The HOA should require comprehensive Service-Level Agreements (SLAs) in all contracts to ensure that contractors are held to clearly defined and measurable performance standards. Compliance with these SLAs should be independently verified by a qualified third party rather than by another contractor who may have a potential conflict of interest.
Most importantly, SLA compliance should be evaluated based on outcomes, quality, and defined service frequency—not merely contractual language or the number of visits performed. The purpose of an SLA is to establish what the community should receive, not simply to document what a contractor intends to do.
Independent Verification and Resident Oversight
SLA compliance should be independently verified, with residents provided an appropriate role in confirming whether contracted services have actually been delivered. A contractor should not be solely responsible for verifying another contractor’s performance.
There should also be complete and meaningful transparency regarding community contracts. Residents should have access to contracts, scopes of work, pricing, performance requirements, SLA terms, and other material provisions that affect the services for which they are paying.
The HOA expects residents to comply with community rules and regulations. That responsibility should work both ways. The HOA and its contractors should likewise be held to a clearly defined Code of Conduct and Code of Deliverables. Accountability cannot be a one-way street.
SLAs Should Define the Required Outcome
For example, consider a leaf-removal contract that states that leaves will be removed two times per year. Simply specifying two visits does not adequately define the required outcome. A contractor could technically perform two visits while leaves remain throughout the community for weeks or months.
Instead, the SLA should establish a measurable outcome, such as:
There shall be no accumulated leaves remaining in designated community areas during the October–December period, subject to clearly defined exceptions.
If the HOA determines that two community-wide leaf-removal operations are sufficient, the contract should specify the required dates and scope, for example:
The contractor shall perform two comprehensive, community-wide leaf-removal operations on October 15 and November 15, covering all contracted areas.
This provides residents and the HOA with a clear and verifiable standard. The objective is not simply to confirm that a contractor showed up twice; it is to ensure that the desired result was achieved.
The same principle should apply to pruning. If the contract provides for only two pruning cycles, the contract should establish specific dates and require completion across the entire contracted area. For example:
Pruning services shall be performed community-wide on May 30 and November 15, with all contracted homes and areas completed during each scheduled service cycle.
A contractor should not be permitted to spread a single service cycle over an undefined period while performing the work incrementally with a minimal crew. If the contract requires a community-wide service, the HOA should establish a reasonable completion timeframe and verify that the entire scope has been completed.
Another example is that Community Management (CM) company says to return call/email in 24 hours, but they seldom do. There is no one to hold them accountable and there is no way that they are addressing resident grievances in a timely fashion. All this process must be transparent and available to every resident. This will show what Community Management is working on and how they are resolving resident issues.
Accountability Must Be Measurable
Contracts should therefore clearly define:
- What must be delivered.
- When it must be delivered.
- Where it must be delivered.
- What quality standard must be met.
- What outcome residents should expect.
- How completion will be verified.
- What happens when the contractor fails to meet the SLA.
- How payments or credits will be adjusted for incomplete, delayed, or deficient services.
The HOA should move away from contracts that merely count visits, hours, or activities and toward contracts that measure completed work, quality, and measurable outcomes.
Residents are ultimately paying for the results—not simply for contractors to appear on the property.
If the HOA requires residents to follow the rules, the HOA, its management company, and its contractors should be held to equally clear standards of accountability, transparency, and performance. It cannot be a one-way street.