1235. There are three
    established exceptions to the federal enclave doctrine: ``where
    Congress has, by statute, provided a different rule; 2) where the state
    explicitly retained the right to legislate over specific matters at the
    time of cession; and 3) where minor regulatory changes modify laws
    existing at the time of cession.'' Id. at 1237.
        Thus, even where the federal enclave doctrine would ordinarily bar
    the application of a particular state law, that law may nonetheless
    apply if it fits within one of the three exceptions. Another potential
    exception to the doctrine is where a contract contains a choice-of-law
    provision specifying that a certain state's laws apply. In that case,
    whether state law applies depends on whether the choice-of-law
    provision is applicable and enforceable. The enforceability inquiry,
    moreover, can turn on whether the provision is governed by currently
    existing state law or state law as it existed at the time the area
    became a federal enclave. See JAAAT Tech. Servs., LLC v. Tetra Tech
    Tesoro, 2017 WL 4003026, at *6-7 (E.D. Va. Sept. 11, 2017). In sum, a
    variety of factors impact if and when state law applies to privatized
    military housing.
        Mr. Garamendi. What do you need from the Department of Defense to
    implement the window fall retrofit requirement contained in the FY20
    NDAA?
        Mr. Taylor. Project companies, like BBC, are currently executing
    the window fall retrofits during all major renovation and new
    construction projects, using project reinvestment account funds.
    Current financial projections, however, indicate these accounts will
    not have the funds necessary to support major renovations or demolition
    and replacement of all remaining non-compliant homes prior to the end
    of the project lease term. Grant money, as permitted in the NDAA
    provision, is an option that would enable the project companies to
    expedite the timeline on retrofits.
        Mr. Garamendi. How are you reconciling auditing the maintenance
    work order system to ensure that work orders are closed out only when
    work has been done well? What are your accountability measures?
        Mr. Taylor. In addition, an online survey from a third-party survey
    company is issued after every new resident move-in and completed/closed
    work order, asking the resident to rate their experience and level of
    satisfaction. These survey responses are received in real time by both
    our senior leadership, local property team and the Army/Navy Air/Force
    housing office. Our team follows-up directly with any resident that
    rates their experience at 3.50 or lower (5.00 is the highest rating) to
    understand where we fell short and how we can correct or improve.
        Our Assurance team reviews work order information entered in our
    maintenance system and reviews to ensure accuracy with the site teams
    on a weekly basis. We created an Assurance team in 2020 to enhance our
    internal controls around work order and incentive fee compliance. This
    team consists of members of our corporate-level staff, as well as
    regional personnel, who oversee compliance reviews at each of our
    military communities. Our Assurance and Business Support teams meet
    monthly to review work order management compliance.
        In addition, our Assurance team performs an annual compliance
    review of the property management system. Where an instance of non-
    compliance with policy or procedure is identified, it is reported to
    senior leadership and an assessment is made as to the appropriate
    response in terms of training or potentially formal disciplinary action
    against the employee(s) where warranted.
        To ensure greater transparency in the work order management
    process, residents receive an email for each change in work order
    status and they have the ability to view (via online portal or mobile
    app) all work order information in our system including before/after
    photos of the repair. Before a work order is closed in our system, the
    resident is contacted to confirm the work has been completed to their
    satisfaction and all aspects of the repair are working properly.
        Mr. Garamendi. What quality assurance measures do have you in place
    at installations for maintenance staff, customer service, and property
    management staff? How do you know your headquarters policies are being
    carried out?
        Mr. Taylor. The Assurance team regularly analyzes data from our
    maintenance system and reviews it with our maintenance teams at the
    properties. The Assurance team also reviews employee compliance against
    company policies and reports their findings to senior leadership for
    corrective action as needed. Our Assurance team also performs on-site
    inspections at the properties on an annual basis to further review
    compliance and provide coaching and mentoring to the maintenance team.
    Reports are compiled with their findings and communicated to the
    management team.
        Any corrective actions are completed and monitored for future
    compliance. Monthly training is conducted with all property staff as
    part of an annual training plan to ensure continuous improvement of
    both their technical and customer service knowledge and skills, as well
    as compliance with company policies and procedures including our Code
    of Conduct.
        Mr. Garamendi. At the hearing, you stated that state law applies to
    privatized military housing. However, we have heard from tenants that
    they are often told that state law does not apply because of the
    federal enclave doctrine. Can you explain when state law applies and
    when it does not?
        Mr. Taylor. Whether state or local landlord tenant law legally
    applies to housing at any of our project locations is dependent upon
    the type of jurisdiction of the lands upon which the housing/
    improvements are located. For example, some of our project locations
    are located on lands that maintain federal exclusive jurisdiction
    (i.e., federal enclave) where state and local law would legally not
    apply; some of our project locations are located on lands that maintain
    concurrent jurisdiction where only limited state and local laws apply--
    typically the right to service of process and certain criminal or tax
    related laws; and some of our project locations (especially those which
    sit ``outside the gate'' or off the installation grounds) are located
    on lands that are proprietary jurisdiction where all state and local
    laws should apply subject only to federal preemption. Under the new
    Universal Lease, we expect that, in alignment with NDAA requirements,
    the lease agreements with tenants will require the landlord to follow
    state landlord/tenant laws on a contractual basis regardless of the
    jurisdiction of the lands where the housing is located.
        Mr. Garamendi. What do you need from the Department of Defense to
    implement the window fall retrofit requirement contained in the FY20
    NDAA?
        Mr. Cowley. 10 USC 2879(a), as amended by the FY20 NDAA, applies to
    new construction housing units or whole-house renovations with
    contracts for construction of the housing units entered after October
    1, 2019. While this requirement will increase the cost of these housing
    units, the expected overall cost impact is relatively minimal on a per-
    home basis and can be addressed if MHPI projects receive the entire 5%
    payment authorized by Section 606 of the FY19 NDAA.
        Of greater concern is any requirement to replace or retrofit
    windows in homes not subject to Section 2879(a), which would place an
    undue financial burden on MHPI projects given the number of homes in
    the portfolios and the potentially significant cost of retrofitting or
    replacing existing windows. MHPI projects would require government
    funding to replace or retrofit windows in homes not subject to Section
    2879(a).
        Funding to inventory and replace or retrofit existing windows would
    need to be provided by grants that the military departments are
    authorized to implement and fund under 10 USC 2879(b)(2) and (3).
    Optionally, Congress could provide specific statutory authority and
    potentially direct DOD to use appropriated funds to make improvements
    to MHPI housing units for window fall prevention.
        [Note: Mr. Cowley is a representative of Clark Realty Capital,
    which declined to testify at this hearing but replied to questions sent
    by Congress.]
        Mr. Garamendi. How are you reconciling auditing the maintenance
    work order system to ensure that work orders are closed out only when
    work has been done well? What are your accountability measures?
        Mr. Cowley. At family housing projects, the property manager and
    government housing office work hand in hand to facilitate the proper
    handling, close out, and QA/QC of resident work orders. Generally, upon
    completion of the work, the Maintenance Supervisor or Customer Service
    Representative reviews work order tickets to ensure they are only
    closed out when work is done well. Closed work orders are reviewed by
    more senior members of the property management staff, which typically
    includes the Facilities Director and/or the Regional Vice President of
    Facilities, to spot check, review QA/QC notes, and audit the completion
    processes used by technicians.
        In addition to these internal procedures, the projects proactively
    solicit feedback directly from residents. For example, if the resident
    is home at time of work order completion, the Service Technician will
    ask the resident to sign the work order to confirm completion and
    satisfaction with the work performed, subject to COVID-19 protocols.
    Additionally, some projects have instituted a ``warm call'' practice by
    which the property manager calls residents once their work order is
    complete to verify the quality and completion.
        Finally, an automated work order satisfaction survey is sent to
    residents within 24 hours of a work order being closed. The property
    manager reaches out to residents who provided negative feedback to
    investigate the issue with the goal of arriving at a positive
    resolution. The property manager, owner, and government housing office
    have full access to the survey software system, including the results
    and follow-up notes. Concurrently, the government housing office
    performs its own verification and QA/QC measures.
        To facilitate collaboration, transparency, and accountability, the
    government housing office has been granted full access to the property
    manager's work order processing software. They use this information to
    perform follow-up phone calls to residents on emergency and urgent work
    orders, as well as a sampling of routine work orders. Accountability
    measures also extend to unit turns: after the property manager's final
    inspection, the military's QA/QC team conducts a full assessment of the
    home and approves it prior to occupancy by a new family.
        Specifically at Pacific Beacon, the Maintenance Supervisor and
    Facilities Director routinely audit the maintenance work order system
    to ensure work orders are only closed out when work is done well. They
    monitor service request activity daily, particularly with respect to
    emergency and urgent requests, and they review closed work orders to
    verify the work has been completed properly. Completed work orders are
    also reviewed regularly by the Navy inspectors, who have full access to
    the work order software system, as well as the Community Director.
        Accountability measures are further supported by automated
    satisfaction surveys sent to residents within 24 hours of work order
    completion. The Facility Director follows up directly with residents on
    any issues identified in the survey until the issue has been resolved.
        Mr. Garamendi. What quality assurance measures do have you in place
    at installations for maintenance staff, customer service, and property
    management staff? How do you know your headquarters policies are being
    carried out?
        Mr. Cowley. Quality assurance measures for maintenance, customer
    service, and other property management staff begin with the property
    manager's recruiting and interviewing processes. While relevant
    experience and technical proficiency are necessary and highly valued,
    just as important are candidates' ability to demonstrate empathy,
    integrity, and teamwork.
        Once selected for hire, property management employees typically
    undergo a month-long onboarding process and initial training period.
    Opportunities for ongoing and continuing education are provided
    throughout the year: depending on the staff member's particular role
    and the requirements of the specific project, training may include
    topics such as fair housing; identification and proper handling of
    mold, asbestos, and lead; universal EPA HVAC certification; fire code
    essentials; and active shooter response plans, among others.
        In addition, all employees along with their respective government
    housing office staff members are invited to attend customer experience
    workshops that reinforce the values of the community and the role that
    each team member plays. In addition to the technical and cultural
    training in place, the property manager has developed processes that
    allow for ongoing verification by senior management of their
    established policies and standards.
        This starts with daily monitoring of the property management
    software system, reports, and analytics in search of any leading
    indicators of quality assurance issues. Any areas of concern,
    discrepancies, or negative trends can be identified remotely and in
    real time. In-person quality assurance measures on behalf of the
    property manager include weekly staff meetings and weekly checkpoints
    between on-site teams and Regional Vice Presidents and/or Facilities
    Directors, as well as quarterly site visits and property walks.
        Any areas in which the physical condition of the property or
    operational standards are found to be deficient are addressed on the
    spot. Ultimately, should any of these quality assurance and
    accountability measures not meet the resident's standards, multiple
    feedback loops are in place including resident satisfaction surveys,
    24-hour government-managed complaint hotlines at Army and Air Force
    locations, and support and oversight by the government housing office
    staff.
        Mr. Garamendi. Can you explain your understanding of when state law
    applies to military family housing and when the federal enclave
    doctrine precludes its application?
        Mr. Cowley. Whether or not Federal Enclave Jurisdiction exists for
    a specific claim is a fact intensive question that turns on the nature
    of the claim asserted, as well as the historic details regarding the
    original grant of the land to the federal government. See, e.g., Swords
    to Plowshares v. Kemp, 423 F. Supp. 2d 1031, 1034 (N.D. Cal. 2005).
    However, as a practical matter, landlord-tenant matters are generally
    governed by state law, and our projects are working on implementing the
    Universal Lease, which specifies that local state law governs each of
    our tenant leases.
        Mr. Garamendi. In your letter declining to participate in the
    hearing, you eluded to your unique structure and how it would preclude
    you for being able to adequately prepare for the hearing. Since
    multiple LLCs covering various projects with services executed at
    different times with different structures is common place amongst
    privatized military family housing partners, please further explain why
    your structure's complexity was sufficiently different from the norm
    that it made it impossible to participate?
        Mr. Cowley. We are committed to supporting the Subcommittees'
    oversight responsibilities, and we look forward to your visit to Fort
    Belvoir on 11 May. Our goal was to obtain and provide accurate,
    complete, and timely information to the Subcommittees in the most
    efficient, effective, and transparent way possible. For our military
    family housing projects, we rely on a military-approved third-party
    property manager whose responsibilities include managing resident
    communications, processing work orders, establishing operational
    procedures, and enforcing quality control measures, among other on-site
    activities.
        This lack of vertical integration with property management and a
    decentralized management structure that emphasizes teamwork and
    decision-making at the project levels, make it difficult for any single
    point of contact to answer specific questions completely and
    accurately. We appreciate the opportunity to respond to questions in
    this manner.
        Mr. Garamendi. Clark Realty Capital and its subsidiaries seems to
    be lagging in implementation of the tenant's bill of rights when
    compared to other housing partners. Why have you been unable to
    implement these reforms in a timely fashion?
        Mr. Cowley. We support the military's commitment to implementing
    the TBOR and have implemented the first 14 TBOR items at the projects.
    For the remaining 4 TBOR items, each project has recommended an
    actionable implementation plan to its DOD partner(s); however,
    implementation may require approval of outside parties including
    project lenders.
        Mr. Garamendi. You indicated in your letter that you make extensive
    use of third-party property management companies. Have you or any of
    your subsidiaries ever refused when one of these companies has
    approached you about providing a remedy or benefit to a tenant either
    in the form of a right delineated in tenants bill of rights, or
    monetary compensation?
        Mr. Cowley. As discussed in the previous question, the projects
    have made the first 14 TBOR items available to residents and are
    working with the project stakeholders on an implementation plan for the
    remaining 4 items. In the interim, the projects have operated in
    accordance with obligations to which they are bound under current
    contracts. To the extent that a tenant requests monetary compensation,
    the projects generally follow a process that includes the participation
    of the resident, property manager, 3rd party experts, owner, and
    insurance companies, if necessary.
                                     ______

                       QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. SPEIER
        Ms. Speier. What is your company's total revenue from MHPI for the
    most recent year?
        General Aycock. The MHPI program provides for the formation of
    public-private partnerships between housing providers and the Services,
    which operate differently from typical businesses to the extent that
    revenue is only spent pursuant to budgets agreed to by the Services. As
    a result, how revenue and profit are considered is also different. Each
    of the individual partnerships generate housing rental revenue, usually
    from Servicemember's Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH), but also from
    other eligible tenant rents.
        In 2020, the partnerships at each of the bases Corvias serves
    collected approximately $399 million in aggregate housing revenue
    (``Project Funds''). These funds are attributable to the public-private
    partnerships; the funds do not go to, and are not directly controlled
    by, Corvias Military Living. Corvias Military Living, LLC is the parent
    company of several entities that earn revenues from their business
    activities in support of the MHPI Program.
        In 2020, the total revenue of those entities was approximately $45
    million, encompassing property management, development, and
    construction work. Of this amount, Corvias earned just over $19 million
    in property management fee revenue, which is charged against annual
    project revenues. The remainder of this revenue is attributable to
    Corvias's construction and development groups work on newbuild
    construction and renovation projects, including initial and out-year
    development, as well as work conducted via the additional $325 million
    in new private sector investment in our Army projects announced in
    2019. Total construction and development revenue was roughly $25
    million in 2020.
        Typically, construction and development projects are paid using
    investment or reserve dollars, rather than current-year revenue. The
    vast majority of Project Funds are used to: (a) pay the project's
    lenders, (b) pay project operating expenses, and (c) fund various
    reinvestment reserve accounts controlled by the military service
    branches in order to sustain the projects over the entire term of the
    public-private partnership. A small portion of reinvestment funds may
    eventually be used to pay the various Corvias entities that oversee
    construction and development work, if earned in connection with the
    additional services those entities provide to the projects over time.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your revenues from your
    participation in MHPI are ascribed to overhead, both at the corporate
    and installation levels?
        General Aycock. The vast majority of rental revenue at the MHPI
    projects we manage is paid in direct expenses associated with resident
    services, such as leasing and maintenance, debt service, utilities,
    property management fees, and other operating costs required to ensure
    the ongoing longevity of the projects.
        In addition, each project also incurs direct construction costs
    related to construction and renovation of new and existing homes--which
    are typically paid from project reserves rather than current-year
    revenues. The MHPI program is a public-private partnership. We are not
    aware of a common definition of ``overhead'' within the context of
    public-private partnership management of housing and, many different
    companies may account for costs accounting departments and business
    apply the term overhead differently, consistent with generally accepted
    accounting principles.
        But, for the purposes of our response, we assume that you are
    referring to indirect, but necessary, costs associated with offering
    these homes for rent, which are allocated to the project company at the
    installation level pursuant to property management or development
    agreements. Using this definition, overhead costs consist of corporate
    accounting, communications, financial reporting, human resources
    (except staff recruiting), legal support, information technology, risk
    management (except insurance premiums), and various corporate executive
    costs. (Again, ``overhead'' does not refer to direct operating costs
    like housing maintenance and repair.)
        Typically, these overhead costs are allocated across our portfolio
    of projects based on the number of homes and associated staffing level
    at each installation, which allows us to ensure the most efficient use
    of available resources possible.
        Overall, in 2020 (the most recent financial year for which data is
    available), of the $399 million in overall revenue ascribable to the 13
    installations of which a subsidiary of Corvias Military Living, LLC is
    the managing member, roughly 2% was ascribable to overhead as described
    above. Once again, it is important to note that the $399 million in
    overall revenue referenced above does not go to, and is not directly
    controlled by, Corvias Military Living. We have provided additional
    detail for the indirect costs for each project below.
        Ms. Speier. How many employees does your company have working for
    your MHPI projects? How many for each garrison or installation where
    your company operates housing?
        General Aycock. As of mid-March 2021, seven hundred and sixty (760)
    of our company's employees serve our military family residents at
    thirteen installations across the Country. This represents roughly
    ninety percent (90%) of all Corvias Group employees. Of these seven
    hundred and sixty individuals, six hundred and forty-six (646)
    individuals are employed at a single installation, while the remainder
    work in supporting functions across our installations, including
    accounting, environmental, health, and safety (EHS), information
    technology, and other activities that can be efficiently provided to
    more than one installation.
        These supporting personnel often work from a specific installation
    close to their home, but also may work remotely (particularly during
    the COVID-19 pandemic). The number of employees assigned directly to
    each installation (including resident support staff, maintenance team
    members, and construction oversight when applicable) is included in the
    following chart:
        [The chart referred to was not available at the time of printing.]
        Ms. Speier. What is the total amount of reduction for incentive
    fees at each installation/garrison for your company over the last 5
    years? Please indicate if these incentive-fee reductions were merely
    deferred and paid later, or if it was a permanent and final cut to what
    the company would otherwise have been paid in incentive fees.
        General Aycock. The following chart illustrates the total amounts
    less than the potentially available incentive fees that Corvias earned
    at each of our projects since 2016. Please note that our incentives are
    awarded on a per-project basis. Therefore, for AFCG there is a single
    incentive fee, which covers our management of housing at Edwards AFB,
    Eglin AFB, Eielson AFB, Hurlburt Field, McConnell AFB, and Seymour
    Johnson. To the extent possible, this chart accounts for any deferred/
    late payments as earned with respect to the year in which they were
    potentially available (rather than the year in which they were paid
    with respect to any deferred incentive payments).
        [The chart referred to was not available at the time of printing.]
        Ms. Speier. How many 7-year histories of properties has your
    company provided to tenants, and how many tenants have refused a
    property after reviewing the 7-year history?
        General Aycock. As of mid-March, we had provided roughly 2,100
    prospective residents with a seven-year maintenance history. Of those,
    five residents (0.25%) declined to accept the home based on the
    maintenance history.
        Ms. Speier. When you provide a 7-year history, is it presented in
    plain English so that they tenant can understand it?
        General Aycock. Yes, the 7-year maintenance history is provided
    using a standardized cover page developed by the Services and approved
    by DOD. We provide an additional cover page related to construction and
    renovation work in the prospective resident's neighborhood and provide
    additional detail on any work conducted at the resident's request.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your company's overall MHPI housing
    units are currently unoccupied because of maintenance or habitability
    reasons?
        General Aycock. As of April 1st, approximately 974 of the homes we
    manage are considered off-line. This represents about 3.8% of the total
    number of homes in our portfolio. Of these off-line homes, 600 are
    currently scheduled to come back on-line either through scheduled
    renovations or other project work. An additional 140 homes are off-line
    and scheduled for demolition, and 234 are awaiting a final development
    decision regarding whether they will be demolished or renovated.
        Ms. Speier. In the last 3 years, how many tenants have you had to
    relocate prior to their scheduled lease termination due to maintenance
    or habitability reasons?
        General Aycock. Our property management software system does not
    directly track the number of residents who have terminated their lease
    specifically due to maintenance or habitability concerns. However, for
    2020 we are able to identify that across our portfolio, 30 families
    moved out of their homes early and indicated that they were doing so
    because they were unhappy with the community. An additional 342
    families moving out early indicated that they were doing so for a
    personal reason.
        Typically in our experience that means they are not being stationed
    elsewhere but have decided to move off-post into a new home that they
    have leased or purchased. This represents a very small percentage
    (1.4%) of our entire portfolio of roughly 27,000 units.
        Ms. Speier. All of the witnesses present testified that their
    companies believe MHPI leases and housing are subject to state and
    local laws related to housing and leases. How does the federal enclave
    doctrine apply to your company's MHPI projects, and in what
    circumstances, if any, does the federal enclave doctrine preempt state
    laws that would otherwise apply to your company's MHPI projects?
        General Aycock. The federal enclave doctrine is constitutionally
    mandated and applies to all federal enclaves, including lands on which
    many MHPI projects are located. It is not relinquished when the federal
    government partners with private parties to provide military housing.
    Nor can it be waived by the private MHPI partner.
        Simply put, and explained in further legal detail below, any state
    law enacted after the land was ceded to the federal government has no
    legal force or effect in the federal enclave. Our Residential Occupancy
    Agreements (``ROA'') with tenants generally state that the ROA will be
    governed by the laws of the state where the home is located to the
    maximum extent that the state law applies to the premises and we abide
    by those terms. Generally, this means that a claim based on breach of
    the ROA will be interpreted under state law.
        On the other hand, a claim based on a particular state statute,
    such as a specific state consumer law, may not be applicable if the
    state law was enacted after the land, on which the home is located,
    became a federal enclave. The federal enclave clause of the United
    States Constitution, Article I, Sec. 8, Clause 17, provides that
    Congress shall have the power ``To exercise exclusive legislation in
    all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles
    square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the acceptance of
    Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and
    to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of
    the legislature of the State in which the same shall be, for the
    erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful
    buildings[.]'' U.S. Const., art 1, Sec. 8, cl. 17. MHPI projects are
    often located on federal enclaves. When ``the United States acquires
    with the `consent' of the state legislature land within the borders of
    that State .1A.1A. the jurisdiction of the Federal Government becomes
    `exclusive.''' Paul v. U.S., 371 U.S. 245, 264 (1963). ``This exclusive
    jurisdiction is `legislative,' meaning the laws and statutes applied to
    these locations must be supplied by the federal government, not the
    states.'' Allison v. Boeing Laser Tech. Serv., 689 F.3d 1234, 1236
    (10th Cir. 2012) (quoting Pac. Coast Dairy v. Dep't of Ag. of Cal., 318
    U.S. 285, 294 (1943)). Under the federal enclave doctrine, any state
    statute adopted after the transfer of sovereignty is without force in
    the enclave. Pac. Coast Dairy, 318 U.S at 294 (``It follows that
    contracts to sell and sales consummated within the enclave cannot be
    regulated by the California law.''); Paul, 371 U.S. at 268 (``only
    state law existing at the time of the acquisition remains enforceable,
    not subsequent laws''). The federal government does not relinquish
    exclusive jurisdiction by partnering with private parties to provide
    military housing. Atl. Marine Corps Cmtys., LLC v. Onslow Cty., N.
    Carolina, 497 F. Supp. 2d 743, 758 (E.D.N.C. 2007).
        Ms. Speier. What is your company's total revenue from MHPI for the
    most recent year?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Attached are audited financials for each of our
    MHPI projects for the most recent fiscal year. We draw your attention
    to the Notes to the Financial Statements under ``Related-Party
    Transactions'', which discloses the revenue received from each of the
    underlying projects. *As these documents are not in the public domain,
    we request they be treated as proprietary and confidential and not
    disclosed outside the Subcommittee without Lendlease's express consent.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your revenues from your
    participation in MHPI are ascribed to overhead, both at the corporate
    and installation levels?
        Ms. Tregarthen. For installation level revenue and overhead, please
    reference the FY20 Project Company audited financials included with
    this request. For Lendlease corporate level information, please
    reference the FY20 Lendlease audited financials by going to: https://
    www.lendlease.com/investor-centre/.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your revenue is ascribed to
    overhead?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Lendlease is a publicly listed company, and our
    revenue and overhead is disclosed in our audited reports. For your
    convenience, Lendlease audited financials for its most recent fiscal
    year can be accessed here: https://www.lendlease.com/investor-centre/.
        Ms. Speier. How many employees does your company have working for
    your MHPI projects? How many for each garrison or installation where
    your company operates housing?
        Ms. Tregarthen. See supporting document attached.
        [The document referred to was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Ms. Speier. What is the total amount of reduction for incentive
    fees at each installation/garrison for your company over the last 5
    years? Please indicate if these incentive-fee reductions were merely
    deferred and paid later, or if it was a permanent and final cut to what
    the company would otherwise have been paid in incentive fees.
        Ms. Tregarthen. Please see the attached document that provides
    total amount of reduction in incentive fees at each installation for
    the last five (5) years. *As this document is not in the public domain,
    we request it be treated as proprietary and confidential and not
    disclosed outside the Subcommittee without Lendlease's express consent.
        Ms. Speier. How many 7-year histories of properties has your
    company provided to tenants, and how many tenants have refused a
    property after reviewing the 7-year history?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Lendlease began distribution of the 7-year
    maintenance history to all new, inbound residents in June 2020. Since
    that time, approximately 14,215 7-year maintenance histories have been
    provided across our portfolio. Of that number, only 24 homes were
    expressly declined as a result of the 7-year maintenance histories,
    with 19 of those prospective residents accepting a different home
    assignment. The remaining five residents ultimately chose to live off
    the installation
        Ms. Speier. When you provide a 7-year history, is it presented in
    plain English so that they tenant can understand it?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Yes. The 7-year maintenance histories are in a
    format that is easily understandable, and our teams are always
    available to answer any questions or clarify any information.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your company's overall MHPI housing
    units are currently unoccupied because of maintenance or habitability
    reasons?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Below chart represents current portfolio vacancies
    due to scheduled renovation, repair and maintenance by project:
        [The chart referred to was not available at the time of printing.]
        Ms. Speier. In the last 3 years, how many tenants have you had to
    relocate prior to their scheduled lease termination due to maintenance
    or habitability reasons?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Historically we did not track this data; however,
    in July 2020 we developed and implemented a resident tracker, which
    allows us to track when residents move within or out of one of our
    installations. In the nine (9) months from 7/1/20 thru 3/31/21, only 60
    residents were offered to relocate within the project or were offered
    the opportunity to break their lease without penalty due to maintenance
    or environmental concerns. These 60 offers are broken out by project as
    follows:
        [The information referred to was not available at the time of
    printing.]
        Ms. Speier. All of the witnesses present testified that their
    companies believe MHPI leases and housing are subject to state and
    local laws related to housing and leases. How does the federal enclave
    doctrine apply to your company's MHPI projects, and in what
    circumstances, if any, does the federal enclave doctrine preempt state
    laws that would otherwise apply to your company's MHPI projects?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Typically, the federal enclave doctrine applies to
    any area deemed a federal enclave. Manning v. Gold Belt Falcon, LLC,
    681 F.Supp.2d 574, 576 (D.N.J. 2010) (``The Federal Enclave Doctrine
    applies to land held by the federal government that was given, deeded
    or ceded by the state.''). As explained in response to Question 19, and
    prescribed by the Constitution, this means Congress possess exclusive
    jurisdiction to legislate over that area. State law would apply if it
    was in existence at the time the land became a federal enclave and is
    consistent with federal law, or if an exception to the federal enclave
    doctrine applies.
        The circumstances concerning when a particular state law applies to
    a privatized housing development are varied. Numerous factors,
    including the date a particular law was enacted, the date and
    conditions under which the land became a federal enclave, the current
    federal regulatory scheme, and the law agreed-to by the parties, affect
    whether and which state laws apply.
        Ms. Speier. How many of your homes are offline at each of your
    installations during a 6 month period of time and how many of your
    families move before the lease is up?
        Ms. Tregarthen. During the most recent six-month period (10/1/20
    thru 3/31/21), the average number of off-line per month by project
    were:
        [The chart referred to was not available at the time of printing.]
        Ms. Speier. Do each of you pay for damaged personal property when a
    unit becomes uninhabitable?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Yes, we pay for damaged personal property when a
    unit becomes uninhabitable if the damage to personal property was
    caused by our failure to maintain the home. Additionally, we regularly
    reimburse families for out-of-pocket expenses and incidentals such as
    providing temporary lodging, per diem, and in some cases have moved
    families into different homes.
        Ms. Speier. What is your company's total revenue from MHPI for the
    most recent year?
        Mr. Taylor. Information regarding all payments from the MHPI
    projects to Balfour Beatty-related entities are included in the project
    level audited financial statements for each of our MHPI projects,
    copies of which are provided to each of the Service Branches and
    respective lenders for the projects.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your revenues from your
    participation in MHPI are ascribed to overhead, both at the corporate
    and installation levels?
        Mr. Taylor. We incur corporate overhead costs that support all of
    our business units, including our military housing portfolio. We do not
    allocate any corporate overhead costs to the military housing projects.
    For example, only the costs of employees directly associated with
    specific projects are allocated to those projects; and these direct
    employee costs are included in the relevant annual budgets for those
    projects which are approved by the Service Branches and the lenders for
    those projects.
        Direct costs that relate to the operation and management of our
    military housing portfolio are charged to the respective military
    projects and are included in the operating costs reflected in each of
    the respective projects audited financial statements. There are
    instances where certain direct costs are incurred to support multiple
    projects. In those instances, the costs are allocated based on the
    respective projects' housing unit count receiving those respective
    services.
        Ms. Speier. How many employees does your company have working for
    your MHPI projects? How many for each garrison or installation where
    your company operates housing?
        Mr. Taylor. As of the end of March, we had 1,055 employees working
    at our MHPI project locations. Following is a breakdown for each
    installation where we operate housing:
          Altus AFB 14
          Beale AFB 17
          Cannon AFB 26
          Carlisle Barracks 10
          Cavalier AFS 2
          JBWS Charleston 22
          Dyess AFB 17
          Ellsworth AFB 16
          Fairchild AFB 22
          FE Warren AFB 18
          Fort Bliss 96
          Fort Carson 57
          Fort Detrick 10
          Fort Eustis 28
          Fort Gordon 25
          Fort Hamilton 10
          Fort Jackson 11
          Fort Leonard Wood 17
          Fort Stewart 51
          Fort Stewart UPH 6
          Fort Story 7
          Grand Forks AFB 7
          Hunter AAF 15
          Lackland AFB 23
          Luke AFB 15
          Malmstrom AFB 28
          Minot AFB 31
          Mitchel Field Complex 7
          Moody AFB 6
          Mountain Home AFB 24
          NAS Jacksonville 9
          NAS Key West 26
          NAS Meridian 5
          NAS Pensacola 25
          NAS Whiting Field 7
          NASJRB Fort Worth 3
          NAVSTA Newport 25
          NCBC Gulfport 22
          NS Mayport 25
          NSA Lakehurst 5
          NSA Panama City 4
          NSA Saratoga Springs 6
          NSB Kings Bay 12
          NSB New London 47
          NSY Portsmouth 5
          NWS Earle 4
          Picatinny Arsenal 5
          Sheppard AFB 23
          Tinker AFB 23
          Travis AFB 25
          Tyndall AFB 4
          Vandenberg AFB 24
          Walter Reed Army Medical Ctr. 6
          West Point 35
          White Sands Missile Range 10
          Whiteman AFB 26
          Regional Operating Center (AZ) 6.
        Ms. Speier. What is the total amount of reduction for incentive
    fees at each installation/garrison for your company over the last 5
    years? Please indicate if these incentive-fee reductions were merely
    deferred and paid later, or if it was a permanent and final cut to what
    the company would otherwise have been paid in incentive fees.
        Mr. Taylor. The terms under our property management and fee
    management agreements with respect to incentive fees, as well as the
    amounts earned and unpaid at the end of the reporting period, are
    disclosed in the respective project audited financial statements.
        Ms. Speier. How many 7-year histories of properties has your
    company provided to tenants, and how many tenants have refused a
    property after reviewing the 7-year history?
        Mr. Taylor. We initiated a pilot program in September 2020 to
    provide the 7-year maintenance history to incoming residents prior to
    move-in at three locations, including Hunter Army Airfield, Moody Air
    Force Base and Naval Air Station Jacksonville. Between September 14,
    2020 and March 29, 2021, we had 242 families scheduled to move-in at
    the three properties listed and all received the 7-year maintenance
    history for their unit in advance. Of the 242 scheduled move-ins, two
    families declined the units they were offered and did not ask for an
    alternative unit, instead opting for other off-base housing. We do not
    have any feedback whether their decision to decline housing was based
    on the maintenance history provided or some other factor.
        Ms. Speier. When you provide a 7-year history, is it presented in
    plain English so that they tenant can understand it?
        Mr. Taylor. Yes, the 7-year maintenance history on a unit is
    provided in plain English that a prospective tenant can easily
    understand. The information provided includes all details required by
    the Department of Defense, including work order number, priority,
    category/service type, description of issue/repair and completion date.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your company's overall MHPI housing
    units are currently unoccupied because of maintenance or habitability
    reasons?
        Mr. Taylor. As of the end of March 2021, 1.73% of our MHPI housing
    units are unoccupied due to the need to perform maintenance work or
    other repairs.
        Ms. Speier. In the last 3 years, how many tenants have you had to
    relocate prior to their scheduled lease termination due to maintenance
    or habitability reasons?
        Mr. Taylor. Across the more than 41,000 units in our military
    housing portfolio, we have relocated 448 tenants over the past three
    years (April 2018 through March 2021) prior to lease termination due to
    the need to perform significant unit repairs (including for natural
    disaster and storm-related damages). This number, however, does not
    include events associated with Hurricane Michael impacts occurring at
    Tyndall AFB in October 2018.
        Ms. Speier. All of the witnesses present testified that their
    companies believe MHPI leases and housing are subject to state and
    local laws related to housing and leases. How does the federal enclave
    doctrine apply to your company's MHPI projects, and in what
    circumstances, if any, does the federal enclave doctrine preempt state
    laws that would otherwise apply to your company's MHPI projects?
        Mr. Taylor. See response to QFR 11 above. In addition, it is
    important to note that in certain situations, the doctrine of federal
    preemption may apply where an otherwise applicable state or local law
    conflicts with a federal purpose. For example, where state or local law
    would otherwise prohibit a landlord from giving priority to service
    members and their families over other housing applicants under fair
    housing laws, then such laws would be deemed preempted by the federal
    purpose of the Military Housing Privatization Initiative.
        Ms. Speier. Do each of you pay for damaged personal property when a
    unit becomes uninhabitable?
        Mr. Taylor. To the extent a resident's personal property is damaged
    due to a negligent act or omission by the landlord, the resident is
    compensated for such damage regardless of whether the home remains
    habitable or uninhabitable.
        Ms. Speier. What is your company's total revenue from MHPI for the
    most recent year?
        Mr. Cowley. The project companies have engaged military-approved
    service providers at each installation for property and asset
    management services, which bill in accordance with the agreements
    established at the beginning of the projects and approved by the DOD
    partners. The following are the approximate fees earned in 2020 by the
    various service providers:
          Third-Party Property Management*: $9,340,000
          Property Management: $1,961,000
          Development: $1,653,000
          Construction: $574,000
          Asset Management: $3,363,000
        *Note: Clark Realty Capital LLC, in its role as the non-member
    manager of the managing member of the project companies, does not
    receive revenue. It has no direct or indirect ownership in, and
    receives no financial benefit from fees paid to, the third-party
    property manager.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your revenues from your
    participation in MHPI are ascribed to overhead, both at the corporate
    and installation levels?
        Mr. Cowley. The project service providers bill in accordance with
    the applicable agreements and budgets and charge direct expenses and
    fees. The construction agreements provide the general contractor an
    overhead charge of 2% on total construction costs, which equaled a
    total of $296,000 in 2020.
        Ms. Speier. How many employees does your company have working for
    your MHPI projects? How many for each garrison or installation where
    your company operates housing?
        Mr. Cowley. For the military family housing projects, the asset
    management teams consist of approximately 16 permanent staff members at
    any given time. For the unaccompanied housing project at Pacific
    Beacon, the team consists of approximately 44 permanent staff members
    at any given time. A breakdown of staff members by installation is
    included below, as well as information on the number of staff members
    for the third-party property manager.
        Ms. Speier. What is the total amount of reduction for incentive
    fees at each installation/garrison for your company over the last 5
    years? Please indicate if these incentive-fee reductions were merely
    deferred and paid later, or if it was a permanent and final cut to what
    the company would otherwise have been paid in incentive fees.
        Mr. Cowley. In total, the property managers have experienced a
    permanent reduction of their incentive fee of approximately $6,433,000
    across all projects. The breakdown below represents the unearned
    property management incentive fees by installation over the past 5
    years.
          Belvoir: $930,000
          Benning: $1,571,000
          Irwin/Moffett/Parks: $764,000
          Monterey: $2,862,000
          Andrews/MacDill: $241,000
          Pacific Beacon: $65,000*
        *Note, Pacific Beacon is an award-winning community earning the
    DoD's ``A+ Platinum'' designation for service excellence in 4 out of
    the past 5 years of the government's annual Residential Satisfaction
    Survey, administered by CEL & Associates.
        Ms. Speier. How many 7-year histories of properties has your
    company provided to tenants, and how many tenants have refused a
    property after reviewing the 7-year history?
        Mr. Cowley. The properties have not provided any 7-year histories
    to residents. There are instances where the military has provided
    histories directly to tenants, and the projects support these efforts.
    Delivery of the 7-year histories is part of the implementation plan
    proposed for the remaining 4 TBOR items.
        Ms. Speier. When you provide a 7-year history, is it presented in
    plain English so that they tenant can understand it?
        Mr. Cowley. N/A. Please see the response above.
        Ms. Speier. What percentage of your company's overall MHPI housing
    units are currently unoccupied because of maintenance or habitability
    reasons?
        Mr. Cowley. As of 1 April 2021, approximately 0.2% of the units are
    currently unoccupied due to substantial maintenance or habitability
    reasons (this excludes approximately 122 historic units that are
    offline for Army-approved renovations).
        Ms. Speier. In the last 3 years, how many tenants have you had to
    relocate prior to their scheduled lease termination due to maintenance
    or habitability reasons?
        Mr. Cowley. In the last three years, the property managers have
    permanently relocated approximately 168 tenants to different homes
    prior to their scheduled lease termination due to maintenance or
    habitability reasons.
        Ms. Speier. All of the witnesses present testified that their
    companies believe MHPI leases and housing are subject to state and
    local laws related to housing and leases. How does the federal enclave
    doctrine apply to your company's MHPI projects, and in what
    circumstances, if any, does the federal enclave doctrine preempt state
    laws that would otherwise apply to your company's MHPI projects?
        Mr. Cowley. As discussed above in the answer to question #12,
    whether or not Federal Enclave Jurisdiction exists for a specific claim
    is a fact-intensive question that turns on the nature of the claim
    asserted, as well as the historic details regarding the original grant
    of the land to the federal government. See, e.g., Swords to Plowshares
    v. Kemp, 423 F. Supp. 2d 1031, 1034 (N.D. Cal. 2005). However, as a
    practical matter, landlord-tenant matters are generally governed by
    State law, and our projects are working on implementing the Universal
    Lease, which specifies that local state law governs each of our tenant
    leases.
                                     ______

                      QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. HOULAHAN
        Ms. Houlahan. I understand that there have been allegations
    regarding irregular reporting in your maintenance records and unsafe
    housing conditions. What steps are you taking to strengthen your
    housing maintenance system and improve transparency? How are you
    working with families to rebuild trust?
        General Aycock. Corvias has implemented several initiatives that
    provide real time updates on work order requests and followup
    mechanisms to strengthen quality control related to work order
    completion and resident satisfaction. Residents can place a work order
    through a mobile application or online that allows tracking from input
    to completion.
        When a work order is placed via phone, in person, or by another
    method, a work order number is provided for resident tracking. When a
    work order requires additional work after the initial visit from our
    maintenance team, residents are provided a prediction on the timing for
    completion, as well as frequent updates.
        We are also migrating to new property management software that has
    robust tracking for timeliness of completion and description of work
    performed. One of these tools, which is being implemented at some of
    our installations already, will send out a simple survey on the day the
    work order is closed asking the residents ``Are you satisfied?'' This
    allows us to solicit feedback in addition to the SatisFacts surveys the
    MHPI partners conduct on work orders and move-ins.
        Corvias is working closely with military housing offices and
    installation leadership to rebuild trust with our residents. Our local
    teams participate in Town Halls and provide several convenient methods
    for residents to reach our teams for two-way dialogue on any feedback
    or concerns. Depending on location and our partners programming, this
    may be Resident Advisory Groups, Installation Focus Groups, or
    participation with AF Resident Advocates as a means to solicit feedback
    and regain trust.
        Ms. Houlahan. It is my understanding that some of the ``tenants
    bill of rights'' provisions are set to take effect this summer,
    including tenants' access to maintenance records and the ability to
    withhold rent if there is a dispute. Where are your companies in its
    efforts to implement these changes?
        General Aycock. Corvias has been a leader among the MHPI partners
    focused on implementing the tenant bill of rights. As of June 2020 the
    DOD certified that 14 of 18 rights where fully implemented. Corvias is
    on track to have the remaining four rights implemented by June 2021,
    these include:
          Maintenance History--Corvias conducted a seven-year
    maintenance history pilot program in 2020 and began rolling those
    histories out to all prospective residents in December, 2020. All
    prospective residents receive a maintenance history, as do current
    residents who request a copy.
          Common/Universal Lease--Corvias first agreed to utilize a
    common lease template in November 2020 but DOD's finalization of the
    template was delayed until February, 2021. Once we received that
    template in February, we began state-level legal review and the
    creation of community-specific addenda, as called for by the template.
    We are working hard to have this rolled out by June, 2021.
          Dispute Resolution--Corvias advocated for the creation of
    a Service-led Dispute Resolution process and has agreed to participate
    as soon as the Army and Air Force finalize their procedures to
    implement the program. In the interim, we continue to work with the
    Military Housing Office and/or Service legal assistance attorneys who
    are assisting service members to resolve disputes that may arise
    between them, as residents, and Corvias as the community's property
    manager. Consistent with the 2020 NDAA, the Services review and approve
    any settlement agreement between Corvias and our servicemember
    residents.
          Rent Segregation--Consistent with the dispute resolution
    process, we have agreed to seek our lenders' consent to allow residents
    to withhold their rent via a segregated account and will do so as soon
    as the Services have proposed their procedures for the dispute
    resolution process. We anticipate the need to revise some operating
    documents to allow for this process but expect to be able to implement
    this program along with the Universal Lease as long as the Services'
    processes are completed.
        Ms. Houlahan. I understand that there have been allegations
    regarding irregular reporting in your maintenance records and unsafe
    housing conditions. What steps are you taking to strengthen your
    housing maintenance system and improve transparency? How are you
    working with families to rebuild trust?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Lendlease is an industry leader in innovating and
    continually improving upon maintenance system technology. Since 2007,
    Lendlease has worked with a software developer to create custom reports
    to manage timeframes for servicing open orders and repeat service
    orders, investing with large on-hand repair parts and managing our
    inventory. Maintenance team members carry company-issued smart pads
    with the ability to review the histories of the homes they repair and
    to allow residents to sign-off when work is completed.
        We continue to be open and transparent with our residents regarding
    the conditions of our homes. As noted, the FY20 NDAA requires us to
    provide prospective residents with seven years of maintenance history
    on an offered home prior to lease signing--and Lendlease is the first
    company to do so. The tenant bill of rights is also posted on our
    project websites.
        In order to build greater trust with our residents, in 2020,
    Lendlease launched a new Customer Care Program based on a commitment to
    five pillars: Safe and Healthy Homes, Quality and Consistent Service
    Experience, Communication and Education, Organizational Culture of
    Caring, and Sense of Community. Under the program, we successfully
    identified and are implementing new ways of listening to and engaging
    with our 123,000 residents across more than 40,000 homes. In addition
    to hiring seasoned customer care professionals to guide our program at
    the highest levels of the organization, we also recently appointed
    local customer care resources for each of our project sites. Our
    enhanced customer care approach includes several new solutions:
          Resident Advisory Boards--At the center of our resident
    engagement strategy is a significant investment in establishing
    Resident Advisory Boards (RABs). RABs are designed to give residents an
    opportunity to work directly with our team to help shape their local
    community, express their concerns, and share their ideas and problem
    solve with our management team. Residents in each neighborhood elect
    representatives to work with the Lendlease Project Company and the
    installation's Military Housing Office. Currently, there are over 70
    RAB members across our Army and Navy portfolios.
          Customer Experience Training--We have developed a series
    of mandatory staff training modules focused on enhancing customer
    service skills.
          Resident Portal and Smart Phone App--Lendlease was the
    first of the MHPI partners to utilize a resident portal and smart phone
    app, Military Cafe, in 2018. Amongst other things the Portal and App
    allows residents to request maintenance, upload photos of the issue,
    and receive updates on the progress of their Service Order, and arrival
    of their technician. We continually work with software engineers to
    launch regular app updates so that the tool represents best practices
    in mobile customer care.
          Quality and Timely Resident Communication--We
    transitioned to a single platform for mass resident communication,
    RedFlag, in January 2020. RedFlag is a notification system for
    residents to receive standard mass resident communications and
    emergency notifications via text and email, as well as mass voice
    calling, from the start of their residency.
          Maintenance Solution Center--This is a new virtual
    dispatch solution to replace our outsourced call center and allows
    residents to schedule work order requests, customize and schedule
    repairs, and talk directly to a team member if they need guidance or
    have specific questions. The Solution Center creates a single
    environment for all service orders to be received and managed by in-
    house staff across our portfolio. This technology permits us to better
    troubleshoot problems and ensure a technician with the right skill set
    and tools arrives at the home at the earliest possible opportunity.
        Ms. Houlahan. It is my understanding that some of the ``tenants
    bill of rights'' provisions are set to take effect this summer,
    including tenants' access to maintenance records and the ability to
    withhold rent if there is a dispute. Where are your companies in its
    efforts to implement these changes?
        Ms. Tregarthen. Lendlease submitted formal certification to each
    military service, agreeing to all proposed measures in the tenant bill
    of rights (TBOR), including a universal lease, dispute resolution
    process and the ability to allow tenants to withhold rent until
    disputes are resolved. Additionally, the TBOR is posted on every one of
    our project websites to increase transparency and trust with our
    residents.
        Lendlease is the first military housing partner to voluntarily
    provide a 7-year maintenance histories to all prospective residents for
    homes they are considering leasing. Lendlease also has voluntarily
    agreed to implement the remaining rights at our existing housing
    projects by June 1, 2021, in time for the Permanent Change of Station
    moves that will take place in calendar year (CY) 2021. Lendlease has
    outlined plans to implement an informal dispute resolution process that
    is streamlined nature and easy to use. Team-member training for both
    the informal and formal dispute resolution processes have begun,
    including when and how to segregate rent if necessary.
        Lendlease is updating all project-specific resident guides to
    ensure they are compliant with and complimentary to the universal
    leases and relevant NDAA requirements concurrently with the roll-out of
    the finalized and approved universal lease. Team training on the
    universal lease is underway while we await its finalization.
        Ms. Houlahan. I understand that there have been allegations
    regarding irregular reporting in your maintenance records and unsafe
    housing conditions. What steps are you taking to strengthen your
    housing maintenance system and improve transparency? How are you
    working with families to rebuild trust?
        Mr. Taylor. The Assurance team regularly analyzes data from our
    maintenance system and reviews it with our maintenance teams at the
    properties. The Assurance team also reviews employee compliance against
    company policies and report their findings to senior leadership for
    corrective action as needed. Our Assurance team also performs on-site
    inspections at the properties on an annual basis to further review
    compliance and provide coaching and mentoring to the maintenance team.
        Reports are compiled with their findings and communicated to the
    management team. Any corrective actions are completed and monitored for
    future compliance. Monthly training is conducted with all property
    staff as part of an annual training plan to ensure continuous
    improvement of both their technical and customer service knowledge and
    skills. In addition, we provide training regularly as to compliance
    with company policies and procedures, including but not limited to our
    Code of Conduct.
        To ensure greater transparency in the work order management
    process, residents receive an email for each change in work order
    status and they have the ability to view (via online portal or mobile
    app) all work order information in our system including before/after
    photos of the repair. Before a work order is closed in our system, the
    resident is contacted to confirm the work has been completed to their
    satisfaction and all aspects of the repair are working properly.
        In addition, an online survey from a third-party survey company is
    issued after every new resident move-in and completed/closed work
    order, asking the resident to rate their experience and level of
    satisfaction. These survey responses are received in real time by both
    our senior leadership, local property team and the Army/Navy Air Force
    housing office. Our teams follow-up directly with any resident that
    rates their experience at 3.50 or lower (5.00 is the highest rating) to
    understand where we fell short and how we can correct or improve.
        We are further working to rebuild trust with residents through more
    robust communication programs that include quarterly housing town halls
    conducted with local Command, monthly resident newsletters and ongoing
    community updates and notifications and updates provided through our
    online resident portal and mobile app, email and social media channels.
        Ms. Houlahan. It is my understanding that some of the ``tenants
    bill of rights'' provisions are set to take effect this summer,
    including tenants' access to maintenance records and the ability to
    withhold rent if there is a dispute. Where are your companies in its
    efforts to implement these changes?
        Mr. Taylor. Balfour Beatty Communities has fully supported, and
    continues to support, implementation of the Department of Defense's
    tenant bill of rights. We remain committed to ensuring service members
    and their families have access to safe, quality, and well-maintained
    homes, along with fair treatment.
        We continue to work jointly with the Services toward implementing
    all components of the tenant bill of rights and completing the actions
    necessary to incorporate all rights and procedures necessary to
    administer those rights within our military housing project legal
    documents. This includes our adoption of a Universal Lease that,
    subject to lender consent, will be used across all of our military
    housing installations, and includes the provision of a seven-year
    maintenance history for all housing applicants and existing tenants, a
    process for dispute resolution available to residents and procedures
    that allow residents to withhold rent until disputes are resolved.
        Over the last several months we have started to provide the 7-year
    maintenance history to incoming residents at three of our sites through
    a proactive pilot program. We are now actively working on rolling out
    the 7-year maintenance history at the remainder of our sites and expect
    it will be fully implemented during the second quarter of this year.
    Regarding the Universal Lease, we are in the final stages of developing
    the state/community-specific addenda for each project location that is
    necessary to ensure compliance with state and local landlord/tenant
    laws.
        We also are awaiting formal guidance from the Services regarding
    the dispute resolution policies and procedures that will be followed
    and administered by each installation's Military Housing Office in
    order to align these with our lease packages, including our resident
    guides and resident lease training. Once these lease materials are
    completed, we then will seek approval for use by the relevant Service
    Branches and project lenders on agreed procedures for rent withholding
    under our project financing agreements.
        In concert with the Department of Defense, we are committed to
    initiating use of the Universal Lease within our military housing
    portfolio by June 1, 2021 to the extent we are able to obtain review
    and concurrence from all stakeholders by such date.
        Ms. Houlahan. I understand that there have been allegations
    regarding irregular reporting in your maintenance records and unsafe
    housing conditions. What steps are you taking to strengthen your
    housing maintenance system and improve transparency? How are you
    working with families to rebuild trust?
        Mr. Cowley. Regarding past allegations of irregular reporting and
    other fraudulent behavior, the previous property manager on the four
    Army projects was removed in 2015. Since then, the projects are not
    familiar with any allegations of intentional misconduct related to
    reporting.
        With respect to any allegations of unsafe housing conditions,
    resident safety is the projects' top priority. Allegations are
    investigated and addressed in partnership with the property manager and
    government housing office. The projects have taken numerous steps to
    strengthen housing maintenance systems.
        Examples from the various projects include making significant
    investments to improve maintenance operations, including a new mobile
    device app to enable routine work order submission and tracking by
    residents, improved work order scheduling options to increase
    convenience for residents, hiring of an in-house master electrician,
    and dedicated emergency maintenance personnel to increase
    responsiveness on our most critical work orders.
        In order to improve transparency, the government staff at each
    installation is provided access to the property manager's maintenance
    software systems, as well as access to all resident responses to
    satisfaction surveys sent after work orders are completed. In an effort
    to strengthen trust with residents and their families, projects have
    increased communication efforts with current and future residents.
        Specific to each location, initiatives may include monthly resident
    newsletters, a multichannel One Call Now communication system, and
    email campaigns to incoming residents with helpful information at
    strategic points prior to their arrival. These increased communication
    and education efforts help to supplement the existing 24/7 maintenance
    hotline, resident portal, quarterly installation Town Hall meetings,
    Facebook pages, and community management offices. In addition, many
    projects have implemented third-party and government inspections. These
    occur prior to occupancy by new families and/or for specific work order
    categories.
        Ms. Houlahan. It is my understanding that some of the ``tenants
    bill of rights'' provisions are set to take effect this summer,
    including tenants' access to maintenance records and the ability to
    withhold rent if there is a dispute. Where are your companies in its
    efforts to implement these changes?
        Mr. Cowley. Please see response above.
                                     ______

                     QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY MS. STRICKLAND
        Ms. Strickland. We have heard concerns that privatized military
    family housing providers use commanders to stifle the voices of service
    members and their families. Can you discuss how you communicate with
    commanders? Please include any asks of the commanders to intervene or
    counsel a service member.
        In the hearing, you mentioned that you attempt to proactively
    educate service members. Given the tendency to involve commanders how
    do you work to educate the commanders you communicate with?
        How often would you say that you involve commanders when a tenant
    complains about an issue? Over a six-month period? Over a year?
        After you involve a commander in an individual's case, how often
    would you say that the tenant follows up if the reported issue persists
    or gets worse?
        General Aycock. Typically, the chain of command reaches out to
    Corvias on behalf of the service member. We try to work directly with
    the service member to resolve any issues or concerns and limit
    involving chain of command. Reaching out to chain of command is a last
    resort. Should we find a need to involve the chain of command, the
    first step is to speak with the military housing office and/or garrison
    and they usually initiate the communication with the chain of command.
        Examples of when a chain of command's support may be requested
    include extreme housekeeping concerns which would be considered a
    health and safety issue or a service member refusing to set up a
    payment plan or not honoring an established plan with respect to
    charges--which would otherwise result in assigning a servicemember to a
    collection agency.
        We try to educate service members by sending out friendly reminders
    and contacting them and discussing any violations and referring them
    back to our Resident Responsibility Guide, which outlines policies and
    procedures. In some cases, we will engage the housing partner. We work
    closely with garrison Commanders and their staff on a weekly basis,
    including regular briefings, status reports, and other methods to
    ensure that we move forward in a coordinated fashion.
        Our garrison partners have typically asked to be informed if there
    is a potential need for their involvement with tenant-related matters,
    particularly if the tenant has expressed concerns regarding their
    health or safety, has indicated that they will take legal action
    against the partnership, or when they have indicated that they elevated
    their concerns outside the garrison (e.g. the media or other
    stakeholders). garrison Commanders may also be engaged by the tenant
    directly via submission of an Interactive Customer Evaluation (ICE),
    through the commander's open-door policy, or other methods available to
    them.
        When a garrison Commander becomes involved, the resident is
    typically more likely to follow-up should the issue persist, or their
    concerns are otherwise not addressed. We generally find that our
    residents are comfortable engaging with their chain of command for
    support and the commanders we engage with strongly support their
    residents' reasonable requests. In addition, in these instances, it is
    our procedure to follow up with the resident to ensure the issue has
    been resolved and the resident is satisfied. The garrison Commanders we
    work with generally expect us to keep them informed if the resident has
    any additional concerns.
        Ms. Strickland. Can you share some of the best practices you've
    developed to respond to tenants and to ensure the health and safety of
    the homes under your care?
        General Aycock. Since 2019, Corvias has implemented a variety of
    measures to strengthen the work order process. In addition, the COVID-
    19 pandemic has prompted the adoption of more extensive health & safety
    conscious practices aimed at ensuring that our residents feel safe and
    secure throughout the leasing process.
        Prior to any resident moving into one of our homes, each home is
    subject to an inspection using an extensive checklist developed in
    conjunction with our service partners. All necessary work is conducted,
    checked for quality assurance by our property management team, and then
    checked again by the Military Housing Office (MHO). This checklist is
    included for residents to review, and its form is available to
    residents as an addendum to the Universal Lease template being
    implemented this summer.
        We have also adopted more consistent standards for preventative
    maintenance checks during a resident's tenancy. With respect to our
    regular maintenance activity in response to resident work orders, we
    ensure that there is ongoing feedback between residents and the
    maintenance team. All emergency work orders are followed up with a call
    to the resident to verify the work was done appropriately and discuss
    next steps if applicable.
        The military housing office (MHO) also follows up on all emergency
    work orders to gauge resident satisfaction. A percentage of the urgent
    and routine work orders are also selected for follow-up, including a
    call to the resident to validate the work was completed correctly. A
    survey is sent to every resident following the completion of a work
    order to measure resident satisfaction. These results are tracked
    carefully and reviewed weekly and monthly. Any resident that submits a
    survey that falls below the benchmark requirements is contacted (if
    they indicate they want to be contacted) to discuss what caused the
    dissatisfaction, and this may trigger another work order to be opened
    to complete the work satisfactorily.
        As we continue to upgrade our PM Software, we are finding new ways
    to reach out to residents to ensure that work has been completed
    consistent with our standards and our residents' expectations. The
    COVID-19 pandemic also prompted us to roll-out additional processes and
    procedures to ensure the safety and well-being of our residents. This
    included some restrictive measures--like closing amenities for a brief
    period last summer--as well as the adoption of additional personnel
    protective equipment, training for our employees on COVID-19, and pre-
    work order surveys of our residents to ensure that they had not been
    exposed prior to work being performed.
        Encouragingly, COVID-19 also prompted the adoption of new solutions
    for leasing, including virtual assistance and a virtual tour option
    that we expect to retain over the long-term to better serve our
    residents who are unable to visit prior to their PCS move. Essentially,
    we are able to walk the servicemember through their potential home
    virtually prior to their move in, which--in conjunction with the seven-
    year maintenance history and other new resources--we believe ensures
    that they have the most information about their home, absent the
    ability to visit the home in person.
        We are also developing and implementing new ways to communicate
    with our residents and to respond to their concerns. We have strongly
    supported development of DOD-wide informal and formal dispute
    resolution mechanisms and are revamping our webpages and other means of
    communications to make Corvias: Response to Questions for the Record--
    ``Privatized Military Family Housing: Update on implementation of
    Housing Reforms'' April 16, 2021 contacting us easier-including
    resident work order portals, direct contact via phone, and installation
    level email addresses that residents can use to directly contact our
    most senior leaders at each installation if they feel their concerns
    are not being properly addressed.
        Ms. Strickland. At JBLM, we've heard concerns about how long it
    takes to turn over units on post. Can you tell me why it would take a
    so long in some of your units?
        Can you discuss best practices for more rapidly turning over units
    to meet demand?
        General Aycock. Our goal is to always accommodate a door to door
    move for our Service Members and their families. Average turn times are
    tracked through the system and reported to Executive and Asset
    Management levels through an operational quarterly review. All areas of
    the facility and turn operation are evaluated when these metrics are
    not being met consistently.
        Corvias Property Management has developed policies and procedures
    to guide our maintenance technician through the process of turning a
    home within the set timeframe of 10 business days. The majority of our
    installation teams are able to meet this benchmark, but there are
    occasions that the condition of a home makes it impossible to have a
    10-day turn. Our process begins with a move-out inspection where all
    the needed repairs are identified and documented via photos and notes.
    A checklist is left in the home with this information and a technician
    is assigned to the home to complete the full scope of turn needs.
        The checklist becomes the guide to complete the turn in a timely
    manner by efficiently scheduling contractors and gathering needed
    supplies for all repairs. The scheduling is tracked through a
    designated Service Center Coordinator utilizing our property management
    software system. The Leasing Consultant who procures the assignment or
    lease is included into the process to ensure that the turn is meeting
    the timeline requirements and future residents' expectations.
        Ms. Strickland. Service members and their families make enormous
    sacrifices for this country and substandard housing is an insult to
    that sacrifice and a threat to military readiness. Can you expand on
    best practices to build the trust of the people under your care?
        General Aycock. The best practices used by Corvias to ensure trust
    with our residents are set from the first contact with a new resident
    moving in and are further built on working closely with residents
    during their time in a home managed by Corvias. We work closely with
    the military from the Installation level to the Pentagon to ensure
    transparency and accountability in the Military Housing Privatization
    Initiative (MHPI) program.
        Move-in. When a new resident arrives, we personally work with them
    to ensure they understand how their home is set up, we walk through the
    lease agreement, and we ensure they know how to reach us in person, by
    phone, online, and by text to initiate any necessary work order. We ask
    all residents to provide us with feedback about the move-in process. We
    receive predominantly positive comments as a result of this process
    and, in the rare event of an issue, we immediately take action to
    resolve the challenge.
        Work orders. When a resident reaches out to us to fix an issue with
    their home through one of the multiple ways we take in work orders, we
    respond quickly and professionally. After the fix, we follow up with
    residents to ensure the quality of the repair. We ask for voluntary
    feedback on the repair.
        Corvias has earned numerous national level customer satisfaction
    awards from SatisFacts, the approved provider of this independent
    thirdparty review, based on direct input from our residents. Permanent
    Change of Station (PCS). During the Summer of 2020, the Department of
    Defense implemented a compressed PCS season with an emphasis on door-
    to-door moves to minimize potential transmission of COVID-19 to protect
    families.
        We worked closely with the inbound and outbound resident to closely
    coordinate their moves and the through between occupancy maintenance of
    each home. Town Halls. At each Installation, our senior housing
    official attends the quarterly Installation town hall to respond
    directly and in public to any housing that are brought forward.
        As requested by Representative Speier, we have also committed to
    ensuring that Major General (Retired) Al Aycock, our Military
    Partnership Executive, attends a town hall at each Installation within
    the next year where Corvias is a partner. We are proud to be a member
    of the MHPI partnership at each of the Installations we serve and
    operate in a transparent and accountable way with all our residents.
    Please see the responses to QFRs 68 through 70 for additional
    explanation regarding best practices we implement.
        Ms. Strickland. We have heard concerns that privatized military
    family housing providers use commanders to stifle the voices of service
    members and their families. Can you discuss how you communicate with
    commanders? Please include any asks of the commanders to intervene or
    counsel a service member.
        In the hearing, you mentioned that you attempt to proactively
    educate service members. Given the tendency to involve commanders how
    do you work to educate the commanders you communicate with?
        How often would you say that you involve commanders when a tenant
    complains about an issue? Over a six-month period? Over a year?
        After you involve a commander in an individual's case, how often
    would you say that the tenant follows up if the reported issue persists
    or gets worse?
        Ms. Tregarthen. As an active member of our military housing
    installation, Lendlease project teams communicate regularly with the
    commanders. Communication varies by installation, and may include the
    following:
          Weekly garrison team meetings with installation
    stakeholders;
          Monthly written communications to Brigade Command Team;
          Housing 101 brief to incoming command;
          Town halls;
          Monthly RAB meetings and training sessions;
          Command ``home visits'' when requested for dissatisfied
    residents;
          Meetings/home visits with dissatisfied residents and
    other stakeholders as part of the dispute resolution process chaired by
    garrison Commander (as required); and
          Monthly Army summit meetings with LTG Gabram to review by
    garrison every key metric via scorecard.
        When a new commander takes over command, Lendlease project team
    leadership participates in the commander's orientation and introduction
    to the installation. Typically, a half day is scheduled with the new
    commander to brief him/her on the following topics:
          Housing Privatization 101--corporate structure and
    financial overview of the Project Company;
          Overview of the Project--high level project status,
    including ongoing or planned development work; and
          Customer Care--how we execute our vision to create
    outstanding communities where military families live, work and thrive.
    This briefing is usually followed by a tour of the community and a few
    example homes. The education continues throughout the commander's
    tenure through a series of planned and impromptu meetings and
    communications as outlined above.
        At all project locations we regularly work with the garrison
    Commander teams and Wing Commander teams in an open and collaborative
    manner. The frequency of a Commander's involvement depends on the
    individual installation, but the intention is to satisfactorily resolve
    resident issues at the project level without the involvement of the
    Commander. In most cases, if a resident is not satisfied, the Housing
    Officer (local RCI or MHO) is engaged immediately by the property
    management team (or the resident) per our internal processes, which is
    consistent with the new dispute resolution process outlined in resident
    guides. Based on a review of our portfolio, we notified base leadership
    approximately 21 times of resident concerns over the past year. On one
    occasion the Commander directly addressed the concern with the
    resident.
        Across our communities, residents have multiple avenues to register
    a complaint or bring up an issue to the command or the command becomes
    aware of a complaint or issue. If a resident has a complaint that we
    are unable to satisfy, we will involve the Military Housing Office
    (MHO)/RCI team first. If the issue is unable to be resolved, we will
    involve the Commander--This rarely happens. Resident includes the
    Commander on emails to property management office. Resident files a
    Congressional Inquiry or an IG complaint. ICE comment ``Ask the
    Commander'' email. Commander's Hotline. For AF--the resident contacts
    the AF Resident Advisor. RAB member makes Commander aware of a resident
    issue.
        In almost all cases we are able to resolve resident concerns and
    issues without needing to go to the command to assist with the
    resolution. When a Commander gets involved due to a resident issue,
    often times, representatives from our property management team as well
    as Directorate of Public Works (DPW), Military Housing Office (MHO) and
    the resident's chain of command meet at the residence to conduct a
    walk-through of the home to personally see and hear the residents'
    concerns. We will also provide information such as 7-year maintenance
    history. Nothing is more important to us than ensuring the military
    families we serve have the safe and quality housing they deserve; and
    we make every effort to respond to and address all concerns in a timely
    manner.
        In the past 12 months, we are unaware of any issue persisting or
    getting worse. To ensure resident issues are addressed satisfactorily
    after a commander's involvement, we proactively follow up with them.
    They receive calls from the community/property management office at
    least once per week for a month from the date of resolution of their
    work orders. This allows us to stay in regular contact and ensure the
    issue is resolved and does not persist. This communication remains at
    the project level with the resident.
        Ms. Strickland. Can you share some of the best practices you've
    developed to respond to tenants and to ensure the health and safety of
    the homes under your care?
        Ms. Tregarthen. We have made broad-ranging improvements across our
    portfolio, including more frequent inspections by Lendlease and our
    military partners, more property management services performed by more
    highly trained personnel, and more options for our residents to
    communicate with us, including online and via our smart phone app. As
    part of our efforts to better manage issues related to older homes
    within our portfolio and improve the housing experience for our
    residents, we instituted Environmental Management Plans at each
    installation, which include the following:
          Enhanced lead-based paint inspections;
          New mold-inhibiting paint and primer;
          Utilization of enhanced HVAC filters;
          Expanded change of occupancy maintenance and improvement
    program, including inspections by our military partners; and
          Improved moisture testing to pinpoint the source(s) of
    any moisture in a home.
        We have made broad-ranging improvements over the last two years to
    meet the NDAA requirements, highlights which are included below:
          Provide seven-year histories to all prospective residents
    for the homes they are considering leasing;
          Ensure most homes are inspected by our military partners
    before they are made available for lease to a new resident--the Army
    and Air Force inspect 100% of homes and the Navy/Marine Corps inspect
    most homes as they are ramping up their staffing to achieve 100%
    inspections;
          Perform high quality property management services with
    appropriately trained, courteous customer service and maintenance
    staff;
          Provide multiple, convenient methods for resident to
    communicate directly with property maintenance staff and to receive
    consistently honest, accurate, straightforward, and responsive
    communications;
          Provide resident access to an electronic work order
    system in which residents may request maintenance or repairs and track
    the progress of the work;
          Inform residents of the required time frames for
    requested maintenance or repairs;
          Relocate residents to suitable lodging or other housing
    at no cost until maintenance or repairs are complete as necessary;
          Provide advance notice to residents of entry into the
    housing units, except in the case of an emergency or abandonment of the
    premises;
          Prohibit the use of nondisclosure agreements in
    connection with leases of privatized military homes; and
          Install carbon monoxide detectors in homes in accordance
    with applicable requirements.
        Additionally, we have implemented the following customer focused
    improvements over the past two years, many of which directly enhance
    some of the provisions included in the FY20 NDAA:
          Established Resident Advisory Boards (RABs) for Army and
    Navy installations, and worked in tandem with the Air Force to support
    its Resident Councils program;
          Added a Customer Care Director leadership role and
    Customer Care roles at all our projects;
          Required Customer Experience training for all staff;
          Activated and continued to develop a resident portal and
    smart phone app for all residents;
          Implemented a resident communication tool, RedFlag, to
    enable both targeted and installation wide communication to residents;
          Implemented our Maintenance University program to assess
    and develop the skills of all maintenance staff; and
          Improved the maintenance service request process to
    ensure residents receive timely updates with useful information and are
    afforded multiple opportunities throughout the experience to provide
    feedback, ask questions or identify issues or challenges.
        All residents have access to our quality surveys through
    SatisFacts. Each time a service order or other service is delivered to
    our residents, they can utilize the system to inform us how satisfied
    they were with the work on a scale of 1-5 by simply using the star
    ratings. Any surveys less than 3.5 stars are proactively responded to
    by our property management team to assess how we can resolve any
    outstanding issues and better serve our residents.
        Ms. Strickland. At JBLM, we've heard concerns about how long it
    takes to turn over units on post. Can you tell me why it would take a
    so long in some of your units?
        Can you discuss best practices for more rapidly turning over units
    to meet demand?
        Ms. Tregarthen. First, to clarify, Lendlease does not manage the
    housing at JBLM. During the six-month period from October 2021 thru
    March 2021, the projects' average time to complete a full Change of
    Occupancy Maintenance (COM) ranged from 13 to 24 days. This does
    represent an increase in COM time as compared with previous periods.
    There are two primary drivers of the COM time increase:
          Enhanced safety protocols stemming from COVID-19, and
    specifically the need to reduce the number of team members working
    within a home at any given time to ensure proper social distancing. As
    a result, the time to complete painting, maintenance, cleaning,
    preventive maintenance and any CRR requirements have increased.
          Enhanced internal quality-control procedures combined
    with a heightened government inspection QA process. These dynamics have
    resulted in modified/increased COM scopes to address potential
    deficiencies that may be identified during the government inspection.
    The most significant best-practice to manage COM time is a coordinated
    government inspection process that allows for the project team to
    address identified issues in a home (if any) in real-time during the
    actual inspection so as to streamline this process and achieve a
    passing evaluation.
        As of today, (April 8, 2021), there are 247 unrented, vacant homes
    in a ready status (i.e., the ``ready-rack'') for any service member and
    family who arrives requiring/requesting an immediate move-in. We
    continue to prioritize and support COM production levels above the
    monthly move-out activity as a means of supporting occupancy
    requirements and boosting the ``ready-rack''. Note for the most recent
    calendar quarter (January 2021 thru March 2021), there were a total of
    3,670 move-outs with 4,245 COMs completed.
        Ms. Strickland. Service members and their families make enormous
    sacrifices for this country and substandard housing is an insult to
    that sacrifice and a threat to military readiness. Can you expand on
    best practices to build the trust of the people under your care?
        Ms. Tregarthen. We continue to be open and transparent with our
    residents. In order to build greater trust, in 2020 Lendlease launched
    a new Customer Care Program based on a commitment to five pillars: Safe
    and Healthy Homes, Quality and Consistent Service Experience,
    Communication and Education, Organizational Culture of Caring, and
    Sense of Community.
        Under the program, we successfully identified and are implementing
    new ways of listening to and engaging with our 123,000 residents across
    more than 40,000 homes.
        We added new customer care managers across our portfolio who work
    with Project Company leadership, installation leadership and residents
    to identify and implement customer care driven solutions that are
    timely and professional.
        We launched Resident Advisory Boards to directly connect residents
    to our teams to foster collaboration and ensure housing issues and
    quality of life concerns are quickly addressed and best practices are
    established, shared, and implemented.
        We introduced a new smart phone app that contains a volume of
    information easily accessible to residents, including the ability to
    initiate and track service orders.
        We introduced new mold-inhibiting protocols, including mold
    inhibiting paint and primer, enhanced filter protection, and new
    ventilation systems.
        We continue to invest in digital technology to improve all aspects
    of our business, with a focus on customer service technology.
        We have sought significant feedback from our residents to clearly
    understand, firsthand, how we can improve our performance.
        We also collaborate with advocacy groups, such as the Safe Military
    Housing Initiative, to gain a deeper appreciation of issues facing
    military families living in our communities.
        Ms. Strickland. We have heard concerns that privatized military
    family housing providers use commanders to stifle the voices of service
    members and their families. Can you discuss how you communicate with
    commanders? Please include any asks of the commanders to intervene or
    counsel a service member.
        In the hearing, you mentioned that you attempt to proactively
    educate service members. Given the tendency to involve commanders how
    do you work to educate the commanders you communicate with?
        How often would you say that you involve commanders when a tenant
    complains about an issue? Over a six-month period? Over a year?
        After you involve a commander in an individual's case, how often
    would you say that the tenant follows up if the reported issue persists
    or gets worse?
        Mr. Taylor. As part of our day-to-day military housing operations,
    we are working directly with both installation Command and the Military
    Housing Office staff on an almost daily basis. These connection points
    include updates and discussions regarding community operations
    including stats and highlights regarding leasing and maintenance
    activity, as well as the status of any major projects underway in the
    community, changes to community policies or procedures, and upcoming
    resident events and programs.
        We also regularly engage on any health/safety-related work orders,
    resident displacements, resident requests for accommodation and
    escalated resident complaints as and when they arise. We share this
    information with Command and the Military Housing Office staff for
    transparency within our partnership and to ensure they can advocate for
    their service members as needed. In addition, we are in the process of
    implementing the Universal Lease protocols required by the NDAA, which
    includes a dispute resolution process that involves additional
    engagement by the Command and Military Housing Office in regard to
    resident disputes.
        Our experience shows local Command involvement does not deter
    residents from following up if reported issues persist or get worse.
    Rather they see they have an additional advocate in Command and their
    local Military Housing Office to help understand and resolve the issue
    at hand.
        Ms. Strickland. Can you share some of the best practices you've
    developed to respond to tenants and to ensure the health and safety of
    the homes under your care?
        Mr. Taylor. Two years ago, we conducted a comprehensive review of
    our business and restructured and optimized every aspect of our
    operations, ultimately transforming the way in which we run our
    privatized military housing program. Over the past two years, we have
    recommitted ourselves to providing residents with safe, quality homes
    supported by superior customer service and prompt, effective
    maintenance support.
        Our team has focused on improving maintenance services and
    operations, strengthening quality assurance and compliance, developing
    enhanced environmental-related policies and procedures, including for
    mold/moisture issues, and delivering the highest level of responsive
    customer service to residents. The following is a high-level overview
    of the steps we have taken to date.
          Realigned our leadership structure to ensure we better
    align technical and customer service responsibilities and improve
    oversight.
          Invested in an enhanced property performance management
    system (Microsoft Power BI) to better track key metrics and generate
    reporting for internal and external stakeholders; and strengthened
    coordination with local installation command and housing partners,
    including more frequent reporting on metrics and resident relations.
          Implemented a more robust preventive maintenance program
    that includes quarterly visits to each home, allowing our teams to
    identify any emerging issues in a timely manner, perform basic
    maintenance tasks, and ensure all systems and home features are working
    properly.
          Engaged a national HVAC specialty company (Motili) to
    manage and maintain the HVAC systems in all homes across our military
    portfolio, including rigorous preventive maintenance and, as-needed,
    repairs and replacements.
          Increased transparency in the work order process by
    launching the RENTCafe mobile app for the real-time submission and
    tracking of work orders and access to work order data.
          Amended work order closeout process to include resident
    sign-off indicating that the work was completed to their satisfaction;
    and currently rolling out an enhancement to allow residents to perform
    their work order closeout via text message.
          Increased our maintenance staff and added new roles
    dedicated to quality assurance and control, environmental management
    and resident engagement; and retained additional third-party
    contractors for specialty services like mold and moisture remediation.
          Appointed a head of training and development and added
    significant employee training resources; and developed and implemented
    an enhanced training program focused on understanding and compliance
    with all policies and procedures, and strengthening customer service
    skills.
          Increased transparency and communication with residents
    through the launch of an online Resident Portal, monthly newsletters,
    quarterly `town hall' meetings with military partners, and ongoing
    email. In addition, through our membership in the Military Housing
    Association, we regularly work with other owners of MHPI projects to
    share best practices regarding military housing operations.
        Ms. Strickland. At JBLM, we've heard concerns about how long it
    takes to turn over units on post. Can you tell me why it would take a
    so long in some of your units?
        Can you discuss best practices for more rapidly turning over units
    to meet demand?
        Mr. Taylor. [No answer was available at the time of printing.]
        Ms. Strickland. Service members and their families make enormous
    sacrifices for this country and substandard housing is an insult to
    that sacrifice and a threat to military readiness. Can you expand on
    best practices to build the trust of the people under your care?
        Mr. Taylor. Please see our response above.
        Ms. Strickland. We have heard concerns that privatized military
    family housing providers use commanders to stifle the voices of service
    members and their families. Can you discuss how you communicate with
    commanders? Please include any asks of the commanders to intervene or
    counsel a service member.
        In the hearing, you mentioned that you attempt to proactively
    educate service members. Given the tendency to involve commanders how
    do you work to educate the commanders you communicate with?
        How often would you say that you involve commanders when a tenant
    complains about an issue? Over a six-month period? Over a year?
        After you involve a commander in an individual's case, how often
    would you say that the tenant follows up if the reported issue persists
    or gets worse?
        Mr. Cowley. A collaborative, professional, and mission-focused
    relationship between the housing projects and their respective commands
    is a key component of providing quality housing services to residents.
    In this relationship, commanders often behave as advocates for
    residents and can help to mediate issues between a resident and a
    property manager, should they arise.
        The projects communicate with their respective commands via regular
    meetings to discuss a wide variety of matters. As it pertains to
    residents, these matters may include issues such as enforcement of
    community guidelines, managing disputes between residents, or
    addressing concerns involving the health or welfare of a service member
    or members of their family. On rare occasions, the commands counsel
    service members, directly or via the government housing office, to
    assist in resolving resident issues. It is the goal of all interested
    parties to resolve any issues early and amicably; however, additional
    resources are available to residents should they not feel satisfied
    with the outcome.
        At Army and Air Force projects, the command education process
    begins with new commander in-briefs that provide an overview of the
    project structure, command roles and responsibilities, and future
    housing investment plans, among other topics. On an ongoing basis,
    projects and commands meet frequently via various forums in order to
    keep commands informed in regard to updates to project matters.
        Specifically at Pacific Beacon, the project works to educate
    commanders starting from the initial change of command: the Prospective
    Commanding Officer tours the community and deliberate measures are
    taken to ensure the Prospective Commanding Officer meets the full
    property management team, receives a full overview of the community,
    and is able to ask any preliminary questions.
        Emphasis is placed on the importance of customer service, quality
    of work, and safety protocols in the community. Moving forward, regular
    recurring meetings are conducted at least quarterly to ensure any
    community-related trends or requests for support are addressed. The
    quarterly town hall meetings are another opportunity for the Commanding
    Officer and property manager to connect on any new or ongoing issues.
        At Army and Air Force projects, commands typically become involved
    in issues raised by residents via the Exception to Policy (ETP)
    process. If a resident has a concern and is not satisfied with the
    property manager's resolution efforts, the resident may submit an ETP,
    which is reviewed by the project and the military. Below are the
    projects' approximation of how frequently this process is used and an
    examples of frequently-seen resident requests:
          Belvoir: Approximately 1 ETP per month and approximately
    1 complaint elevated to garrison Commander per quarter. The most
    frequently requested ETPs involve families asking the project to waive
    transfer costs when desiring to move to another Village prior to
    fulfilling their current lease term.
          Benning: Approximately 5-10 ETPs per month. The most
    frequently requested ETPs involve a family requesting to stay in
    housing while the service member is deployed or PCSed to a different
    installation, or approval to keep RVs in driveways beyond the standard
    two-week limitation.
          Irwin/Moffett/Parks: Approximately 1-2 ETPs per month at
    each location. The most frequently requested ETPs are related to a
    service member wanting a home that is larger than what they qualify for
    or wanting to reside in a specific neighborhood.
          Monterey: Approximately 1-2 ETPs per month. The most
    frequently requested ETPs are related to a service member wanting a
    home that is larger than what they qualify for or wanting to reside in
    a specific neighborhood.
          Andrews/MacDill: Approximately 1-3 ETPs per month at each
    location. The most frequently requested ETPs are requesting to break a
    lease early to buy a house, requesting to stay in housing when a
    service member has PCSed to a different location, and long-term guest
    requests.
        For MacDill specifically, residents request ETPs to live in ground-
    level homes (many homes at MacDill are elevated off the ground due to
    flood mitigation measures). At Pacific Beacon, residents are able to
    reach out about any issue through their chain of command. However, in
    the last 12 months, no issues have been communicated by the chain of
    command to the property manager.
        In general, the project does not have visibility into the
    satisfaction of each party and process for appeals or escalation once a
    resident has engaged with the commander via the ETP process described
    above. To the projects' understanding, a majority of the issues are
    resolved to the residents' satisfaction.
        Ms. Strickland. Can you share some of the best practices you've
    developed to respond to tenants and to ensure the health and safety of
    the homes under your care?
        Mr. Cowley. While specific initiatives may vary across projects,
    broadly speaking, best practices to respond to residents and ensure the
    health and safety of homes include practices such as:
          Comprehensive inspection program throughout residents'
    tenancy. Multiple inspections by the property manager and Army
    inspectors occur prior to move-in with annual inspections and routine
    HVAC filter changes. Homes are inspected again during every work order
    response, and each year a randomized selection of homes is inspected by
    an independent third-party.
          Additional inspections by the Army. Inspection by an Army
    Industrial Hygienist prior to the unit being made available for move-in
    on units that have undergone substantial remediation.
          Accommodations for displaced families. Furnished
    hospitality homes set up to facilitate planned or unplanned
    displacements.
          Additional staff to enhance resident communication and
    trust. Increased budgeting for staff positions that focus on resident
    communications and environmental issues. For example: Customer Service
    Representatives, a Director of Marketing and Resident Communications,
    and certified Mold and Environmental Hazard Assessors.
          Environmental training. Annual environmental training for
    all property management staff members.
          Significant investments to improve maintenance
    operations. This includes a new mobile device app to enable routine
    work order submission and tracking by residents, new work order
    appointment options to increase convenience for residents, and
    dedicated emergency maintenance personnel to increase responsiveness on
    our most critical work orders.
          Focus on resident education. Initiatives include New
    Resident Orientations to provide information on preventative measures
    and resident responsibilities, the importance of timely reporting of
    emergency maintenance issues, leak and mold detection and prevention,
    best practices to prevent fires, benefits of obtaining renter's
    insurance, facts about lead based paint, and important home features.
    Residents are also informed about the multiple ways to submit service
    requests 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
        Ms. Strickland. At JBLM, we've heard concerns about how long it
    takes to turn over units on post. Can you tell me why it would take a
    so long in some of your units?
        Can you discuss best practices for more rapidly turning over units
    to meet demand?
        Mr. Cowley. On unit turns, the property manager is focused on
    completeness and quality. The time it takes to turn a unit is dependent
    on the condition in which the previous resident left the home, staff
    and vendor availability, and the time it takes the government housing
    office to complete its inspection and sign off on the home. Note that
    turns are prioritized based on waitlist demand. This means that a unit
    may be in the turn process longer than others, but there may not
    necessarily be a resident waiting to move into the home.
        Efficient and well-executed turns require coordination across the
    property management staff, thirdparty vendors, and the installation.
    Specifically, best practices would be:
          Intelligent forecasting. Obtaining a regular gains/loss
    roster from the installation to get an accurate picture of high demand
    season move-outs.
          Proactive inspections. Proactively inspecting units 30
    days prior to resident move-out to identify long-lead items (e.g., HVAC
    or appliance orders) and to complete minor repairs that can be
    performed before move-out, as well as to educate residents what they
    can do to limit move-out damage charges.
          Outsourcing preventative maintenance. Performing HVAC
    preventative maintenance with a qualified contractor on each turn so
    that the property manager's turn staff can focus on other components of
    the turn.
          Paying contractors quickly. Pre-funding monthly turn
    expenses to the property manager for prompt payment to contractors upon
    completion of a turn.
          Contractor onboarding. Focusing on training and
    expectation management for vendors so that they are prepared for high-
    volume turn seasons.
          Setting expectations for overtime. Preparing property
    management staff for high-volume turn seasons and budgeting for the
    corresponding overtime hours.
          Developing in-house staff. Cross-training property
    management staff to be flexible during heavy turns so that they can
    step into a variety of roles as needed.
          Increasing roster of qualified contractors. Ensuring
    multiple vendors are available and approved through the vendor vetting
    process to conduct increased volumes of change of occupancy management.
          Enhancing vendor communication. Engaging each on-site
    vendor daily to ensure community requirements, including unit turns,
    are prioritized appropriately.
          Increasing supply inventory. Ensuring an adequate
    backstock of any furniture or appliance replacements are on-site since
    the project provides fully furnished housing accommodations.
        Ms. Strickland. Service members and their families make enormous
    sacrifices for this country and substandard housing is an insult to
    that sacrifice and a threat to military readiness. Can you expand on
    best practices to build the trust of the people under your care?
        Mr. Cowley. The projects appreciate the enormous sacrifices made by
    the service members and their families and are committed to the mission
    of providing quality housing to everyone who calls our communities
    home. With nearly half of the asset management team members having
    served in our nation's military, we understand firsthand the importance
    the home front has on the battle front. To that end, our communities
    have gone above and beyond in their efforts to strengthen confidence
    amongst our residents. Best practices include:
          Enhanced communication efforts with current and future
    residents.
          Solicitation of additional resident feedback through
    multiple channels, including military surveys, third-party touchpoint
    surveys (at move-in, at move-out, and after every work order), third-
    party sentiment surveys every 90 days, annual military-wide
    standardized surveys, quarterly Town Hall meetings, and the Village
    Mayor program.
          Increased monitoring and resident education related to
    maintenance concerns, including the implementation of ``hotspot
    checklists'' to proactively check areas in the home that may experience
    water intrusion or other maintenance issues.
          Expansion of inspections program to include several
    quality assurance touchpoints for each home over the duration of a
    service member's residency. Before move-in, up to 1,000+ inspection
    points may be examined and upheld across multiple assessments. After
    move-in, every home may receive annual inspections and routine HVAC
    filter changes. Homes may be inspected again during every work order
    response, and each year a randomized selection of homes may be
    inspected by an independent third-party.
          Providing residents with educational materials, including
    resident handbooks, online maintenance tips, video posts, and
    environmental brochures.

                                      [all]