Renewals now account for a record 57% of leasing activity, and new-lease concessions are climbing. That combination should terrify anyone running a build-to-rent portfolio, because it means the expensive customer is the new one and the profitable customer is already living in the unit. Yet most operators still treat their customer relationship management (CRM) as a record-keeping system rather than an early warning system, logging maintenance tickets and payment histories that nobody reads until a resident gives notice. Kelvin Lee Thomas, who has built property management teams at both large and small scale, argues the signals are already sitting in the database. Residents, he says, have told operators exactly what they think. The failure is one of interpretation, not collection. “The data you can collect should be the main driver of any business,” he says. “Your residents have already told you what they like and don’t like based on their reactions to your actions or inactions.”
The Three Signals That Predict A Renewal
Kelvin narrows the predictive field to three data points: maintenance requests, collections, and communication. None of them requires sophisticated modeling. All of them sit in systems operators already pay for. The maintenance signal is the one he treats as most severe. A resident who has fought with recurring issues across a lease term is, in his experience, 75% less likely to renew in that same unit. The reasoning is obvious once stated plainly. Nobody agrees to pay more for a home they have decided is falling apart.
What makes that number damning is the cause. Kelvin points to two operational habits that produce it. “Most operators either band-aid the problem in the interest of maintaining strict budget constraints or the maintenance requests are lost in inadequate or ineffective operating procedures.” Both are self-inflicted. A budget decision made in month three to patch, rather than repair, quietly sets up a vacancy in month 12, and the cost of that vacancy never gets charged back to the line item that caused it. Collections behave differently but point in the same direction. A resident who pays late consistently, while otherwise responsible, is signaling an affordability ceiling. Kelvin expects that resident to move to something they can comfortably afford once the lease permits it. That is not a collections problem. It is a renewal forecast arriving 12 months early.
Communication Is The Variable Operators Control
The third signal is the one operators can move quickly. Kelvin puts it bluntly: residents who do not know they have the means of contacting their property operators will not contact them. Silence then gets misread as satisfaction. “When they don’t communicate, it makes it very hard for operators to be able to keep a pulse on what is going on with their tenants and assets.” The portfolios that perform, in his experience, are the ones that reach out first. Not because outreach itself retains anyone, but because it keeps the data flowing. An operator who initiates contact learns about the recurring leak in month four instead of discovering it on a notice-to-vacate form.
This reframes staffing as a data-quality issue rather than an overhead line. Kelvin ties the retention of his own teams directly to the retention of residents, citing consistent presence with tenants and the avoidance of gaps in communication and training lags. Every time a leasing or maintenance role turns over, the informal knowledge about which units have problems and which residents are at risk walks out with it. The CRM holds the transactions. The staff hold the context. Lose the staff often enough and the database becomes a ledger of events that get harder to interpret.
Pricing Renewals Against The Real Cost Of Turnover
Where Kelvin gets most specific is on renewal pricing, and his method deserves attention because it inverts how most teams approach the conversation. Rather than asking what the market will bear, he asks what losing the resident costs. “Operators should be using a loss/gain analysis to figure out what it would cost them to lose the resident(s) in question. Especially as this is the biggest loss to overall revenue that can be prevented.” The arithmetic is simple enough to run on a whiteboard. If maintenance averages 14 days to turn a unit and leasing averages 14 days to fill it, losing a tenant costs roughly a month of rent. That figure assumes a flat turn cost and no concession to attract the replacement, which Thomas notes is a generous assumption in a market where concessions are rising. Against that baseline, offering a half month to retain an existing resident stops looking like a giveaway and starts looking like arbitrage.
The board-level framing follows from the same logic. He observes that most boards measure asset health by revenue and net operating income – a high-level, oversimplified view that reflects several operational levers pulled at the right times. Revenue is an output. The inputs are marketing aligned to the local market, proper screening at the prospect stage, clear payment expectations, preventative maintenance that heads off larger overruns, vendor procurement matched to budget and service standards, and stable staffing. With more than 64,000 build-to-rent homes due for delivery through late 2027, Kelvin expects competitive pressure to sharpen the question considerably. His prompt for owners and developers is uncomfortable but fair: how do my assets stand out? Even if you are building into an underserved market, prospective tenants have no shortage of options. For anyone without a confident answer, his advice is to go into the market and listen to what tenants are saying about competitors, find the shortfalls, and answer those needs. The data is already out there. So is everyone else’s.
Follow Kelvin Lee Thomas on LinkedIn for more insights on build-to-rent operations, resident retention, and property management strategy.
