DHS awarded $54.5M for correctional services in Elizabeth, NJ, over nearly 4 years

Contract Overview

Contract Amount: $54,510,208 ($54.5M)

Contractor: Corecivic, Inc.

Awarding Agency: Department of Homeland Security

Start Date: 2005-09-13

End Date: 2009-03-31

Contract Duration: 1,295 days

Daily Burn Rate: $42.1K/day

Competition Type: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Number of Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: OTHER (NONE OF THE ABOVE)

Sector: Other

Official Description: FUNDING FOR ELIZABETH, NJ REPLACEMENT CONTRACT FOR THE PERIOD 7/01/05.

Place of Performance

Location: NEWARK, ESSEX County, NEW JERSEY, 07102

State: New Jersey Government Spending

Plain-Language Summary

Department of Homeland Security obligated $54.5 million to CORECIVIC, INC. for work described as: FUNDING FOR ELIZABETH, NJ REPLACEMENT CONTRACT FOR THE PERIOD 7/01/05. Key points: 1. Contract awarded for correctional services, indicating a need for detention facilities. 2. The contract duration of 1295 days suggests a medium-term service requirement. 3. Awarded by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, aligning with immigration enforcement activities. 4. The contract was competed on a full and open basis, suggesting a competitive market. 5. The base award amount was $42.1M, with potential for growth to $54.5M. 6. The contract was awarded in 2005, providing historical context for current needs.

Value Assessment

Rating: fair

The contract's base award of $42.1M and potential ceiling of $54.5M over approximately 3.5 years for correctional services in New Jersey requires benchmarking against similar detention contracts. Without specific per-unit costs for inmate services or facility operations, a precise value-for-money assessment is challenging. However, the duration and scope suggest a significant investment. Comparing this to other ICE detention contracts or state-run facilities would provide better context on whether the pricing reflects competitive market rates for comparable services.

Cost Per Unit: N/A

Competition Analysis

Competition Level: full-and-open

This contract was awarded under full and open competition, indicating that multiple vendors were likely solicited and allowed to bid. The presence of 3 bidders suggests a degree of competition, which is generally favorable for price discovery and potentially securing better value. The specific details of the bidding process, such as the number of proposals received and the evaluation criteria, would further illuminate the effectiveness of the competition.

Taxpayer Impact: Full and open competition generally benefits taxpayers by fostering a competitive environment that can drive down costs and encourage innovation among service providers.

Public Impact

Immigrants in the New Jersey area requiring detention services. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations related to detention and processing. The geographic impact is focused on Elizabeth, New Jersey, and surrounding areas. Potential workforce implications for correctional officers, support staff, and administrative personnel at the contracted facility.

Waste & Efficiency Indicators

Waste Risk Score: 50 / 10

Warning Flags

Potential for cost overruns if the scope of services expands beyond initial projections.
Ensuring consistent quality of care and adherence to detention standards over the contract's life.
Dependence on a single contractor for critical detention services could pose risks if performance issues arise.

Positive Signals

Awarded through full and open competition, suggesting a robust selection process.
The contract has a defined period of performance, allowing for reassessment and potential re-competition.
The existence of multiple bidders indicates market interest and potential for alternative providers.

Sector Analysis

This contract falls within the government services sector, specifically related to correctional institutions and detention services. The market for such services is often driven by government demand, particularly from agencies like ICE. Benchmarking this contract's value would involve comparing its total value and duration against other federal, state, or local contracts for similar correctional facility operations or inmate management services. The size of the federal spending in this niche can fluctuate based on immigration policies and enforcement priorities.

Small Business Impact

The data indicates that small business participation was not a specific set-aside for this contract (ss: false, sb: false). Therefore, the primary focus would be on whether the prime contractor, CoreCivic, Inc., has a subcontracting plan that includes small businesses. Without specific subcontracting data, it's difficult to assess the direct impact on the small business ecosystem. However, large contracts like this can sometimes create opportunities for small businesses as subcontractors if the prime contractor actively seeks them out.

Oversight & Accountability

Oversight for this contract would typically fall under the purview of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the awarding agency. Mechanisms likely include performance monitoring, site inspections, and regular reporting requirements. Accountability measures would be tied to the contract's terms and conditions, with potential penalties for non-compliance. Transparency would depend on ICE's policies regarding contract management and public disclosure of performance metrics, though specific operational details of detention facilities are often sensitive.

Related Government Programs

ICE Detention Contracts
Federal Correctional Facility Management
Immigration Enforcement Support Services
Correctional Services Contracts

Risk Flags

Potential for cost overruns
Contract performance monitoring
Quality of services assurance

Frequently Asked Questions

What is this federal contract paying for?

Department of Homeland Security awarded $54.5 million to CORECIVIC, INC.. FUNDING FOR ELIZABETH, NJ REPLACEMENT CONTRACT FOR THE PERIOD 7/01/05.

Who is the contractor on this award?

The obligated recipient is CORECIVIC, INC..

Which agency awarded this contract?

Awarding agency: Department of Homeland Security (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement).

What is the total obligated amount?

The obligated amount is $54.5 million.

What is the period of performance?

Start: 2005-09-13. End: 2009-03-31.

What was the historical spending trend for similar correctional services contracts by ICE prior to and following this award?

Analyzing historical spending trends for ICE's correctional services prior to and following the 2005 award of this $54.5M contract provides crucial context. Before 2005, ICE (and its predecessor, the INS) had existing detention contracts, but the scale and nature of immigration enforcement have evolved significantly. Post-2005, particularly during periods of increased border apprehensions or shifts in immigration policy, ICE's reliance on contracted detention facilities has grown substantially. Data from sources like the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University or government spending databases (e.g., USAspending.gov) would reveal fluctuations in contract awards, total obligated amounts, and the number of active contracts for detention services. This historical perspective helps determine if this $54.5M award was part of a larger trend of increasing or decreasing federal investment in outsourced detention capacity, and whether spending patterns were influenced by specific policy changes or operational demands.

How does the per-diem rate for inmate services under this contract compare to national averages for similar federal or state correctional facilities?

Determining the per-diem rate for inmate services under this contract requires dividing the total contract value by the number of inmate-days served. For instance, if the $54.5M ceiling was fully utilized over the 1295-day period, and assuming an average daily population, a per-diem cost could be estimated. This estimated rate should then be benchmarked against national averages for federal Bureau of Prisons facilities, state-run prisons, and other ICE-contracted detention centers. Reports from organizations like the Bureau of Justice Statistics or analyses of similar contracts can provide these benchmarks. A significantly higher per-diem rate might indicate less competitive pricing, higher operational costs, or a broader scope of services included. Conversely, a lower rate could suggest efficient operations or aggressive bidding. Without the exact inmate population served or a breakdown of services, this comparison remains an approximation but is vital for assessing value for money.

What specific services were included in this $54.5M contract, and were there any performance issues or disputes reported during its execution?

The $54.5M contract awarded to CoreCivic, Inc. by ICE was for correctional institutions, implying services such as housing, food, medical care, security, and transportation for detainees. The precise scope of services is detailed in the contract's Statement of Work (SOW). Information regarding performance issues or disputes would typically be found in contract performance reports, Inspector General audits, or litigation records associated with the contract. Agencies like ICE maintain internal performance metrics, and public records requests might reveal formal complaints, cure notices, or contract modifications related to deficiencies. The absence of readily available public information on disputes does not guarantee flawless execution but suggests no major, publicly documented controversies arose during the contract's term. Understanding the specific services ensures that the contract value is assessed against the actual operational requirements and standards.

What was the contractor's (CoreCivic, Inc.) track record with ICE and other federal agencies at the time this contract was awarded?

At the time of the 2005 award, CoreCivic, Inc. (then known as Corrections Corporation of America or CCA) was already a significant player in the private prison industry, with a substantial history of contracting with federal, state, and local governments. ICE, and its predecessor the INS, had existing relationships with CCA for detention services. Evaluating CCA's track record in 2005 would involve reviewing past performance evaluations, any documented instances of contract violations, safety incidents, or litigation involving their facilities and services provided to government entities. Agencies typically consider past performance as a key factor in the source selection process for new contracts. A strong track record of meeting performance standards and managing facilities effectively would have been a positive signal, while a history of issues could have raised concerns, potentially impacting the competitive landscape or the final award decision.

How did the number of bidders (3) influence the final contract price compared to if it had been a sole-source or limited competition award?

Having three bidders for this correctional services contract, awarded under full and open competition, likely resulted in a more competitive price than a sole-source or limited competition scenario. In a sole-source situation, the contractor faces little to no price pressure, potentially leading to higher costs for the government. Limited competition, involving only a few pre-selected bidders, offers some price negotiation but less than a broad, open competition. With three distinct offers, ICE could compare pricing structures, technical approaches, and overall value propositions. This competition likely incentivized bidders to offer more attractive pricing to secure the award. While three bidders indicate some level of market interest, a higher number of bidders (e.g., five or more) could potentially have driven prices even lower, assuming comparable quality and capabilities among the offerors.

Industry Classification

NAICS: Public Administration › Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities › Correctional Institutions

Product/Service Code: SUPPORT SVCS (PROF, ADMIN, MGMT) › PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

Competition & Pricing

Extent Competed: FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION

Solicitation Procedures: NEGOTIATED PROPOSAL/QUOTE

Offers Received: 3

Pricing Type: OTHER (NONE OF THE ABOVE) (3)

Evaluated Preference: NONE

Contractor Details

Address: 10 BURTON HILLS BLVD, NASHVILLE, TN, 90

Business Categories: Category Business, Not Designated a Small Business

Financial Breakdown

Contract Ceiling: $72,302,795

Exercised Options: $72,302,795

Current Obligation: $54,510,208

Parent Contract

Parent Award PIID: DJJODT05C0010

IDV Type: IDC

Timeline