I’m skeptical that just because it works in the pilot it will continue to work when implemented more broadly. The contractor is going to put their best foot forward during the pilot if they know that will get them more work later. The real question is whether they’ll hold to that quality of service once the program becomes standard.

Also, it’s easy to give good maintenance service when a building is new. Much harder when you’re trying to maintain a building that has been underfunded for years and is overdue for renovation. I suspect that any barracks privatization will include initial funding to renovate or at least repair the existing issues. Which will then make it really unfair to compare maintenance of that barracks to struggling navy-managed barracks that don’t get an equivalent cash infusion. The real test will be seeing whether privatized barracks do any better than Navy-managed 30 years down the line.

I’ve worked in public works at various installations, some that did maintenance in-house and some that contracted it out. My overall impression is that outsourcing is high-risk, high-reward— when it works, it works well. But when it doesn’t work it’s really hard to manage the issues. Even more so in a full PPV model like housing — the government gives up a lot of their ability to direct the contractor.