The Army[1] is preparing to overhaul its food service system in a move that could strip away government-run dining facilities and hand operations to private, for-profit companies.
Framed as a modernization effort, the plan could saddle enlisted soldiers, many of whom already struggle with low pay[2], with even greater costs for meals they are effectively required to buy.
So-called "campus-style dining" has been pitched to lawmakers as a way to incentivize private vendors to create Army dining spaces where soldiers want to eat, with longer hours, a better atmosphere, and additional menu variety.
Read Next: Military Domestic Violence Conviction Skyrocketed After Commanders Were Removed from Process[3]
But documents reviewed by Military.com show a system light on guardrails, nutrition standards and financial transparency -- and heavy on opportunities for contractors to upsell alcohol and high-priced extras to a population that has little choice to opt out.
So far, the Army still hasn't found a contractor to take up the deal. The deadline for contractors to make a pitch is Tuesday.
"[We] will leverage industry expertise and incentivize a contractor to operate a facility where soldiers want to dine, with better ambience, additional healthy food options, extended operating hours, and more," Lt. Gen. Chris Mohan, the acting head of Army Material Command, told lawmakers during an April hearing on the Defense Department's food operations.
The pilot program, currently open for bids, covers dining operations at five of the Army's largest installations: Fort Bragg, North Carolina; Fort Carson[4], Colorado; Fort Stewart[5], Georgia; Fort Drum[6], New York; and Fort Cavazos[7], Texas.
Under the proposal, contractors would run the facilities, cover renovation costs up front, and be allowed to sell premium items such as higher-quality meal options, snacks and booze. They would also share the profits with the Army.
There are few restrictions on what vendors can sell, and they are exempt from following Army nutritional standards altogether, though the service itself also frequently skirts its own nutrition rules[8]. The Army has also waived compliance with the Berry Amendment, which requires the military to prioritize U.S.-made products or purchase through the Defense Logistics Agency, which governs oversight and logistics of food products for the Pentagon.
For many of the troops who would be affected, there is no real choice in the matter.
Junior enlisted service members who live in barracks are automatically charged a Basic Allowance for Subsistence, or BAS, amounting to roughly $460 per month. That money is deducted directly from their paychecks, regardless of how often they eat or what they consume, though the service has been largely unable to account for how that money is spent[9].
Under the privatized model, the deductions would continue, but soldiers may find themselves paying out of pocket for items not covered in the contractor's meal package under the "campus-style dining" initiative.
"It's important to stress this is a pilot program; we'll be assessing how this goes," Col. Junel Jeffrey, a service spokesperson, told Military.com. "Regular dining facilities are not being replaced."
Phrases such as "high-quality" and "fresh" are used frequently throughout the solicitation for contracts dictating what the Army expects from potential contractors, though the service never defines what those words actually mean.
The Defense Department has had mixed success with privatizing some of its major quality-of-life services, such as medical care, housing and military permanent change of station[10] moves.
It has looked to private companies to tackle some of the department's largest duties since the early 1990s, giving broader access to privately managed health care to family members and retirees, establishing the privatized military housing program to address shortfalls in family housing and, most recently, awarding a contract to a private joint partnership to run military moves.
For the most part, companies have invested heavily in their military contracts, providing services and benefits beyond what were offered by the Defense Department when it managed the programs.
But those efforts have not been without trouble and, in some cases, major scandals.
In 2018, the Reuters news organization uncovered shoddy construction and workmanship, poor service and inadequate maintenance that contributed to poor health and safety concerns[11] among military families in privatized housing.
A change in Tricare[12] contractors this year continues to affect military families, who have faced problems getting medical appointments[13] and maintaining their services with private health care providers in a new network managed by TriWest Healthcare Alliance.
And as recently as last week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth canceled a $7.2 billion contract to a company hired in 2021 to run the services' permanent change of station moves[14]. According to the DoD, the company, HomeSafe Alliance, failed to deliver on promises that it would assume management of nearly all of the DoD's domestic moves this year.
Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said cancellation of the company's contract was "for cause due to HSA's demonstrated inability to fulfill their obligations and deliver high-quality moves to service members."
Related: The Army Is Going All-In on Food Kiosks as Base Dining Facilities Struggle[15]
© Copyright 2025 Military.com. All rights reserved. This article may not be republished, rebroadcast, rewritten or otherwise distributed without written permission. To reprint or license this article or any content from Military.com, please submit your request here[16].
