Content provided by Willo Products
Prisons, jails and detention facilities across the United States face a growing challenge: addressing the safety, security and operational inefficiencies of aging infrastructure. Most facilities, built decades ago, require upgrades and renovations to meet modern standards. Yet, when it’s time to begin renovations or build an entirely new facility, the traditional procurement methods prioritize cost over innovation, often stifling the modern upgrades needed to enhance the safety and security of the facility.
The prevailing procurement mindset treats detention facility projects as commodity-based undertakings. For facility-wide updates, systems and components like HVAC, kitchen equipment and structural elements dominate the focus, with contracts awarded to the lowest bidder. While this approach appears to ensure fiscal responsibility, it frequently undermines the potential for meaningful advancements in critical areas, such as door and lock security systems – components that are vital for safety and operational reliability.
THE DOWNSIDES OF “WINNER TAKE ALL” PROJECTS
Government budgetary rules often create excessively large, “winner take all” projects, managed by general contractors. These contracts prioritize overall cost savings but inadvertently limit opportunities for specialized, niche innovations.
For example, smaller, highly specialized providers of cutting-edge locking systems are often excluded because their solutions must pass through layers of cost-focused decision-making and value engineering by contractors and detention equipment suppliers. This procurement structure dilutes the emphasis on quality and safety in favor of minimizing costs, resulting in outcomes that fail to address the specific needs of door and lock security.
There’s more to a correctional facility project than just the raw dollar costs of the upgrades. To discover more about other factors to consider, click here to understand the hidden costs and here to understand the human costs of faulty door and lock security.
THE IMPACT ON SECURITY INNOVATIONS
By focusing on the lowest bid price, clients often leave little room for innovations that could significantly benefit a project in the long term. As Bridgett Cooper, a construction industry expert, explains in her article on low-bid procurement:
“By adopting the low-bid mindset, clients sacrifice the project’s value to save money. Sometimes, the cheapest bid can become problematic in the future, where the entire project must be redone.” – Bridgett Cooper
This principle applies to detention facilities, where cost-driven decisions often result in the installation of outdated, inadequate locking systems that compromise security and require repeated fixes.
Door and lock security exemplifies the pitfalls of this outdated procurement approach. Unlike generic building components, detention facility locks must withstand constant manipulation and tampering. However, under the current system:
- Specification errors: Architects tasked with specifying innovative security features may overlook critical details due to insufficient knowledge of security locking devices, allowing inferior alternatives to meet bid requirements. Frequently the most commonly known product is specified with no additional research into alternatives.
- Low-bid bias: General contractors are incentivized to prioritize cost over quality, sometimes in efforts to meet unrealistic GMP stipulations or to simply be the low bidder, often selecting subpar solutions that fail to address safety concerns. The end result is new facilities that often require retrofits to operate as intended.
- Lost focus on security: When door and lock innovations are bundled into larger renovation projects their significance diminishes, and funds are allocated to less critical components. Regardless of all other components and programs, dependable locking devices are the backbone of the facility, ensuring inmate and staff safety.
A PATH TO PROGRESS: REDEFINING PROCUREMENT PRACTICES
To address these challenges and foster innovation, the corrections industry must separate cutting-edge solutions from commoditized services. A more intentional procurement process could significantly enhance facility safety and operational efficiency.
Key steps for reform:
- Decouple security innovations from general construction and renovations: Isolating lock and door security from broader projects ensures these critical components receive the necessary focus and investment. Specialized products could then be evaluated on their merits without being overshadowed by cost-cutting measures.
- Adopt quality-driven RFPs: Shifting requests for proposals (RFPs) to emphasize quality, innovation and supplier expertise would prioritize long-term value over immediate cost savings. Studies show that low-price, technically acceptable (LPTA) approaches often lead to inferior outcomes, sacrificing both quality and safety.
- Direct procurement of specialized products: Facilities should procure advanced security products directly from suppliers and then bid out installation and complementary renovations separately. This strategy avoids unnecessary markups – estimated at up to 40% – from intermediaries like general contractors and detention equipment contractors. Direct procurement ensures control over product selection while maintaining competitive bidding for ancillary work.
- Require operational and safety priorities: Architects, engineers and facility managers can drive innovation and enhance safety by specifying operational and security priorities in their project requirements, particularly for door and lock systems. These specifications should explicitly address known vulnerabilities, such as tampering and unreliable locking mechanisms, and mandate innovative solutions like tamper-resistant designs and advanced monitoring capabilities. Without detailed, outcome-focused requirements, projects risk defaulting to outdated, inadequate systems. By clearly outlining these needs, stakeholders ensure that facilities receive modern, effective solutions.
BALANCING COST AND SAFETY
A study by Market Connections underscores the drawbacks of LPTA procurement: nearly two-thirds of contractors and federal decision-makers believe this approach sacrifices long-term value for short-term savings. Additionally, awarding contracts to minimally qualified providers stifles innovation and continuous improvement.
As Stan Soloway, president of the Professional Services Council, noted, “Innovation goes out the window ... when acquiring services of any degree of complexity, it makes no sense at all.”
EMBRACING CHANGE FOR SAFER FACILITIES
To ensure that correctional facilities are equipped for the future, procurement practices must evolve. By decoupling innovative solutions from traditional cost-driven methods, facilities can enhance safety, reliability and operational efficiency.
This shift is not just about adopting better products – it’s about aligning procurement practices with the values and priorities of those tasked with maintaining secure and effective detention environments. Only by embracing these reforms can the industry move beyond outdated methods and prioritize the safety and security of its staff and residents.