Edgar Filing: GEO GROUP INC

Large accelerated filer

Accelerated filer

Non-Accelerated filer

¨ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Smaller reporting company

10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

(Mark One)

x	ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015

¨	TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from to

Commission file number: 1-14260

The GEO Group, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)


Florida		65-0043078
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

One Park Place, Suite 700, 621 Northwest 53rd Street Boca Raton, Florida		33487-8242
(Address of principal executive offices)		(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (561) 893-0101

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:


Title of Each Class		Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
Common Stock, $0.01 Par Value		New York Stock Exchange

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ¨ No x

The aggregate market value of the 74,121,907 voting and non-voting shares of common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2015 (based on the last reported sales price of such stock on the New York Stock Exchange on such date, the last business day of the registrant’s quarter ended June 30, 2015 of $34.16 per share) was approximately $2.5 billion.

As of February 23, 2016, the registrant had 74,665,823 shares of common stock outstanding.

Certain portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement pursuant to Regulation 14A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for its 2015 annual meeting of shareholders, which will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of the year covered by this report, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.

TABLE OF CONTENTS


		Page
PART I
Item 1.	Business		3
Item 1A.	Risk Factors		24
Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments		45
Item 2.	Properties		45
Item 3.	Legal Proceedings		45
Item 4.	Mine Safety Disclosures		46
PART II
Item 5.	Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities		47
Item 6.	Selected Financial Data		50
Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		51
Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk		80
Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data		81
Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure		158
Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures		158
Item 9B.	Other Information		158
PART III
Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance		159
Item 11.	Executive Compensation		159
Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters		159
Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence		159
Item 14.	Principal Accounting Fees and Services		160
PART IV
Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules		160
	Signatures		165

PART I

Item 1.

Business

As used in this report, the terms “we,” “us,” “our,” “GEO” and the “Company” refer to The GEO Group, Inc., its consolidated subsidiaries and its unconsolidated affiliates, unless otherwise expressly stated or the context otherwise requires.

General

We are a fully-integrated real estate investment trust (“REIT”) specializing in the ownership, leasing and management of correctional, detention and re-entry facilities and the provision of community-based services and youth services in the United States, Australia, South Africa and the United Kingdom. We own, lease and operate a broad range of correctional and detention facilities including maximum, medium and minimum security prisons, immigration detention centers, minimum security detention centers, as well as community based re-entry facilities. We develop new facilities based on contract awards, using our project development expertise and experience to design, construct and finance what we believe are state-of-the-art facilities that maximize security and efficiency. We provide innovative compliance technologies, industry-leading monitoring services, and evidence-based supervision and treatment programs for community-based parolees, probationers and pretrial defendants. We also provide secure transportation services for offender and detainee populations as contracted domestically and in the United Kingdom through our joint venture GEO Amey PECS Ltd. (“GEOAmey”). As of December 31, 2015, our worldwide operations included the management and/or ownership of approximately 87,000 beds at 104 correctional, detention and community based facilities, including idle facilities and projects under development, and also include the provision of community supervision services for more than 139,000 offenders and pre-trial defendants, including approximately 89,000 individuals through an array of technology products including radio frequency, GPS, and alcohol monitoring devices.

We provide a diversified scope of services on behalf of our government clients:

•

our correctional and detention management services involve the provision of security, administrative, rehabilitation, education, and food services, primarily at adult male correctional and detention facilities;

•

our community-based services involve supervision of adult parolees and probationers and the provision of temporary housing, programming, employment assistance and other services with the intention of the successful reintegration of residents into the community;

•

our youth services include residential, detention and shelter care and community-based services along with rehabilitative and educational programs;

•

we provide comprehensive electronic monitoring and supervision services;

•

we develop new facilities, using our project development experience to design, construct and finance what we believe are state-of-the-art facilities that maximize security and efficiency;

•

we provide secure transportation services for offender and detainee populations as contracted; and

•

our services are provided at facilities which we either own, lease or are owned by our customers.

We began operating as a REIT for federal income tax purposes effective January 1, 2013. As a result of the REIT conversion, we reorganized our operations and moved non-real estate components into taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS”). We are a Florida corporation and our predecessor corporation prior to the REIT conversion was originally organized in 1984.

Business Segments

We conduct our business through four reportable business segments: our U.S. Corrections & Detention segment; our GEO Care segment; our International Services segment and our Facility Construction & Design segment. We have identified these four reportable segments to reflect our current view that we operate four distinct business lines, each of which constitutes a material part of our overall business. Our U.S. Corrections & Detention segment primarily encompasses our U.S.-based privatized corrections and detention business. Our GEO Care segment, which conducts its services in the U.S., consists of our community based services business, our youth services business and our electronic monitoring and supervision service. Our International Services segment primarily consists of our privatized corrections and detention operations in South Africa, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Our Facility Construction & Design segment primarily contracts with various states, local and federal agencies, as well as international agencies, for the design and construction of facilities for which we generally have been, or expect to be, awarded management contracts. Financial information about these segments for years 2015, 2014 and 2013 is contained in Note 17 — Business Segments and Geographic Information included in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Recent Developments

Contract awards and facility activations

The following contract awards and facility activations occurred during 2015:

On January 28, 2015, we announced that we signed a contract for the reactivation of our company-owned, 400-bed Mesa Verde Detention Facility in California. The facility will house immigration detainees under an intergovernmental service agreement between the City of McFarland and U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement (“ICE”).

On February 18, 2015, we announced the closing of our previously announced acquisition of the LCS Facilities (as defined below) totaling more than 6,500 beds from LCS. Refer to Note 2 — Business Combinations in the notes to the audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further discussion.

On April 27, 2015, we announced that our wholly-owned subsidiary, The GEO Group Australia Pty. Ltd (“GEO Australia”) signed a contract with the Department of Justice and Regulation in the State of Victoria, Australia for the continued management and operation of the Fulham Correctional Centre and the Fulham Nalu Challenge Community Unit (the “Centre”). The Centre has a contract capacity of 947 beds with a further increase in planned capacity under construction.

On April 28, 2015, we announced that we had begun to mobilize our company-owned, 1,748-bed North Lake Correctional Facility located in Baldwin, Michigan. The decision to mobilize North Lake Correctional Facility was made as a result of the current demand for out-of-state correctional bed space.

On May 20, 2015, we announced that we signed a contract with the Vermont Department of Corrections for the out-of-state housing of up to 675 inmates at our company-owned North Lake Correctional Facility in Baldwin, Michigan.

On May 21, 2015, we announced that we signed a contract with the Washington Department of Corrections for the out-of-state housing of up to 1,000 inmates at our company-owned North Lake Correctional Facility in Baldwin, Michigan.

On July 6, 2015, we announced the activation of three company-owned facilities totaling 4,320 beds in Oklahoma, Michigan, and California. On October 1, 2015, we announced the signing of a new contract with ICE

for the continued management of our company-owned, 1,575-bed Northwest Detention Center (the “Center”) in Tacoma, Washington. The contract for the continued management of the Center will have a term of nine years and six months inclusive of renewal options.

In September 2015, our GEO Care division was awarded a five-year contract for the provision of community-based case management services under a new pilot program by the Department of Homeland Security for families going through the immigration review process.

On October 28, 2015, we announced that we will assume management of the 3,400-bed Arizona State Prison-Kingman in Kingman, Arizona on December 1, 2015 under a managed-only contract with the Arizona Department of Corrections effective through February 2023. The facility currently houses approximately 1,700 inmates and is expected to ramp up through end of the first quarter of 2016.

Business Combinations

On February 17, 2015, we acquired eight correctional and detention facilities (the “LCS Facilities”) totaling more than 6,500 beds from LCS Corrections Services, Inc., a privately-held owner and operator of correctional and detention facilities in the United States, and its affiliates (collectively, “LCS”) for cash consideration of $307.4 million. Refer to Note 2 Business Combinations included in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

On May 18, 2015, our wholly-owned subsidiary, B.I. Incorporated (“BI”) acquired 100% of the outstanding common stock of Soberlink, Inc. (“Soberlink”) for cash consideration of $24.4 million. Soberlink is a leading developer and distributor of mobile alcohol monitoring devices and services. Refer to Note 2 — Business Combinations included in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Idle Facilities

We are currently marketing approximately 3,300 vacant beds at four of our idle facilities to potential customers. The annual carrying cost of idle facilities in 2016 is estimated to be $12.7 million, including depreciation expense of $1.5 million. As of December 31, 2015, these facilities had a net book value of $35.2 million. We currently do not have any firm commitment or agreement in place to activate these facilities. These idle facilities are included in the U.S. Corrections & Detention segment. The per diem rates that we charge our clients often vary by contract across our portfolio. However, if all of these idle facilities were to be activated using our U.S. Corrections & Detention average per diem rate in 2015, (calculated as the U.S. Corrections & Detention revenue divided by the number of U.S. Corrections & Detention mandays) and based on the average occupancy rate in our U.S. Corrections & Detention facilities for 2015, we would expect to receive incremental revenue of approximately $70 million and an increase in earnings per share of approximately $.20 to $.25 per share based on our average U.S. Corrections and Detention operating margin.

Quality of Operations

We operate each facility in accordance with our company-wide policies and procedures and with the standards and guidelines required under the relevant management contract. For many facilities, the standards and guidelines include those established by the American Correctional Association, or (“ACA”). The ACA is an independent organization of corrections professionals, which establishes correctional facility standards and guidelines that are generally acknowledged as a benchmark by governmental agencies responsible for correctional facilities. Many of our contracts in the United States require us to seek and maintain ACA accreditation of the facility. We have sought and received ACA accreditation and re-accreditation for all such facilities. We achieved a median re-accreditation score of 99.8% as of December 31, 2015. Approximately 79.5% of our 2015 U.S. Corrections & Detention revenue was derived from ACA accredited facilities for the year ended

December 31, 2015. We have also achieved and maintained accreditation by The Joint Commission at four of our correctional facilities and at nine of our youth services locations. We have been successful in achieving and maintaining accreditation under the National Commission on Correctional Health Care, or (“NCCHC”), in a majority of the facilities that we currently operate. The NCCHC accreditation is a voluntary process which we have used to establish comprehensive health care policies and procedures to meet and adhere to the ACA standards. The NCCHC standards, in most cases, exceed ACA Health Care Standards and we have achieved this accreditation at nine of our U.S. Corrections & Detention facilities and at two youth services locations. Additionally, BI has achieved a certification for ISO 9001:2008 for the design, production, installation and servicing of products and services produced by the electronic monitoring business units, including electronic home arrest and electronic monitoring technology products and monitoring services, installation services, and automated caseload management services.

Business Development Overview

We intend to pursue a diversified growth strategy by winning new clients and contracts, expanding our real estate and government services portfolio and pursuing selective acquisition opportunities. Our primary potential customers include: governmental agencies responsible for local, state and federal correctional facilities in the United States; governmental agencies responsible for correctional facilities in Australia, South Africa and the United Kingdom; federal, state and local government agencies in the United States responsible for community-based services for adult and juvenile offenders; federal, state and local government agencies responsible for monitoring community-based parolees, probationers and pretrial defendants; and other foreign governmental agencies. We achieve organic growth through competitive bidding that begins with the issuance by a government agency of a request for proposal, or RFP. We primarily rely on the RFP process for organic growth in our U.S. and international corrections operations as well as in our community based re-entry services and electronic monitoring services business.

For our facility management contracts, our state and local experience has been that a period of approximately 60 to 90 days is generally required from the issuance of a request for proposal to the submission of our response to the request for proposal; that between one and four months elapse between the submission of our response and the agency’s award for a contract; and that between one and four months elapse between the award of a contract and the commencement of facility construction or management of the facility, as applicable.

For our facility management contracts, our federal experience has been that a period of approximately 60 to 90 days is generally required from the issuance of a request for proposal to the submission of our response to the request for proposal; that between 12 and 18 months elapse between the submission of our response and the agency’s award for a contract; and that between four and 18 weeks elapse between the award of a contract and the commencement of facility construction or management of the facility, as applicable.

If the local, state or federal facility for which an award has been made must be constructed, our experience is that construction usually takes between nine and twenty-four months to complete, depending on the size and complexity of the project. Therefore, management of a newly constructed facility typically commences between ten and twenty-eight months after the governmental agency’s award.

For the services provided by BI, local, state and federal experience has been that a period of approximately 30 to 90 days is generally required from the issuance of an RFP or Invitation to Bid, or ITB, to the submission of our response; that between one and three months elapse between the submission of our response and the agency’s award for a contract; and that between one and three months elapse between the award of a contract and the commencement of a program or the implementation of program operations, as applicable.

The term of our local, state and federal contracts range from one to five years and some contracts include provisions for optional renewal years beyond the initial contract term. Contracts can, and are periodically, extended beyond the contract term and optional renewal years through alternative procurement processes including sole source justification processes, cooperative procurement vehicles and agency decisions to add extension time periods.

We believe that our long operating history and reputation have earned us credibility with both existing and prospective customers when bidding on new facility management contracts or when renewing existing contracts. Our success in the RFP process has resulted in a pipeline of new projects with significant revenue potential.

During 2015, we entered into seven new or expansion projects representing an aggregate of 8,681 additional beds compared to eight new or expansion projects representing an aggregate of 7,720 beds during 2014.

In addition to pursuing organic growth through the RFP process, we will from time to time selectively consider the financing and construction of new facilities or expansions to existing facilities on a speculative basis without having a signed contract with a known customer. We also plan to leverage our experience and scale of service offerings to expand the range of government-outsourced services that we provide. We will continue to pursue real-estate opportunities and selected acquisition opportunities in our core services and other government services areas that meet our criteria for growth and profitability. We have engaged and intend in the future to engage independent consultants to assist us in developing privatization opportunities and in responding to requests for proposals, monitoring the legislative and business climate, and maintaining relationships with existing customers.

Facility Design, Construction and Finance

We offer governmental agencies consultation and management services relating to the design and construction of new correctional and detention facilities and the redesign and renovation of older facilities including facilities we own, lease or manage as well as facilities we do not own, lease or manage. Domestically, as of December 31, 2015, we have provided services for the design and construction of approximately 53 facilities and for the redesign, renovation and expansion of approximately 49 facilities. Internationally, as of December 31, 2015, we have provided services for the design and construction of 11 facilities and for the redesign, renovation and expansion of one facility.

Contracts to design and construct or to redesign and renovate facilities may be financed in a variety of ways. Governmental agencies may finance the construction of such facilities through any of the following methods:

•

a one time general revenue appropriation by the governmental agency for the cost of the new facility;

•

general obligation bonds that are secured by either a limited or unlimited tax levy by the issuing governmental entity; or

•

revenue bonds or certificates of participation secured by an annual lease payment that is subject to annual or bi-annual legislative appropriations.

We may also act as a source of financing or as a facilitator with respect to the financing of the construction of a facility. In these cases, the construction of such facilities may be financed through various methods including the following:

•

funds from equity offerings of our stock;

•

cash on hand and/or cash flows from our operations;

•

borrowings by us from banks or other institutions (which may or may not be subject to government guarantees in the event of contract termination);

•

funds from debt offerings of our notes; or

•

lease arrangements with third parties.

If the project is financed using direct governmental appropriations, with proceeds of the sale of bonds or other obligations issued prior to the award of the project, then financing is in place when the contract relating to the construction or renovation project is executed. If the project is financed using project-specific tax-exempt bonds or other obligations, the construction contract is generally subject to the sale of such bonds or obligations. Generally, substantial expenditures for construction will not be made on such a project until the tax-exempt bonds or other obligations are sold; and, if such bonds or obligations are not sold, construction and therefore,

management of the facility, may either be delayed until alternative financing is procured or the development of the project will be suspended or entirely canceled. If the project is self-financed by us, then financing is generally in place prior to the commencement of construction.

Under our construction and design management contracts, we generally agree to be responsible for overall project development and completion. We typically act as the primary developer on construction contracts for facilities and subcontract with bonded National and/or Regional Design Build Contractors. Where possible, we subcontract with construction companies that we have worked with previously. We make use of an in-house staff of architects and operational experts from various correctional disciplines (e.g. security, medical service, food service, inmate programs and facility maintenance) as part of the team that participates from conceptual design through final construction of the project. This staff coordinates all aspects of the development with subcontractors and provides site-specific services.

When designing a facility, our architects use, with appropriate modifications, prototype designs we have used in developing prior projects. We believe that the use of these designs allows us to reduce the potential of cost overruns and construction delays and to reduce the number of correctional officers required to provide security at a facility, thus controlling costs both to construct and to manage the facility. Our facility designs also maintain security because they increase the area under direct surveillance by correctional officers and make use of additional electronic surveillance.

The following table sets forth our current expansion and development project and its stage of completion for the Company’s facilities:

Facilities Under Construction

Additional
Beds

Capacity
Following
Expansion/
Construction

Estimated
Completion
Date

Customer

Financing

Ravenhall Prison Development

1,300

Q4 2017

Department of Justice,

GEO

State of Victoria

Competitive Strengths

Leading Corrections Provider Uniquely Positioned to Offer a Continuum of Care

We are the second largest provider of privatized correctional and detention facilities worldwide and the largest provider of community-based re-entry services, youth services and electronic monitoring services in the U.S. corrections industry. We believe these leading market positions and our diverse and complementary service offerings enable us to meet the growing demand from our clients for comprehensive services throughout the entire corrections lifecycle. Our continuum of care enables us to provide consistency and continuity in case management, which we believe results in a higher quality of care for offenders, reduces recidivism, lowers overall costs for our clients, improves public safety and facilitates successful reintegration of offenders back into society. In 2015, we made a commitment to fund up to an additional $5 million dollar annual investment to expand our continuum of care platform of programs.

Attractive REIT Profile

Key characteristics of our business make us a highly attractive REIT. We are in a real estate intensive industry. Since our inception, we have financed and developed dozens of facilities. We have a diversified set of investment grade customers in the form of government agencies which are required to pay us on time by law. We have historically experienced customer retention in excess of 90%. Our strong and predictable occupancy rates generate a stable and sustainable stream of revenue. This stream of revenue combined with our low maintenance capital expenditure requirement translates into steady predictable cash flow. The REIT structure also allows us to pursue growth opportunities due to the capital intensive nature of corrections/detention business.

Large Scale Operator with National Presence

We operate the sixth largest correctional system in the U.S. by number of beds, including the federal government and all 50 states. We currently have correctional operations in approximately 33 states and offer electronic monitoring services in every state. In addition, we have extensive experience in overall facility operations, including staff recruitment, administration, facility maintenance, food service, security, and in the supervision, treatment and education of inmates. We believe our size and breadth of service offerings enable us to generate economies of scale which maximize our efficiencies and allows us to pass along cost savings to our clients. Our national presence also positions us to bid on and develop new facilities across the U.S.

Long-Term Relationships with High-Quality Government Customers

We have developed long-term relationships with our federal, state and other governmental customers, which we believe enhance our ability to win new contracts and retain existing business. We have provided correctional and detention management services to the United States Federal Government for 29 years, the State of California for 28 years, the State of Texas for approximately 28 years, various Australian state government entities for 24 years and the State of Florida for approximately 22 years. These customers accounted for approximately 68.2% of our consolidated revenues for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

Recurring Revenue with Strong Cash Flow

Our revenue base is derived from our long-term customer relationships, with contract renewal rates and facility occupancy rates both approximating 90% over the past five years. We have been able to expand our revenue base by continuing to reinvest our strong operating cash flow into expansionary projects and through strategic acquisitions that provide scale and further enhance our service offerings. Our consolidated revenues have grown from $877.0 million in 2007 to $1.8 billion in 2015. We expect our operating cash flow to be well in excess of our anticipated annual maintenance capital expenditure needs, which would provide us significant flexibility for growth in capital expenditures, future dividend payments in connection with operating as a REIT, acquisitions and/or the repayment of indebtedness.

Sizeable International Busines

Our international infrastructure, which leverages our operational excellence in the U.S., allows us to aggressively target foreign opportunities that our U.S. based competitors without overseas operations may have difficulty pursuing. We currently have international operations in Australia, South Africa and the United Kingdom. Our international services business generated approximately $262 million of revenues, representing approximately 14% of our consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015. Included in our international revenues are construction revenues related to our prison project in Ravenhall, Australia which are presented in our Facility Design & Construction segment. We believe we are well positioned to continue benefiting from foreign governments’ initiatives to outsource correctional services.

Experienced, Proven Senior Management Team

Our Chief Executive Officer and the founder, George C. Zoley, Ph.D., has led our Company for 31 years and has established a track record of growth and profitability. Under his leadership, our annual consolidated revenues from continuing operations have grown from $40.0 million in 1991 to $1.8 billion in 2015. Mr. Zoley is one of the pioneers of the industry, having developed and opened what we believe to be one of the first privatized detention facilities in the U.S. in 1986. Our Chief Financial Officer, Brian R. Evans, has been with our Company for over 15 years and has led our conversion to a REIT as well as the integration of our recent acquisitions and financing activities. Our top seven senior executives have an average tenure with our Company of over 11 years.

Business Strategies

Provide High Quality, Comprehensive Services and Cost Savings Throughout the Corrections Lifecycle

Our objective is to provide federal, state and local governmental agencies with a comprehensive offering of high quality, essential services at a lower cost than they themselves could achieve. We believe government agencies facing budgetary constraints will increasingly seek to outsource a greater proportion of their correctional needs to reliable providers that can enhance quality of service at a reduced cost. We believe our expanded and diversified facility and service offerings uniquely position us to bundle our high quality facility services and provide a comprehensive continuum of care for our clients, which we believe will lead to lower cost outcomes for our clients and larger scale business opportunities for us.

Maintain Disciplined Operating Approach

We refrain from pursuing contracts that we do not believe will yield attractive profit margins in relation to the associated operational risks. In addition, although we engage in facility development from time to time without having a corresponding management contract award in place, we endeavor to do so only where we have determined that there is medium to long-term client demand for a facility in that geographical area. We have also elected not to enter certain international markets with a history of economic and political instability. We believe that our strategy of emphasizing lower risk and higher profit opportunities helps us to consistently deliver strong operational performance, lower our costs and increase our overall profitability.

Pursue International Growth Opportunities

As a global provider of privatized correctional services, we are able to capitalize on opportunities to operate existing or new facilities on behalf of foreign governments. We have seen increased business development opportunities including opportunities to cross sell our expanded service offerings in recent years in the international markets in which we operate and are currently exploring opportunities for several new projects. We will continue to actively bid on new international projects in our current markets and in new markets that fit our target profile for profitability and operational risk.

Selectively Pursue Acquisition Opportunities

We intend to continue to supplement our organic growth by selectively identifying, acquiring and integrating businesses that fit our strategic objectives and enhance our geographic platform and service offerings. Since 2005, and including the acquisitions of Protocol Criminal Justice, Inc. (“Protocol”), Soberlink and the LCS Facilities, we have completed nine acquisitions for total consideration, including debt assumed, in excess of $1.7 billion. Our management team utilizes a disciplined approach to analyze and evaluate acquisition opportunities, which we believe has contributed to our success in completing and integrating our acquisitions.

Facilities and Day Reporting Centers

The following table summarizes certain information with respect to: (i) U.S. and international detention and corrections facilities; (ii) residential and non-residential community-based services facilities; and (iii) residential and non-residential youth services facilities. The information in the table includes the facilities that we (or a subsidiary or joint venture of GEO) owned, operated under a management contract, had an agreement to provide services, had an award to manage or was in the process of constructing or expanding as of December 31, 2015:

Facility Name &

Location

Capacity(1)

Primary
Customer

Facility
Type

Security
Level

Commencement
of Current
Contract(2)

Base
Period

Renewal
Options

Managed
Leased/
Owned

Corrections & Detention — Western Region:

Adelanto Detention Facility, Adelanto, CA (3)

1,940

ICE - IGA

Federal

Detention

Minimum/

Medium

May 2011

5 years

None

Owned

Alhambra City Jail, Los Angeles, CA

USMS

City Jail

All

Levels

July 2008

3 years

Five, One
Year

Managed

Arizona State-Prison Florence West Florence, AZ

750

AZ DOC

State DUI/

RTC

Correctional

Minimum

October

2002

10 years

Two,
Five-year

Managed

Arizona State Prison — Kingman, AZ

3,400

AZ DOC

State
Correctional
Facility

Minimum/
Medium

January 2008

10 years

Two,
Five-year

Managed

Arizona State-Prison Phoenix West Phoenix, AZ

500

AZ DOC

State DWI

Correctional

Minimum

July 2002

10 years

Two,
Five-year

Managed

Aurora/ICE Processing Center Aurora, CO

1,532

ICE / USMS

Federal

Detention

All Levels

September
2011/ October
2012

2 years /
2 years

Four,
Two-year
/ Four,
Two-year

Owned

Baldwin Park City Jail, Baldwin Park, CA

Los Angeles
County

City Jail

All

Levels

July 2003

3 years

Perpetual,
Three-year

Managed

Central Arizona Correctional Facility Florence, AZ

1,280

AZ DOC

State Sex

Offender

Correctional

Minimum/
Medium

December

2006

10 years

Two,
Five-year

Managed

Central Valley MCCF McFarland, CA

700

CDCR

State
Correctional
Facility

Medium

September
2013

Four Years
and Ten
Months

None

Owned

Desert View MCCF Adelanto, CA

700

CDCR

State
Correctional
Facility

Medium

September
2013

Four Years
and Ten
Months

None

Owned

Downey City Jail Los Angeles, CA

Los Angeles
County

City Jail

All

Levels

November
2014

3 years

Two, One-
year

Managed

Fontana City Jail Los Angeles, CA

Los Angeles
County

City Jail

All

Levels

February

2007

5 months

Five, One-
year, Plus
2 Year
Extension

Managed

Garden Grove City Jail Los Angeles, CA

Los Angeles
County

City Jail

All

Levels

July 2015

3 years

Unlimited,
Perpetual
Three-Year

Managed

Golden State MCCF McFarland, CA

700

CDCR

State

Correctional

Medium

November
2013

Four Years
and
Eight
Months

None

Owned

Facility Name &

Location

Capacity(1)

Primary
Customer

Facility
Type

Security
Level

Commencement
of Current
Contract(2)

Base
Period

Renewal
Options

Managed
Leased/
Owned

Guadalupe County Correctional Facility Santa Rosa, NM(3)

600

NMCD - IGA

Local/State

Correctional

Medium

January

1999

Perpetual

None

Owned

Hudson Correctional Facility Hudson, CO

1,250

Idle

Leased

Lea County Correctional Facility Hobbs, NM(3)

1,200

NMCD - IGA

Local/State

Correctional

Medium

December
2015

3 Years

None

Owned

McFarland Community Correctional Facility McFarland, CA

300

CDCR

State

Correctional

Minimum

April

2014

4 Years
and Two
Months

None

Owned

Mesa Verde Community Correctional Facility Bakersfield, CA(3)

400

ICE - IGA

State
Correctional

Minimum

March

2015

5 Years

None

Owned

Montebello City Jail Los Angeles, CA

Los Angeles
County

City Jail

All

Levels

July

2014

2 Years

Two,
Two-Year

Managed

Northeast New Mexico Detention Facility Clayton, NM(3)

625

NMCD / IGA

Local/State

Correctional

Medium

August

2008

21 Years,
Eleven
Months

Unlimited,
One-Year

Managed

Northwest Detention Center Tacoma, WA

1,575

ICE

Federal

Detention

All

Levels

September
2015

1 Year

Nine,
One-Year

Owned

Ontario City Jail Los Angeles, CA

Los Angeles
County

City Jail

Any

Level

July

2014

3 Years

Two,
Three-year

Managed

Western Region Detention Facility San Diego, CA

770

USMS

Federal

Detention

Maximum

Janaury

2006

5 Years,
Two
Months

One, Five-
year

Leased

Corrections & Detention — Central Region:

Big Spring Correctional Center Big Spring, TX

3,509

BOP

Federal

Correctional

Medium

April

2007

4 years

Three,
Two-year

Owned

Brooks County Detention Center, TX(3)

652

USMS - IGA

Local &
Federal
Detention

Medium

March

2013

Perpetual

None

Owned

Central Texas Detention Facility San Antonio, TX(3)

688

USMS / IGA

Local &

Federal

Detention

Minimum/

Medium

April

2009

Perpetual

None

Managed

Coastal Bend Detention Center,TX(3)

1,176

USMS - IGA

Local &
Federal
Detention

Medium

July

2012

Perpetual

None

Owned

East Hildago Detention Center(3)

1,300

USMS - IGA

Local &
Federal
Detention

Medium

July

2012

Perpetual

None

Owned

Great Plains Correctional Facility Hinton, OK

1,940

BOP

Federal

Correctional

Minimum

June

2015

5 years

Five, One-
Year Plus
One Six-
Month
Extension

Owned

Joe Corley Detention Facility Conroe, TX

1,517

USMS / ICE

Local

Correctional

Medium

July

2008/July

2008

Perpetual/5
Years

None/18-
Months
Plus Two,
Six-Month
Extensions

Owned

Karnes Correctional Center Karnes City, TX(3)

679

USMS—IGA

Local &

Federal

Detention

All

Levels

February
1998

Perpetual

None

Owned

Facility Name &

Location

Capacity(1)

Primary
Customer

Facility
Type

Security
Level

Commencement
of Current
Contract(2)

Base
Period

Renewal
Options

Managed
Leased/
Owned

Karnes County Residential Center,TX(3)

532

ICE - IGA

Federal

Detention

All

Levels

December

2010

5 years

One, Five-
Year

Owned

Lawton Correctional Facility Lawton, OK

2,526

OK DOC

State

Correctional

Medium

October

2013

1 Year

Four,
Automatic
One-year

Owned

Reeves County Detention Complex R1/R2 Pecos, TX

2,407

BOP

Federal

Correctional

Low

February

2007

4 years

Three,
Two-year

Managed

Reeves County Detention Complex R3 Pecos, TX

1,356

BOP

Federal

Correctional

Low

January

2007

4 years

Three,
Two-year

Managed

Rio Grande Detention Center Laredo, TX

1,900

USMS

Federal

Detention

Medium

October

2008

5 years

Three,
Five-year

Owned

South Texas Detention Complex Pearsall, TX

1,904

ICE

Federal

Detention

All

Levels

December

2011

11
months

Four,
One-year

Owned

Val Verde Correctional Facility Del Rio, TX(3)

1,407

USMS - IGA

Local &

Federal

Detention

All

Levels

January

2001

Perpetual

None

Owned

Corrections & Detention — Eastern Region:

Alexandria Transfer Center Alexandria, LA (3)

400

ICE - IGA

Federal

Detention

Minimum/
Medium

November
2013

5 years

Four,
One-year

Owned

Allen Correctional Center Kinder, LA

1,576

LA DOC

State

Correctional

Medium/

Maximum

July

2010

10 years

None

Managed

Bay Correctional Center Panama City, FL

985

FL DMS

State
Correctional

Minimum/
Medium

February
2014

3 years

Unlimited,
Two-year

Managed

Blackwater River Correctional Facility Milton, FL

2,000

FL DMS

State

Correctional

Medium/

October

2010

3 years

Unlimited,
Two-year

Managed

Broward Transition Center Deerfield Beach, FL

700

ICE

Federal

Detention

Minimum

July

2015

1 year

Five, One-
year plus
One, Six-
month
extension

Owned

Caldwell Parish Detention Center, LA

232

Third Party
Tenant

State
Correctional

Low

N/A

Owned

D. Ray James Correctional Facility Folkston, GA

2,847

BOP

Federal

Detention

All

Levels

October

2010

4 years

Three,
Two-year

Owned

Graceville Correctional Facility Jackson, FL

1,884

FL DMS

State
Correctional

All

Levels

February
2014

3 years

Unlimited,
Two year

Managed

Heritage Trails (Plainfield STOP) Plainfield, IN

1,066

IN DOC

State
Correctional

Minimum

March
2011

4 years

One,
Four-year

Managed

JB Evans Correctional Center, LA

388

Idle

Owned

LaSalle Detention Facility Jena, LA(3)

1,160

ICE - IGA

Federal

Detention

Minimum/

Medium

November
2013

1 year

Forty,
One-year

Owned

Lawrenceville Correctional Center Lawrenceville, VA

1,536

VA DOC

State

Correctional

Medium

March

2003

5 years

Two,
Five-year

Managed

Moshannon Valley Correctional Center Philipsburg, PA

1,878

BOP

Federal

Correctional

Medium

March

2006

3 years

Seven,
One-year

Owned

Facility Name &

Location

Capacity(1)

Primary
Customer

Facility
Type

Security
Level

Commencement
of Current
Contract(2)

Base
Period

Renewal
Options

Managed
Leased/
Owned

Moore Haven Correctional Facility Moore Haven, FL

985

FL DMS

State
Correctional

Minimum/
Medium

February
2014

3 years

Unlimited,
Two-year

Managed

New Castle Correctional Facility New Castle, IN

3,196

IN DOC

State

Correctional

All

Levels

January

2006

4 years

Two,
Five-year
plus One
Six-Month

Managed

North Lake Correctional Facility Baldwin, MI

1,748

VT DOC/WA
DOC

State
Correctional

Maximum

May
2015/June
2015

2 years/3
years,
four
months

One, Two
year/One,
Two year

Owned

Perry County Correctional Facility, AL

690

Idle

Owned

Pine Prairie Correctional Center, LA

1,094

Idle

Owned

Queens Private Detention Facility Jamaica, NY

222

USMS

Federal

Detention

Minimum/

Medium

January

2008

2 years

Four,
Two-year

Owned

Riverbend Correctional Facility Milledgeville, GA

1,500

GA DOC

State

Correctional

Medium

July

2010

1 year

Forty,
One-year

Owned

Rivers Correctional Institution Winton, NC

1,450

BOP

Federal

Correctional

Low

April

2011

4 years

Three,
Two-year

Owned

Robert A. Deyton Detention Facility Lovejoy, GA

768

USMS

Federal

Detention

Medium

February

2008

5 years

Three,
Five year

Leased

South Bay Correctional Facility South Bay, FL

1,948

FL DMS

State

Correctional

Medium/

July

2009

3 years

Unlimited,
Two-year

Managed

South Louisiana Correctional Center, LA(3)

1,000

ICE - IGA

Federal
Detention

Maximum

June

2015

5 years

None

Owned

Corrections & Detention — Australia:

Arthur Gorrie Correctional Centre Queensland, Australia

890

QLD

DCS

State

Remand

Prison

High/

Maximum

January

2012

5 years

None

Managed

Fulham Correctional Centre & Nalu Challenge Community Victoria, Australia

785

VIC DOJ

State Prison

Minimum/

Medium

July

2012

4 years

19 years,
Four
months

Managed

Junee Correctional Centre New South Wales, Australia

790

NSW

State Prison

Minimum/

Medium

March

2019

5 years

Two, Five
year

Managed

Parklea Correctional Centre Sydney, Australia

823

NSW

State

Remand

Prison

All Levels

October

2009

5 years

One,
Three year

Managed

Corrections & Detention — United Kingdom:

Dungavel House Immigration Removal Centre, South Lanarkshire, UK

249

UKBA

Detention

Centre

Minimum

September

2011

5 years

One,
Three year

Managed

Corrections & Detention — South Africa:

Kutama-Sinthumule Correctional Centre Limpopo Province, Republic of South Africa

3,024

RSA DCS

National

Prison

Maximum

February

2002

25 years

None

Managed

Facility Name &

Location

Capacity(1)

Primary
Customer

Facility
Type

Security
Level

Commencement
of Current
Contract(2)

Base
Period

Renewal
Options

Managed
Leased/
Owned

Corrections & Detention — Canada:

New Brunswick Youth Centre Mirimachi, Canada(4)

N/A

PNB

Provincial

Juvenile

Facility

All Levels

October

1997

25 years

One,

Ten-year

Managed

Corrections & Detention — Leased:

Delaney Hall

Newark, NJ

1,200

Community

Education

Centers

Community

Corrections

Community

None

—

Owned

GEO Care — Community Based Services:

Beaumont Transitional Treatment Center Beaumont, TX

180

TDCJ

Community

Corrections

Community

September

2003

2 years

Five,
Two-year
plus Five
One-year

Owned

Bronx Community Re-entry Center Bronx, NY

110

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

August

2014

1 year

Four,
One-year

Leased

Cordova Center Anchorage, AK

262

BOP / AK
DOC

Community

Corrections

Community

January
2013/March
2013

2 years /
4 months

Four, one-
year/Four,
one-year,
One five-
month

Owned

El Monte Center El Monte, CA

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

July

2013

1 year

Four, one
year

Leased

Grossman Center Leavenworth, KS

150

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

November
2012

2 years

Three,
one-year

Leased

Las Vegas Community Correctional Center Las Vegas, NV

124

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

October

2010

2 years

Three,
one-year
plus One
Four
month

Owned

Leidel Comprehensive Sanction Center Houston, TX

190

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

January

2011

2 years

Four, one-
year plus
Four one-
year

Owned

Marvin Gardens Center Los Angeles, CA

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

March

2012

2 years

Three,
one-year

Leased

McCabe Center Austin, TX

113

Third Party
Tenant

Community

Corrections

Community

September
2012

None

Owned

Mid Valley House Edinburg, TX

128

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

July

2014

1 year

Four, one-
year

Owned

Midtown Center Anchorage, AK

AK DOC

Community

Corrections

Community

March 13

4 months

Four, one-
year, One
Five-
month

Owned

Newark Center Newark, NJ

240

NJ State
Parole Board

Community
Corrections

Community

July

2014

3 years

Two, one-
year

Leased

Northstar Center Fairbanks, AK

143

AK DOC

Community

Corrections

Community

February

2011

5 months

Four, one-
year, One
Five-
month

Leased

Oakland Center Oakland, CA

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

November

2008

3 years

Seven,
one-year

Owned

Parkview Center Anchorage, AK

112

AK DOC

Community

Corrections

Community

March

2013

4 months

Four, one-
year, One
Five-
month

Owned

Facility Name &

Location

Capacity(1)

Primary
Customer

Facility
Type

Security
Level

Commencement
of Current
Contract(2)

Base
Period

Renewal
Options

Managed
Leased/
Owned

Reality House Brownsville, TX

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

September
2011

2 year

Three,
one-year

Owned

Salt Lake City Center Salt Lake City, UT

115

BOP

Community

Corrections

Community

June

2011

2 years

Three one-
year

Leased

Seaside Center Nome, AK

AK DOC

Community

Corrections

Community

February
2014

5 months

Four, one-
year and
One,six-
month

Leased

Southeast Texas Transitional Center Houston, TX

500

TDCJ

Community

Corrections

Community

September

2003

2 years

Five, two-
year plus
Five one-
year

Owned

Taylor Street Center San Francisco, CA

210

BOP / CDCR

Community

Corrections

Community

April
2006/July
2015

2 years,
8 month
/ 2 years

Seven,
one-year
plus Four-
month
extension/
none

Owned

Tundra Center Bethel, AK

AK DOC

Community

Corrections

Community

February
2012

5 months

Four, one-
year and
One, six-
month

Owned

GEO Care — Youth Services:

Residential Facilities

Abraxas Academy Morgantown, PA

214

Various

Youth

Residential

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Owned

Abraxas I Marienville, PA

204

Various

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

May

2005

N/A

Owned

Abraxas Ohio Shelby, OH

100

Various

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Owned

Abraxas Youth Center South Mountain, PA

PA Dept of
Public
Welfare

Youth

Residential

Secure/

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Leased

Contact Interventions Wauconda, IL

Idle

Owned

DuPage Interventions Hinsdale, IL

DASA,

Medicaid,

Private

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Owned

Erie Residential Programs Erie, PA

Idle

Owned

Hector Garza

Center San Antonio, TX

139

TYC

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Owned

Leadership Development Program South Mountain, PA

128

Various

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Leased

Southern Peaks Regional Treatment Center Canon City, CO

136

Various

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Owned

Southwood Interventions Chicago, IL

IL DASA,

City of

Chicago,

Medicaid

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Owned

Woodridge Interventions Woodridge, IL

IL DASA,

Medicaid

Youth

Residential

Staff

Secure

June

2005

N/A

Owned

Facility Name &

Location

Capacity(1)

Primary
Customer

Facility
Type

Security
Level

Commencement
of Current
Contract(2)

Base
Period

Renewal
Options

Managed
Leased/
Owned

GEO Care — Youth Services:

Non-residential Facilities:

Abraxas Counseling Center Columbus, OH

175

Various

Youth

Non-

residential

Open

2008

N/A

Lease

Cleveland Counseling Center Cleveland, OH

Various

Youth Non-
residential

Open

2014

N/A

Lease

Cincinnati Counseling Center Cincinnati, OH

125

City of
Cincinnati

Youth

Non-

residential

Open

2012

N/A

Lease

Harrisburg Community-Based Programs Harrisburg, PA

Dauphin or

Cumberland

Counties

Youth

Non-

residential

Open

1995

N/A

Lease

Lehigh Valley Community-Based Programs Lehigh Valley, PA

Lehigh and

Northampton

Counties

Youth

Non-

residential

Open

1987

N/A

Lease

Mansfield Counseling Center, OH

Richland
County, Ohio

Youth

Non-

residential

Open

2015

N/A

Lease

WorkBridge Pittsburgh, PA

690

Allegheny

County

Youth

Non-

residential

Open

1987

N/A

Lease

The following table summarizes certain information with respect to our re-entry Day Reporting Centers, which we refer to as DRCs. The information in the table includes the DRCs that we (or a subsidiary or joint venture of GEO) operated under a management contract or had an agreement to provide services as of December 31, 2015:

DRC Location

Number of

reporting

centers

Type of

Customers

Commencement

of current

contract(s)

Base

period

Renewal

options

Manage only/

lease

Colorado(5)

State, County

Various,

2004 – 2012

Various,

1 year to

18 months

One to Four, One

year

Lease

California

State, County

Various,

2007 – 2012

Various,

1 to 5 years

Varies

Lease

North Carolina

State

2012

2 years

One, Two year

Lease

New Jersey

State, County

2008

3 years

Two, One

year

Lease

Pennsylvania

County

Various,

2006 – 2010

Various,

1 to 3 years

Indefinite, One

year

Lease

Illinois

State, County

2003

5 years

One, Five

year

Lease or Manage

only

Kansas

County

2011

4 years

Four, One

year

Lease

Louisiana

State

2010

1 year

Two, One

year

Lease

Kentucky

County

2010

2 years

Three, One

year

Lease

Virginia

State

2013

2 years

Three, One year

Lease

Customer Legend:


Abbreviation		Customer
AZ DOC		Arizona Department of Corrections
AK DOC		Alaska Department of Corrections
BOP		Federal Bureau of Prisons
CDCR		California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation
CO DOC		Colorado Department of Corrections
FL DOC		Florida Department of Corrections
FL DMS		Florida Department of Management Services
GA DOC		Georgia Department of Corrections
ICE		U.S. Immigration & Customs Enforcement
IN DOC		Indiana Department of Correction
IGA		Intergovernmental Agreement
IL DASA		Illinois Department of Alcoholism and Substance Abuse
LA DOC		Louisiana Department of Corrections
NMCD		New Mexico Corrections Department
NSW		Commissioner of Corrective Services for New South Wales
OK DOC		Oklahoma Department of Corrections
PNB		Province of New Brunswick
QLD DCS		Department of Corrective Services of the State of Queensland
RSA DCS		Republic of South Africa Department of Correctional Services
TDCJ		Texas Department of Criminal Justice
TYC		Texas Youth Commission
UKBA		United Kingdom Border Agency
USMS		United States Marshals Service
VA DOC		Virginia Department of Corrections
VIC DOJ		Department of Justice of the State of Victoria
VT DOC		Vermont Department of Corrections
WA DOC		Washington Department of Corrections

(1)	Capacity as used in the table refers to operational capacity consisting of total beds for all facilities except for the seven Non-residential service centers under Youth Services for which we have provided service capacity which represents the number of juveniles that can be serviced daily.

(2)

For Youth Services Non-Residential Service Centers, the contract commencement date represents either the program start date or the date that the facility operations were acquired by our subsidiary. The service agreements under these arrangements provide for services on an as-contracted basis and there are no guaranteed minimum populations or management contracts with specified renewal dates. These arrangements are more perpetual in nature. For acquired operations, the commencement date is the original date of contract.

(3)	GEO provides services at these facilities through various Inter-Governmental Agreements, or IGAs, through the various counties and other jurisdictions.

(4)	The contract for this facility only requires GEO to provide maintenance services.

(5)

The Colorado Day Reporting Centers provide many of the same services as the full service Day Reporting Centers, but rather than providing these services through comprehensive treatment plans dictated by the governing authority, these services are provided on a fee for service basis. Such services may be connected to government agency contracts and would be reimbursed by those agencies. Other services are offered directly to offenders allowing them to meet court-ordered requirements and paid by the offender as the service is provided.

Government Contracts — Terminations, Renewals and Competitive Re-bids

Generally, we may lose our facility management contracts due to one of three reasons: the termination by a government customer with or without cause at any time; the failure by a customer to renew a contract with us upon the expiration of the then current term; or our failure to win the right to continue to operate under a contract that has been competitively re-bid in a procurement process upon its termination or expiration. Our facility management contracts typically allow a contracting governmental agency to terminate a contract with or without cause at any time by giving us written notice ranging from 30 to 180 days. If government agencies were to use these provisions to terminate, or renegotiate the terms of their agreements with us, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. See “Risk Factors — “We are subject to the loss of our facility management contracts, due to terminations, non-renewals or competitive re-bids, which could adversely affect our results of operations and liquidity, including our ability to secure new facility management contracts from other government customers”.

Aside from our customers’ unilateral right to terminate our facility management contracts with them at any time for any reason, there are two points during the typical lifecycle of a contract which may result in the loss by us of a facility management contract with our customers. We refer to these points as contract “renewals” and contract “re-bids.” Many of our facility management contracts with our government customers have an initial fixed term and subsequent renewal rights for one or more additional periods at the unilateral option of the customer. Because most of our contracts for youth services do not guarantee placement or revenue, we have not considered these contracts to ever be in the renewal or re-bid stage since they are more perpetual in nature. As such, the contracts for youth services are not considered as renewals or re-bids nor are they included in the table below. We count each government customer’s right to renew a particular facility management contract for an additional period as a separate “renewal.” For example, a five-year initial fixed term contract with customer options to renew for five separate additional one-year periods would, if fully exercised, be counted as five separate renewals, with one renewal coming in each of the five years following the initial term. As of December 31, 2015, 36 of our facility management contracts representing approximately 25,000 beds are scheduled to expire on or before December 31, 2016, unless renewed by the customer at its sole option in certain cases, or unless renewed by mutual agreement in other cases. These contracts represented 29.3% of our consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015. We undertake substantial efforts to renew our facility management contracts. Our average historical facility management contract renewal approximates 90%. However, given their unilateral nature, we cannot assure you that our customers will in fact exercise their renewal options under existing contracts. In addition, in connection with contract renewals, either we or the contracting government agency have typically requested changes or adjustments to contractual terms. As a result, contract renewals may be made on terms that are more or less favorable to us than those in existence prior to the renewals.

We define competitive re-bids as contracts currently under our management which we believe, based on our experience with the customer and the facility involved, will be re-bid to us and other potential service providers in a competitive procurement process upon the expiration or termination of our contract, assuming all renewal options are exercised. Our determination of which contracts we believe will be competitively re-bid may in some cases be subjective and judgmental, based largely on our knowledge of the dynamics involving a particular contract, the customer and the facility involved. Competitive re-bids may result from the expiration of the term of a contract, including the initial fixed term plus any renewal periods, or the early termination of a contract by a customer. Competitive re-bids are often required by applicable federal or state procurement laws periodically in order to encourage competitive pricing and other terms for the government customer. Potential bidders in competitive re-bid situations include us, other private operators and other government entities. While we are pleased with our historical win rate on competitive re-bids and are committed to continuing to bid competitively on appropriate future competitive re-bid opportunities, we cannot in fact assure you that we will prevail in future competitive re-bid situations. Also, we cannot assure you that any competitive re-bids we win will be on terms more favorable to us than those in existence with respect to the expiring contract.

As of December 31, 2015, eight of our facility management contracts representing 8.7% and $160.0 million of our 2015 consolidated revenues are subject to competitive re-bid in 2016. The following table sets forth the number of facility management contracts that we currently believe will be subject to competitive re-bid in each of the next five years and thereafter, and the total number of beds relating to those potential competitive re-bid situations during each period:


Year	Re-bid		Total Number of Beds up for Re-bid
2016		8		5,238
2017		12		10,844
2018		12		7,124
2019		8		2,381
2020		6		4,978
Thereafter		32		27,089

Total		78		57,654

Competition

We compete primarily on the basis of the quality of facility and range of services we offer; our experience domestically and internationally in the design, construction, and management of privatized correctional and detention facilities; our reputation; and our pricing. We compete directly with the public sector, where governmental agencies responsible for the operation of correctional, detention, youth services, community based services and re-entry facilities are often seeking to retain projects that might otherwise be privatized. In the private sector, our U.S. Corrections & Detention and International Services business segments compete with a number of companies, including, but not limited to: Corrections Corporation of America; Management and Training Corporation; Emerald Companies; Community Education Centers; LaSalle Southwest Corrections; Group 4 Securicor; Sodexo Justice Services (formerly Kaylx); and Serco. Our GEO Care business segment competes with a number of different small-to-medium sized companies, reflecting the highly fragmented nature of the youth services and community based services industry. BI’s electronic monitoring business competes with a number of companies, including, but not limited to: G4 Justice Services, LLC; Elmo-Tech, a 3M Company; and Pro-Tech, a 3M Company. Some of our competitors are larger and have more resources than we do. We also compete in some markets with small local companies that may have a better knowledge of the local conditions and may be better able to gain political and public acceptance.

Employees and Employee Training

At December 31, 2015, we had 15,806 full-time employees. Of our full-time employees, 483 were employed at our corporate headquarters and regional offices and 15,323 were employed at facilities and international offices. We employ personnel in positions of management, administrative and clerical, security, educational services, human services, health services and general maintenance at our various locations. Approximately 3,260 and 1,590 employees are covered by collective bargaining agreements in the United States and at international offices, respectively. We believe that our relations with our employees are satisfactory.

Under the laws applicable to most of our operations, and internal company policies, our correctional officers are required to complete a minimum amount of training. We generally require at least 40 hours of pre-service training before an employee is allowed to assume their duties plus an additional 120 hours of training during their first year of employment in our domestic facilities, consistent with ACA standards and/or applicable state laws. In addition to the usual 160 hours of training in the first year, most states require 40 or 80 hours of on-the-job training. Florida law requires that correctional officers receive 520 hours of training. We believe that our training programs meet or exceed all applicable requirements.

Our training program for domestic facilities typically begins with approximately 40 hours of instruction regarding our policies, operational procedures and management philosophy. Training continues with an additional 120 hours of instruction covering legal issues, rights of inmates, techniques of communication and

supervision, interpersonal skills and job training relating to the particular position to be held. Each of our employees who has contact with inmates receives a minimum of 40 hours of additional training each year, and each manager receives at least 24 hours of training each year.

At least 160 hours of training are required for our employees in Australia and South Africa before such employees are allowed to work in positions that will bring them into contact with inmates. Our employees in Australia and South Africa receive a minimum of 40 hours of refresher training each year. In the United Kingdom, our corrections employees also receive a minimum of 240 hours of training prior to coming in contact with inmates and receive additional training of approximately 25 hours annually.

With respect to BI and the Intensive Supervision and Appearance Program (“ISAP”) services contract, new employees are required to complete training requirements as outlined in the contract within 14 days of hire and prior to being assigned autonomous ISAP related duties. These employees receive 25 hours of refresher training annually thereafter. Program managers for our ISAP contract must receive 24 hours of additional initial training. BI’s monitoring services maintains its own comprehensive certification and training program for all monitoring service specialists. We require all new personnel hired for a position in monitoring operations to complete a seven-week training program. Successful completion of our training program and a final certification is required of all of our personnel performing monitoring operations. We require that certification is achieved prior to being permitted to work independently in the call center.

Business Regulations and Legal Considerations

Many governmental agencies are required to enter into a competitive bidding procedure before awarding contracts for products or services. The laws of certain jurisdictions may also require us to award subcontracts on a competitive basis or to subcontract or partner with businesses owned by women or members of minority groups.

Certain states, such as Florida, deem correctional officers to be peace officers and require our personnel to be licensed and subject to background investigation. State law also typically requires correctional officers to meet certain training standards.

The failure to comply with any applicable laws, rules or regulations or the loss of any required license could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, our current and future operations may be subject to additional regulations as a result of, among other factors, new statutes and regulations and changes in the manner in which existing statutes and regulations are or may be interpreted or applied. Any such additional regulations could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Insurance

The nature of our business exposes us to various types of third-party legal claims, including, but not limited to, civil rights claims relating to conditions of confinement and/or mistreatment, sexual misconduct claims brought by prisoners or detainees, medical malpractice claims, product liability claims, intellectual property infringement claims, claims relating to employment matters (including, but not limited to, employment discrimination claims, union grievances and wage and hour claims), property loss claims, environmental claims, automobile liability claims, contractual claims and claims for personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with our facilities, programs, electronic monitoring products, personnel or prisoners, including damages arising from a prisoner’s escape or from a disturbance or riot at a facility. In addition, our management contracts generally require us to indemnify the governmental agency against any damages to which the governmental agency may be subject in connection with such claims or litigation. We maintain a broad program of insurance coverage for these general types of claims, except for claims relating to employment matters, for which we carry no insurance. There can be no assurance that our insurance coverage will be adequate to cover all claims to which we may be exposed. It is our general practice to bring merged or acquired companies into our corporate master policies in order to take advantage of certain economies of scale.

We currently maintain a general liability policy and excess liability policies with total limits of $77.0 million per occurrence and in the aggregate covering the operations of U.S. Corrections & Detention, GEO Care’s community based services, GEO Care’s youth services and BI. We have a claims-made liability insurance program with a specific loss limit of $35.0 million per occurrence and in the aggregate related to medical professional liability claims arising out of correctional healthcare services. We are uninsured for any claims in excess of these limits. We also maintain insurance to cover property and other casualty risks including, workers’ compensation, environmental liability and automobile liability.

For most casualty insurance policies, we carry substantial deductibles or self-insured retentions of $3.0 million per occurrence for general liability and medical professional liability, $2.0 million per occurrence for workers’ compensation and $1.0 million per occurrence for automobile liability. In addition, certain of our facilities located in Florida and other high-risk hurricane areas carry substantial windstorm deductibles. Since hurricanes are considered unpredictable future events, no reserves have been established to pre-fund for potential windstorm damage. Limited commercial availability of certain types of insurance relating to windstorm exposure in coastal areas and earthquake exposure mainly in California and the Pacific Northwest may prevent us from insuring some of our facilities to full replacement value.

With respect to our operations in South Africa, the United Kingdom and Australia, we utilize a combination of locally-procured insurance and global policies to meet contractual insurance requirements and to protect us. In addition to these policies, our Australian subsidiary carries tail insurance on a general liability policy related to a discontinued contract.

Of the reserves discussed above, our most significant insurance reserves relate to workers’ compensation, general liability and auto claims. These reserves are undiscounted and were $52.8 million and $49.5 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively and are included in accrued expenses in the accompanying balance sheets. We use statistical and actuarial methods to estimate amounts for claims that have been reported but not paid and claims incurred but not reported. In applying these methods and assessing their results, we consider such factors as historical frequency and severity of claims at each of our facilities, claim development, payment patterns and changes in the nature of our business, among other factors. Such factors are analyzed for each of our business segments. Our estimates may be impacted by such factors as increases in the market price for medical services and unpredictability of the size of jury awards. We also may experience variability between our estimates and the actual settlement due to limitations inherent in the estimation process, including our ability to estimate costs of processing and settling claims in a timely manner as well as our ability to accurately estimate our exposure at the onset of a claim. Because we have high deductible insurance policies, the amount of our insurance expense is dependent on our ability to control our claims experience. If actual losses related to insurance claims significantly differ from our estimates, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely impacted.

International Operations

Our international operations for fiscal years 2015, 2014 and 2013 consisted of the operations of our wholly-owned Australian subsidiaries, our wholly owned subsidiary in the United Kingdom, and South African Custodial Management Pty. Limited, our consolidated joint venture in South Africa, which we refer to as SACM. In Australia, our wholly-owned subsidiary, GEO Australia, currently manages four facilities. Additionally, in September 2014, one of our Australian subsidiaries signed the Ravenhall Prison Project Agreement (“Ravenhall Contract”) with the State for the development and operation of a new 1,000-bed facility in Ravenhall, a locality near Melbourne, Australia under a Public-Private Partnership financing structure. The facility will also have the capacity to house 1,300 inmates should the State have the need for additional beds in the future. The design and construction phase of the agreement began in September 2014 with completion expected towards the end of 2017. We operate one facility in South Africa through SACM. Our wholly-owned subsidiary in the United Kingdom, The GEO Group UK Ltd., operates the 217-bed Dungavel House Immigration Removal Centre located near Glasgow, Scotland. See Item 7 for more discussion related to the results of our international operations.

Financial information about our operations in different geographic regions appears in Note-17 Business Segments and Geographic Information in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Business Concentration

Except for the major customers noted in the following table, no other single customer made up greater than 10% of our consolidated revenues, excluding discontinued operations, for these years.


Customer	2015			2014			2013
Various agencies of the U.S Federal Government:		45	%		42	%		45	%

Credit risk related to accounts receivable is reflective of the related revenues.

Available Information

Additional information about us can be found at www.geogroup.com. We make available on our website, free of charge, access to our Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, our annual proxy statement on Schedule 14A and amendments to those materials filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically submit such materials to the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. In addition, the SEC makes available on its website, free of charge, reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including GEO. The SEC’s website is located at http://www.sec.gov. Information provided on our website or on the SEC’s website is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

The following are certain risks to which our business operations are subject. Any of these risks could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, or results of operations. These risks could also cause our actual results to differ materially from those indicated in the forward-looking statements contained herein and elsewhere. The risks described below are not the only risks we face. Additional risks not currently known to us or those we currently deem to be immaterial may also materially and adversely affect our business operations.

Risks Related to REIT Status

If we fail to remain qualified as a REIT, we will be subject to U.S. federal income tax as a regular corporation and could face a substantial tax liability, which would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our shareholders.

We began operating as a REIT on January 1, 2013. We received an opinion of our special REIT tax counsel (“Special Tax Counsel”) with respect to our qualification as a REIT. Investors should be aware, however, that opinions of counsel are not binding on the Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) or any court. The opinion of Special Tax Counsel represents only the view of Special Tax Counsel based on its review and analysis of existing law and on certain representations as to factual matters and covenants made by us, including representations relating to the values of our assets and the sources of our income. The opinion is expressed as of the date issued. Special Tax Counsel has no obligation to advise us or the holders of our common stock of any subsequent change in the matters stated, represented or assumed or of any subsequent change in applicable law. Furthermore, both the validity of the opinion of Special Tax Counsel and our qualification as a REIT will depend on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, shareholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis, the results of which will not be monitored by Special Tax Counsel. Our ability to satisfy the asset tests depends upon our analysis of the characterization and fair market values of our assets, some of which are not susceptible to a precise determination, and for which we will not obtain independent appraisals.

We have received a favorable private letter ruling from the IRS with respect to certain issues relevant to our qualification as a REIT. Although we may generally rely upon the ruling, no assurance can be given that the IRS will not challenge our qualification as a REIT on the basis of other issues or facts outside the scope of the ruling.

If we fail to qualify as a REIT in any taxable year, we would be subject to U.S. federal income tax, including any applicable alternative minimum tax, on our taxable income at regular corporate rates, and dividends paid to our shareholders would not be deductible by us in computing our taxable income. Any resulting corporate tax liability could be substantial and would reduce the amount of cash available for distribution to our shareholders, which in turn could have an adverse impact on the value of our common stock. Unless we were entitled to relief under certain Internal Revenue Service Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) provisions, we also would be disqualified from re-electing to be taxed as a REIT for the four taxable years following the year in which we failed to qualify as a REIT. If we fail to qualify for taxation as a REIT, we may need to borrow additional funds or liquidate some investments to pay any additional tax liability. Accordingly, funds available for investment and making payments on our indebtedness would be reduced.

Qualifying as a REIT involves highly technical and complex provisions of the Code.

Qualification as a REIT involves the application of highly technical and complex Code provisions for which only limited judicial and administrative authorities exist. Even a technical or inadvertent violation could jeopardize our REIT qualification. Our qualification as a REIT will depend on our satisfaction of certain asset, income, organizational, distribution, shareholder ownership and other requirements on a continuing basis.

Complying with the REIT requirements may cause us to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive opportunities.

To qualify as a REIT, we must ensure that, at the end of each calendar quarter, at least 75% of the value of our assets consists of cash, cash items, government securities and “real estate assets” (as defined in the Code),

including certain mortgage loans and securities. The remainder of our investments (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a TRS) generally cannot include more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of any one issuer or more than 10% of the total value of the outstanding securities of any one issuer. In addition, in general, no more than 5% of the value of our total assets (other than government securities, qualified real estate assets and securities issued by a TRS) can consist of the securities of any one issuer, and no more than 25% of the value of our total assets can be represented by securities of one or more TRSs (20% starting with calendar year 2018). If we fail to comply with these requirements at the end of any calendar quarter, we must correct the failure within 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter or qualify for certain statutory relief provisions to avoid losing our REIT qualification and suffering adverse tax consequences. As a result, we may be required to liquidate or forgo otherwise attractive investments. These actions could have the effect of reducing our income, amounts available for distribution to our shareholders and amounts available for making payments on our indebtedness.

In addition to the asset tests set forth above, to qualify as a REIT, we must continually satisfy tests concerning, among other things, the sources of our income, the amounts we distribute to our shareholders and the ownership of our stock. We may be unable to pursue investments that would be otherwise advantageous to us in order to satisfy the source-of-income or asset-diversification requirements for qualifying as a REIT. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to make certain attractive investments and make payments on our indebtedness.

Dividends payable by REITs do not qualify for the reduced tax rates available for some dividends.

The maximum U.S. federal income tax rate applicable to income from “qualified dividends” payable to U.S. shareholders that are individuals, trusts and estates is currently 20%. Dividends payable by REITs, however, generally are not eligible for the reduced rates. Although these rules do not adversely affect the taxation of REITs, the more favorable rates applicable to regular corporate qualified dividends could cause investors who are individuals, trusts and estates to perceive investments in REITs to be relatively less attractive than investments in the stocks of non-REIT corporations that pay dividends, which could adversely affect the value of the stock of REITs, including our common stock.

REIT distribution requirements could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan.

We generally must distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income, determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and excluding any net capital gains, in order for us to qualify as a REIT (assuming that certain other requirements are also satisfied) so that U.S. federal corporate income tax does not apply to earnings that we distribute. To the extent that we satisfy this distribution requirement and qualify for taxation as a REIT but distribute less than 100% of our REIT taxable income, including any net capital gains, we will be subject to U.S. federal corporate income tax on our undistributed net taxable income. In addition, we will be subject to a 4% nondeductible excise tax if the actual amount that we distribute to our shareholders in a calendar year is less than a minimum amount specified under U.S. federal tax laws. We intend to make distributions to our shareholders to comply with the REIT requirements of the Code.

From time to time, we may generate taxable income greater than our cash flow as a result of differences in timing between the recognition of taxable income and the actual receipt of cash or the effect of nondeductible capital expenditures, the creation of reserves or required debt or amortization payments. If we do not have other funds available in these situations, we could be required to borrow funds on unfavorable terms, sell assets at disadvantageous prices or distribute amounts that would otherwise be invested in future acquisitions to make distributions sufficient to enable us to pay out enough of our taxable income to satisfy the REIT distribution requirement and to avoid corporate income tax and the 4% excise tax in a particular year. These alternatives could increase our costs, reduce our equity or adversely impact our ability to raise short and long-term debt. Furthermore, the REIT distribution requirements may increase the financing we need to fund capital expenditures, future growth and expansion initiatives. Thus, compliance with the REIT requirements may hinder our ability to grow, which could adversely affect the value of our common stock.

Our cash distributions are not guaranteed and may fluctuate.

A REIT generally is required to distribute at least 90% of its REIT taxable income to its shareholders. Our board of directors, in its sole discretion, will determine on a quarterly basis the amount of cash to be distributed to our shareholders based on a number of factors including, but not limited to, our results of operations, cash flow and capital requirements, economic conditions, tax considerations, borrowing capacity and other factors, including debt covenant restrictions that may impose limitations on cash payments and plans for future acquisitions and divestitures. Consequently, our distribution levels may fluctuate.

Certain of our business activities may be subject to corporate level income tax and foreign taxes, which would reduce our cash flows, and may have potential deferred and contingent tax liabilities.

We may be subject to certain federal, state, local and foreign taxes on our income and assets, including alternative minimum taxes, taxes on any undistributed income and state, local or foreign income, franchise, property and transfer taxes. In addition, we could, in certain circumstances, be required to pay an excise or penalty tax, which could be significant in amount, in order to utilize one or more relief provisions under the Code to maintain qualification for taxation as a REIT. In addition, we may incur a 100% excise tax on transactions with a TRS if they are not conducted on an arm’s length basis. Any of these taxes would decrease our earnings and our available cash.

Our TRS assets and operations will continue to be subject, as applicable, to federal and state corporate income taxes and to foreign taxes in the jurisdictions in which those assets and operations are located.

We will also be subject to a federal corporate level tax at the highest regular corporate rate (currently 35%) on the gain recognized from a sale of assets occurring during our first ten years as a REIT, up to the amount of the built-in gain that existed on January 1, 2013, which is based on the fair market value of those assets in excess of our tax basis as of January 1, 2013. Gain from a sale of an asset occurring after the specified period ends will not be subject to this corporate level tax. We currently do not expect to sell any asset if the sale would result in the imposition of a material tax liability. We cannot, however, assure you that we will not change our plans in this regard.

REIT ownership limitations may restrict or prevent you from engaging in certain transfers of our common stock.

In order to satisfy the requirements for REIT qualification, no more than 50% in value of all classes or series of our outstanding shares of stock may be owned, actually or constructively, by five or fewer individuals (as defined in the Code to include certain entities) at any time during the last half of each taxable year beginning with our 2014 taxable year. In 2014, GEO merged into a newly formed entity, to facilitate GEO’s compliance with the REIT rules by implementing ownership limitations that generally restrict shareholders from owning more than 9.8% of our outstanding shares. The merger was approved by our shareholders. Under applicable constructive ownership rules, any shares of stock owned by certain affiliated owners generally would be added together for purposes of the common stock ownership limits, and any shares of a given class or series of preferred stock owned by certain affiliated owners generally would be added together for purposes of the ownership limit on such class or series.

Our use of TRSs may cause us to fail to qualify as a REIT.

The net income of our TRSs is not required to be distributed to us, and such undistributed TRS income is generally not subject to our REIT distribution requirements. However, if the accumulation of cash or reinvestment of significant earnings in our TRSs causes the fair market value of our securities in those entities, taken together with other non-qualifying assets to exceed 25% of the fair market value of our assets, in each case as determined for REIT asset testing purposes, we would, absent timely responsive action, fail to qualify as a REIT. Additionally, beginning in 2018, if the accumulation of cash or reinvestment of significant earnings in our TRSs causes the fair market value of our securities in those entities to exceed 20% of the fair market value of our assets, in each case as determined for REIT asset testing purposes, we would, absent timely responsive action, similarly fail to qualify as a REIT.

There are uncertainties relating to the special earnings and profits (“E&P”) distribution.

To qualify for taxation as a REIT, we were required to distribute to our shareholders all of our pre-REIT accumulated earnings and profits, if any, as measured for federal income tax purposes, prior to the end of our first taxable year as a REIT, which was for the taxable period ended December 31, 2013. We declared and paid a special dividend during the fourth quarter of 2012 for the purposes of distributing to our shareholders our pre-REIT accumulated earnings and profits. The calculation of the amount to be distributed in a special E&P distribution was a complex factual and legal determination. We currently believe our special E&P distribution paid during the fourth quarter of 2012, together with distributions paid in 2013, satisfied the requirements relating to the distribution of our pre-REIT accumulated earnings and profits. No assurance can be given, however, that the IRS will agree with our calculation. If the IRS finds additional amounts of pre-REIT E&P, there are procedures generally available to cure any failure to distribute all of our pre-REIT E&P.

Legislative or other actions affecting REITs could have a negative effect on us.

The rules dealing with U.S. federal income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the IRS and the U.S. Department of the Treasury (the “Treasury”). Changes to the tax laws or interpretations thereof, with or without retroactive application, could materially and adversely affect our investors or us. We cannot predict how changes in the tax laws might affect our investors or us. New legislation, Treasury regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions could significantly and negatively affect our ability to qualify as a REIT or the U.S. federal income tax consequences to our investors and us of such qualification.

We have limited experience operating as a REIT, which may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share trading price of our common stock and ability to satisfy debt service obligations.

We have only been operating as a REIT since January 1, 2013. Accordingly, the experience of our senior management operating a REIT is limited. Our pre-REIT operating experience may not be sufficient to operate successfully as a REIT. Failure to maintain REIT status could adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations, cash flow, per share trading price of our common stock and ability to satisfy debt service obligations.

Risks Related to Our High Level of Indebtedness

Our level of indebtedness could adversely affect our financial condition and prevent us from fulfilling our debt service obligations.

We have a significant amount of indebtedness. Our total consolidated indebtedness as of December 31, 2015 was approximately $1.9 billion, excluding non-recourse debt of $247.1 million and capital lease obligations of $9.9 million. As of December 31, 2015, we had $54.3 million outstanding in letters of credit and $485.0 million in borrowings outstanding under our revolver. Also as of December 31, 2015, we had the ability to borrow $160.7 million under our revolver, after applying the limitations and restrictions in our debt covenants and subject to our satisfying the relevant borrowing conditions under our senior credit facility with respect to the incurrence of additional indebtedness. At December 31, 2015, we also had approximately AUD 215 million in letters of credit outstanding under our Australian letter of credit facility in connection with certain performance guarantees related to the Ravenhall Prison Project. We also have the ability to increase our senior credit facility by an additional $350 million, subject to lender demand and prevailing market conditions and satisfying the relevant borrowing conditions.

Our substantial indebtedness could have important consequences. For example, it could:

•

make it more difficult for us to satisfy our obligations with respect to our senior notes and our other debt and liabilities;

•

require us to dedicate a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations to payments on our indebtedness, thereby reducing the availability of our cash flow to fund working capital, capital

expenditures, and other general corporate purposes including to make distributions on our common stock as currently contemplated or necessary to maintain our qualification as a REIT;

•

limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the industry in which we operate;

•

increase our vulnerability to adverse economic and industry conditions;

•

place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to competitors that may be less leveraged;

•

restrict us from pursuing strategic acquisitions or exploiting certain business opportunities; and

•

limit our ability to borrow additional funds or refinance existing indebtedness on favorable terms.

If we are unable to meet our debt service obligations, we may need to reduce capital expenditures, restructure or refinance our indebtedness, obtain additional equity financing or sell assets. We may be unable to restructure or refinance our indebtedness, obtain additional equity financing or sell assets on satisfactory terms or at all. In addition, our ability to incur additional indebtedness will be restricted by the terms of our Senior Credit facility, the indenture governing the 6.625% Senior Notes, the indenture governing the 5.125% Senior Notes, the indenture governing the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the indenture governing the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024.

We are incurring significant indebtedness in connection with substantial ongoing capital expenditures. Capital expenditures for existing and future projects may materially strain our liquidity.

As of December 31, 2015, we were developing a number of projects that we estimate will cost approximately $153.0 million, of which $53.0 million was spent through December 31, 2015. We estimate our remaining capital requirements to be approximately $100.0 million, which we anticipate will be spent in fiscal years 2016 through 2017. Included in these commitments is a contractual commitment to provide a capital contribution towards the design and construction of a prison project in Ravenhall, a locality near Melbourne, Australia, in the amount of AUD 115 million, or $84.0 million, based on exchange rates at December 31, 2015. This capital contribution is expected to be made in January 2017. Capital expenditures related to facility maintenance costs are expected to be approximately $24 million for 2016. We intend to finance these and future projects using our own funds, including cash on hand, cash flow from operations and borrowings under the Revolver. In addition to these current estimated capital requirements for 2016 and 2017, we are currently in the process of bidding on, or evaluating potential bids for the design, construction and management of a number of new projects. In the event that we win bids for these projects and decide to self-finance their construction, our capital requirements in 2016 through 2017 could materially increase. As of December 31, 2015, we had the ability to borrow $160.7 million under the Revolver after applying the limitations and restrictions in our debt covenants and subject to our satisfying the relevant borrowing conditions under the Senior Credit Facility. In addition, we have the ability to increase the Senior Credit Facility by an additional $350 million, subject to lender demand and prevailing market conditions and satisfying the relevant borrowing conditions thereunder. While we believe we currently have adequate borrowing capacity under our Senior Credit Facility to fund our operations and all of our committed capital expenditure projects, we may need additional borrowings or financing from other sources in order to complete potential capital expenditures related to new projects in the future. We cannot assure you that such borrowings or financing will be made available to us on satisfactory terms, or at all. In addition, the large capital commitments that these projects will require over the next 12-18 month period may materially strain our liquidity and our borrowing capacity for other purposes. Capital constraints caused by these projects may also cause us to have to entirely refinance our existing indebtedness or incur more indebtedness. Such financing may have terms less favorable than those we currently have in place, or not be available to us at all. In addition, the concurrent development of these and other large capital projects exposes us to material risks. For example, we may not complete some or all of the projects on time or on budget, which could cause us to absorb any losses associated with any delays.

Despite current indebtedness levels, we may still incur more indebtedness, which could further exacerbate the risks described above.

The terms of the indentures governing the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and our Senior Credit Facility restrict our ability to incur but do not prohibit us from incurring significant additional indebtedness in the future. As of December 31, 2015, we had the ability to borrow an additional $160.7 million under the revolver portion of our Senior Credit Facility after applying the limitations and restrictions in our debt covenants and subject to our satisfying the relevant borrowing conditions under the Senior Credit Facility. We also would have the ability to increase the Senior Credit Facility by an additional $350 million, subject to lender demand, prevailing market conditions and satisfying relevant borrowing conditions. Also, we may refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness, including borrowings under our Senior Credit Facility, the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024. The terms of such refinancing may be less restrictive and permit us to incur more indebtedness than we can now. If new indebtedness is added to our and our subsidiaries’ current debt levels, the related risks that we and they now face related to our significant level of indebtedness could intensify.

The covenants in the indentures governing the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and the covenants in our Senior Credit Facility impose significant operating and financial restrictions which may adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

The indentures governing the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and our Senior Credit Facility impose significant operating and financial restrictions on us and certain of our subsidiaries, which we refer to as restricted subsidiaries. These restrictions limit our ability to, among other things:

•

incur additional indebtedness;

•

pay dividends and or distributions on our capital stock, repurchase, redeem or retire our capital stock, prepay subordinated indebtedness, make investments;

•

issue preferred stock of subsidiaries;

•

guarantee other indebtedness;

•

create liens on our assets;

•

transfer and sell assets;

•

make capital expenditures above certain limits;

•

create or permit restrictions on the ability of our restricted subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other distributions to us;

•

enter into sale/leaseback transactions;

•

enter into transactions with affiliates; and

•

merge or consolidate with another company or sell all or substantially all of our assets.

These restrictions could limit our ability to finance our future operations or capital needs, make acquisitions or pursue available business opportunities. In addition, our Senior Credit Facility requires us to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy certain financial covenants, including maintaining a maximum senior secured leverage ratio and total leverage ratio, and a minimum interest coverage ratio. We may be required to take action to reduce our indebtedness or to act in a manner contrary to our business objectives to meet these ratios and satisfy these covenants. We could also incur additional indebtedness having even more restrictive covenants. Our failure to comply with any of the covenants under our Senior Credit Facility, the indentures governing the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022, the 5.875%

Senior Notes due 2024, or any other indebtedness could prevent us from being able to draw on the Revolver, cause an event of default under such documents and result in an acceleration of all of our outstanding indebtedness. If all of our outstanding indebtedness were to be accelerated, we likely would not be able to simultaneously satisfy all of our obligations under such indebtedness, which would materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Servicing our indebtedness will require a significant amount of cash. Our ability to generate cash depends on many factors beyond our control and we may not be able to generate the cash required to service our indebtedness.

Our ability to make payments on our indebtedness and to fund planned capital expenditures will depend on our ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our control.

Our business may not be able to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or future borrowings may not be available to us under our Senior Credit Facility or otherwise in an amount sufficient to enable us to pay our indebtedness or debt securities, including the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022, and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024, or to fund our other liquidity needs. As a result, we may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness on or before maturity. However, we may not be able to complete such refinancing on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If for any reason we are unable to meet our debt service obligations, we would be in default under the terms of the agreements governing our outstanding debt. If such a default were to occur, the lenders under the senior credit facility, and holders of the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 could elect to declare all amounts outstanding immediately due and payable, and the lenders would not be obligated to continue to advance funds under the Senior Credit Facility. If the amounts outstanding under the Senior Credit Facility or other agreements governing our outstanding debt, were accelerated, our assets may not be sufficient to repay in full the money owed to our lenders and holders of the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and any other debt holders.

Because portions of our senior indebtedness have floating interest rates, a general increase in interest rates would adversely affect cash flows.

Borrowings under our Senior Credit Facility bear interest at a variable rate. As a result, to the extent our exposure to increases in interest rates is not eliminated through interest rate protection agreements, such increases will result in higher debt service costs which will adversely affect our cash flows. We currently do not have interest rate protection agreements in place to protect against interest rate fluctuations on borrowings under our Senior Credit Facility. As of December 31, 2015, we had $777.5 million of indebtedness outstanding under our Senior Credit Facility, and a one percent increase in the interest rate applicable to the Senior Credit Facility would increase our annual interest expense by approximately $8.0 million.

We depend on distributions from our subsidiaries to make payments on our indebtedness. These distributions may not be made.

A substantial portion of our business is conducted by our subsidiaries. Therefore, our ability to meet our payment obligations on our indebtedness is substantially dependent on the earnings of certain of our subsidiaries and the payment of funds to us by our subsidiaries as dividends, loans, advances or other payments. Our subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and, unless they expressly guarantee any indebtedness of ours, they are not obligated to make funds available for payment of our indebtedness in the form of loans, distributions or otherwise. Our subsidiaries’ ability to make any such loans, distributions or other payments to us will depend on their earnings, business results, the terms of their existing and any future indebtedness, tax considerations and legal or contractual restrictions to which they may be subject. If our subsidiaries do not make such payments to us, our ability to repay our indebtedness may be materially adversely affected. For the year ended December 31, 2015, our subsidiaries accounted for 73.8% of our consolidated revenues, and as of December 31, 2015, our subsidiaries accounted for 90.9% of our total assets.

We may not be able to satisfy our repurchase obligations in the event of a change of control because the terms of our indebtedness or lack of funds may prevent us from doing so.

Upon a change of control as specified in the indentures governing the terms of our senior notes, each holder of the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 will have the right to require us to repurchase their notes at 101% of their principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest, and, liquidated damages, if any, to the date of repurchase. The terms of the Senior Credit Facility limit our ability to repurchase the notes in the event of a change of control. Any future agreement governing any of our indebtedness may contain similar restrictions and provisions. Accordingly, it is possible that restrictions in the Senior Credit Facility or other indebtedness that may be incurred in the future will not allow the required repurchase of the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 and the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 upon a change of control. Even if such repurchase is permitted by the terms of our then existing indebtedness, we may not have sufficient funds available to satisfy our repurchase obligations. Our failure to purchase any of the senior notes would be a default under the indenture governing such notes, which in turn would trigger a default under the Senior Credit Facility and the indentures governing the other senior notes.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

From time to time, we may not have a management contract with a client to operate existing beds at a facility or new beds at a facility that we are expanding and we cannot assure you that such a contract will be obtained. Failure to obtain a management contract for these beds will subject us to carrying costs with no corresponding management revenue.

From time to time, we may not have a management contract with a customer to operate existing beds or new beds at facilities that we are currently in the process of renovating and expanding. While we will always strive to work diligently with a number of different customers for the use of these beds, we cannot assure you that a contract for the beds will be secured on a timely basis, or at all. While a facility or new beds at a facility are vacant, we incur carrying costs. We are currently marketing approximately 3,300 vacant beds at four of our idle facilities to potential customers. The annual carrying cost of idle facilities in 2016 is estimated to be $12.7 million, including depreciation expense of $1.5 million, if the facilities remain vacant during 2016. At December 31, 2015, these facilities had a net book value of $35.2 million. Failure to secure a management contract for a facility or expansion project could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and/or cash flows. We review our facilities for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the net book value of the facility may not be recoverable. Impairment charges taken on our facilities could require material non-cash charges to our results of operations. In addition, in order to secure a management contract for these beds, we may need to incur significant capital expenditures to renovate or further expand the facility to meet potential clients’ needs.

Negative conditions in the capital markets could prevent us from obtaining financing, which could materially harm our business.

Our ability to obtain additional financing is highly dependent on the conditions of the capital markets, among other things. The capital and credit markets have experienced significant periods of volatility and disruption since 2008. During this time period, the economic impacts observed have included a downturn in the equity and debt markets, the tightening of the credit markets, a general economic slowdown and other macroeconomic conditions, volatility in currency exchange rates and concerns over sovereign debt levels abroad and in the U.S. and concerns over the failure to adequately address the federal deficit and the debt ceiling. If those macroeconomic conditions continue or worsen in the future, we could be prevented from raising additional capital or obtaining additional financing on satisfactory terms, or at all. If we need, but cannot obtain, adequate capital as a result of negative conditions in the capital markets or otherwise, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected. Additionally, such inability to obtain capital could prevent us from pursuing attractive business development opportunities, including new facility constructions or expansions of existing facilities, and business or asset acquisitions.

We are subject to the loss of our facility management contracts, due to terminations, non-renewals or competitive re-bids, which could adversely affect our results of operations and liquidity, including our ability to secure new facility management contracts from other government customers.

We are exposed to the risk that we may lose our facility management contracts primarily due to one of three reasons: (i) the termination by a government customer with or without cause at any time; (ii) the failure by a customer to exercise its unilateral option to renew a contract with us upon the expiration of the then current term; or (iii) our failure to win the right to continue to operate under a contract that has been competitively re-bid in a procurement process upon its termination or expiration. Our facility management contracts typically allow a contracting governmental agency to terminate a contract with or without cause at any time by giving us written notice ranging from 30 to 180 days. If government agencies were to use these provisions to terminate, or renegotiate the terms of their agreements with us, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

As of December 31, 2015, eight of our facility management contracts representing $160.0 million (or 8.7%) of our consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015 are subject to competitive re-bid in 2016. While we are pleased with our historical win rate on competitive re-bids and are committed to continuing to bid competitively on appropriate future competitive re-bid opportunities, we cannot in fact assure you that we will prevail in future re-bid situations. Also, we cannot assure you that any competitive re-bids we win will be on terms more favorable to us than those in existence with respect to the expiring contract.

For additional information on facility management contracts that we currently believe will be competitively re-bid during each of the next five years and thereafter, please see “Business — Government Contracts — Terminations, Renewals and Competitive Re-bids”. The loss by us of facility management contracts due to terminations, non-renewals or competitive re-bids could materially adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity, including our ability to secure new facility management contracts from other government customers.

We may not be able to successfully identify, consummate or integrate acquisitions.

We have an active acquisition program, the objective of which is to identify suitable acquisition targets that will enhance our growth. The pursuit of acquisitions may pose certain risks to us. We may not be able to identify acquisition candidates that fit our criteria for growth and profitability. Even if we are able to identify such candidates, we may not be able to acquire them on terms satisfactory to us. We will incur expenses and dedicate attention and resources associated with the review of acquisition opportunities, whether or not we consummate such acquisitions.

Additionally, even if we are able to acquire suitable targets on agreeable terms, we may not be able to successfully integrate their operations with ours. Achieving the anticipated benefits of any acquisition will depend in significant part upon whether we integrate such acquired businesses in an efficient and effective manner. We may not be able to achieve the anticipated operating and cost synergies or long-term strategic benefits of our acquisitions within the anticipated timing or at all. For example, elimination of duplicative costs may not be fully achieved or may take longer than anticipated. For at least the first year after a substantial acquisition, and possibly longer, the benefits from the acquisition will be offset by the costs incurred in integrating the businesses and operations. We may also assume liabilities in connection with acquisitions that we would otherwise not be exposed to. An inability to realize the full extent of, or any of, the anticipated synergies or other benefits of an acquisition as well as any delays that may be encountered in the integration process, which may delay the timing of such synergies or other benefits, could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

As a result of our acquisitions, we have recorded and will continue to record a significant amount of goodwill and other intangible assets. In the future, our goodwill or other intangible assets may become impaired, which could result in material non-cash charges to our results of operations.

We have a substantial amount of goodwill and other intangible assets resulting from business acquisitions. As of December 31, 2015, we had $839.6 million of goodwill and other intangible assets. At least annually, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate a potential impairment in the carrying value as defined by Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States of America, or U.S. GAAP, we will evaluate this goodwill for impairment by first assessing qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events or circumstances leads to a determination that it is more likely than not that the fair value of the reporting unit is less than the carrying amount. Estimated fair values could change if there are changes in our capital structure, cost of debt, interest rates, capital expenditure levels, operating cash flows, or market capitalization. Impairments of goodwill or other intangible assets could require material non-cash charges to our results of operations.

Our growth depends on our ability to secure contracts to develop and manage new correctional, detention and community based facilities and to secure contracts to provide electronic monitoring services, community-based re-entry services and monitoring and supervision services, the demand for which is outside our control.

Our growth is primarily dependent upon our ability to obtain new contracts to develop and/or manage correctional, detention, and community based facilities under public-private partnerships. Additionally, our growth is generally dependent upon our ability to obtain new contracts to offer electronic monitoring services, provide community-based re-entry services and provide monitoring and supervision services. Demand for new public-private partnership facilities in our areas of operation may decrease and our potential for growth will depend on a number of factors we cannot control, including overall economic conditions, governmental and public acceptance of public-private partnerships, government budgetary constraints, and the number of facilities available for public-private partnerships.

In particular, the demand for our correctional and detention services, electronic monitoring services, community-based re-entry services and monitoring and supervision services could be affected by changes in existing policies which adversely impact the need for and acceptance of public-private partnerships across the correctional, detention, and community reentry services spectrum. Various factors outside our control could adversely impact the growth of our GEO Care business, including government customer resistance to the public-private partnerships for residential community based facilities, and changes to Medicaid and similar reimbursement programs.

We may not be able to meet state requirements for capital investment or locate land for the development of new facilities, which could adversely affect our results of operations and future growth.

Certain jurisdictions have in the past required successful bidders to make a significant capital investment in connection with the financing of a particular project. If this trend were to continue in the future, we may not be able to obtain sufficient capital resources when needed to compete effectively for facility management contracts. Additionally, our success in obtaining new awards and contracts may depend, in part, upon our ability to locate land that can be leased or acquired under favorable terms. Our inability to secure financing and desirable locations for new facilities could adversely affect our results of operations and future growth.

We depend on a limited number of governmental customers for a significant portion of our revenues. The loss of, or a significant decrease in revenues from, these customers could seriously harm our financial condition and results of operations.

We currently derive, and expect to continue to derive, a significant portion of our revenues from a limited number of governmental agencies. Of our governmental partners, four customers, through multiple individual

contracts, accounted for 45.5% of our consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015. In addition, three federal governmental agencies with correctional and detention responsibilities, the Bureau of Prisons, ICE, and the U.S. Marshals Service, accounted for 44.9% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015 through multiple individual contracts, with the Bureau of Prisons accounting for 15.6% of our total consolidated revenues for such period, ICE accounting for 17.7% of our total consolidated revenues for such period, and the U.S. Marshals Service accounting for 11.6% of our total consolidated revenues for such period; however, no individual contract with these clients accounted for more than 5.0% of our total consolidated revenues. Government agencies from the State of Florida accounted for 6.1% of our total consolidated revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015 through multiple individual contracts. Our revenues depend on our governmental customers receiving sufficient funding and providing us with timely payment under the terms of our contracts. If the applicable governmental customers do not receive sufficient appropriations to cover their contractual obligations, they may delay or reduce payment to us or terminate their contracts with us. With respect to our federal government customers, any future impasse or struggle impacting the federal government’s ability to reach agreement on the federal budget, debt ceiling, immigration reform and how to fund the Department of Homeland Security, and any future federal government shut downs could result in material payment delays, payment reductions or contract terminations. Additionally, our governmental customers may request in the future that we reduce our per diem contract rates or forego increases to those rates as a way for those governmental customers to control their spending and address their budgetary shortfalls. The loss of, or a significant decrease in, business from the Bureau of Prisons, ICE, the U.S. Marshals Service, the State of Florida or any other significant customers could seriously harm our financial condition and results of operations. We expect to continue to depend upon these federal and state agencies and a relatively small group of other governmental customers for a significant percentage of our revenues.

A decrease in occupancy levels could cause a decrease in revenues and profitability.

While a substantial portion of our cost structure is generally fixed, most of our revenues are generated under facility management contracts which provide for per diem payments based upon daily occupancy. Several of these contracts provide fixed-price payments that cover a portion or all of our fixed costs. However, many of our contracts have no fixed-price payments and simply provide for a per diem payment based on actual occupancy. As a result, with respect to our contracts that have no fixed-price payments, we are highly dependent upon the governmental agencies with which we have contracts to utilize our facilities. Under a per diem rate structure, a decrease in our utilization rates could cause a decrease in revenues and profitability. In addition, we acquired eight correctional and detention facilities from LCS Correctional Services, Inc. and its affiliates in 2015 which historically have had lower occupancy rates than GEO’s facilities. It may take longer than anticipated to increase the occupancy rates for these facilities. When combined with relatively fixed costs for operating each facility, regardless of the occupancy level, a material decrease in occupancy levels at one or more of our facilities could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and profitability, and consequently, on our financial condition and results of operations.

State budgetary constraints may have a material adverse impact on us.

State budgets continue their slow to moderate recovery. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, the outlook for state budgets is stable. Revenue performance is positive, and expenditure overruns are relatively modest. Overall, most state officials anticipate a slow and steady improvement in state finances. As of December 31, 2015, we had 11 state correctional clients: Florida, Georgia, Alaska, Louisiana, Virginia, Indiana, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Vermont and California. If state budgetary conditions deteriorate, our 11 state customers’ ability to pay us may be impaired and/or we may be forced to renegotiate our management contracts with those customers on less favorable terms and our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows could be materially adversely impacted. In addition, budgetary constraints in states that are not our current customers could prevent those states from using public-private partnerships for correctional, detention or community based service opportunities that we otherwise could have pursued.

Competition for contracts may adversely affect the profitability of our business.

We compete with government entities and other public-private partnership operators on the basis of cost, bed availability, location of facility, quality and range of services offered, experience in managing facilities, and reputation of management and personnel. Barriers to entering the market for the management of correctional and detention facilities and the provision of community reentry programs may not be sufficient to limit additional competition in our industry. In addition, some of our government customers may assume the management of a facility currently managed by us upon the termination of the corresponding management contract or, if such customers have capacity at the facilities which they operate, they may choose to use less capacity at our facilities. Since we are paid on a per diem basis based on actual occupancy under some of our contracts, a decrease in occupancy could cause a decrease in both our revenues and our profitability.

We are dependent on government appropriations, which may not be made on a timely basis or at all and may be adversely impacted by budgetary constraints at the federal, state and local levels.

Our cash flow is subject to the receipt of sufficient funding of and timely payment by contracting governmental entities. If the contracting governmental agency does not receive sufficient appropriations to cover its contractual obligations, it may terminate our contract or delay or reduce payment to us. Any delays in payment, or the termination of a contract, could have a material adverse effect on our cash flow and financial condition, which may make it difficult to satisfy our payment obligations on our indebtedness, including the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and the Senior Credit Facility, in a timely manner. In addition, as a result of, among other things, recent economic developments, federal, state and local governments have encountered, and may continue to encounter, unusual budgetary constraints. As a result, a number of state and local governments may be under pressure to control additional spending or reduce current levels of spending which could limit or eliminate appropriations for the facilities that we operate. Additionally, as a result of these factors, we may be requested in the future to reduce our existing per diem contract rates or forego prospective increases to those rates. Budgetary limitations may also make it more difficult for us to renew our existing contracts on favorable terms or at all. Further, a number of states in which we operate may experience budget constraints for fiscal year 2016. We cannot assure you that these constraints would not result in reductions in per diems, delays in payment for services rendered or unilateral termination of contracts.

Public resistance to the use of public-private partnerships for correctional, detention and community based facilities could result in our inability to obtain new contracts or the loss of existing contracts, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The management and operation of correctional, detention and community based facilities under public-private partnerships has not achieved complete acceptance by either government agencies or the public. Some governmental agencies have limitations on their ability to delegate their traditional management responsibilities for such facilities to private companies and additional legislative changes or prohibitions could occur that further increase these limitations. In addition, the movement toward using public-private partnerships for such facilities has encountered resistance from groups, such as labor unions, which believe that correctional, detention and community based facilities should only be operated by governmental agencies. In addition, negative publicity about conditions, an escape, riot or other disturbance at a facility operated under a public-private partnership may result in adverse publicity to us and public-private partnerships in general. Any of these occurrences or continued trends may make it more difficult for us to renew or maintain existing contracts or to obtain new contracts. Changes in governing political parties could also result in significant changes to previously established views of public-private partnerships. Increased public resistance to the use of public-private partnerships for correctional, detention and community based facilities in any of the markets in which we operate, as a result of these or other factors, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Operating youth services facilities poses certain unique or increased risks and difficulties compared to operating other facilities.

As a result of the acquisition of Cornell Companies, Inc. (the “Cornell Acquisition”) in 2010, we re-entered the market of operating youth services facilities. Operating youth services facilities may pose increased operational risks and difficulties that may result in increased litigation, higher personnel costs, higher levels of turnover of personnel and reduced profitability. Examples of the increased operational risks and difficulties involved in operating youth services facilities include, mandated client to staff ratios as high as 1:6, elevated reporting and audit requirements, a reduced number of management options to use with offenders and multiple funding sources as opposed to a single source payer. Additionally, youth services contracts related to educational services may provide for annual collection several months after a school year is completed. This may pose a risk that we will not be able to collect the full amount owed thereby reducing our profitability or it may adversely impact our annual budgeting process due to the lag time between us providing the educational services required under a contract and collecting the amount owed to us for such services. We cannot assure that we will be successful in operating youth services facilities or that we will be able to minimize the risks and difficulties involved while yielding an attractive profit margin.

Adverse publicity may negatively impact our ability to retain existing contracts and obtain new contracts.

Any negative publicity about an escape, riot or other disturbance or perceived conditions operated at a facility under a public-private partnership, any failures experienced by our electronic monitoring services and any negative publicity about a crime or disturbance occurring during a failure of service or the loss or unauthorized access to any of the data we maintain in the course of providing our services may result in publicity adverse to us and public-private partnerships in general. Any of these occurrences or continued trends may make it more difficult for us to renew existing contracts or to obtain new contracts or could result in the termination of an existing contract or the closure of one or more of our facilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Such negative events may also result in a significant increase in our liability insurance costs.

We may incur significant start-up and operating costs on new contracts before receiving related revenues, which may impact our cash flows and not be recouped.

When we are awarded a contract to manage a facility, we may incur significant start-up and operating expenses, including the cost of constructing the facility, purchasing equipment and staffing the facility, before we receive any payments under the contract. These expenditures could result in a significant reduction in our cash reserves and may make it more difficult for us to meet other cash obligations, including our payment obligations on the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and the Senior Credit Facility. In addition, a contract may be terminated prior to its scheduled expiration and as a result we may not recover these expenditures or realize any return on our investment.

Failure to comply with extensive government regulation and applicable contractual requirements could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

The industry in which we operate is subject to extensive federal, state and local regulation, including educational, environmental, health care and safety laws, rules and regulations, which are administered by many regulatory authorities. Some of the regulations are unique to the corrections industry, and the combination of regulations affects all areas of our operations. Corrections officers and juvenile care workers are customarily required to meet certain training standards and, in some instances, facility personnel are required to be licensed and are subject to background investigations. Certain jurisdictions also require us to award subcontracts on a competitive basis or to subcontract with businesses owned by members of minority groups. We may not always successfully comply with these and other regulations to which we are subject and failure to comply can result in material penalties or the non-renewal or termination of facility management contracts. In addition, changes in existing regulations could require us to substantially modify the manner in which we conduct our business and, therefore, could have a material adverse effect on us.

In addition, public-private partnerships are increasingly subject to government legislation and regulation attempting to restrict the ability of private operators to house certain classifications of offenders, such as offenders from other jurisdictions or offenders at higher security levels. Legislation has been enacted in several states, and has previously been proposed in the United States House of Representatives, containing such restrictions. Although we do not believe that existing legislation will have a material adverse effect on us, future legislation may have such an effect on us.

Governmental agencies may investigate and audit our contracts and, if any improprieties are found, we may be required to refund amounts we have received, to forego anticipated revenues and we may be subject to penalties and sanctions, including prohibitions on our bidding in response to RFPs from governmental agencies to manage correctional facilities. Governmental agencies we contract with have the authority to audit and investigate our contracts with them. As part of that process, governmental agencies may review our performance of the contract, our pricing practices, our cost structure and our compliance with applicable laws, regulations and standards. For contracts that actually or effectively provide for certain reimbursement of expenses, if an agency determines that we have improperly allocated costs to a specific contract, we may not be reimbursed for those costs, and we could be required to refund the amount of any such costs that have been reimbursed. If we are found to have engaged in improper or illegal activities, including under the United States False Claims Act, we may be subject to civil and criminal penalties and administrative sanctions, including termination of contracts, forfeitures of profits, suspension of payments, fines and suspension or disqualification from doing business with certain governmental entities. An adverse determination in an action alleging improper or illegal activities by us could also adversely impact our ability to bid in response to RFPs in one or more jurisdictions.

In addition to compliance with applicable laws and regulations, our facility management contracts typically have numerous requirements addressing all aspects of our operations which we may not be able to satisfy. For example, our contracts require us to maintain certain levels of coverage for general liability, workers’ compensation, vehicle liability, and property loss or damage. If we do not maintain the required categories and levels of coverage, the contracting governmental agency may be permitted to terminate the contract. In addition, we are required under our contracts to indemnify the contracting governmental agency for all claims and costs arising out of our management of facilities and, in some instances, we are required to maintain performance bonds relating to the construction, development and operation of facilities. Facility management contracts also typically include reporting requirements, supervision and on-site monitoring by representatives of the contracting governmental agencies. Failure to properly adhere to the various terms of our customer contracts could expose us to liability for damages relating to any breaches as well as the loss of such contracts, which could materially adversely impact us.

We may face community opposition to facility location, which may adversely affect our ability to obtain new contracts.

Our success in obtaining new awards and contracts sometimes depends, in part, upon our ability to locate land that can be leased or acquired, on economically favorable terms, by us or other entities working with us in conjunction with our proposal to construct and/or manage a facility. Some locations may be in or near populous areas and, therefore, may generate legal action or other forms of opposition from residents in areas surrounding a proposed site. When we select the intended project site, we attempt to conduct business in communities where local leaders and residents generally support the establishment of a new project. Future efforts to find suitable host communities may not be successful. In many cases, the site selection is made by the contracting governmental entity. In such cases, site selection may be made for reasons related to economic development interests.

Our business operations expose us to various liabilities for which we may not have adequate insurance and may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

brought by prisoners or detainees, medical malpractice claims, product liability claims, intellectual property infringement claims, claims relating to employment matters (including, but not limited to, employment discrimination claims, union grievances and wage and hour claims), property loss claims, environmental claims, automobile liability claims, contractual claims and claims for personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with our facilities, programs, electronic monitoring products, personnel or prisoners, including damages arising from a prisoner’s escape or from a disturbance or riot at a facility. In addition, our management contracts generally require us to indemnify the governmental agency against any damages to which the governmental agency may be subject in connection with such claims or litigation. We maintain insurance coverage for these general types of claims, except for claims relating to employment matters, for which we carry no insurance. However, we generally have high deductible payment requirements on our primary insurance policies, including our general liability insurance, and there are also varying limits on the maximum amount of our overall coverage. As a result, the insurance we maintain to cover the various liabilities to which we are exposed may not be adequate. Any losses relating to matters for which we are either uninsured or for which we do not have adequate insurance could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. In addition, any losses relating to employment matters could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. To the extent the events serving as a basis for any potential claims are alleged or determined to constitute illegal or criminal activity, we could also be subject to criminal liability. Such liability could result in significant monetary fines and could affect our ability to bid on future contracts and retain our existing contracts.

We may not be able to obtain or maintain the insurance levels required by our government contracts.

Our government contracts require us to obtain and maintain specified insurance levels. The occurrence of any events specific to our company or to our industry, or a general rise in insurance rates, could substantially increase our costs of obtaining or maintaining the levels of insurance required under our government contracts, or prevent us from obtaining or maintaining such insurance altogether. If we are unable to obtain or maintain the required insurance levels, our ability to win new government contracts, renew government contracts that have expired and retain existing government contracts could be significantly impaired, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our international operations expose us to risks which could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

For the year ended December 31, 2015, our international operations accounted for approximately 14% of our consolidated revenues from continuing operations. We face risks associated with our operations outside the United States. These risks include, among others, political and economic instability, exchange rate fluctuations, taxes, duties and the laws or regulations in those foreign jurisdictions in which we operate. In the event that we experience any difficulties arising from our operations in foreign markets, our business, financial condition and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

We conduct certain of our operations through joint ventures or consortiums, which may lead to disagreements with our joint venture partners or business partners and adversely affect our interest in the joint ventures or consortiums.

We conduct our operations in South Africa through our consolidated joint venture, SACM, and through our 50% owned and unconsolidated joint venture South African Custodial Services Pty. Limited, referred to as SACS. We conduct our prisoner escort and related custody services in the United Kingdom through our 50% owned and unconsolidated joint venture in GEO Amey PECS Limited, which we refer to as GEOAmey. We may enter into additional joint ventures in the future. Although we have the majority vote in our consolidated joint venture, SACM, through our ownership of 62.5% of the voting shares, we share equal voting control on all significant matters to come before SACS. We also share equal voting control on all significant matters to come before GEOAmey. We are conducting certain operations in Victoria, Australia through a consortium comprised

of our wholly owned subsidiary, GEO Australia, John Holland Construction and Honeywell. The consortium is in the process of developing a new 1,300 bed prison in Ravenhall, a location near Melbourne, Australia. These joint venture partners, as well as any future partners, may have interests that are different from ours which may result in conflicting views as to the conduct of the business of the joint venture or consortium. In the event that we have a disagreement with a joint venture partner or consortium business partner as to the resolution of a particular issue to come before the joint venture or consortium, or as to the management or conduct of the business of the joint venture or consortium in general, we may not be able to resolve such disagreement in our favor and such disagreement could have a material adverse effect on our interest in the joint venture or consortium or the business of the joint venture or consortium in general.

We are dependent upon our senior management and our ability to attract and retain sufficient qualified personnel.

We are dependent upon the continued service of each member of our senior management team, including George C. Zoley, Ph.D., our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Brian R. Evans, our Chief Financial Officer, J. David Donahue, our Senior Vice President, and President, U.S. Corrections & Detention, Ann Schlarb, our Senior Vice President and President, GEO Care, David Venturella, our Senior Vice President, Business Development and also our other executive officers at the Vice President level and above. The unexpected loss of Mr. Zoley, Mr. Evans or any other key member of our senior management team could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

In addition, the services we provide are labor-intensive. When we are awarded a facility management contract or open a new facility, depending on the service we have been contracted to provide, we may need to hire operating management, correctional officers, security staff, physicians, nurses and other qualified personnel. The success of our business requires that we attract, develop and retain these personnel. Our inability to hire sufficient qualified personnel on a timely basis or the loss of significant numbers of personnel at existing facilities could have a material effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our profitability may be materially adversely affected by inflation.

Many of our facility management contracts provide for fixed management fees or fees that increase by only small amounts during their terms. While a substantial portion of our cost structure is generally fixed, if, due to inflation or other causes, our operating expenses, such as costs relating to personnel, utilities, insurance, medical and food, increase at rates faster than increases, if any, in our facility management fees, then our profitability could be materially adversely affected.

Various risks associated with the ownership of real estate may increase costs, expose us to uninsured losses and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Our ownership of correctional and detention facilities subjects us to risks typically associated with investments in real estate. Investments in real estate, and in particular, correctional and detention facilities, are relatively illiquid and, therefore, our ability to divest ourselves of one or more of our facilities promptly in response to changed conditions is limited. Investments in correctional and detention facilities, in particular, subject us to risks involving potential exposure to environmental liability and uninsured loss. Our operating costs may be affected by the obligation to pay for the cost of complying with existing environmental laws, ordinances and regulations, as well as the cost of complying with future legislation. In addition, although we maintain insurance for many types of losses, there are certain types of losses, such as losses from hurricanes, earthquakes, riots and acts of terrorism, which may be either uninsurable or for which it may not be economically feasible to obtain insurance coverage, in light of the substantial costs associated with such insurance. As a result, we could lose both our capital invested in, and anticipated profits from, one or more of the facilities we own. Further, even if we have insurance for a particular loss, we may experience losses that may exceed the limits of our coverage.

Risks related to facility construction and development activities may increase our costs related to such activities.

When we are engaged to perform construction and design services for a facility, we typically act as the primary contractor and subcontract with other companies who act as the general contractors. As primary contractor, we are subject to the various risks associated with construction (including, without limitation, shortages of labor and materials, work stoppages, labor disputes and weather interference) which could cause construction delays. In addition, we are subject to the risk that the general contractor will be unable to complete construction within the level of budgeted costs or be unable to fund any excess construction costs, even though we typically require general contractors to post construction bonds and insurance. Under such contracts, we are ultimately liable for all late delivery penalties and cost overruns.

The rising cost and increasing difficulty of obtaining adequate levels of surety credit on favorable terms could adversely affect our operating results.

We are often required to post performance bonds issued by a surety company as a condition to bidding on or being awarded a facility development contract. Availability and pricing of these surety commitments is subject to general market and industry conditions, among other factors. Recent events in the economy have caused the surety market to become unsettled, causing many reinsurers and sureties to reevaluate their commitment levels and required returns. As a result, surety bond premiums generally are increasing. If we are unable to effectively pass along the higher surety costs to our customers, any increase in surety costs could adversely affect our operating results. In addition, we may not continue to have access to surety credit or be able to secure bonds economically, without additional collateral, or at the levels required for any potential facility development or contract bids. If we are unable to obtain adequate levels of surety credit on favorable terms, we would have to rely upon letters of credit under our senior credit facility, which would entail higher costs even if such borrowing capacity was available when desired, and our ability to bid for or obtain new contracts could be impaired.

Adverse developments in our relationship with our employees could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

At December 31, 2015, approximately 31% of our workforce was covered by collective bargaining agreements and, as of such date, collective bargaining agreements with approximately 4% of our employees were set to expire in less than one year. While only approximately 31% of our workforce schedule is covered by collective bargaining agreements, increases in organizational activity or any future work stoppages could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Technological changes could cause our electronic monitoring products and technology to become obsolete or require the redesign of our electronic monitoring products, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Technological changes within the electronic monitoring business in which we conduct business may require us to expend substantial resources in an effort to develop and/or utilize new electronic monitoring products and technology. We may not be able to anticipate or respond to technological changes in a timely manner, and our response may not result in successful electronic monitoring product development and timely product introductions. If we are unable to anticipate or timely respond to technological changes, our business could be adversely affected and could compromise our competitive position, particularly if our competitors announce or introduce new electronic monitoring products and services in advance of us. Additionally, new electronic monitoring products and technology face the uncertainty of customer acceptance and reaction from competitors.

Any negative changes in the level of acceptance of or resistance to the use of electronic monitoring products and services by governmental customers could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Governmental customers use electronic monitoring products and services to monitor low risk offenders as a way to help reduce overcrowding in correctional facilities, as a monitoring and sanctioning tool, and to promote public safety by imposing restrictions on movement and serving as a deterrent for alcohol usage. If the level of acceptance of or resistance to the use of electronic monitoring products and services by governmental customers were to change over time in a negative manner so that governmental customers decide to decrease their usage levels and contracting for electronic monitoring products and services, this could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We depend on a limited number of third parties to manufacture and supply quality infrastructure components for our electronic monitoring products. If our suppliers cannot provide the components or services we require and with such quality as we expect, our ability to market and sell our electronic monitoring products and services could be harmed.

If our suppliers fail to supply components in a timely manner that meets our quantity, quality, cost requirements, or technical specifications, we may not be able to access alternative sources of these components within a reasonable period of time or at commercially reasonable rates. A reduction or interruption in the supply of components, or a significant increase in the price of components, could have a material adverse effect on our marketing and sales initiatives, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The interruption, delay or failure of the provision of our services or information systems could adversely affect our business.

Certain segments of our business depend significantly on effective information systems. As with all companies that utilize information technology, we are vulnerable to negative impacts if information is inadvertently interrupted, delayed, compromised or lost. We routinely process, store and transmit large amounts of data for our clients. We continually work to update and maintain effective information systems. Despite the security measures we have in place and any additional measures we may implement in the future, our facilities and systems, and those of our third-party service providers, could be vulnerable to security breaches, computer viruses, lost or misplaced data, programming errors, human errors, acts of vandalism, or other events. For example, several well-known companies have recently disclosed high-profile security breaches, involving sophisticated and highly targeted attacks on their company’s infrastructure or their customers’ data, which were not recognized or detected until after such companies had been affected notwithstanding the preventative measures they had in place. Any security breach or event resulting in the interruption, delay or failure of our services or information systems, or the misappropriation, loss, or other unauthorized disclosure of client data or confidential information, whether by us directly or our third-party service providers, could damage our reputation, expose us to the risks of litigation and liability, disrupt our business, result in lost business or otherwise adversely affect our results of operations.

An inability to acquire, protect or maintain our intellectual property and patents in the electronic monitoring space could harm our ability to compete or grow.

We have numerous United States and foreign patents issued as well as a number of United States patents pending in the electronic monitoring space. There can be no assurance that the protection afforded by these patents will provide us with a competitive advantage, prevent our competitors from duplicating our products, or that we will be able to assert our intellectual property rights in infringement actions.

In addition, any of our patents may be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or rendered unenforceable. There can be no assurance that we will be successful should one or more of our patents be challenged for any reason. If our patent claims are rendered invalid or unenforceable, or narrowed in scope, the patent coverage

afforded to our products could be impaired, which could significantly impede our ability to market our products, negatively affect our competitive position and harm our business and operating results.

There can be no assurance that any pending or future patent applications held by us will result in an issued patent, or that if patents are issued to us, that such patents will provide meaningful protection against competitors or against competitive technologies. The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its validity or its enforceability. The United States federal courts or equivalent national courts or patent offices elsewhere may invalidate our patents or find them unenforceable. Competitors may also be able to design around our patents. Our patents and patent applications cover particular aspects of our products. Other parties may develop and obtain patent protection for more effective technologies, designs or methods. If these developments were to occur, it could have an adverse effect on our sales. We may not be able to prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our technical knowledge or trade secrets by consultants, vendors, former employees and current employees, despite the existence of nondisclosure and confidentiality agreements and other contractual restrictions. Furthermore, the laws of foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property rights effectively or to the same extent as the laws of the United States. If our intellectual property rights are not adequately protected, we may not be able to commercialize our technologies, products or services and our competitors could commercialize our technologies, which could result in a decrease in our sales and market share that would harm our business and operating results.

Additionally, the expiration of any of our patents may reduce the barriers to entry into our electronic monitoring line of business and may result in loss of market share and a decrease in our competitive abilities, thus having a potential adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

Our electronic monitoring products could infringe on the intellectual property rights of others, which may lead to litigation that could itself be costly, could result in the payment of substantial damages or royalties, and/or prevent us from using technology that is essential to our products.

There can be no assurance that our current products or products under development will not infringe any patent or other intellectual property rights of third parties. If infringement claims are brought against us, whether successfully or not, these assertions could distract management from other tasks important to the success of our business, necessitate us expending potentially significant funds and resources to defend or settle such claims and harm our reputation. We cannot be certain that we will have the financial resources to defend ourselves against any patent or other intellectual property litigation.

In addition, intellectual property litigation or claims could force us to do one or more of the following:

•

cease selling or using any products that incorporate the asserted intellectual property, which would adversely affect our revenue;

•

pay substantial damages for past use of the asserted intellectual property;

•

obtain a license from the holder of the asserted intellectual property, which license may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all; or

•

redesign or rename, in the case of trademark claims, our products to avoid infringing the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may not be possible and could be costly and time-consuming if it is possible to do.

In the event of an adverse determination in an intellectual property suit or proceeding, or our failure to license essential technology, our sales could be harmed and/or our costs could increase, which would harm our financial condition.

We license intellectual property rights in the electronic monitoring space, including patents, from third party owners. If such owners do not properly maintain or enforce the intellectual property underlying such licenses, our competitive position and business prospects could be harmed. Our licensors may also seek to terminate our license.

We are a party to a number of licenses that give us rights to third-party intellectual property that is necessary or useful to our business. Our success will depend in part on the ability of our licensors to obtain, maintain and enforce our licensed intellectual property. Our licensors may not successfully prosecute any applications for or maintain intellectual property to which we have licenses, may determine not to pursue litigation against other companies that are infringing such intellectual property, or may pursue such litigation less aggressively than we would. Without protection for the intellectual property we license, other companies might be able to offer similar products for sale, which could adversely affect our competitive business position and harm our business prospects.

If we lose any of our rights to use third-party intellectual property, it could adversely affect our ability to commercialize our technologies, products or services, as well as harm our competitive business position and our business prospects.

We may be subject to costly product liability claims from the use of our electronic monitoring products, which could damage our reputation, impair the marketability of our products and services and force us to pay costs and damages that may not be covered by adequate insurance.

Manufacturing, marketing, selling, testing and the operation of our electronic monitoring products and services entail a risk of product liability. We could be subject to product liability claims to the extent our electronic monitoring products fail to perform as intended. Even unsuccessful claims against us could result in the expenditure of funds in litigation, the diversion of management time and resources, damage to our reputation and impairment in the marketability of our electronic monitoring products and services. While we maintain liability insurance, it is possible that a successful claim could be made against us, that the amount of our insurance coverage would not be adequate to cover the costs of defending against or paying such a claim, or that damages payable by us would harm our business.

Risks Related to Our Common Stock

The market price of our common stock may vary substantially.

The trading prices of equity securities issued by REITs have historically been affected by changes in market interest rates. One of the factors that may influence the market price of our common stock is the annual yield from distributions on our common stock as compared to yields on other financial instruments. An increase in market interest rates, or a decrease in our distributions to shareholders, may lead prospective purchasers of our shares to demand a higher annual yield, which could reduce the market price of our common stock.

Other factors that could affect the market price of our common stock include the following:

•

actual or anticipated variations in our quarterly results of operations;

•

changes in market valuations of companies in the correctional and detention industries;

•

changes in expectations of future financial performance or changes in estimates of securities analysts;

•

fluctuations in stock market prices and volumes;

•

issuances of common stock or other securities in the future;

•

the addition or departure of key personnel;

•

announcements by us or our competitors of acquisitions, investments or strategic alliances; and

•

changes in the prospects of public-private partnerships in the corrections and detention industry.

Future sales of shares of our common stock could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and may be dilutive to current shareholders.

Sales of shares of our common stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, could adversely affect the price for our common stock. As of December 31, 2015, there were 125,000,000 shares of common stock authorized under our Articles of Incorporation, of which 74,642,859 shares were outstanding. Our Board of Directors may authorize the issuance of additional authorized but unissued shares of our common stock or other authorized but unissued securities of ours at any time, including pursuant to equity incentive plans and stock purchase plans. In addition, we have filed a registration statement with the SEC allowing us to offer, from time to time, an indeterminate amount of common stock, subject to certain market conditions and other factors. Accordingly, we may, from time to time and at any time, seek to offer and sell shares of our common stock based upon market conditions and other factors. For example, on May 8, 2013, we filed with the SEC a prospectus supplement related to the offer and sale from time to time of our common stock at an aggregate offering price of up to $100 million through certain sales agents. Sales of shares of our common stock under this prospectus supplement and the equity distribution agreements entered into with the sales agents, if any, may be made in negotiated transactions or transactions that are deemed to be “at the market” offerings as defined in Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933. Additionally, on July 18, 2014, we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a post-effective amendment to our shelf registration statement on Form S-3 (pursuant to which the prospectus supplement had been filed) as a result of the merger of the Company into GEO REIT effective June 27, 2014.

In September 2014, the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a new shelf registration statement on Form S-3. On November 10, 2014, in connection with the new shelf registration, the Company filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a new prospectus supplement related to the offer and sale from time to time of the Company’s common stock at an aggregate offering price of up to $150 million through sales agents. Sales of shares of the Company’s common stock under the prospectus supplement and the equity distribution agreements entered into with the sales agents, if any, may be made in negotiated transactions or transactions that are deemed to be “at the market” offerings as defined in Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933.

An offering of shares of our common stock may have a dilutive effect on our earnings per share and funds from operations per share after giving effect to the issuance of our common stock in this offering and the receipt of the expected net proceeds. The actual amount of dilution from any offering of our equity securities, cannot be determined at this time. The market price of our common stock could decline as a result of sales of a large number of shares of our common stock in the market pursuant to an offering, or otherwise, or as a result of the perception or expectation that such sales could occur.

Various anti-takeover protections applicable to us may make an acquisition of us more difficult and reduce the market value of our common stock.

We are a Florida corporation and the anti-takeover provisions of Florida law impose various impediments to the ability of a third party to acquire control of our company, even if a change of control would be beneficial to our shareholders. In addition, provisions of our articles of incorporation may make an acquisition of us more difficult. Our articles of incorporation authorize the issuance by our Board of Directors of “blank check” preferred stock without shareholder approval. Such shares of preferred stock could be given voting rights, dividend rights, liquidation rights or other similar rights superior to those of our common stock, making a takeover of us more difficult and expensive. In addition to discouraging takeovers, the anti-takeover provisions of Florida law and our articles of incorporation may have the impact of reducing the market value of our common stock.

Failure to maintain effective internal controls in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 could have an adverse effect on our business and the trading price of our common stock.

If we fail to maintain the adequacy of our internal controls, in accordance with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as such standards are modified, supplemented or amended from time to time, our exposure to fraud and errors in accounting and financial reporting could materially increase. Also, inadequate internal controls would likely prevent us from concluding on an ongoing basis that we have effective internal control over financial reporting in accordance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Such failure to achieve and maintain effective internal controls could adversely impact our business and the price of our common stock.

We may issue additional debt securities that could limit our operating flexibility and negatively affect the value of our common stock.

In the future, we may issue additional debt securities which may be governed by an indenture or other instrument containing covenants that could place restrictions on the operation of our business and the execution of our business strategy in addition to the restrictions on our business already contained in the agreements governing our existing debt. In addition, we may choose to issue debt that is convertible or exchangeable for other securities, including our common stock, or that has rights, preferences and privileges senior to our common stock. Because any decision to issue debt securities will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of any future debt financings and we may be required to accept unfavorable terms for any such financings. Accordingly, any future issuance of debt could dilute the interest of holders of our common stock and reduce the value of our common stock.

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2.

Properties

We lease our corporate offices which are located in Boca Raton, Florida, under a lease agreement which was amended in April 2013. The current lease expires in March 2020 and has two 5-year renewal options, which if exercised will result in a maximum term ending March 2030. In addition, we lease office space for our eastern regional office in Charlotte, North Carolina; our central regional office in San Antonio, Texas; our western regional office in Los Angeles, California; and our youth services division in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. As a result of the Protocol acquisition in February 2014, we are also currently leasing office space in Aurora, Illinois. We also lease office space in Sydney, Australia, and in Sandton, South Africa, through our overseas affiliates to support our Australian, and South African operations, respectively. We consider our office space adequate for our current operations.

See the Facilities and Day Reporting Centers listing under Item 1 for a list of the correctional, detention and re-entry properties we own or lease in connection with our operations.

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

escape or from a disturbance or riot at a facility. We do not expect the outcome of any pending claims or legal proceedings to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Item 4.

Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Our common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “GEO.” The following table shows the high and low prices for our common stock, as reported by the New York Stock Exchange, for each of the four quarters of fiscal years 2015 and 2014. The prices shown have been rounded to the nearest $1/100. The approximate number of shareholders of record as of February 23, 2016 is 629.


	2015				2014
Quarter	High		Low		High		Low
First	$	45.25	$	40.20	$	34.14	$	30.85
Second		44.85		33.90		35.82		31.53
Third		38.06		28.83		38.41		34.20
Fourth		34.05		26.00		41.66		36.01

Issuer Purchase of Equity Securities

The table below sets forth information with respect to shares of common stock repurchased by the Company during the fourth quarter of 2015.


Period	Total Number of Shares Purchased(1)		Average Price Paid per Share		Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs		Approximate Dollar Value of Shares that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs
October 1, 2015 — October 31, 2015		1,183	$	29.43		—	$	—
November 1, 2015 — November 30, 2015		—	$	—		—	$	—
December 1, 2015 — December 31, 2015		—	$	—		—	$	—

Total		1,183	$	29.43		—	$	—

(1)	The Company withheld these shares through net share settlements to satisfy minimum statutory tax withholding requirements upon vesting of shares of restricted stock held by employees. These purchases were not made as part of a publicly announced plan or program.

Distributions

As a REIT, the Company is required to distribute annually at least 90% of its REIT taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and by excluding net capital gain). The amount, timing and frequency of future distributions will be at the sole discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors and will be declared based upon various factors, many of which are beyond the Company’s control, including, the Company’s financial condition and operating cash flows, the amount required to maintain REIT status and reduce any income taxes that the Company otherwise would be required to pay, limitations on distributions in the Company’s existing and future debt instruments, limitations on the Company’s ability to fund distributions using cash generated through our taxable REIT subsidiaries and other factors that the Company’s Board of Directors may deem relevant.

During the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 we declared and paid the following regular cash distributions to our shareholders which were treated as qualified and non-qualified ordinary income dividends and non dividend distributions for federal income tax purposes as stated below:


						Ordinary Dividends									Capital Gains
Declaration Date	Payment Date	Record Date	Distribution per share			Total			Qualified(1)			Non-Qualified			Total			Unrecaptured Section 1250			Long Term			Non Dividend Distributions(2)			Aggregate Payment Amount (in millions)
February 18, 2014	March 14, 2014	March 3, 2014		0.57			0.4602428			0.0448272			0.4154156			—			—			—			0.1097572			41.1
April 28, 2014	May 27, 2014	May 15, 2014		0.57			0.4602428			0.0448272			0.4154156			—			—			—			0.1097572			41.5
August 5, 2014	August 29, 2014	August 18, 2014		0.57			0.4602428			0.0448272			0.4154156			—			—			—			0.1097572			41.4
November 5, 2014	November 26, 2014	November 17, 2014		0.62			0.5006150			0.0487594			0.4518556			—			—			—			0.1193850			46.0

Totals			$	2.33		$	1.8813434		$	0.1832410		$	1.6981024		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.4486565		$	170

Percentage				100.0	%		80.7	%		9.7	%		90.3	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		19.3	%
February 6, 2015	February 27, 2015	February 17, 2015		0.62			0.4669470			0.0529749			0.4139721			—			—			—			0.1530530			46.0
April 29, 2015	May 21, 2015	May 11, 2015		0.62			0.4669470			0.0529749			0.4139721			—			—			—			0.1530530			46.3
July 31, 2015	August 24, 2015	August 14, 2015		0.62			0.4669470			0.0529749			0.4139721			—			—			—			0.1530530			46.3
November 3, 2015	November 25, 2015	November 16, 2015		0.65			0.4895412			0.0555382			0.4340030			—			—			—			0.1604588			48.5

Totals			$	2.51		$	1.8903821		$	0.2144627		$	1.6759194		$	—		$	—		$	—		$	0.6196179		$	187.1

Percentage				100.0	%		75.3	%		11.3	%		88.7	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		0.0	%		24.7	%

(1)	Qualified Dividends represents the portion of the Total Ordinary Dividends which constitutes a “Qualified Dividend”, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service.

(2)	The amount constitutes a “Return of Capital”, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service.

We intend to continue paying regular quarterly cash dividends consistent with our stated expectation to pay at least 75% of our adjusted funds from operations (“AFFO”) in dividends with a goal to increase our dividend payout ratio over time. The amount, timing and frequency of our future dividends will be at the sole discretion of the Board of Directors based upon the factors mentioned above.

In addition to these factors, the indentures governing our 6.625% Senior Notes, 5.125% Senior Notes, 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022, 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and our Senior Credit Facility also place material restrictions on our ability to pay dividends. See the Liquidity and Capital Resources section in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Note 15 — Debt in “Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data”, for further description of these restrictions. We believe we have the ability to continue to fund our working capital, our debt service requirements, and our maintenance and growth capital expenditure requirements, while maintaining sufficient liquidity for other corporate purposes.

Performance Graph

The following performance graph compares the performance of our common stock to the Russell 2000, the S&P 500 Commercial Services and Supplies Index, and the MSCI U.S. REIT Index and is provided in accordance with Item 201(e) of Regulation S-K.

Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Return*

The GEO Group, Inc., Russell 2000,

S&P 500 Commercial Services and Supplies Index

and MSCI U.S. REIT Index

(Performance through December 31, 2015)

LOGO


Date	The GEO Group, Inc.		Russell 2000		S&P 500 Commercial Services and Supplies		MSCI U.S. REIT Index
December 31, 2010	$	100.00	$	100.00	$	100.00	$	100.00
December 31, 2011	$	67.92	$	94.55	$	93.46	$	104.70
December 31, 2012	$	141.14	$	108.38	$	102.74	$	118.90
December 31, 2013	$	171.17	$	148.49	$	132.56	$	117.25
December 31, 2014	$	228.85	$	153.73	$	147.94	$	146.89
December 31, 2015	$	176.19	$	144.95	$	144.84	$	156.61

Assumes $100 invested on December 31, 2010 in our common stock and the Index companies.

*	Total return assumes reinvestment of dividends.

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data

The following table sets forth historical financial data as of and for each of the five years in the period ended December 31, 2015. The selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with our “Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and the notes to the consolidated financial statements (in thousands, except per share and operational data).


Year Ended:	2015		2014		2013		2012		2011
*Results of Continuing Operations:*
Revenues	$	1,843,307	$	1,691,620	$	1,522,074	$	1,479,062	$	1,407,172
Operating income from continuing operations		235,729		234,731		185,484		184,353		179,599
Income from continuing operations	$	139,315	$	143,840	$	117,462	$	144,558	$	69,644

Income from continuing operations per common share attributable to The GEO Group, Inc.:
*Basic:*	$	1.89	$	1.99	$	1.65	$	2.39	$	1.12

*Diluted:*	$	1.88	$	1.98	$	1.64	$	2.37	$	1.11

*Weighted Average Shares Outstanding:*
Basic		73,696		72,270		71,116		60,934		63,425
Diluted		73,995		72,547		71,605		61,265		63,740
*Cash and Stock Dividends per Common Share:*
Quarterly Cash Dividends	$	2.51	$	2.33	$	2.05		0.4		—
Special Dividend-Cash and Stock(1)		—	$	—	$	—		5.68		—
*Financial Condition:*
Current assets	$	438,346	$	377,406	$	384,345	$	337,183	$	459,329
Current liabilities		278,624		254,075		223,125		259,871		288,818
Total assets		3,503,342		3,002,208		2,889,364		2,839,194		3,049,923
Long-term debt, including current portion (excluding non-recourse debt and capital leases)		1,878,870		1,465,921		1,488,721		1,351,697		1,338,384
Total Shareholders’ equity	$	1,006,837	$	1,045,993	$	1,023,976	$	1,047,304	$	1,038,521
*Operational Data:*
Facilities in operation(2)		104		92		86		87		90
Operational capacity of contracts(2)		83,878		75,302		66,130		65,949		65,787
Compensated mandays(3)		23,841,256		22,390,904		20,867,016		20,530,885		19,884,802

(1)	Special Dividend paid on December 31, 2012 in connection with the Company’s REIT conversion.

(2)	Represents the number of beds primarily from correction and detention facilities and excludes idle facilities.

(3)

Compensated mandays are calculated as follows: (a) for per diem rate facilities — the number of beds occupied by residents on a daily basis during the fiscal year; and (b) for fixed rate facilities — the capacity of the facility multiplied by the number of days the facility was in operation during the fiscal year.

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Introduction

The following discussion and analysis provides information which management believes is relevant to an assessment and understanding of our consolidated results of operations and financial condition. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of numerous factors including, but not limited to, those described above under “Item 1A. Risk Factors,” and “Forward-Looking Statements — Safe Harbor” below. The discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto.

We are a real estate investment trust specializing in the ownership, leasing and management of correctional, detention and re-entry facilities and the provision of community-based services and youth services in the United States, Australia, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. We own, lease and operate a broad range of correctional and detention facilities including maximum, medium and minimum security prisons, immigration detention centers, minimum security detention centers, and community based re-entry facilities. We offer counseling, education and/or treatment to inmates with alcohol and drug abuse problems at most of the domestic facilities we manage. We are also a provider of innovative compliance technologies, industry-leading monitoring services, and evidence-based supervision and treatment programs for community-based parolees, probationers and pretrial defendants. Additionally, we have an exclusive contract with ICE to provide supervision and reporting services designed to improve the participation of non-detained aliens in the immigration court system. We develop new facilities based on contract awards, using our project development expertise and experience to design, construct and finance what we believe are state-of-the-art facilities that maximize security and efficiency. We also provide secure transportation services for offender and detainee populations as contracted domestically and in the United Kingdom through our joint venture GEOAmey.

As of December 31, 2015, our worldwide operations included the management and/or ownership of approximately 87,000 beds at 104 correctional, detention and re-entry facilities, including idle facilities and projects under development and also included the provision of monitoring of more than 70,000 offenders in a community-based environment on behalf of approximately 900 federal, state and local correctional agencies located in all 50 states.

For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, we had consolidated revenues of $1.8 billion, $1.7 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively, and we maintained an average company wide facility occupancy rate of 91.5% including 83,878 active beds and excluding 3,484 idle beds for the year ended December 31, 2015, and 95.7% including 75,302 active beds and excluding 3,708 idle beds for the year ended December 31, 2014.

REIT Conversion

We have been a leading owner, lessor and operator of correctional, detention and re-entry facilities and provider of community-based services and youth services in the industry since 1984 and began operating as a REIT for federal income tax purposes effective January 1, 2013. As a result of the REIT conversion, we reorganized our operations and moved non-real estate components into taxable REIT subsidiaries (“TRS”). Through the TRS structure, the portion of our businesses which are non-real estate related, such as our managed-only contracts, international operations, electronic monitoring services, and other non-residential and community based facilities, are part of wholly-owned taxable subsidiaries of the REIT. Most of our business segments, which are real estate related and involve company-owned and company-leased facilities, are part of the REIT. The TRS structure allows us to maintain the strategic alignment of almost all of our diversified business segments under one entity. The TRS assets and operations will continue to be subject to federal and state corporate income taxes and to foreign taxes as applicable in the jurisdictions in which those assets and operations are located.

As a REIT, we are required to distribute annually at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined without regard to the dividends paid deduction and by excluding net capital gain) and we began paying regular distributions in 2013. We declared and paid the following regular REIT distributions to our shareholders which were treated for federal income taxes as follows:


					Ordinary Dividends
Declaration Date	Payment Date	Record Date	Distribution Per Share		Qualified(1)		Non-Qualified		Nondividend Distributions(2)		Aggregate Payment Amount (millions)
January 17, 2013	March 1, 2013	February 15, 2013	$	0.50	$	0.1551057	$	0.3448943		—	$	35.7
May 7, 2013	June 3, 2013	May 20, 2013	$	0.50	$	0.1551057	$	0.3448943		—	$	35.8
July 30, 2013	August 29, 2013	August 19, 2013	$	0.50	$	0.1551057	$	0.3448943		—	$	36.1
November 1, 2013	November 26, 2013	November 14, 2013	$	0.55	$	0.1706163	$	0.3793837		—	$	39.6
February 18, 2014	March 14, 2014	March 3, 2014	$	0.57	$	0.0448272	$	0.4154156	$	0.1097572	$	41.1
April 28, 2014	May 27, 2014	May 15, 2014	$	0.57	$	0.0448272	$	0.4154156	$	0.1097572	$	41.5
August 5, 2014	August 29, 2014	August 18, 2014	$	0.57	$	0.0448272	$	0.4154156	$	0.1097572	$	41.4
November 5, 2014	November 26, 2014	November 17, 2014	$	0.62	$	0.0487594	$	0.4518556	$	0.1193850	$	46.0
February 6, 2015	February 27, 2015	February 17, 2015	$	0.62	$	0.0529749	$	0.4139721	$	0.1530530	$	46.0
April 29, 2015	May 21, 2015	May 11, 2015	$	0.62	$	0.0529749	$	0.4139721	$	0.1530530	$	46.3
July 31, 2015	August 24, 2015	August 14, 2015	$	0.62	$	0.0529749	$	0.4139721	$	0.1530530	$	46.3
November 3, 2015	November 25, 2015	November 16, 2015	$	0.65	$	0.0555382	$	0.4340030	$	0.1604588	$	48.5

(1)	The amount constitutes a “Qualified Dividend”, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service.

(2)	The amount constitutes a “Return of Capital”, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service.

Critical Accounting Policies

We believe that the accounting policies described below are critical to understanding our business, results of operations and financial condition because they involve the more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. We have discussed the development, selection and application of our critical accounting policies with the audit committee of our Board of Directors, and our audit committee has reviewed our disclosure relating to our critical accounting policies in this “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. As such, we are required to make certain estimates, judgments and assumptions that we believe are reasonable based upon the information available. These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. We routinely evaluate our estimates based on historical experience and on various other assumptions that our management believes are reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. If actual results significantly differ from our estimates, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially impacted.

Other significant accounting policies, primarily those with lower levels of uncertainty than those discussed below, are also critical to understanding our consolidated financial statements. The notes to our consolidated financial statements contain additional information related to our accounting policies and should be read in conjunction with this discussion.

Revenue Recognition

Facility management revenues are recognized as services are provided under facility management contracts with approved government appropriations based on a net rate per day per inmate or on a fixed monthly rate, as applicable. A limited number of our contracts have provisions upon which a small portion of the revenue for the contract is based on the performance of certain targets. Revenue based on the performance of certain targets is less than 1% of our

consolidated annual revenues. These performance targets are based on specific criteria to be met over specific periods of time. Such criteria includes our ability to achieve certain contractual benchmarks relative to the quality of service we provide, non-occurrence of certain disruptive events, effectiveness of our quality control programs and our responsiveness to customer requirements and concerns. For the limited number of contracts where revenue is based on the performance of certain targets, revenue is either (i) recorded pro rata when revenue is fixed and determinable or (ii) recorded when the specified time period lapses. In many instances, we are a party to more than one contract with a single entity. In these instances, each contract is accounted for separately.

Construction revenues are recognized from our contracts with certain customers to perform construction and design services (“project development services”) for various facilities. In these instances, we act as the primary developer and subcontract with bonded National and/or Regional Design Build Contractors. These construction revenues are recognized as earned on a percentage of completion basis measured by the percentage of costs incurred to date as compared to the estimated total cost for each contract. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts and changes to cost estimates are made in the period in which we determine that such losses and changes are probable. Typically, we enter into fixed price contracts and do not perform additional work unless approved change orders are in place. Costs attributable to unapproved change orders are expensed in the period in which the costs are incurred if we believe that it is not probable that the costs will be recovered through a change in the contract price. If we believe that it is probable that the costs will be recovered through a change in the contract price, costs related to unapproved change orders are expensed in the period in which they are incurred, and contract revenue is recognized to the extent of the costs incurred. Revenue in excess of the costs attributable to unapproved change orders is not recognized until the change order is approved. Changes in job performance, job conditions, and estimated profitability, including those arising from contract penalty provisions, and final contract settlements, may result in revisions to estimated costs and income, and are recognized in the period in which the revisions are determined. For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, there have been no changes in job performance, job conditions and estimated profitability that would require a revision to the estimated costs and income related to project development services. As the primary contractor, we are exposed to the various risks associated with construction, including the risk of cost overruns. Accordingly, we record our construction revenue on a gross basis and include the related cost of construction activities in Operating Expenses.

When evaluating multiple element arrangements for certain contracts where we provide project development services to our clients in addition to standard management services, we follow revenue recognition guidance for multiple element arrangements under ASC 605-25 “Multiple Element Arrangements”. This revenue recognition guidance related to multiple deliverables in an arrangement provides guidance on determining if separate contracts should be evaluated as a single arrangement and if an arrangement involves a single unit of accounting or separate units of accounting and if the arrangement is determined to have separate units, how to allocate amounts received in the arrangement for revenue recognition purposes. In instances where we provide these project development services and subsequent management services, generally, the arrangement results in no delivered elements at the onset of the agreement. The elements are delivered, and revenue is recognized, over the contract period as the project development and management services are performed. Project development services are generally not provided separately to a customer without a management contract. We have determined that the significant deliverables in such an arrangement during the project development phase and services performed under the management contract qualify as separate units of accounting. With respect to the deliverables during the management services period, we regularly negotiate such contracts and provide management services to our customers outside of any arrangement for construction. We establish per diem rates for all of our management contracts based on, amongst other factors, expected and guaranteed occupancy, costs of providing the services and desired margins. As such, the fair value of the consideration to each deliverable was determined using our estimated selling price for the project development deliverable and vendor specific objective evidence for the facility management services deliverable.

Reserves for Insurance Losses

The nature of our business exposes us to various types of third-party legal claims, including, but not limited to, civil rights claims relating to conditions of confinement and/or mistreatment, sexual misconduct claims brought by prisoners or detainees, product liability claims, intellectual property infringement claims, claims relating to employment matters (including, but not limited to, employment discrimination claims, union grievances and wage and hour claims), property loss claims, environmental claims, automobile liability claims, contractual claims and claims for personal injury or other damages resulting from contact with our facilities, programs, electronic monitoring products, personnel or prisoners, including damages arising from a prisoner’s escape or from a disturbance or riot at a facility. In addition, our management contracts generally require us to indemnify the governmental agency against any damages to which the governmental agency may be subject in connection with such claims or litigation. We maintain a broad program of insurance coverage for these general types of claims, except for claims relating to employment matters, for which we carry no insurance. There can be no assurance that our insurance coverage will be adequate to cover all claims to which we may be exposed. It is our general practice to bring merged or acquired companies into our corporate master policies in order to take advantage of certain economies of scale.

We currently maintain a general liability policy and excess liability policies with total limits of $77.0 million per occurrence and $100 million in the aggregate covering the operations of U.S. Corrections & Detention, GEO Care’s community based services, GEO Care’s youth services and BI. We have a claims-made liability insurance program with a specific loss limit of $35.0 million per occurrence and in the aggregate related to medical professional liability claims arising out of correctional healthcare services. We are uninsured for any claims in excess of these limits. We also maintain insurance to cover property and other casualty risks including, workers’ compensation, environmental liability and automobile liability.

For most casualty insurance policies, we carry substantial deductibles or self-insured retentions of $3.0 million per occurrence for general liability and medical professional liability, $2.0 million per occurrence for workers’ compensation and $1.0 million per occurrence for automobile liability. In addition, certain of our facilities located in Florida and other high-risk hurricane areas carry substantial windstorm deductibles. Since hurricanes are considered unpredictable future events, no reserves have been established to pre-fund for potential windstorm damage. Limited commercial availability of certain types of insurance relating to windstorm exposure in coastal areas and earthquake exposure mainly in California and the Pacific Northwest may prevent the Company from insuring some of its facilities to full replacement value.

With respect to operations in South Africa, the United Kingdom and Australia, we utilize a combination of locally-procured insurance and global policies to meet contractual insurance requirements and protect us. In addition to these policies, our Australian subsidiary carries tail insurance on a general liability policy related to a discontinued contract.

Of the insurance policies discussed above, our most significant insurance reserves relate to workers’ compensation, general liability and auto claims. These reserves are undiscounted and were $52.8 million and $49.5 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively and are included in accrued expenses in the accompanying balance sheets. We use statistical and actuarial methods to estimate amounts for claims that have been reported but not paid and claims incurred but not reported. In applying these methods and assessing their results, we consider such factors as historical frequency and severity of claims at each of our facilities, claim development, payment patterns and changes in the nature of our business, among other factors. Such factors are analyzed for each of our business segments. Our estimates may be impacted by such factors as increases in the market price for medical services and unpredictability of the size of jury awards. We also may experience variability between our estimates and the actual settlement due to limitations inherent in the estimation process, including our ability to estimate costs of processing and settling claims in a timely manner as well as our ability to accurately estimate our exposure at the onset of a claim. Because we have high deductible insurance policies, the amount of our insurance expense is dependent on our ability to control our claims experience. If actual losses

related to insurance claims significantly differ from our estimates, our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely impacted.

Income Taxes

The consolidated financial statements reflect provisions for federal, state, local and foreign income taxes. We recognize deferred tax assets and liabilities for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax basis, as well as operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. We measure deferred tax assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences and carryforwards are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities as a result of a change in tax rates is recognized as income in the period that includes the enactment date. Refer to Note 18- Income Taxes in the notes to the consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K. Effective January 1, 2013, as a REIT that plans to distribute 100% of its taxable income to shareholders, we do not expect to pay federal income taxes at the REIT level (including our qualified REIT subsidiaries), as the resulting dividends paid deduction will generally offset our taxable income. Since we do not expect to pay taxes on our REIT taxable income, we do not expect to be able to recognize such deferred tax assets and liabilities.

Deferred income taxes are determined based on the estimated future tax effects of differences between the financial statement and tax basis of assets and liabilities given the provisions of enacted tax laws. Significant judgments are required to determine the consolidated provision for income taxes. Deferred income tax provisions and benefits are based on changes to the assets or liabilities from year to year. Realization of our deferred tax assets is dependent upon many factors such as tax regulations applicable to the jurisdictions in which we operate, estimates of future taxable income and the character of such taxable income.

Additionally, we must use significant judgment in addressing uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws and regulations. If actual circumstances differ from our assumptions, adjustments to the carrying value of deferred tax assets or liabilities may be required, which may result in an adverse impact on the results of our operations and our effective tax rate. Valuation allowances are recorded related to deferred tax assets based on the “more likely than not” criteria. We have not made any significant changes to the way we account for our deferred tax assets and liabilities in any year presented in the consolidated financial statements. Based on our estimate of future earnings and our favorable earnings history, we currently expect full realization of the deferred tax assets net of any recorded valuation allowances. Furthermore, tax positions taken by us may not be fully sustained upon examination by the taxing authorities. In determining the adequacy of our provision (benefit) for income taxes, potential settlement outcomes resulting from income tax examinations are regularly assessed. As such, the final outcome of tax examinations, including the total amount payable or the timing of any such payments upon resolution of these issues, cannot be estimated with certainty.

Property and Equipment

Property and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Buildings and improvements are depreciated over 2 to 50 years. Equipment and furniture and fixtures are depreciated over 3 to 10 years. Straight-line and accelerated methods of depreciation are generally used for income tax purposes. Leasehold improvements are amortized on a straight-line basis over the shorter of the useful life of the improvement or the term of the lease. We perform ongoing evaluations of the estimated useful lives of the property and equipment for depreciation purposes. The estimated useful lives are determined and continually evaluated based on the period over which services are expected to be rendered by the asset. If the assessment indicates that assets will be used for a longer or shorter period than previously anticipated, the useful lives of the assets are revised, resulting in a change in estimate. We have not made any changes in estimates during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013. Maintenance and repairs are expensed as incurred. Interest is capitalized in connection with the

construction of company-owned correctional and detention facilities. Cost for self-constructed correctional and detention facilities includes direct materials and labor, capitalized interest and certain other indirect costs associated with construction of the facility, such as property taxes, other indirect labor and related benefits and payroll taxes. The Company begins the capitalization of costs during the pre-construction phase, which is the period during which costs are incurred to evaluate the site, and continues until the facility is substantially complete and ready for occupancy. Labor costs capitalized for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 were not significant. Capitalized interest is recorded as part of the asset to which it relates and is amortized over the asset’s estimated useful life.

Asset Impairments

The Company had property and equipment of $1.9 billion and $1.8 billion as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, including approximately 3,328 vacant beds at four idle facilities with a carrying value of $35.2 million which are being marketed to potential customers as of December 31, 2015, excluding equipment and other assets that can be easily transferred for use at other facilities.

We review long-lived assets to be held and used for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such assets may not be fully recoverable. Events that would trigger an impairment assessment include deterioration of profits for a business segment that has long-lived assets, or when other changes occur that might impair recovery of long-lived assets such as the termination of a management contract or a significant decrease in inmate population. If impairment indicators are present, we perform a recoverability test to determine whether or not an impairment loss should be measured.

We test idle facilities for impairment upon notification that the facilities will no longer be utilized by the customer. If a long-lived asset is part of a group that includes other assets, the unit of accounting for the long-lived asset is its group. Generally, we group assets by facility for the purpose of considering whether any impairment exists. The estimates of recoverability are based on projected undiscounted cash flows associated with actual marketing efforts where available or, in other instances, projected undiscounted cash flows that are comparable to historical cash flows from management contracts at similar facilities and sensitivity analyses that consider reductions to such cash flows. Our sensitivity analyses include adjustments to projected cash flows compared to the historical cash flows due to current business conditions which impact per diem rates as well as labor and other operating costs, changes related to facility mission due to changes in prospective clients, and changes in projected capacity and occupancy rates. We also factor in prolonged periods of vacancies as well as the time and costs required to ramp up facility population once a contract is obtained. We perform the impairment analyses on an annual basis for each of the idle facilities and update each quarter for market developments for the potential utilization of each of the facilities in order to identify events that may cause us to reconsider the most recent assumptions. Such events could include negotiations with a prospective customer for the utilization of an idle facility at terms significantly less favorable than used in our most recent impairment analysis, or changes in legislation surrounding a particular facility that could impact our ability to house certain types of inmates at such facility. Further, a substantial increase in the number of available beds at other facilities that we own, or in the marketplace, could lead to deterioration in market conditions and projected cash flows. Although they are not frequently received, an unsolicited offer to purchase any of our idle facilities, at amounts that are less than their carrying value could also cause us to reconsider the assumptions used in the most recent impairment analysis. We have identified marketing prospects to utilize each of the remaining currently idled facilities and do not see any catalysts that would result in a current impairment. However, we can provide no assurance that we will be able to secure management contracts to utilize our idle facilities, or that we will not incur impairment charges in the future. In all cases, the projected undiscounted cash flows in our analysis as of December 31, 2015 substantially exceeded the carrying amounts of each facility.

Our evaluations also take into consideration historical experience in securing new management contracts to utilize facilities that had been previously idled for periods comparable to or in excess of the periods our currently idle facilities have been idle. Such previously idle facilities are currently being operated under contracts that

generate cash flows resulting in the recoverability of the net book value of the previously idled facilities by substantial amounts. Due to a variety of factors, the lead time to negotiate contracts with federal and state agencies to utilize idle bed capacity is generally lengthy which has historically resulted in periods of idleness similar to the ones we are currently experiencing. As a result of our analyses, we determined each of these assets to have recoverable values substantially in excess of the corresponding carrying values.

By their nature, these estimates contain uncertainties with respect to the extent and timing of the respective cash flows due to potential delays or material changes to forecasted terms and conditions in contracts with prospective customers that could impact the estimate of projected cash flows. Notwithstanding the effects the current economy has had on our customers’ demand for prison beds in the short term which has led to our decision to idle certain facilities, we believe the long-term trends favor an increase in the utilization of our idle correctional facilities. This belief is also based on our experience in working with governmental agencies faced with significant budgetary challenges which is a primary contributing factor to the lack of appropriated funding to build new bed capacity by federal and state agencies.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In January 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Financial Instruments — Overall,” The main provisions of ASU No. 2016-01 applicable to public business entities are: (i) equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) are required to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income; (ii) simplification of the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment; (iii) eliminates the requirement for public business entities to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet; (iv) requires public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; (v) requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments; (vi) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the balance sheet in the accompanying notes to the financial statements; and (vii) clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. The amendments resulting from ASU No. 2016-01 are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The implementation of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In November 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, “Income Taxes,” which simplifies the presentation of deferred income taxes by requiring that all deferred tax assets and liabilities be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. Current Generally Accepted Accounting Principles requires entities to separate deferred income tax assets and liabilities into current and noncurrent amounts in a classified statement of financial position. The amendments resulting from ASU No. 2015-17 are effective for public business entities for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods. The implementation of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In September 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-16, “Business Combinations,” which eliminates the requirement to restate prior period financial statements for measurement period adjustments following a business combination. The new guidance requires that the cumulative impact of a measurement period adjustment (including the impact on prior periods) be recognized in the reporting period in which the adjustment is identified. The prior period impact of the adjustment should be either presented separately on the face of the income statement or disclosed in the notes. The amendments resulting from ASU No. 2015-16 are effective for

public business entities for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. The amendments in this update should be applied prospectively to adjustments to provisional amounts that occur after the effective date of this update with earlier application permitted for financial statements that have not been issued. The implementation of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In August 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14 to delay the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers,” for public companies from annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016 to annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017. ASU No. 2014-09 clarifies the principles for recognizing revenue and develops a common revenue standard for U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”). We intend to adopt ASU No. 2014-09 on its effective date and expect to complete our assessment of whether the adoption of this standard would have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows by late 2016 or early 2017.

In April 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03 “Interest-Imputation of Interest,” which is intended to simplify the presentation of debt issuance costs. The amendments require that debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability be presented in the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, consistent with debt discounts. The amendments resulting from ASU No. 2015-03 are effective for public business entities for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015 with early adoption permitted for financial statements that have not previously been issued. The guidance does not address presentation or subsequent measurement of debt issuance costs related to line-of-credit arrangements. In August 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-15 “Interest-Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30) Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to Staff Announcement at June 18, 2015 EITF Meeting,” which states that given the absence of authoritative guidance within ASU No. 2015-03 for debt issuance costs related to line-of-credit arrangements, the SEC staff would not object to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs as an asset and subsequently amortizing the deferred debt issuance costs ratably over the term of the line-of-credit arrangement, regardless of whether there are any outstanding borrowings on the line-of-credit arrangement. The implementation of these standards are not expected to have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

In February 2015, FASB issued ASU No. 2015-02 “Consolidation,” which modifies the evaluation of whether limited partnerships and similar legal entities are variable interest entities (“VIEs”) or voting interest entities, eliminates the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership, affects the consolidation analysis of reporting entities that are involved with VIEs, particularly those that have fee arrangements and related party relationships and provides a scope exception from consolidation guidance for reporting entities with interests in legal entities that are required to comply with or operate in accordance with requirements that are similar to those in Rule 2a-7 of the Investment Company Act of 1940 for registered money market funds. The amendments resulting from ASU No. 2015-02 are effective for public business entities for fiscal years, and for interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015 with early adoption permitted. The implementation of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Other recent accounting pronouncements issued by the FASB (including its Emerging Issues Task Force), the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the SEC did not, or are not expected to, have a material effect on our results of operations or financial position.

Results of Operations

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the notes to the consolidated financial statements accompanying this report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results may differ materially from those

anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including, but not limited to, those described under “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and those included in other portions of this report.

The discussion of our results of operations below excludes the results of discontinued operations reported in 2013. Refer to Note 3 — Discontinued Operations included in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further information.

2015 versus 2014

Revenues


	2015		% of Revenue			2014		% of Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
U.S. Corrections & Detention	$	1,240,440		67.3	%	$	1,108,397		65.5	%	$	132,043			11.9	%
GEO Care		340,918		18.5	%		329,253		19.5	%		11,665			3.5	%
International Services		154,902		8.4	%	$	197,992		11.7	%	$	(43,090	)		(21.8	)%
Facility Construction & Design		107,047		5.8	%		55,978		3.3	%		51,069			91.2	%

Total	$	1,843,307		100.0	%	$	1,691,620		100.0	%	$	151,687			9.0	%

U.S. Corrections & Detention

Revenues increased in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to aggregate increases of $103.7 million resulting from: (i) the activation of our Alexandria Staging facility in November 2014; (ii) the activation of our McFarland Female Community Reentry facility; (iii) the activation of our company-owned Mesa Verde facility; (iv) our assumption of the management of the 3,400-bed Arizona State Prison-Kingman in Kingman, Arizona on December 1, 2015; (v) the activation of our North Lake Correctional Facility in June 2015; and (vi) the acquisition of the LCS Facilities in February 2015. We also experienced aggregate increases in revenues of $32.3 million at certain of our facilities primarily due to net increases in population, transportation services and/or rates. These increases were partially offset by an aggregate decrease of $4.0 million primarily due to contract terminations.

The number of compensated mandays in U.S. Corrections & Detention facilities was 20.3 million in 2015 as compared to 18.7 million in 2014. We experienced an aggregate net increase of approximately 1.6 million mandays as a result of our new contracts discussed above and also as a result of population increases at certain facilities. These increases were partially offset by decreases resulting from contract terminations. We look at the average occupancy in our facilities to determine how we are managing our available beds. The average occupancy is calculated by taking compensated mandays as a percentage of capacity. The average occupancy in our U.S. Corrections & Detention facilities was 91.5% and 96.3% of capacity in 2015 and 2014, respectively, excluding idle facilities. Average occupancy declined to 91.5% from 96.3% and was driven primarily by our acquisition and integration of eight correctional and detention LCS Facilities totaling more than 6,500 beds in February 2015. As we have previously disclosed, the LCS Facilities have been historically underutilized. As we continue to integrate the LCS facilities, we expect our occupancy rate to increase.

GEO Care

The increase in revenues for GEO Care in 2015 compared to 2014 is primarily attributable to our acquisition of Soberlink, ISAP growth and new programs and program growth at our community based and reentry centers.

International Services

Revenues for International Services in 2015 compared to 2014 decreased by $43.1 million. Contributing to the decrease was the result of (i) foreign exchange rate fluctuations of $(29.8) million resulting from the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against certain international currencies; and (ii) a decrease of $16.5 million in our

United Kingdom subsidiary primarily due to the winding down of our Harmondworth management contract. These decreases were partially offset by an aggregate increase of $3.2 million primarily related to population increases at our Australian subsidiary.

Facility Construction & Design

The increase in revenues for our Facility Construction & Design services is due to a full year of design and construction activity for our new Ravenhall Prison Contract, which was executed in September 2014, with the Department of Justice in the State of Victoria, Australia. Refer to Note 8 — Contract Receivable of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Operating Expenses


	2015		% of Segment Revenues			2014		% of Segment Revenues			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
U.S. Corrections & Detention	$	888,009		71.6	%	$	781,680		70.5	%	$	106,329			13.6	%
GEO Care		224,530		65.9	%		219,335		66.6	%		5,195			2.4	%
International Services		144,548		93.3	%		189,147		95.5	%		(44,599	)		(23.6	)%
Facility Construction & Design		106,695		99.7	%		55,538		99.2	%		51,157			92.1	%

Total	$	1,363,782		74.0	%	$	1,245,700		73.6	%	$	118,082			9.5	%

U.S. Corrections & Detention

The increase in operating expenses for U.S. Corrections & Detention reflects an increase of $71.4 million due to (i) the activation of our Alexandria Staging facility in November 2014; (ii) the activation of our McFarland Female Community Reentry facility; (iii) the activation of our company-owned Mesa Verde facility; (iv) our assumption of the management of the 3,400-bed Arizona State Prison-Kingman in Kingman, Arizona on December 1, 2015; (v) the activation of our North Lake Correctional Facility in June 2015 and (vi) the acquisition of the LCS Facilities in February 2015. We also experienced increases of $37.7 million at certain of our facilities primarily attributable to expenditures related to the expansion of the delivery of offender rehabilitation services under our GEO Continuum of Care platform, net population increases, increased transportation services and the variable costs associated with those increases. These increases were partially offset by an aggregate decrease of $2.8 million primarily related to contract terminations.

GEO Care

Operating expenses for GEO Care increased by $5.2 million during 2015 from 2014 primarily due to our acquisition of Soberlink, ISAP growth and new programs and program growth at our community based and reentry centers.

International Services

Operating expenses for International Services in 2015 compared to 2014 decreased by $45.0 million. Contributing to the decrease was (i) the result of foreign exchange rate fluctuations of $(27.5) million resulting from the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against certain international currencies; and (ii) a decrease of $18.3 million in our United Kingdom subsidiary primarily due to the winding down of our Harmondworth management contract. These decreases were partially offset by an aggregate increase of $0.8 million primarily attributable to our South African subsidiary related to increases in labor costs.

Facility Construction & Design

The increase in operating expenses for our Facility Construction & Design services is due to a full year of design and construction activity for our new Ravenhall Prison Contract, which was executed in September 2014, with the Department of Justice in the State of Victoria, Australia. Refer to Note 8 — Contract Receivable of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Depreciation and Amortization


	2015		% of Segment Revenue			2014		% of Segment Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
U.S. Corrections & Detention	$	70,486		5.7	%	$	63,690		5.7	%	$	6,796			10.7	%
GEO Care		33,582		9.9	%		29,766		9.0	%		3,816			12.8	%
International Services		2,688		1.7	%		2,715		1.4	%		(27	)		(1.0	)%

Total	$	106,756		5.8	%	$	96,171		5.7	%	$	10,585			11.0	%

U.S. Corrections & Detention

U.S. Corrections & Detention depreciation and amortization expense increased by $6.8 million in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to renovations made at several of our facilities and also our acquisition of the LCS Facilities in February 2015.

GEO Care

GEO Care depreciation and amortization increased in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to renovations made at several of our locations.

International Services

Depreciation and amortization expense was fairly consistent in 2015 compared to 2014 as there were no significant additions or renovations during 2015 or 2014 at our international subsidiaries.

Other Unallocated Operating Expenses


	2015		% of Revenue			2014		% of Revenue			$ Change		% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
General and Administrative Expenses	$	137,040		7.4	%	$	115,018		6.8	%	$	22,022		19.1	%

General and administrative expenses comprise substantially all of our other unallocated operating expenses which primarily includes corporate management salaries and benefits, professional fees and other administrative expenses. The increase in general and administrative expenses in 2015 compared to 2014 was primarily attributable to increases in (i) business development expenses of $6.0 million related to new contract opportunities both domestically and internationally; (ii) expenditures related to the expansion of the delivery of offender rehabilitation services under our GEO Continuum of Care platform of $1.9 million; (iii) non-cash stock based compensation included in general and administrative expenses of $4.6 million; (iv) nonrecurring professional fees of $3.0 million incurred in connection with our acquisitions of Soberlink and the LCS Facilities in 2015; and (v) exit charges of $4.6 million related to non-core operating leases. We also experienced increases related to normal compensation adjustments and professional fees.

Non Operating Income and Expense

Interest Income and Interest Expense


	2015		% of Revenue			2014		% of Revenue			$ Change		% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
Interest Income	$	11,578		0.6	%	$	4,747		0.3	%	$	6,831		143.9	%
Interest Expense	$	106,136		5.8	%	$	87,368		5.2	%	$	18,768		21.5	%

Interest income increased in 2015 primarily due to additional interest earned on our long-term contract receivable of $8.2 million in connection with the Ravenhall prison project. This increase was partially offset by lower cash balances at our international subsidiaries. Refer to Note 8-Contract Receivable of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further information.

Interest expense increased in 2015 compared to 2014 primarily due to: (i) additional interest of $10.6 million on our $250 million 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 which were issued in September 2014; (ii) additional Revolver interest incurred in connection with our acquisition of the LCS Facilities in February 2015 of $6.8 million; (iii) additional interest incurred of $1.2 million related to our acquisition of Soberlink in May 2015; and (iv) additional construction loan interest of $6.3 million related to our prison project in Ravenhall, Australia. These increases were partially offset by: (i) a decrease of $4.4 million as a portion of the proceeds from our $250 million 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 were used to pay down our Revolver; and (ii) a decrease of $2.5 million as a result of the payoff of our non-recourse debt related to our Northwest Detention Center in October 2014. Refer to Note 15 - Debt of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Provision for Income Taxes


	2015		Effective Rate			2014		Effective Rate			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
Provision for Income Taxes	$	7,389		5.2	%	$	14,093		9.3	%	$	(6,704	)		(47.6	)%

The provision for income taxes during 2015 decreased by $6.7 million compared to 2014 and the effective tax rate decreased from 9.3% to 5.2%. The decrease is primarily attributable to non-recurring items in 2015. As a REIT, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our taxable income to shareholders and in turn are allowed a deduction for the distribution at the REIT level. Our wholly-owned taxable REIT subsidiaries, or TRS, continue to be fully subject to federal, state and foreign income taxes, as applicable. For 2016, we estimate our annual effective tax rate to be in the range of approximately 8% to 9% exclusive of any non-recurring items. As a result of a decrease in the incremental business profitability in our taxable REIT subsidiaries, or TRS, our composition of taxable income changed resulting in a decrease in our estimated tax rate for this year.

Equity in Earnings of Affiliates


	2015		% of Revenue			2014		% of Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
Equity in Earnings of Affiliates	$	5,533		0.3	%	$	5,823		0.3	%	$	(290	)		(5.0	)%

Equity in earnings of affiliates, presented net of income taxes, represents the earnings of SACS and GEOAmey, respectively. Overall, we experienced a slight decrease in equity in earnings of affiliates during 2015 compared to 2014, which is primarily due to less favorable performance from the operations of SACS during 2015 compared to 2014 along with foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations.

2014 versus 2013

Revenues


	2014		% of Revenue			2013		% of Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
U.S. Corrections & Detention	$	1,108,397		65.5	%	$	1,011,818		66.5	%	$	96,579			9.5	%
GEO Care		329,253		19.5	%		302,094		19.8	%		27,159			9.0	%
International Services		197,992		11.7	%		208,162		13.7	%		(10,170	)		(4.9	)%
Facility Construction & Design		55,978		3.3	%		—		—	%		55,978			—	%

Total	$	1,691,620		100.0	%	$	1,522,074		100.0	%	$	169,546			11.1	%

U.S. Corrections & Detention

Revenues increased in 2014 compared to 2013 primarily due to aggregate increases of $82.3 million resulting from: (i) the activation of our Central Valley, Desert View and McFarland correctional facilities, as well as our 100-bed expansion of the Company-owned Golden State correctional facility, in the fourth quarter of 2013; (ii) our assumption of the management of the Moore Haven, Bay and Graceville correctional facilities in the first quarter of 2014; and (iii) our 400-bed expansion of the Rio Grande correctional facility in the first quarter of 2014 and 640-bed expansion of the Adelanto correctional facility in the second quarter of 2014. We also experienced aggregate increases in revenues of $30.9 million at certain of our facilities primarily due to net increases in population, transportation services and/or rates, including the increased revenues due to our purchase of the previously managed-only 1,287-bed Joe Corley Detention Center in June 2013. These increases were partially offset by an aggregate decrease of $16.7 million primarily due to contract terminations.

The number of compensated mandays in U.S. Corrections & Detention facilities was 18.7 million in 2014 as compared to 17.1 million in 2013. We experienced an aggregate net increase of approximately 1.6 million mandays as a result of our new contracts discussed above and also as a result of population increases at certain facilities. These increases were partially offset by decreases resulting from contract terminations. We look at the average occupancy in our facilities to determine how we are managing our available beds. The average occupancy is calculated by taking compensated mandays as a percentage of capacity. The average occupancy in our U.S. Corrections & Detention facilities was 96.3% and 95.4% of capacity in 2014 and 2013, respectively, excluding idle facilities.

GEO Care

The increase in revenues for GEO Care in 2014 compared to 2013 is primarily attributable to net increases of $26.8 million due to increased counts in our electronic monitoring contracts and ISAP program at BI and BI’s acquisition of Protocol in the first quarter of 2014. Protocol accounted for $10.1 million of the $26.8 million increase. In addition, we experienced a net increase of $7.0 million primarily due to new programs and program growth at our community based and re-entry centers. These increases were partially offset by decreases in revenues of $6.6 million related to contract terminations and census declines at certain facilities.

International Services

The decrease in revenues for International Services in 2014 compared to 2013 is primarily due to the result of foreign exchange rate fluctuations of $(12.0) million. Revenues also decreased by $7.3 million in our United Kingdom subsidiary due to the discontinuation of our Harmondworth management contract. These decreases were partially offset by an aggregate net increase of $9.1 million primarily attributable to our Australian subsidiary related to population increases, contractual increases linked to the inflationary index and the provision of additional services under certain contracts.

Facility Construction & Design

The increase in revenues for our Facility Construction & Design services is due to the commencement of design and construction activity for our new Ravenhall Prison Contract executed in September 2014 with the Department of Justice in the State of Victoria, Australia. Refer to Note 8 — Contract Receivable of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Operating Expenses


	2014		% of Segment Revenues			2013		% of Segment Revenues			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
U.S. Corrections & Detention	$	781,680		70.5	%	$	731,788		72.3	%	$	49,892			6.8	%
GEO Care		219,335		66.6	%		200,826		66.5	%		18,509			9.2	%
International Services		189,147		95.5	%		192,251		92.4	%		(3,104	)		(1.6	)%
Facility Construction & Design		55,538		—	%		—		—	%		55,538			—	%

Total	$	1,245,700		73.6	%	$	1,124,865		73.9	%	$	120,835			10.7	%

Operating expenses consist of those expenses incurred in the operation and management of our correctional, detention and GEO Care facilities and expenses incurred in our Facility Construction & Design segment, except that there were no significant expenses incurred in such segment for 2013.

U.S. Corrections & Detention

Operating expenses increased in 2014 compared to 2013 primarily due to aggregate increases of $61.3 million resulting from: (i) the activation of our Central Valley, Desert View and McFarland correctional facilities, as well as our 100-bed expansion of the Company-owned Golden State correctional facility, in the fourth quarter of 2013; (ii) our assumption of the management of the Moore Haven, Bay and Graceville correctional facilities in the first quarter of 2014; and (iii) our 400-bed expansion of the Rio Grande correctional facility in the first quarter of 2014 and 640-bed expansion of the Adelanto correctional facility in the second quarter of 2014. We also experienced aggregate increases in expenses of $12.0 million at certain of our facilities primarily due to net increases in population, transportation services and/or rates. These increases were partially offset by an aggregate decrease of $17.3 million primarily due to contract terminations. Additionally, in 2013, in connection with our annual actuarial analysis we recorded an additional $6.1 million to our insurance reserves which is why we experienced a decrease in our operating expenses as a percentage of revenues in 2014. In 2014, additional charges to our insurance reserves were not as significant based on the same annual actuarial analysis.

GEO Care

Operating expenses for GEO Care increased by approximately $18.5 million during 2014 from 2013 primarily due to increases of approximately $25.4 million due to the following: (i) variable costs associated with increases in counts in our electronic monitoring contracts and ISAP program at BI; (ii) new programs and program growth at our community based and re-entry centers; and (iii) BI’s acquisition of Protocol in the first quarter of 2014. These increases were partially offset by decreases that resulted from contract terminations and census declines of approximately $6.8 million.

International Services

Operating expenses for our International Services segment during 2014 decreased $3.1 million over 2013 which was primarily attributable to the impact of foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations of $(10.9) million. In addition, there was a net decrease of $6.2 million related to the discontinuation of our Harmondsworth

contract at our subsidiary in the United Kingdom in September 2014. These decreases were partially offset by an increase of $2.2 million related to bid costs incurred at our subsidiary in the United Kingdom. Both the termination of our Harmondsworth contract and the bid costs incurred in the United Kingdom resulted in an increase in operating expenses as a percentage of revenues. These decreases were also partially offset by a net increase of $11.8 million primarily attributable to our Australian subsidiary due to population increases, contractual increases in labor and additional services provided under new contracts at those facilities.

Facility Construction & Design

The increase in operating expenses for our Facility Construction & Design services is due to the commencement of design and construction activity for our new Ravenhall Prison Contract executed in September 2014 with the Department of Justice in the State of Victoria, Australia. Refer to Note 8 — Contract Receivable of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Depreciation and Amortization


	2014		% of Segment Revenue			2013		% of Segment Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
U.S. Corrections & Detention	$	63,690		5.7	%	$	62,112		6.1	%	$	1,578			2.5	%
GEO Care		29,766		9.0	%		29,989		9.9	%		(223	)		(0.7	)%
International Services		2,715		1.4	%		2,563		1.2	%		152			5.9	%

Total	$	96,171		5.7	%	$	94,664		6.2	%	$	1,507			1.6	%

U.S. Corrections & Detention

U.S. Corrections & Detention depreciation and amortization expense increased by $1.6 million in 2014 compared to 2013 primarily due to renovations made at several of our facilities and also our purchase of the 1,287-bed Joe Corley Detention Center in June 2013.

GEO Care

GEO Care depreciation and amortization decreased slightly in 2014 compared to 2013. The decrease is primarily due to certain assets becoming fully depreciated in 2014.

International Services

Depreciation and amortization expense increased slightly in 2014 compared to 2013 primarily due to increases in capital expenditures at our Australian subsidiary. This increase was partially offset by exchange rate fluctuations.

Other Unallocated Operating Expenses


	2014		% of Revenue			2013		% of Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
General and Administrative Expenses	$	115,018		6.8	%	$	117,061		7.7	%	$	(2,043	)		(1.7	)%

General and administrative expenses comprise substantially all of our other unallocated operating expenses primarily including corporate management salaries and benefits, professional fees and other administrative expenses. The decrease in general and administrative expenses in 2014 compared to 2013 was primarily

attributable to nonrecurring professional fees incurred in 2013 associated with our conversion to a REIT. The decrease in general and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenue is primary due to new contracts added or expanded in 2014 which did not have a corresponding direct increase in overhead costs.

Non Operating Income and Expense

Interest Income and Interest Expense


	2014		% of Revenue			2013		% of Revenue			$ Change		% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
Interest Income	$	4,747		0.3	%	$	3,324		0.2	%	$	1,423		42.8	%
Interest Expense	$	87,368		5.2	%	$	83,004		5.5	%	$	4,364		5.3	%

The majority of our interest income generated in 2014 and 2013 is from the cash balances at our foreign subsidiaries. Interest income increased in 2014 primarily due to interest earned on our long-term contract receivable in connection with the Ravenhall prison project. Refer to Note 8-Contract Receivable of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further information.

Interest expense increased in 2014 compared to 2013 primarily due to $5.6 million of additional bond interest as a result of our $250 million offering of our 5.875% Senior Notes in September 2014. Interest expense also increased by $1.4 million in connection with our non-recourse debt related to our Ravenhall prison project. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in term loan interest under our Senior Credit Facility as a portion of the proceeds from our $300 million offering of our 5.125% Senior Notes in 2013 was used to pay outstanding term loans under the facility. Refer to Note 15 — Debt of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Loss on Extinguishment of Debt


	2014		% of Revenue			2013		% of Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
Loss on Extinguishment of Debt	$	—		—	%	$	20,657		1.4	%	$	(20,657	)		(100.0	)%

The loss on extinguishment of debt in 2013 is the result of the following: (i) in the second quarter 2013, we refinanced our prior senior credit facility and entered into a new credit agreement, as a result of which we wrote off $4.4 million of unamortized deferred financing costs and unamortized debt discount pertaining to the Prior Senior Credit Facility and expensed $1.1 million in fees related to the new Credit Agreement; (ii) our defeasance of the non-recourse bonds related to South Texas Development Corporation on September 30, 2013, as a result of which we incurred a $1.5 million loss on extinguishment of debt which represented the excess of the reacquisition price over the carrying value of the bonds and other defeasance related fees and expenses; and (iii) in the fourth quarter 2013, we completed a tender offer and redemption of our 7 3/4% Senior Notes which resulted in a loss of $17.7 million related to the tender premium and deferred costs associated with the 7 3/4% Senior Notes. This loss was partially offset by proceeds of $4.0 million received for the settlement of the interest rate swaps related to the 7 3/4% Senior Notes. Refer to Note 15 — Debt of the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes


	2014		Effective Rate			2013			Effective Rate
	(Dollars in thousands)
Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes	$	14,093		9.3	%	$	(26,050	)		(30.6	)%

The provision for income taxes during 2014 increased by $40.1 million compared to 2013 and the effective tax rate increased from (30.6)% to 9.3%. The increase is primarily attributable to certain one-time discrete items

in 2013 which did not recur in 2014. As a REIT, we are required to distribute at least 90% of our taxable income to shareholders and in turn are allowed a deduction for the distribution at the REIT level. The Company’s wholly-owned taxable REIT subsidiaries continue to be fully subject to federal, state and foreign income taxes, as applicable. We estimate our annual effective tax rate to be approximately 10% exclusive of any non-recurring items. As a result of incremental business profitability in our TRS, our composition of taxable income changed resulting in an increase in our estimated effective tax rate for the year.

Equity in Earnings of Affiliates


	2014		% of Revenue			2013		% of Revenue			$ Change			% Change
	(Dollars in thousands)
Equity in Earnings of Affiliates	$	5,823		0.3	%	$	6,265		0.4	%	$	(442	)		(7.1	)%

Equity in earnings of affiliates, presented net of income taxes, represents the earnings of SACS and GEOAmey, respectively. Overall, we experienced a slight decrease in equity in earnings of affiliates during 2014 compared to 2013, which is primarily due to less favorable performance from the operations of GEOAmey during 2014 compared to 2013 along with foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations.

Financial Condition

Capital Requirements

Our current cash requirements consist of amounts needed for working capital, distributions of our REIT taxable income in order to maintain our REIT qualification under the Code, debt service, supply purchases, investments in joint ventures, and capital expenditures related to either the development of new correctional, detention and re-entry facilities, or the maintenance of existing facilities. In addition, some of our management contracts require us to make substantial initial expenditures of cash in connection with opening or renovating a facility. Generally, these initial expenditures are subsequently fully or partially recoverable as pass-through costs or are billable as a component of the per diem rates or monthly fixed fees to the contracting agency over the original term of the contract. Additional capital needs may also arise in the future with respect to possible acquisitions, other corporate transactions or other corporate purposes.

In connection with GEOAmey, our joint venture in the United Kingdom, we and our joint venture partner have each provided a line of credit of £12 million, or $17.7 million, based on exchange rates as of December 31, 2015, for GEOAmey’s operations.

As of December 31, 2015, we were developing a number of projects that we estimate will cost approximately $153 million, of which $53 million was spent through December 31, 2015. We estimate our remaining capital requirements to be approximately $100 million. Domestic projects included in these amounts are expected to be completed in 2016. Included in these commitments is a contractual commitment to provide a capital contribution towards the design and construction of a prison project in Ravenhall, a locality near Melbourne, Australia, in the amount of AUD 115 million, or $84.0 million, based on exchange rates at December 31, 2015. This capital contribution is expected to be made in January 2017.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Credit Agreement

On August 27, 2014, we executed a second amended and restated credit agreement by and among us and GEO Corrections Holdings, Inc., our wholly-owned subsidiary, as borrowers, BNP Paribas, as Administrative Agent, and the lenders who are, or may from time to time become, a party thereto (the “Credit Agreement”).

The Credit Agreement evidences a credit facility (the “Credit Facility”) consisting of a $296.3 million term loan (the “Term Loan”) bearing interest at LIBOR plus 2.50% (with a LIBOR floor of .75%), and a $700 million revolving credit facility (the “Revolver”) initially bearing interest at LIBOR plus 2.25% (with no LIBOR floor) together with AUD 225 million available solely for the issuance of financial letters of credit and performance letters of credit, in each case denominated in Australian Dollars (the “Australian LC Facility”). The interest rate is subject to a pricing grid based upon our total leverage ratio. At December 31, 2015, we had approximately AUD 215 million in letters of credit outstanding under the Australian LC Facility in connection with certain performance guarantees related to the Ravenhall Prison Project. Refer to Note 15-Debt in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further discussion. Amounts to be borrowed by us under the Credit Agreement are subject to the satisfaction of customary conditions to borrowing. The Revolver component is scheduled to mature on August 27, 2019 and the Term Loan component is scheduled to mature on April 3, 2020.

The Credit Agreement contains certain customary representations and warranties, and certain customary covenants that restrict our ability to, among other things (i) create, incur or assume any indebtedness, (ii) create, incur, assume or permit liens, (iii) make loans and investments, (iv) engage in mergers, acquisitions and asset sales, (v) make certain restricted payments, (vi) issue, sell or otherwise dispose of capital stock, (vii) engage in transactions with affiliates, (viii) allow the total leverage ratio to exceed 5.75 to 1.00, allow the senior secured leverage ratio to exceed 3.50 to 1.00 or allow the interest coverage ratio to be less than 3.00 to 1.00, (ix) cancel, forgive, make any voluntary or optional payment or prepayment on, or redeem or acquire for value any senior notes, except as permitted, (x) alter the business we conduct, and (xi) materially impair our lenders’ security interests in the collateral for its loans. The restricted payments covenant remains consistent with our election to be treated as a real estate investment trust under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, effective as of January 1, 2013.

Events of default under the Credit Agreement include, but are not limited to, (i) our failure to pay principal or interest when due, (ii) our material breach of any representation or warranty, (iii) covenant defaults, (iv) liquidation, reorganization or other relief relating to bankruptcy or insolvency, (v) cross default under certain other material indebtedness, (vi) unsatisfied final judgments over a specified threshold, (vii) certain material environmental liability claims which have been asserted against us, and (viii) a change in control. We were in compliance with all of the financial covenants of the Credit Agreement as of December 31, 2015.

As of December 31, 2015, we had $292.5 million in aggregate borrowings outstanding, net of discount, under the Term Loan and $485.0 million in borrowings under the Revolver, and approximately $54.3 million in letters of credit which left $160.7 million in additional borrowing capacity under the Revolver. In addition, we have the ability to increase the Senior Credit Facility by an additional $350.0 million, subject to lender demand and prevailing market conditions and satisfying the relevant borrowing conditions thereunder. Refer to Note 15 — Debt in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

5.875% Senior Notes due 2024

On September 25, 2014, we completed an offering of $250.0 million aggregate principal amount of senior unsecured notes. The notes will mature on October 15, 2024 and have a coupon rate and yield to maturity of 5.875%. Interest is payable semi-annually in cash in arrears on April 15 and October 15, which commenced on April 15, 2015. The 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 are guaranteed on a senior unsecured basis by all our restricted subsidiaries that guarantee obligations. The 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 rank equally in right of payment with any unsecured, unsubordinated indebtedness of the Company and the guarantors, including our 6.625% senior notes due 2021, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022, the 5.125% senior notes due 2023, and the guarantors’ guarantees thereof, senior in right of payment to any future indebtedness of ours and the guarantors that is expressly subordinated to the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and the guarantees, effectively junior to any secured indebtedness of ours and the guarantors, including indebtedness under our senior credit facility, to the extent of the

value of the assets securing such indebtedness, and structurally junior to all obligations of our subsidiaries that are not guarantors. The sale of the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 was registered under our automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3 filed on September 12, 2014. Refer to Note 15 — Debt in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

5.875% Senior Notes due 2022

On October 3, 2013, we completed an offering of $250.0 million aggregate principal amount of 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022. The 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 will mature on January 15, 2022 and have a coupon rate and yield to maturity of 5.875%. Interest is payable semi-annually on January 15 and July 15 each year, which commenced on January 15, 2014. The proceeds received from the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022 were used, together with cash on hand, to fund the repurchase, redemption or other discharge of our 7 3/4% Senior Notes and to pay related transaction fees and expenses. Refer to Note 15 — Debt in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

5.125% Senior Notes

On March 19, 2013, we completed an offering of $300.0 million aggregate principal amount of 5.125% Senior Notes. The 5.125% Senior Notes will mature on April 1, 2023 and have a coupon rate and yield to maturity of 5.125%. Interest is payable semi-annually on April 1 and October 1 each year, which commenced on October 1, 2013. A portion of the proceeds received from the 5.125% Senior Notes were used on the date of the financing to repay the prior revolver credit draws outstanding under the prior senior credit facility. Refer to Note 15 — Debt in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

6.625% Senior Notes

In February 2011, we completed an offering of $300.0 million in aggregate principal amount of our 6.625% Senior Notes. The 6.625% Senior Notes will mature on February 15, 2021 and have a coupon rate and yield to maturity of 6.625%. Interest is payable semi-annually in arrears on February 15 and August 15, which commenced on August 15, 2011. Refer to Note 15 — Debt in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

We are also considering opportunities for future business and/or asset acquisitions. If we are successful in our pursuit of these new projects, our cash on hand, cash flows from operations and borrowings under the existing Senior Credit Facility may not provide sufficient liquidity to meet our capital needs through 2016 and we could be forced to seek additional financing or refinance our existing indebtedness. There can be no assurance that any such financing or refinancing would be available to us on terms equal to or more favorable than our current financing terms, or at all. In the future, our access to capital and ability to compete for future capital-intensive projects will also be dependent upon, among other things, our ability to meet certain financial covenants in the the indentures governing the 6.625% Senior Notes, the 5.125% Senior Notes, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2022, the 5.875% Senior Notes due 2024 and our Senior Credit Facility. A substantial decline in our financial performance could limit our access to capital pursuant to these covenants and have a material adverse affect on our liquidity and capital resources and, as a result, on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition to these foregoing potential constraints on our capital, a number of state government agencies have been suffering from budget deficits and liquidity issues. While we expect to be in compliance with our debt covenants, if these constraints were to intensify, our liquidity could be materially adversely impacted as could our ability to remain in compliance with these debt covenants.

Prospectus Supplement

On May 8, 2013, we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a prospectus supplement related to the offer and sale from time to time of our common stock at an aggregate offering price of up to $100 million through sales agents. Sales of shares of our common stock under the prospectus supplement and the equity distribution agreements entered into with the sales agents, if any, may be made in negotiated transactions or transactions that are deemed to be “at the market” offerings as defined in Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933. On July 18, 2014, we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a post-effective amendment to our shelf registration statement on Form S-3 (pursuant to which the prospectus supplement had been filed) as a result of our merger into GEO REIT effective June 27, 2014. During the year ended December 31, 2014, there were approximately 1.5 million shares of common stock sold under the prospectus supplement for net proceeds of $54.7 million. There were no shares of our common stock sold under the prospectus supplement during the years ended December 31, 2015 or 2013.

In September 2014, we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a new shelf registration statement on Form S-3. On November 10, 2014, in connection with the new shelf registration, we filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission a new prospectus supplement related to the offer and sale from time to time of our common stock at an aggregate offering price of up to $150 million through sales agents. Sales of shares of our common stock under the prospectus supplement and the equity distribution agreements entered into with the sales agents, if any, may be made in negotiated transactions or transactions that are deemed to be “at the market” offerings as defined in Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933. There were no shares of our common stock sold under this prospectus supplement during the years ended December 31, 2015 or 2014.

REIT Distributions

As a REIT, we are subject to a number of organizational and operational requirements, including a requirement that we annually distribute to our shareholders an amount equal to at least 90% of our REIT taxable income (determined before the deduction for dividends paid and by excluding any net capital gain). Generally, we expect to distribute all or substantially all of our REIT taxable income so as not to be subject to the income or excise tax on undistributed REIT taxable income. The amount, timing and frequency of distributions will be at the sole discretion of our Board of Directors and will be based upon various factors.

We plan to fund all of our capital needs, including distributions of our REIT taxable income in order to maintain our REIT qualification, and capital expenditures, from cash on hand, cash from operations, borrowings under our Senior Credit Facility and any other financings which our management and Board of Directors, in their discretion, may consummate. Currently, our primary source of liquidity to meet these requirements is cash flow from operations and borrowings under the $700.0 million Revolver. Our management believes that cash on hand, cash flows from operations and availability under our Senior Credit Facility will be adequate to support our capital requirements for 2016 and 2017 as disclosed under “Capital Requirements” above.

Non-Recourse Debt

Northwest Detention Center

On June 30, 2003, Correctional Services Corporation (“CSC”) arranged financing for the construction of a detention center in Tacoma, Washington, referred to as the Northwest Detention Center, which was completed and opened for operation in April 2004. We began to operate this facility following our acquisition of CSC in November 2005 (this facility was expanded by us in 2009 to 1,575 beds from the original 1,030 beds).

In connection with the original financing, CSC of Tacoma, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of CSC, issued a $57.0 million note payable to the Washington Economic Development Finance Authority (“WEDFA”), an instrumentality of the State of Washington, which issued revenue bonds (“2003 Revenue Bonds”). The bonds were non-recourse to us and matured and were fully paid in October 2014.

Additionally, on December 9, 2011, WEDFA issued $54.4 million of its Washington Economic Development Finance Authority Taxable Economic Development Revenue Bonds, series 2011 (“2011 Revenue Bonds”). The payment of principal and interest on the bonds is non-recourse to us. None of the bonds nor CSC’s obligations under the loan are our obligations nor are they guaranteed by us.

As of December 31, 2015, the remaining balance of the debt service requirement related to the 2011 Revenue Bonds is $43.1 million, of which $6.5 million is classified as current in the accompanying balance sheet. As of December 31, 2015, included in restricted cash and investments is $8.6 million (all current) of funds held in trust with respect to the Northwest Detention Center for debt service and other reserves which had not been released to us as of December 31, 2015. Refer to Note 15-Debt in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further information.

Australia — Fulham

Our wholly-owned Australian subsidiary financed the development of a facility and subsequent expansion in 2003 with long-term debt obligations. These obligations are non-recourse to us and total $9.0 million (AUD 12.4 million) and $16.4 million (AUD 22.5 million) at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, respectively, based on exchange rates in effect as of December 31, 2015. The term of the non-recourse debt is through 2017 and it bears interest at a variable rate quoted by certain Australian banks plus 140 basis points. Any obligations or liabilities of the subsidiary are matched by a similar or corresponding commitment from the government of the State of Victoria. As a condition of the loan, we are required to maintain a restricted cash balance of AUD 5.0 million along with interest earned on the account, which, at December 31, 2015, was $3.7 million (including interest) based on exchange rates in effect as of December 31, 2015. This amount is included in non-current restricted cash and the annual maturities of the future debt obligation are included in non-recourse debt.

Australia — Ravenhall

In connection with a new design and build prison project agreement with the State of Victoria, we entered into a Construction Facility with National Australia Bank Limited to provide debt financing for construction of the project. Refer to Note 8 — Contract Receivable in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K. The Construction Facility provides for non-recourse funding up to AUD 791.0 million, or $577.4 million, based on exchange rates as of December 31, 2015. Construction draws will be funded throughout the project according to a fixed utilization schedule as defined in the syndicated facility agreement. The term of the Construction Facility is through October 2019 and bears interest at a variable rate quoted by certain Australian banks plus 200 basis points. After October 2019, the Construction Facility will be converted to a term loan with payments due quarterly beginning in 2019 through 2041. In accordance with the terms of the Construction Facility, upon completion and commercial acceptance of the prison, in accordance with prison contract, the State will make a lump sum payment of AUD 310 million, or $226.3 million, based on exchange rates as of December 31, 2015, which will be used to pay a portion of the outstanding principal. The remaining outstanding principal balance will be repaid over the term of the operating agreement. As of December 31, 2015, $195.5 million was outstanding under the Construction Facility. We also entered into interest rate swap and interest rate cap agreements related to our non-recourse debt in connection with the project. Refer to Note 10 — Derivative Financial Instruments in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Guarantees

The Company has entered into certain guarantees in connection in connection with the design, financing and construction of certain facilities as well as loan, working capital and other obligation guarantees for our subsidiaries in Australia, South Africa, Canada and our joint ventures. Refer to Note 15-Debt in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Executive Retirement Agreements

We have a non-qualified deferred compensation agreement with our Chief Executive Officer, who we refer to as our CEO. The current agreement, as amended, provides for a lump sum payment upon retirement, no sooner than age 55. As of December 31, 2015, our CEO had reached age 55 and was eligible to receive the payment upon retirement. If our CEO had retired as of December 31, 2015, we would have had to pay him $7.4 million. Based on our current capitalization, we do not believe that making this payment would materially adversely impact our liquidity.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Except as discussed above, and in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K, we do not have any off balance sheet arrangements.

We are also exposed to various commitments and contingencies which may have a material adverse effect on our liquidity. See Note 19 — Commitments and Contingencies in the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K.

Derivatives

One of our Australian subsidiaries is a party to an interest rate swap agreement to fix the interest rate on the variable rate non-recourse debt to 9.7%. We have determined the swap, which has a notional amount of $50.9 million, payment and expiration dates, and call provisions that coincide with the terms of the non-recourse debt, to be an effective cash flow hedge. Accordingly, we record the change in the value of the interest rate swap in accumulated other comprehensive income, net of applicable income taxes. respectively, and is recorded as a component of other liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. There was no material ineffectiveness of this interest rate swap for the periods presented. We do not expect to enter into any transactions during the next twelve months which would result in the reclassification into earnings or losses associated with this swap currently reported in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). Refer to Note 10-Derivative Financial Instruments in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further information.

In September 2014, one of our Australian subsidiaries entered into interest rate swap agreements to fix the interest rate on its variable rate non-recourse debt related to a prison project in Ravenhall, a locality near Melbourne, Australia to 3.3% during the design and construction phase and 4.2% during the project’s operating phase. Refer to Note 8-Contract Receivable and Note 10-Derivative Financial Instruments in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further information. The swaps’ notional amounts coincide with construction draw fixed commitments throughout the project. At December 31, 2015, the swaps had a notional value of approximately AUD 267.8 million, or $195.5 million, based on exchange rates at December 31, 2015, related to the outstanding draws for the design and construction phase and approximately AUD 466.3 million, or $340.4 million, based on exchange rates at December 31, 2015, related to future construction draws. The total fair value of the swap liability as of December 31, 2015 was $20.7 million and is recorded as a component of Other Non-Current liabilities within the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. We have determined that the swaps have payment, expiration dates and provisions that coincide with the terms of the non-recourse debt and the critical terms of the swap agreements and construction draw fixed commitments are the same and are therefore considered to be effective cash flow hedges. Accordingly, we will record the change in the fair value of the interest rate swaps in accumulated other comprehensive income, net of applicable income taxes.

Additionally, upon completion and commercial acceptance of the prison project, the Department of Justice in the State in accordance with the prison contract, will make a lump sum payment of AUD 310.0 million, or $226.3 million, based on exchange rates at December 31, 2015, towards a portion of the outstanding balance

which will be used to pay down the principal of the non-recourse debt. The Company’s Australian subsidiary also entered into interest rate cap agreements in September 2014 giving the Company the option to cap the interest rate on its variable non-recourse debt related to the project in the event that the completion of the prison project is delayed which could delay the State’s payment. These instruments do not meet the requirements for hedge accounting, and therefore, changes in fair value of the interest rate caps are recorded in earnings. Refer to Note 10-Derivative Financial Instruments in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K for further information.

Contractual Obligations

The following is a table of certain of our contractual obligations, as of December 31, 2015, which requires us to make payments over the periods presented.


	Payments Due by Period
Contractual Obligations	Total		Less Than 1 Year		1-3 Years		3-5 Years		More Than 5 Years
	(In thousands)
Long-Term Debt	$	1,101,370	$	314	$	633	$	412	$	1,100,011
Term Loan		292,500		3,000		6,000		283,500		—
Revolver		485,000		—		—		485,000		—
Capital Lease Obligations (includes imputed interest)		12,842		1,935		3,870		3,868		3,170
Operating Lease Obligations		154,480		38,517		60,215		28,800		26,948
Non-Recourse Debt (including future construction draws)		619,514		12,842		243,266		14,945		348,461
Estimated interest payments on debt(a)		1,033,991		122,804		257,053		216,824		437,310
Estimated funding of pension and other post retirement benefits		25,935		7,968		1,285		1,553		15,129
Estimated construction commitments		100,000		16,000		84,000		—		—
Estimated tax payments for uncertain tax positions(b)		1,571		—		1,571		—		—

Total	$	3,827,203	$	203,380	$	657,893	$	1,034,902	$	1,931,029

(a)	Due to the uncertainties of future LIBOR rates, the variable interest payments on our Senior Credit Facility were calculated using an average LIBOR rate of 1.54% based on projected interest rates through 2021.

(b)	State income tax payments are reflected net of the federal income tax benefit.

Cash Flow

Cash and cash equivalents as of December 31, 2015 was $59.6 million, compared to $41.3 million as of December 31, 2014 and was impacted by the following:

Cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations in 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $142.2 million, $202.5 million, and $192.2 million, respectively. Cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations in 2015 was positively impacted by non-cash expenses such as depreciation and amortization, amortization of debt issuance costs, stock-based compensation expense, exit charges related to non-core operating leases and dividends received from our unconsolidated joint venture. Equity in earnings of affiliates negatively impacted cash. Changes in accounts receivable, prepaid expenses and other assets increased in total by a net of $29.3 million, representing a negative impact on cash. The increase was primarily driven by our acquisition of LCS in 2015 as well as new contract activations. The remaining change is due to the timing of billings and collections. Changes in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities increased by $21.9 million which positively impacted cash. The increase was primarily due to our acquisition of LCS in 2015 as well as new contract

activations. Additionally, cash provided by operating activities from continuing operations in 2015 was negatively impacted by an increase in contract receivable of $114.1 million. This increase relates to costs incurred and estimated earnings in excess of billings related to the Ravenhall Project. Refer to Note 8 — Contract Receivable included in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K. The Contract Receivable is expected to grow as construction services are performed and will continue to have a negative impact on cash from operating activities until the balance is ultimately settled with the State. In accordance with the contract, the project will not be billed out until completion and commercial acceptance of the facility.

Cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations in 2014 was positively impacted by increases in net income attributable to GEO, non-cash expenses such as depreciation and amortization, amortization of debt issuance costs, stock-based compensation expense and dividends received from our unconsolidated joint venture. Increases in equity in earnings of affiliates negatively impacted cash. Changes in accounts receivable, prepaid expenses and other assets decreased in total by a net of $23.8 million, representing a positive impact on cash. The decrease was primarily driven by approximately $22.4 million of federal and state tax over payments that were included in other current assets at December 31, 2013 which were applied in 2014. The remaining change is due to the timing of billings and collections. Changes in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities increased by $9.0 million which positively impacted cash. The increase was primarily due to a prepayment from the RTS divestiture of $6.5 million in connection with the termination of the services and license agreement as well as the timing of payments. Additionally, cash provided by operating activities from continuing operations in 2014 was negatively impacted by an increase in contract receivable of $73.3 million. This increase relates to costs incurred and estimated earnings in excess of billings related to the Ravenhall Project. Refer to Note 8 — Contract Receivable included in the notes to our audited consolidated financial statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this annual report on Form 10-K. The Contract Receivable is expected to grow as construction services are performed and will continue to have a negative impact on cash from operating activities until the balance is ultimately settled with the State. In accordance with the contract, the project will not be billed out until completion and commercial acceptance of the facility.

Cash provided by operating activities of continuing operations in 2013 was positively impacted by non-cash expenses such as depreciation and amortization, loss on extinguishment of debt, stock-based compensation expense and dividends received from our unconsolidated joint venture. These positive impacts were offset by changes in our working capital components which were primarily driven by increases in accounts receivable, prepaid expenses and other assets along with decreases in accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities. Accounts receivable, prepaid expenses and other current assets increased by $27.2 million, representing a negative impact on cash. The increase was primarily driven by federal and state income tax overpayments of $22.4 million included in prepaid expenses and other current assets at December 31, 2013 and the timing of billings and collections. Increases in equity in earnings of affiliates, net of tax, the tax benefit related to equity compensation and a release of reserves for uncertain tax positions also negatively impacted cash. Accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities decreased by $10.0 million which negatively impacted cash. The decrease was primarily caused by general liability insurance settlements in 2013, a release of reserves for uncertain tax positions and the timing of payments on accounts payable and accrued payroll and related taxes.

Cash used in investing activities by continuing operations of $452.9 million in 2015 was primarily the result of capital expenditures of $117.6 million, offset by changes in restricted cash of $4.8 million. and our acquisitions of LCS and Soberlink of $307.4 and $24.4, respectively. Cash used in investing activities by continuing operations of $121.2 million in 2014 was primarily the result of capital expenditures of $114.2 million, offset by changes in restricted cash of $5.4 million. Cash used in investing activities by continuing operations of $99.0 million in 2013 was primarily the result of capital expenditures of $117.6 million, offset by changes in restricted cash of $17.4 million.

Cash used in financing activities by continuing operations in 2015 reflects payments of $323.9 million on long term debt and non-recourse debt offset by $848.4 million of proceeds from long term debt and non-recourse

debt, including $631.0 million of borrowings under our Revolver. We also paid cash dividends of $187.0 million and deferred debt costs of $7.1 million.

Cash used in financing activities by continuing operations in 2014 reflects payments of $696.7 million on long term debt and non-recourse debt offset by $741.9 million of proceeds from long term debt and non-recourse debt, including $674.0 million of borrowings under our Revolver. We also paid cash dividends of $170.2 million, deferred debt issuance costs of $26.4 million offset by an increase of $54.7 million for issuance of common stock under our prospectus supplement.

Cash used in financing activities by continuing operations in 2013 reflects payments of $1,134.5 million on indebtedness offset by $1,238.0 million of proceeds from long term debt, including $300.0 million from the 5.125% Senior Notes, $250.0 million from the 5 7/8% Senior Notes as well as $404.0 million of borrowings under our Revolver. We also paid cash dividends of $147.2 million, deferred debt issuance costs of $23.8 million and debt issuance fees of $13.4 million.

Inflation

We believe that inflation, in general, did not have a material effect on our results of operations during 2015, 2014 and 2013. While some of our contracts include provisions for inflationary indexing, inflation could have a substantial adverse effect on our results of operations in the future to the extent that wages and salaries, which represent our largest expense, increase at a faster rate than the per diem or fixed rates received by us for our management services.

Funds from Operations

Funds from Operations (“FFO”) is a widely accepted supplemental non-GAAP measure utilized to evaluate the operating performance of real estate companies. It is defined in accordance with the standards established by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, or NAREIT, which defines FFO as net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders (computed in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles), excluding real estate related depreciation and amortization, excluding gains and losses from the cumulative effects of accounting changes, extraordinary items and sales of properties, and including adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.

We also present Normalized Funds From Operations, or Normalized FFO, and Adjusted Funds from Operations, or AFFO, supplemental non-GAAP financial measures of real estate companies’ operating performances.

Normalized FFO is defined as FFO adjusted for certain items which by their nature are not comparable from period to period or that tend to obscure the Company’s actual operating performance, including for the periods presented M&A related expenses, net of tax and start-up expenses, net of tax.

AFFO is defined as Normalized FFO adjusted by adding non-cash expenses such as non-real estate related depreciation and amortization, stock based compensation expense, the amortization of debt issuance costs, discount and/or premium and other non-cash interest, and by subtracting recurring consolidated maintenance capital expenditures.

Because of the unique design, structure and use of our correctional facilities, we believe that assessing the performance of our correctional facilities without the impact of depreciation or amortization is useful and meaningful to investors. Although NAREIT has published its definition of FFO, companies often modify this definition as they seek to provide financial measures that meaningfully reflect their distinctive operations. We have modified FFO to derive Normalized FFO and AFFO that meaningfully reflect our operations. Our assessment of our operations is focused on long-term sustainability. The adjustments we make to derive the non-

GAAP measures of Normalized FFO and AFFO exclude items which may cause short-term fluctuations in income from continuing operations but have no impact on our cash flows, or we do not consider them to be fundamental attributes or the primary drivers of our business plan and they do not affect our overall long-term operating performance.

We may make adjustments to FFO from time to time for certain other income and expenses that do not reflect a necessary component of our operational performance on the basis discussed above, even though such items may require cash settlement. Because FFO, Normalized FFO and AFFO exclude depreciation and amortization unique to real estate as well as non-operational items and certain other charges that are highly variable from year to year, they provide our investors with performance measures that reflect the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, per diem rates, operating costs and interest costs, providing a perspective not immediately apparent from income from continuing operations. We believe the presentation of FFO, Normalized FFO and AFFO provide useful information to investors as they provide an indication of our ability to fund capital expenditures and expand our business. FFO, Normalized FFO and AFFO provide disclosure on the same basis as that used by our management and provide consistency in our financial reporting, facilitate internal and external comparisons of our historical operating performance and our business units and provide continuity to investors for comparability purposes. Additionally, FFO, Normalized FFO and AFFO are widely recognized measures in our industry as a real estate investment trust.

Our reconciliation of net income to FFO, Normalized FFO and AFFO for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, is as follows (in thousands):


	December 31, 2015		December 31, 2014
Funds From Operations
Net income attributable to The GEO Group, Inc.	$	139,438	$	143,930
Depreciation-real estate assets		57,758		52,960

NAREIT Defined FFO		197,196		196,890

Start-up expenses, net of tax		4,831		—
M&A related expenses, net of tax	$