Detailed Information on the
Prison Construction Assessment

Analyze, review and provide summary on staffing efficiencies, savings and cost avoidances associated with the procurement of electrified security fences. The BOP expects to award contracts in FY 2006 for $10 million to procure lethal electrified fences at seven high security federal prisons. The BOP believes this technology will serve as heightened security and help deter potential escapes and operate more cost-effectively by reducing the guard towers, and redesigning staffing patterns.

The BOP is beginning to take greater advantage of State, local and private sector bed space to meet its space requirements. This is evidenced by BOP's December 2004 contract to house 1,125 Federal inmates at a private correctional facility in Youngstown, Ohio.

The BOP has constructed 11 new medium and high security facilities and is committed to contracting out for low and minimum security inmates. There are 109,500 low and minimum security inmates, and about 28,000 are housed in contract confinement.

Perform an independent, non-biased evaluation and/or validation of the Program Review Division's program audit review procedures of the construction program to ensure compliance with PART guidelines. If possible, enhance and modify BOP's existing program evaluation approach to provide the most rigorous evidence and recommendations possible. This approach will be high quality, of sufficient scope, unbiased and independent, and conducted on a regular basis, covering targeted aspects of new construction and modernization and repair programs.

Systemwide crowding at federal correctional facilities has been in excess of 30 percent for the past several years. The BOP is evaluating crowding conditions, and rated capacity may need to be adjusted.

Measure: Percent of Modernization and Repair Projects completed on time.

Explanation:

Measure: Critical Systems Equipment Replacements in Accordance with Industry Standards.

Explanation:

Measure: Keep mission critical facilities in operating conditions 100% of the time.

Explanation:

Measure: Construction Cost per bed for High Security Facilities.

Explanation:

Measure: To add capacity to BOP so that all inmates in federal custody are imprisoned to the fullest extent of the law.

Explanation:

Measure: New Institutions Completed within 36 months of notice to proceed.

Explanation:

Measure: Construction Cost per bed for Medium Security Facilities.

Explanation:

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: The BOP was established by statue to protect society by confining federal inmates in prisons and community-based facilities that are safe, humane, cost-efficient, and appropriately secure. The Buildings and Facilities appropriation is a no year appropriation that supports site planning, acquisition, and construction of new facilities, and the remodeling, renovating, and equipping of existing facilities for penal and correctional use.

Evidence: The evidence can be found in 18 U.S. Code Section 4009, 4010, 4042, and 4081. The evidence can also be found in U.S. Department of Justice Strategic Plan (2003 - 2008) Chapter II Goal IV.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The Federal inmate population has increased over six-fold in the last two decades, from approximately 25,000 inmates and 41 institutions to over 184,000 inmates and 115 institutions as of June 9, 2005. Over 156,000 (85%) of these inmates are in facilities operated by the BOP, and the remainder (28,000 inmates or 15%) are in contract care - privately operated facilities managed by state and local governments, private community correction centers, or home confinement. The program ensures that sufficient cost effective prison capacity exists so that violent and other serious criminal offenders are imprisoned in the most cost effective and least restrictive correctional facility appropriate to custody and security level requirements. Inmate population projections are based on U.S. Court data.

Evidence: In FY 2004, the BOP added 7,396 new inmates, and in FY 2005 through June 9, 2005 BOP added 4,335 new inmates. As of June 9, 2005, based on facility rated capacity, overall systemwide crowding was 37 percent. The BOP is currently evaluating conditions of low security facilities for possible changes in security level. The BOP must accept all inmates sentenced to confinement by the Federal Courts. The evidence can be found in the U.S. Code Title 18, U.S. Court statistics demonstrating conviction trends for major offenses, BOP's budget submissions and weekly population reports. In addition, in accordance with the D.C. Revitalization Act of 1997, the BOP assumed responsibility for the District of Columbia sentenced felon population.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: The BOP is the only agency mandated to be responsible for the care and custody of Federally sentenced offenders. The BOP currently houses over 100,000 minimum and low security inmates. Although, the BOP has committed to no longer constructing low security facilities, but instead to contract out for this population, it does operate, maintain, modernize and repair low and minimum security correctional facilities. The BOP is still responsible for housing medium and high security inmates and therefore, continues to build these higher level institutions, as needed. The BOP's strategy is to employ the most effective mix of federal, state and local, and private facilities in order to safely house inmates. Over the last 20 years, the BOP has relied on private corrections to complement the facilities constructed and operated by the BOP. Currently, 15.2 percent of the BOP's total inmate population is housed in contract facilities which include privately-operated prisons, facilities managed by state and local governments, community correction centers, or home confinement. In addition, the Modernization and Repair (M&R) program provides the resources to undertake essential rehabilitation, renovation and replacement projects at existing institutions to ensure that structure, utilities system, and other plant facilities are kept in a good state of repair. The BOP has established a Long Range Master Plan to address the inventory of older facilities which require major renovations and repairs. The Plan places projects involving life and safety projects in the highest priority category. Surveys are conducted by contractors to determine the extent of renovations required to bring the older facilities to an adequate state of repair, and whether the costs of repair would equal or exceed the cost of replacing the facility. There are 45 projects underway at various older existing institutions, to determine the extent of renovations required.

Evidence: The BOP attempts to accommodate the increasing inmate population in the most cost-effective manner, following a policy of adding bed space through the use of contract facilities, expansion of existing facilities, the acquisition and conversion of military and other properties to prison use, and the ongoing design and construction of new prisons. As of June 9, 2005, the BOP has a total inmate population of 184,230. Of these inmates, 27,987 (15.2%) are housed in contract facilities which includes privately-operated prisons, facilities managed by state and local governments, community correction centers, or home confinement. The percentage of inmates housed in non-federal facilities has remained relatively constant, however, the actual number of federal inmates in contract facilities has increased by almost 2 percent. Numerous private prison providers exist to house low and minimum security inmates. The BOP's practice of converting former military and other properties to correctional use has proven to be an excellent way to maximize resources for additional capacity. The BOP has acquired and converted 55 properties to federal prison use. The evidence can be found in BOP's B&F Budget Submission Base Program Description, Status of Construction Exhibit, and Private Contract awards. The BOP uses private Contract Management firms to work on-site to support BOP Project Management Team Representatives in providing the oversight of projects.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: The BOP is sometimes limited by specific direction provided by the Administration and/or Congress for the location/activation and funding of its facilities. However, the BOP has developed a long term Capacity Plan and population projection model, and has maximized the B&F program through its long term plan. The Capacity Plan includes pertinent data such as the projected inmate population, capacity, crowding and which part of the country has the greatest need for additional bed space. Additionally, the BOP maintains a mix of in-house and outside contracts for federal inmate confinement and prison services. The BOP makes every attempt to house inmates within 500 miles of their state of legal residence and is thereby, at times, restricted as to the geographic area in which an inmate can be confined.

Evidence: Evidence is found in BOP Budget Submissions, Long term Capacity Plan, OMB Passback, B&F Appropriation language, and Conference Reports.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: The BOP uses the long term Capacity Plan and population projections, based on historical data, to target new construction and modernization & repair to meet the greatest need. However, the BOP is hampered by the fact that new projects are often funded well in advance of need. This had led to the new construction and M&R accounts being reprogrammed or rescinded to fund other more immediate high priority programs. The BOP continuously monitors the M&R program and reprioritizes in an effort to be more efficient and maximize resources. The BOP has approximately 800 M&R projects at various stages of completion at any given time. Individual project costs range from a low of $10,000 to several millions of dollars. To manage this volume of projects and resources most efficiently, the BOP implemented three initiatives in recent years which have improved the M&R program: long range master planning with surveys by contractors of older facilities; project time limit policy (3 years); and 2 percent replacement value method of annual funding. Increased capacity is accomplished through the utilization of contract facilities, expansion of existing facilities, acquisition and conversion of military and other properties to prison use, and the ongoing design and construction of new prisons.

Evidence: Surveys are conducted by contractors to determine the extent of renovations required to bring the older facilities to an adequate state of repair, and whether the costs of repair would equal or exceed the cost of replacing the facility. Survey results, along with other known renovation needs, are then used by management in a long range plan, so M&R projects can be prioritized and planned well into the future. A 3-year time limit policy for M&R projects was implemented in 1998 to ensure that institutions either complete scheduled projects in a timely manner, are excepted due to specific circumstances, or the project is cancelled and the funds are committed to other high priority M&R projects. The BOP has increased capacity by adding 1,931 inmate beds in FY 2003, 3,344 inmate beds in FY 2004 and added 5,742 beds so far in FY 2005. BOP's practice of converting former military and other properties to correctional use (for low security inmates) has proven to be another way to maximize resources. The BOP has acquired and converted 55 properties to federal prison use at the low security level. Additionally, the BOP currently has 5 (fully funded) new prison construction projects and 4 expansion projects under development. Over the past three fiscal years, 171 M&R projects have been cancelled as a result of the BOP's 3-year policy. However, the number of M&R projects being cancelled per fiscal year has decreased from 65 in FY 2002 to 48 in FY 2004, and the funding is applied to the next highest priority project. BOP has identified a goal of 85% for FY '07 and 95% completions thereafter. The evidence is found in the status of construction exhibit, M&R completion database, Performance Tables, B&F Budget Submissions in Base Program Description.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: The BOP has long-term performance measures which are closely monitored and updated on a regular basis. Further, related annual goals are targeted to support the long-term goals. The long term performance measures are: 1) To add capacity to Federal Bureau of Prisons; 2) To keep mission critical (all existing institutions) facilities in operating conditions 100% of the time; and 3) Percent of Modernization and Repair (M&R) projects completed on time.

Evidence: Evidence is found in the Public DOJ Performance Plan/Report GPRA document, DOJ and BOP Strategic Plans, and in BOP Budget Submissions. Further, there are numerous BOP documents which contain performance reporting information, such as the Capacity Plan and population projections.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The BOP has ambitious targets and timeframes for its long term measures which are closely monitored and updated on a regular basis, and related annual goals are targeted to support the long term goals. The long term goals are: To add capacity to Federal Bureau of Prisons; to keep mission critical facilities in operating conditions 100% of the time; and percent of Modernization and Repair projects completed on time. Long term plans are reviewed and updated monthly/quarterly by the BOP Budget Staff in concert with program managers.

Evidence: Evidence is found in the BOP budget submissions, Capacity Plan and Status of Construction Exhibit. Further, there are numerous BOP documents which contain performance reporting information. The BOP capacity plan is utilized to manage the current Federal inmate population and plan for the future. It contains detailed long term performance targets based on anticipated resource levels along with projected inmate population levels. (Note: Long term measures, targets and timeframes were developed for the PART exercise and, as such, are not contained in existing DOJ GPRA documents.)

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: The BOP has annual performance measures that are discrete, quantifiable, and measurable. These measures are: New Institutions Completed within 36 months of notice to proceed; Construction Cost per bed for Medium and High Security facilities; and Equipment Replacements in accordance with Industry Standards. These annual measures monitor the progress towards reaching the long-term goals. On a regular basis (daily, weekly and/or monthly), the BOP tracks inmate population, capacity, status of construction and modernization and repair projects. The BOP has specific annual and long term targets which are ambitious, outcome oriented, and emphasize the importance of obtaining adequate capacity.

Evidence: The evidence is found in BOP's Status of Construction Exhibit, Awarded Design Build Contracts, and the Total Maintenance System (TMS) utilized for equipment replacements. (Note: Long term measures, targets and timeframes were developed for the PART exercise and, as such, are not included in any DOJ GPRA documents. Annual performance measures to demonstrate progress toward achieving long term goals were developed as part of the PART exercise and, as such, are not included in DOJ GPRA documents.)

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The BOP has established baselines for its annual measures: New Institutions Completed within 36 months of notice to proceed; Construction cost per bed for Medium and High security facilities; and Equipment replacements in accordance with Industry Standards. To ensure that electronic equipment utilized for life safety sustains trouble-free operation, the BOP schedules life cycle equipment replacement based on a ten-year cycle, consistent with industry standards. The type of equipment included in this measure would be Public Branch Exchange (PBX) and radio systems (including body alarms) used to communicate within and outside prison parameters. The specific quantified annual targets have been developed (See performance measures section) for all of the annual measures referenced above. These targets provide a specific value with which performance can be compared. These targets are ambitious and they are set at levels that ensure continued improvement and realization of efficiencies.

Evidence: Evidence is found in the Status of Construction exhibit, Design Build Contracts, and Equipment replacement can be verified through the Total Maintenance System program reports.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: All contracts contain explicit guidance and criteria which address achievements expected and milestones for completion throughout the project life. The design build contract includes a Statement of Work which provides design guidelines and other required information and documentation which are essential in the construction of a federal correctional facility. Construction goals are maintained by a schedule of the necessary steps to accomplish a given task, and the order in which they must be performed. Partnering Sessions are held between the Contractor, Sub-contractor and BOP to encourage contracting parties to seek early resolution of contract issues. An Executive Planning Session is held a few weeks after award and major project goals are set. In addition, a monthly Owners and Design Builders meeting is held at the project site. The on-site project team, design-build contractor and the construction management firm also meet weekly to review progress and performance of the project.

Evidence: The evidence can be found in the Design Build Contracts and Partnering Maintenance Workshop documents. BOP has implemented a design build program which has reduced the completion time and potential for costly litigation. Under this program, facilities have normally been completed within or earlier specified construction time frames. The BOP strives to design and construct correctional facilities that are structurally sound, economical, energy efficient, and continue to maintain stringent security standards. In order to ensure that the most sensible, cost effective methods are employed in the development of new institutions and the renovation of existing facilities, the BOP constantly reviews industry standards, conducts post occupancy evaluations of completed facilities, and works with the activating staff at new institutions to identify problems, methods to contain costs, and improve future facilities.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The BOP conducts internal evaluations through the BOP's program review process where reviews are conducted by the Program Review Division which reports directly to the BOP Director. The BOP program review process provides reviews for new construction and M&R based upon program review guidelines developed by BOP staff. Program review guidelines are developed through a management assessment process, utilizing the PRD's program examiners and discipline experts. Once these guidelines are developed, they must be approved by the Assistant Director that is responsible for the program area and the Review Authority. The reviews are conducted at least once every three years. Although BOP subjects each of its programs to a thorough examination by organizationally independent, trained BOP reviewers, the process is internal and has not yet been subjected to external review or validation. Where applicable, standards for program reviews utilize "generally accepted government auditing standards." These standards cover auditor qualifications, auditor independence, due professional care or audit quality including sound professional judgment and standards relating to examination, evaluation, and reporting, and quality control including internal and external reviews. At least annually, facilities program managers analyze the results of all their program reviews, special studies, trend data, and management indicators. Based on this analysis, the program review guidelines (PRGs) may be updated and reissued for facilities programs. Corrective actions may include: (1) Development of new or modified PRGs; (2) Plans for special studies or reviews; (3) Improvement in training programs; (4) Changes in policy; (5) Monitoring the accomplishment of strategic action plans, etc. A certification letter is provided to the Director stating that control systems for facilities programs and other programs, functional areas, or installations are operating effectively, except as noted. In addition to BOP's internal program evaluations, BOP is subject to periodic, subject matter audits by GAO and OIG.

Evidence: BOP evaluations are conducted by internal program review division which has not yet been subjected to external audit or validation procedures or review. Evidence can be found in the GAO study, Audited Financial Statement, New facility Post Occupancy Survey, BOP's Management Control and Program Review Program Statement (P.S. 1210.23), Program Review Schedule, and Program Review Guidelines (PRGs) for Design and Construction, Finance, and Facilities Management for institutions, regions, and the Central Office.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The BOP Budget requests are explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long term performance goals. The performance planning and budget planning processes are integrated. The BOP, in its budget presentation, provides data demonstrating the impact requested funding will have on performance. The budget request explains why the requested performance/resource mix is appropriate, i.e. the Federal Facilities Council's formula for determining M&R budgets. The BOP program budget is strategically aligned by decision unit with program goals and objectives. This program has one decision unit (Inmate Confinement/Prison Capacity) with two program areas: New Construction and Modernization and Repair of existing facilities. The budget provides all direct and indirect costs needed to attain the performance results.

Evidence: The Federal Prison System restructured its FY 2006 budget in accordance with the President's Management Agenda and the Government Performance and Results Act. The new structure condenses the Buildings and Facilities budget from two decision units (New Construction and Modernization and Repair) to one decision unit (Inmate Confinement/Prison Capacity) with two program areas. The evidence can be found in the BOP budget submissions.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: Strategic planning is driven by the BOP's mission and vision statements, which are supported by seven broad, long-term correctional goals. Each of the seven goals is supported by specific objectives and action plans. The BOP Executive Staff holds quarterly planning sessions to ensure that the agency's strategic goals continue to meet the needs of society and reflect the major issues that face the agency, the vision and mission of a modern correctional system, and the challenges confronting the BOP both currently and in the future. During these sessions, the Executive Staff make decisions concerning proposals to revise, eliminate, or add objectives. Additionally, required reports from institutions, regions, and divisions outlining progress forward meeting objectives and action plans are reviewed.

Evidence: Material weakness are identified, i.e., crowding, and addressed through the agency plan, DOJ's Strategic Plan, DOJ's Performance Plan/Report, as well as through long-term and annual goals.

Has the agency/program conducted a recent, meaningful, credible analysis of alternatives that includes trade-offs between cost, schedule, risk, and performance goals, and used the results to guide the resulting activity?

Explanation: The BOP is currently evaluating the potential for upgrading existing low security prisons to house higher security inmates. In addition, the BOP continues to review availability of excess State, local and private sector jail space for potential Federal utilization. Finally, the BOP is evaluating the degree to which crowding is acceptable depending on security level. These evaluations will be completed by the fall of 2005.

Evidence: The studies are ongoing and will be completed by the fall of 2005. Further, in the recent past, the BOP has evaluated several privatization facilities for conversion, i.e., Youngstown, Ohio and Jena, Louisiana, but found them to be insufficient for higher security inmates (Note: the BOP has however, contracted with Youngstown for low security inmates). The BOP has converted 55 facilities including military bases, religious facilities and college dorms to correctional use.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: The BOP monitors the status of construction and M&R projects on a regular basis. The construction on-site staff monitors the project's progress and status on a daily basis. Further, the project management teams in the Design and Construction Branch, Central Office, review the status of each project through weekly reports to ensure the projects are on schedule and within funding. The Central Office project staff and the field/on-site staff in conjunction with the design build contractor meet regularly to ensure all issues are addressed in a timely manner and that the project remains within schedule. On-site staff performs scheduled maintenance, cost estimates for contract modifications, quality inspections and document control. Throughout the life of a project, various meetings are held to discuss design issues, technology changes, security changes, which may affect current or future projects. In 1997, the BOP established a Design Criteria Review Committee to ensure that proposed changes receive adequate review and appropriate approval before their implementation. During a Design Criteria meeting, proposed changes are discussed and if the change is adopted each project is reviewed to determine the benefit versus cost of making the change. Future projects would then adapt the change into the new project's design criteria.

Evidence: Monthly Status of Construction exhibit, obligation reports, unobligated balance reports, weekly project progress report and the project status summary report.

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Contracts contain guidance and criteria which addresses achievements expected. Specific contract performance standards are included with solicitations. They outline consequences of non-performance. On June 30, 2004, the Attorney General transmitted decisions on the SES Performance-based Pay System to OPM and OMB with the Human Capital report, including a generic work plan for all Departmental SES members, with accompanying Performance "contract" that must explicitly relate to the Department's, the President's or the AG's defined goals. On December 10, 2004, DOJ obtained approval for the SES and GS/Prevailing Rate performance orders. Additionally, DOJ completed the application package for OPM/OMB certification of the DOJ SES Performance Management and Compensation Plan. DOJ components implemented five-level performance plans for all SES. New SES and manager plans include cascading tasks/assignments that are linked to the DOJ Strategic Plan and the PMA. By Dec 30, 2004, all DOJ components certified to the Attorney General that all SES and direct report performance work plans are in place. Finally, by the end of the FY05-1Q, the Department has performance appraisals for more than 60% of the work force, that: link to agency mission, goals and outcomes in DOJ's Strategic Plan; hold employees accountable for results appropriate to their level of responsibility; effectively differentiate between various levels of performance; and provide consequences based on performance.

Evidence: The evidence can be found in contract awards. DOJ Performance and Accountability Report (p. IV-5); PMA (Human Capital and Performance and Budget Integration) Scorecard (December 31, 2004); DOJ's 2003-2008 Strategic Plan; sample performance work plans.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: The BOP has focused on timely obligation of funds over the past several years. Headquarters and regional offices consistently review status of obligation reports monthly and quarterly, and meet monthly. In terms of spending funds for intended purposes, there is a certain degree of flexibility in the BOP's decision unit funding structure. When discretion and latitude exceed reasonable interpretation, the BOP requests formal reallocation of funds through reprogramming requests. Further, even though M&R funds are no year funds and available until expended, the BOP has self-imposed an expiration for these projects. This will allow for the timely obligation of funds and force M&R projects to complete within a 3 year term limit. In addition, the BOP has changed the way funds are allocated to larger projects. Rather than providing a location with a large sum of funds for both the design and construction at one time, funds are only provided for the design of the project and the remaining construction funds are not provided until the design is complete. This allows for more resource flexibility and contributes to a lower unobligated balance.

Evidence: Apportionment requests, Treasury end-of-year reports, 133's indicate that funds are obligated in a timely manner.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: The new construction and modernization and repair programs have not been subjected to competitive sourcing evaluations or cost comparison studies. Although the BOP awards construction contracts on the basis of a competitive bidding process, it has not compared its costs, designs, etc. with other similar construction programs, i.e., States and the private sector. The BOP does have regular procedures in place to help achieve certain efficiencies and cost effectiveness and they are utilized as follows. For construction, goals are maintained by a schedule of the necessary steps to accomplish a given task, and the order in which they must be performed. The schedule provides time-control information regarding the planned sequence of activities. Further, Partnering Sessions are held between the Contractor, Sub-contractor and BOP to encourage contracting parties to seek early resolution of contract issues. An Executive Planning Session is held a few weeks after award and major project goals are set. In addition, a monthly Owners and Design Builders meeting is held at the project site. The on-site project team, design-build contractor and the construction management firm also meet weekly to review progress and performance of the project. The BOP's Design Criteria Review Committee ensures that proposed changes receive adequate consideration and appropriate approval before their implementation. The change is adopted if the Committee determines that it is most cost effective and will produce the best value for taxpayer dollars. Future projects would then adapt the change into the new project's design criteria. The new construction and modernization and repair programs have developed three efficiency measures: Construction cost per bed for medium security level facilities; Percent of Modernization and Repair projects completed on time; and Construction cost per bed for high security level facilities. The BOP evaluates cost per project by using free and open competition, through bids. The BOP has improved the pace and effectiveness of its construction program by incorporating design build contracts for new construction projects.

Evidence: Evidence can be found in Partnering Maintenance Workshop documents, BOP budget submissions, private contract awards, design-build contracts, post occupancy surveys, and environmental site comparisons.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: The BOP coordinates with FBI, USMS, USAs, BICE (INS), Federal Courts, state and local governments, and communities to ensure that every Federally sentenced inmate serves their term in facilities which provide appropriate security, programming, work opportunities, and pre-release transitioning to the community. In addition, under specified circumstances, the BOP houses inmates for the USMS, BICE (INS) and other state and local correctional systems.

Evidence: The BOP staff meets and partners with state and local officials and private contractors as well as participates in professional associations to ensure most effective project management. The BOP participates in several cross-bureau and cross-agency working groups.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The BOP has consistently received "unqualified" opinions (clean) on its Audited Financial Statements since 1999. The BOP's financial statements audits revealed no material weaknesses.

Evidence: Evidence can be found in audited financial statements and DOJ's Performance and Accountability Report.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: In 1997, the BOP established a Design Criteria Review Committee to ensure that proposed changes receive adequate review and appropriate approval before their implementation. The Committee is comprised of executive level senior administrators representing the Facilities Management, Design and Construction, Correctional Programs and Safety and Sanitation Branches of the BOP. Of the sixty-seven proposals reviewed during FY 2004, the Design Criteria Review Committee agreed to adopt fifty-four because it was demonstrated that the changes proposed would trim or help contain costs, or would otherwise improve the design and future maintenance of the facilities. The BOP has a systematic approach to assessing operations and programs at all organizational levels throughout the BOP program review process. Deficiencies identified through this process are promptly corrected. The BOP's program review division is responsible for analyzing BOP programs and guiding BOP managers in the assessment of their operations. The division ensures that effective management and operational procedures exist throughout the BOP including new construction and M&R programs. In addition, the BOP is regularly the subject of initial findings, audit and follow-up reports conducted by the American Correctional Association (ACA) and the Government Accountability Office (GAO).

Evidence: The evidence can be found in BOP's program review guidelines.

Is the program managed by maintaining clearly defined deliverables, capability/performance characteristics, and appropriate, credible cost and schedule goals?

Explanation: The BOP establishes project timelines and milestones as defined in contracts and internal guidelines, for both new construction and modernization and repair projects. Construction goals are maintained by a schedule of the necessary steps to accomplish a given task, and the order in which they must be performed. The schedule provides time-control information regarding the planned sequence of activities. Progress reported by the Contractor is verified through on-site, visual inspection of work completed. By reviewing the schedule and verifying work performed, the BOP is able to ensure that the contract is within schedule and budget. Sanctions and incentives are included in contracts to help ensure compliance with established timelines and milestones.

Evidence: The evidence is provided in contracts, internal guidelines, by finished facilities, completed renovation projects, updated facility infrastructure, monthly project progress reports and partnering meetings.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: The program has demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long term performance goal of adding capacity to the BOP: In FY 2004, BOP added 3,344 institution beds and 1,090 contract beds. So far, in FY 2005 BOP has added 5,742 institution beds and 610 contract beds. In addition, the percent of Modernization and Repair (M&R) projects completed on time has improved from the baseline level. Finally, mission critical facilities continue to operate at full capacity.

Evidence: The evidence can be found in Weekly Population Reports, the Capacity plan, BOP Budget Submissions, and M&R database.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: The program has established benchmarks for achieving its annual performance goal of construction cost per bed for Medium and High Security facilities - which is inflated by 2.1% per year for the outyears (Unclear as to what the basis is for using the 2.1 inflation rate every year through 2013). Currently, projects appear to be on target to meet the goal of 36 months completion from the notice to proceed date. Additionally, the BOP seems to be on track with scheduling life safety equipment replacements. To ensure that electronic equipment utilized for life safety sustains trouble-free operation, the BOP schedules life cycle equipment replacement based on a ten-year cycle, consistent with industry standards. The type of equipment included in this measure would be Public Branch Exchange (PBX) and radio systems (including body alarms) used to communicate within and outside prison parameters.

Evidence: Baseline data is being collected. Verification will be through the Status of Construction exhibit included in the Congressional Budget, Capacity Plan and Design Build Contracts. In addition, equipment replacement will be verified through the Total Maintenance System database.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: Baselines have been established in 2005 and beyond for the new construction and M&R projects to measure that projects are completed on schedule or earlier than planned. Completing projects on time saves costs because when projects are delayed they cost more to complete due to inflationary factors, seasonal adjustments, etc. The design build program has reduced the completion time of new construction projects. Additionally, the percent of M&R projects completed within the 3 year term limit has helped improve the cost effectiveness of the program. Finally, the BOP has improved their procuring processing of Environmental Impact Surveys. The BOP has been able to eliminate non-value steps and speed up value steps by reducing the time by half (59 days to 30 days).

Evidence: Evidence can be found in the Status of Construction Exhibit, Obligation reports, Design Build Contracts, and the M&R project database, Flow Chart of Task Order Approval Timeline for Statement of Works.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: Although the BOP has over 35 years of experience with the design and construction of major new correctional facilities, it has not conducted a comparison of its new construction and modernization & repair program with similar programs. From 1970 to 1982 twelve new prison facilities were completed and since 1982, an additional 64 major new institutions have been completed.

Evidence: Some evidence for comparative purposes may be found in the BOP's existing prisons where 35 institutions are over 50 years old. BOP is in the process of re-examining and adjusting staffing patterns and also exploring ways to improve designs for new facilities. Corrections Year Book. BOP's Status of Construction exhibit. State Corrections websites.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: Internal BOP facilities program reviews indicate that BOP's B&F program for Modernization and Repair (M&R) of existing facilities is effective and achieving results. These evaluations were conducted by a review authority within BOP's Program Review Division (PRD) utilizing "generally accepted government auditing standards". These standards cover auditor qualifications, auditor independence, due professional care and audit quality including sound professional judgment and standards relating to examination, evaluation, and reporting, and quality control including internal and external reviews. The scope of facilities program reviews was determined by a management assessment process which looked at information on program performance and internal controls. In FY 2004, the BOP completed 474 projects, exceeding BOP's established target of 465. During the current fiscal year, M&R projects completed within the three year's time limit have thus far shown improvement from last year (from 41% to 65%). Further, the BOP's PRD also analyzed new construction projects and guided managers in the assessment of their operations, indicating that the new construction program is also effective and achieving results. The BOP's new construction staff has overseen private contract construction and completion of ten new prisons during FY 2004 and FY 2005, within funding levels and on time. These new prisons added approximately 11,400 new beds to BOP's capacity. After completion of each new institution, the BOP conducts its own post occupancy evaluations to identify problems, methods to contain costs and improve future facilities. The evaluations are reviewed by the BOP's Design Criteria Review Committee which was established to ensure that proposed contract changes receive adequate review and appropriate approval before their implementation. The GAO's FY 2002 study on Capital Planning found that BOP's practices conform to OMB and GAO's guidance on strategic linkage and that the BOP identifies and evaluates multiple alternatives to bridge the performance gap, including non-capital options. Finally, the BOP has taken action on three recommendations contained in the GAO report. The GAO did a follow-up in May 2005, regarding actions the BOP has taken to date in response to the recommendations, and they advised that BOP's progress was good.

Evidence: Independent evidence is not available to determine whether the new construction and M&R programs are effective and achieving results. Limited independent evidence (of insufficient scope) can be found in the GAO study, Audited Financial Statement, New facility Post Occupancy Survey, The BOP's Management Control and Program Review Program Statement (P.S. 1210.23), Program Review Schedule, and Program Review Guidelines (PRGs) for Design and Construction, Finance, and Facilities Management for institutions, regions, and the Central Office.

Were program goals achieved within budgeted costs and established schedules?

Explanation: Program goals for new facility construction were achieved within budgeted costs and established schedules in FY 2004 and 2005. The new construction projects which are scheduled for completion in FY 2006 and FY 2007 remain within budgeted costs and are on established schedule. This includes Tucson, AZ USP (facility already completed), Butner, NC FCI, Hazelton, WV Secure Women's Facility, Pollock, LA FCI, and expansion at Sandstone, MN and Florence, CO.

Evidence: In FY 2004 and 2005, ten facilities were completed as projected and began the activation process (note: due to delays in the Appropriation Bill, the activation process came somewhat later). The evidence can be found in the Design Build contracts which identify targets that were met, BOP population report which shows all facilities and the number of inmates. Further, completed projects are identified as complete in BOP Budget Submissions (now have 115 prisons), and newly completed institutions have been dropped off from the Status of Construction exhibit updated and provided on a monthly basis to OMB and DOJ.