Housing Analyses Differ Among Services

The Army and Navy believe they could benefit from privatized housing on some installations in limited circumstances, while the Air Force and Marine Corps do not, according to studies each service conducted between 1997 and 2011. Each service analyzed housing needs at the request of Congress, but used slightly different criteria to draw their conclusions. The Army and Navy surveyed attitudes and needs on several installations, while the Air Force and Marines took a more limited approach. The Army and Navy concluded that privatized housing could work well in situations where unaccompanied service members were presently receiving a basic allowance for housing (BAH) to offset costs for living off base. The Air Force expressed concern that privatization could affect housing needs adversely by disrupting the income stream necessary for paying rent for privatized housing and limiting the availability of BAH for junior unaccompanied airmen. Also, the service believes privatization gets complicated when frequency of deployments and the fluctuating level of the total force are factored into the equation. The Army and Navy have used privatization funds to establish several projects between 1996 and 2013, while the Air Force used the money to demolish old and dilapidated facilities and replace them with newer ones. The findings were presented in a March 18 report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), which participated in part because of concerns that inadequate housing may be a contributing factor in service members’ decisions to leave the armed forces.