Bill Overview
Title: To direct the Secretary of Defense to develop a feedback tool for use by members of the Armed Forces and their spouses to identify, rate, and compare housing, and for other purposes.
Description: This bill requires the Department of Defense (DOD) to develop a feedback tool through which members of the Armed Forces and their spouses may anonymously identify, rate, and compare housing under the jurisdiction of DOD, including privatized military housing.
Sponsors: Rep. Thompson, Glenn [R-PA-15]
Target Audience
Population: Members of the Armed Forces and their spouses
Estimated Size: 2600000
- The target population includes all active-duty members of the U.S. Armed Forces.
- The target also includes the spouses of these active-duty military personnel, who are affected by housing decisions and conditions.
- As of 2022, there are approximately 1.3 million active-duty military members in the United States.
- Considering that many service members have spouses, the population effectively impacted will roughly be double the number of active-duty soldiers, accounting for individual variance.
- The global target population would be mainly focused in the U.S. where the bill is implemented, along with any service members stationed abroad.
Reasoning
- The policy primarily targets active-duty military personnel and their spouses, which constitute a population of around 2.6 million people.
- Given the budget constraints, the tool needs to be cost-effective, possibly as a digital platform accessible to all within this group.
- The potential impact of the tool is medium to high for those who face housing issues, while likely low for those already satisfied with their housing.
- There will likely be a significant portion of the target population who might not use the tool but benefit indirectly through improvements driven by aggregated feedback.
Simulated Interviews
Military Spouse (North Carolina)
Age: 30 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm hopeful that this platform will help us highlight issues that have been ignored.
- Living conditions on base housing are sometimes less than ideal, and responses to complaints are slow.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Navy (California)
Age: 40 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Transparency in housing quality is long overdue, but I hope the implementation isn't messy.
- I'm skeptical about whether this will truly have an impact or just be another bureaucratic step.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Army (Texas)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone who lives off base, my main concern is the comparison feature - it's crucial for decision-making.
- I think this will need to be well-maintained to ensure current information.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 4 |
Marine (Virginia)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 17/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm not too worried about housing, but a reliable source of information can't hurt.
- I feel future recruits might benefit more from this than someone already established.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Air Force (Washington)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm near retirement, and I've seen young families struggle with housing issues - more so than myself.
- I believe any step towards accountability will be beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Military Spouse (Hawaii)
Age: 26 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 13/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's challenging when you have young children and little information about the place you'll live next.
- This feedback tool could ease the transition between bases.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Army Veteran now working with housing affairs (Alaska)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I've pushed for such measures for years. Good to see things might change.
- Consistency across bases is crucial for this to be effective.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Naval Officer living abroad (Italy)
Age: 32 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Distance makes me uncertain about this policy's reach.
- It's needed but might be challenged by regional implementations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Air Force Engineer (Nevada)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate any technology that increases efficiency in reporting and communication.
- Housing ratings could lead to innovative changes if taken seriously.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Enlisted in the National Guard (New York)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a new recruit, I look forward to any tools that could give me a better understanding of military life.
- Unsure how soon this will affect me personally but good to have options.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $12000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $3000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $4000000)
Year 3: $3100000 (Low: $2100000, High: $4100000)
Year 5: $3200000 (Low: $2200000, High: $4200000)
Year 10: $3400000 (Low: $2300000, High: $4500000)
Year 100: $4000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $5000000)
Key Considerations
- A critical concern will be ensuring the anonymity and secure handling of the feedback data to protect military personnel.
- Effective communication and training will be necessary to maximize the tool's usage among the target population.
- Integration with existing DOD systems might present technical challenges and additional costs.