About APCTO - Association of Private Treatment and Correctional Organizations

Private prisons have proven to be an effective strategy for helping states keep their public corrections budgets under control, according to a new study by two researchers from Vanderbilt University and released by APCTO. In fact, introducing private prisons into states that do not currently utilize them could reduce public prison operating costs in a single state by an average $20 million annually.

According to the study, "The Interrelationship Between Public and Private Prisons: Does the Existence of Prisoners Under Private Management Affect the Rate of Growth in Expenditures on Prisoners Under Public Management?" even small levels of private prison use can have a large impact on public corrections expenditures.

Between 1999-2001, states with less than 5% of their prison population housed in private facilities saw their public corrections budgets grow by 12.5% compared to an 18.9% increase in states with no private prisons. States with even larger percentages (20% and above) of prisoners under private management generated even greater savings, with per capita increases held to just 5.9%.

APCTO is the non-profit association which represents an increasingly broad array of correctional and treatment services offered throughout the United States and around the world. APCTO members include academics, non-profit as well as for-profit corporations, service providers, government officials, students, and individuals who are interested in innovative, cost-effective public private partnerships that today benefit more than 150,000 juveniles and adults under the supervision of correctional systems in the United States.

APCTO is the non-benefit affiliation which spoke to, in years past when the affiliation was dynamic, an expansive exhibit of restorative and treatment administrations offered all through the United States and around the globe.

In view of the perceptions that there was not a gigantic requirement for such an association, the individuals from the affiliation (for example scholastics, non-benefit, revenue driven, specialist organizations, government authorities, understudies, and people) aggregately chose in 2008 to disband the proper participation and chain of importance of the affiliation.

The previous APCTO individuals chose to hold the choice to return together, should a need emerge.

Now, the Facility Database is being kept current by Management and Training Corporation.

In its 40-year history in North America, temporary workers, and government accomplices in the rectifications and treatment industry keep on cutting down expenses, improve quality, and increment responsibility. Here is a case of how this significant open private association has delivered these three key advantages.

Benefits of Using APCTO

Giving protected, secure, and sympathetic consideration and authority for guilty parties is the most necessity of any open private remedial organization. Setting aside cash to the detriment of nature of administration gives not an incentive to the citizen. Numerous realities and free examinations archive the elevated level of administration gave by the private part.


Citizens can appreciate critical investment funds by using open private remedial organizations to configuration, money, fabricate, and work detainment facilities, prisons, network rectifications offices, and adolescent equity programs.

These investment funds are gotten from an assortment of advantages offered by privatization and are archived by various autonomous research thinks about.

Operation of a federal correctional facility at Taft, California, cost between 6% and 10%, or $9.6 million and $16.5 million, less during the five-year period of the study.

When compared to public construction, on average, private prisons cost between 15% and 25% less in the design and construction of a new prison. Use of the design-build method with a fixed-fee contract contributes to these savings.

The design-build method allows for construction of new private prisons in approximately half the time of a government built prison. This saves construction debt costs, costs associated with materials price inflation, and potential litigation costs related to continuing to operate in an overcrowded existing facility.

Construction of a 1,318-bed facility cost taxpayers 24% less than a comparable facility built by the state.

Operational costs at the same 1,318-bed facility were 10.6% less than the comparable state-run facility. The rehabilitative programs provided by the private operator were significantly more sophisticated than those of the publicly managed facility.

Performance-based contracts often shift the burden of inmate litigation to the private provider. Doing so places a limit on government's exposure to these costs and also provides a significant economic incentive for the provider to operate the facility in a high-quality manner.

Medical-risk also represents a significant cost to the taxpayer. Private contracts can shift this risk to the private provider or through the application of a cap for catastrophic expenses, can at least reduce the risk for the government.

Utilizing the latest design technology can reduce the size of the staff necessary to operate the facility in a safe, humane, and secure manner.

Because private facilities operate with a profit motive, the operator has an incentive to employ the newest/most efficient electronic technology to reduce costs.


Citizens, through neighborhood, state, and government contracting offices should request the most noteworthy conceivable nature of activities at the least conceivable expense, and they ought to have plan of action if models are not met. Open Private Correctional Partnerships guarantee that the private administrator of a specific office is considered responsible to a lot higher degree than are freely worked offices.

Public-Private Correctional Partnerships Provide High-Quality Service

Providing safe, secure, and humane care and custody for offenders is the most critical requirement of any public-private correctional partnership. Saving money at the expense of quality of service provides no value to the taxpayer. Many facts and independent studies document the high level of service provided by the private sector.

  • The Abt Associates Study, funded by the Department of Justice, found that the private operator of the Taft Federal Correctional Institution met every contractual requirement and did exactly what it said it would do.

  • In 2002, a Florida study revealed that rehabilitative programs provided by the private operator were significantly more sophisticated than those made available to prisoners in a comparable state prison.

  • The Reason Public Policy Institute issued an independent 2002 report, which found that 61% of the private prison research surveys conducted (11 out of 16), concluded that the private operations were as good as or better than comparable publicly-managed facilities were at providing services.

  • The standard for quality operation in the United States is accreditation by the American Correctional Association. Forty-four U.S. prisons hold this accreditation while only 10 publicly-operated facilities meet this same standard.

  • State jurisdictions generally provide an on-site contract monitor at private facilities, and conduct numerous contract compliance audits. These activities rarely, if ever, occur at public facilities.

  • Contracts to operate facilities can be terminated for poor quality control, therefore each private operator is motivated to rigorously maintain its standards of quality operation.

  • Contracts may provide financial incentives for superior performance, and financial penalties for failure to meet standards, thereby encouraging superior performance by private operators.


Taxpayers, through local, state, and federal contracting agencies should demand the highest possible quality of operations at the lowest possible cost, and they should have recourse if standards are not met. Public-Private Correctional Partnerships ensure that the private operator of a particular facility is held accountable to a much higher degree than are publicly-operated facilities.

  • Provide the contracting agency with exactly the types and quality of services defined in the agreement.

  • Contracts can, and often do, dictate financial penalties for failure to meet contract standards, or, conversely, provide for financial incentives for superior performance.

  • Ultimate accountability is ensured through the contracting agencies' ability to terminate the contract for failure to perform, if standards are not met.

  • Submit to government monitoring through on-site reviews and unrestricted access to the facilities.

  • Pass annual performance audits conducted by the government.

  • Employ in-house self-audits to gauge and document performance.

  • Ensure quality assurance and use outside objective accreditation agencies (e.g., the American Correctional Association) to verify performance.

  • Compete to earn the privilege of operating a correctional facility, and then re-bid on the contract on a regular basis.

  • Operate under the intense scrutiny of the media and anti-privatization groups.

Why Contract With Private Companies

A Partnership in Corrections that Works.

How do companies save governments money in corrections?

What rehabilitation and education programming do offenders receive in contractor-operated facilities?

Who are private companies accountable to and who determines the length of an offender's sentence?

What training do companies provide to correctional officers?

What safety and security standards must contractors meet?