• page one
• |
• page two
• |
• page three
• |
• page four

The Direct Cost Savings of Partnership

These efficiencies and capabilities enable partnership corrections providers to provide a tremendous public benefit: real, significant cost savings, without sacrificing safety or effectiveness.

In a February 2009 article, Sen. Glenn Coffee of Oklahoma (where nearly a quarter of state inmates are in private facilities) voiced his continued support of correctional partnerships in alleviating the toll on public facilities. “[I]n tough economic times when the capital outlay of building new prisons may be a bridge too far with now, and those beds are available, we need to make use of them,” he said. [7]

Government officials who have seen the benefits of partnership prisons firsthand are not the only ones who recognize their value. Empirical research reflects the cost benefits of public-private partnership in corrections. In 2005 testimony to the Utah Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee, Geoffrey Segal, director of government reform for the Reason Foundation, said:

• Upon conducting a direct comparison of public and private facilities, there are 23 reputable studies, performed either by a university or a government entity, comparing the cost of government-run and private prisons. This research supports a conservative estimate that private facilities do operate at about a 10-15 percent lower cost than do government facilities. It is important to note that is achieved without sacrificing quality. [8]

Governments partnering with CCA typically realize savings ranging from 5-15 percent on daily operating costs. Generally, some of CCA’s state partners have saved millions each year in corrections spending, in some cases saving 50 percent or more in providing housing and services to offenders each day.

When is comes to tax dollars, savings and efficiency are always important. Today, when state corrections departments are proposing drastic budgetary cuts, significant workforce reductions, controversial early release programs, facility closures and more, they are more than important. They are essential.[9] Today, “nearly one in every 18 state general fund dollars [is] spent on corrections.”[10] Under the stresses of ballooning offender populations and aging facilities, states must find ways to fulfill their central responsibility: providing safety and security to America’s communities. And they must do it in the midst of fiscal crisis, a recession that has most states projecting budgetary shortfalls through fiscal year 2011. [11] Governments on every level are looking for smart, common-sense solutions, solutions that do not compromise quality or safety. Correctional partnerships can be a major part of a solution, serving as a major relief valve for some and, for many others, as a long-term, sustainable solution to meet our nation’s security needs.

[7] Bisbee, Julie. “Private sector may aid Oklahoma’s prison woes,” The Oklahoman, February 2, 2009

[8] Segal, Geoffrey. “Testimony of Geoffrey Segal, Director of Government Reform, Reason Foundation, to the Utah law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Interim Committee, September 21, 2005.

[9] National Conference of State Legislatures, “FY 2010 Actions and Proposals to Balance the Budget: Criminal Justice,” April 2009, http://www.ncsl.org/programs/fiscal/FY2010CJ.htm

[10] Lawrence, Allison. “Crime Costs,” National Conference of State Legislatures, March 2009.

[11] McNichol, Elizabeth and Iris J. Law. “State Budget Troubles Worsen.” Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.” January 29, 2009.