DOJ's $31M correctional facility management contract with CoreCivic, Inc. awarded via full and open competition
Contract Overview
Contract Amount: $31,025,216 ($31.0M)
Contractor: Corecivic, Inc.
Awarding Agency: Department of Justice
Start Date: 2013-12-01
End Date: 2019-02-08
Contract Duration: 1,895 days
Daily Burn Rate: $16.4K/day
Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE
Sector: Other
Official Description: IGF::CL::IGF = CLOSELY RELATED: PROVIDE SERVICES FOR MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OF A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY FOR BASE YEAR TWO.
Place of Performance
Location: MC RAE, TELFAIR County, GEORGIA, 31055
State: Georgia Government Spending
Plain-Language Summary
Department of Justice obligated $31.0 million to CORECIVIC, INC. for work described as: IGF::CL::IGF = CLOSELY RELATED: PROVIDE SERVICES FOR MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OF A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY FOR BASE YEAR TWO. Key points: 1. Value for money assessed through firm-fixed-price contract type, aiming for cost certainty. 2. Competition dynamics indicate a full and open approach, potentially driving competitive pricing. 3. Risk indicators include contract duration and the inherent complexities of correctional facility operations. 4. Performance context relies on the contractor's ability to manage facility operations effectively. 5. Sector positioning within facilities support services, a critical component of government operations.
Value Assessment
Rating: fair
The firm-fixed-price contract type suggests an attempt to control costs. However, without detailed performance metrics or comparisons to similar correctional facility management contracts, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. The total value of over $31 million over its period of performance indicates a significant investment. Benchmarking against industry standards for correctional facility operations would be necessary for a more robust evaluation of pricing and value.
Cost Per Unit: N/A
Competition Analysis
Competition Level: full-and-open
The contract was awarded under full and open competition, suggesting that multiple bidders were likely considered. This competitive process is generally expected to lead to more favorable pricing for the government. The number of bidders and the specific evaluation criteria would provide further insight into the intensity of the competition and its impact on price discovery.
Taxpayer Impact: A full and open competition process is beneficial for taxpayers as it encourages a wider range of providers to bid, potentially leading to lower costs and better service quality through market forces.
Public Impact
Benefits federal inmates by ensuring the provision of essential services for a correctional facility. Delivers critical facility management and operational services, maintaining a secure and functional environment. Geographic impact is localized to the specific correctional facility in Georgia. Workforce implications include employment opportunities for facility staff managed by the contractor.
Waste & Efficiency Indicators
Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10
Warning Flags
- Potential for cost overruns if not managed tightly under the firm-fixed-price structure.
- Reliance on contractor performance for critical public safety functions.
- Challenges in ensuring consistent service quality across the contract duration.
Positive Signals
- Firm-fixed-price contract provides cost predictability.
- Full and open competition suggests a robust selection process.
- Contract duration allows for stable operations and service delivery.
Sector Analysis
This contract falls within the Facilities Support Services sector, specifically related to the management and operation of correctional facilities. This is a specialized niche within the broader government contracting landscape, often characterized by long-term contracts and significant operational requirements. Comparable spending benchmarks would involve analyzing other contracts for similar correctional facility management services across different federal agencies.
Small Business Impact
Information regarding small business set-asides or subcontracting plans was not explicitly provided in the data. Typically, large contracts for specialized services like correctional facility management may have subcontracting goals, but the primary awardee is often a large business. Further analysis would be needed to determine the extent of small business participation.
Oversight & Accountability
Oversight would typically be managed by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) within the Department of Justice. Accountability measures would be defined in the contract's performance work statement, with potential for penalties or remedies for non-performance. Transparency is generally maintained through contract award databases, though detailed operational oversight is internal.
Related Government Programs
- Federal Prison System Operations
- Correctional Facility Management Services
- Government Facility Operations and Maintenance
Risk Flags
- Contract Duration
- Contractor Performance History
- Public Safety Implications
Tags
department-of-justice, bureau-of-prisons, facilities-support-services, correctional-facility-management, firm-fixed-price, full-and-open-competition, corecivic-inc, georgia, delivery-order, large-contract
Frequently Asked Questions
What is this federal contract paying for?
Department of Justice awarded $31.0 million to CORECIVIC, INC.. IGF::CL::IGF = CLOSELY RELATED: PROVIDE SERVICES FOR MANAGEMENT AND OPERATION OF A CORRECTIONAL FACILITY FOR BASE YEAR TWO.
Who is the contractor on this award?
The obligated recipient is CORECIVIC, INC..
Which agency awarded this contract?
Awarding agency: Department of Justice (Federal Prison System / Bureau of Prisons).
What is the total obligated amount?
The obligated amount is $31.0 million.
What is the period of performance?
Start: 2013-12-01. End: 2019-02-08.
What is the contractor's track record in managing correctional facilities for the federal government?
CoreCivic, Inc. is a significant private prison operator with a substantial history of managing correctional facilities for federal, state, and local governments. Their track record includes operating numerous facilities and providing a range of services. However, like many large contractors in this sector, they have faced scrutiny regarding operational standards, inmate welfare, and cost-effectiveness in various contracts. A detailed review of their performance on specific Bureau of Prisons contracts, including any past performance issues or commendations, would be necessary to fully assess their suitability for this particular contract.
How does the pricing of this contract compare to similar correctional facility management contracts?
Benchmarking the pricing of this $31 million contract against similar correctional facility management contracts is challenging without access to detailed pricing structures and performance metrics of comparable agreements. The firm-fixed-price (FFP) nature of this contract aims for cost certainty, but the actual value for money depends on the scope of services, facility size, inmate population, and specific operational requirements. A comprehensive comparison would require analyzing contracts with similar durations, security levels, and service inclusions awarded by the Bureau of Prisons or other federal agencies to different providers. Without such comparative data, it's difficult to definitively state whether the pricing is competitive or represents excellent value.
What are the primary risks associated with this contract for the government?
The primary risks associated with this contract include potential contractor performance failures that could impact facility security, inmate welfare, and operational continuity. Given the nature of correctional facility management, any lapse in service could have severe consequences. Another risk is the potential for cost overruns if the firm-fixed-price contract does not adequately account for unforeseen operational challenges or changes in requirements, although FFP generally shifts this risk to the contractor. Ensuring consistent adherence to federal standards and regulations throughout the contract's duration, and managing the contractor's compliance, are ongoing risks that require diligent government oversight.
How effective has the Bureau of Prisons been in overseeing similar correctional facility management contracts?
The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has a long history of overseeing contracts for correctional facility management, both directly and through private providers. Their effectiveness in oversight can vary. While the BOP has established procedures and standards, past Inspector General reports and GAO reviews have sometimes highlighted challenges in ensuring consistent contract compliance, monitoring performance adequately, and enforcing contract terms, particularly concerning inmate safety and living conditions. The effectiveness of oversight is heavily dependent on resource allocation, staff expertise, and the rigor with which contract terms are monitored and enforced.
What are the historical spending patterns for correctional facility management by the Department of Justice?
The Department of Justice, primarily through the Bureau of Prisons (BOP), has historically utilized private contractors for correctional facility management to supplement its own facilities. Spending in this area has fluctuated based on federal inmate population trends, budget allocations, and policy decisions regarding the use of private prisons. Over the years, there have been periods of significant reliance on private facilities, followed by shifts in policy that have sometimes aimed to reduce this reliance. Analyzing historical spending data would reveal trends in the total dollar amounts awarded for these services, the number of contracts issued, and the primary contractors involved, providing context for the current contract's scale.
Industry Classification
NAICS: Administrative and Support and Waste Management and Remediation Services › Facilities Support Services › Facilities Support Services
Product/Service Code: SOCIAL SERVICES › SOCIAL SERVICES
Competition & Pricing
Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION
Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE
Pricing Type: FIRM FIXED PRICE (J)
Evaluated Preference: NONE
Contractor Details
Address: 10 BURTON HILLS BLVD, NASHVILLE, TN, 37215
Business Categories: Category Business, Corporate Entity Not Tax Exempt, Not Designated a Small Business, Special Designations, U.S.-Owned Business
Financial Breakdown
Contract Ceiling: $31,025,216
Exercised Options: $31,025,216
Current Obligation: $31,025,216
Contract Characteristics
Multi-Year Contract: Yes
Commercial Item: COMMERCIAL ITEM PROCEDURES NOT USED
Cost or Pricing Data: YES
Parent Contract
Parent Award PIID: DJB1PC016
IDV Type: IDC
Timeline
Start Date: 2013-12-01
Current End Date: 2019-02-08
Potential End Date: 2019-02-08 00:00:00
Last Modified: 2019-02-08
More Contracts from Corecivic, Inc.
- TAS 151060 - Services for the Management and Operation of a Contractor-Owned, Contractor-Operated, Correctional Facility for 2,567 Beds in Adams County, Mississippi — $574.3M (Department of Justice)
- Detention Services - LAS Vergas, NV — $558.7M (Department of Justice)
- 151060 — $456.5M (Department of Justice)
- Detention Services — $444.7M (Department of Justice)
- 151060 — $395.4M (Department of Justice)
Other Department of Justice Contracts
- Contractor Owned and Operated Existing Correctional Facility for Approximately 3,500 LOW Security Male Inmates — $794.5M (Cornell Companies, Inc.)
- Detention Services - SAN Diego — $776.9M (THE GEO Group, Inc.)
- CO: Telly Renfroe Award of NEW Task Order Base Year Initial Funding — $616.4M (AT&T Enterprises, LLC)
- TAS 151060 - Services for the Management and Operation of a Contractor-Owned, Contractor-Operated, Correctional Facility for 2,567 Beds in Adams County, Mississippi — $574.3M (Corecivic, Inc.)
- Provide Services for the Management and Operation of a Correctional Facility in Accordance With Rfp-Pcc-0014 — $568.9M (Cornell Companies, Inc.)