[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]