Treatment Abuse, Behavior Modification, Thought Reform > Facility Question and Answers
anybody ever hear of Abraxas?
Ursus:
Thanks for this information, Celyne. As noted in my post above, Abraxas has been owned by Cornell Corrections, Inc. for some time. When I visited Cornell's website just now, to check on the state of affairs, I was redirected to GEO's website. Apparently The GEO Group, Inc. bought out Cornell just a couple of months ago.
Ursus:
--- Quote from: "Celyne" ---I did know that GEO bought Abraxas but just found online that Cubic Corp bought Abraxas, (from GEO?) if this is the same Abraxas that runs the juvenile facilities? Maybe it's a different Abraxas Corp? I believe Cubic is one of the leading manufacturers of military weapons. I have to research this more....
FYI: This posted 4 days ago on the WEB:
"Cubic Corp. (CUB) has agreed to pay $124 million for Abraxas Corp., a provider of risk mitigation and expertise for national-security, law-enforcement and homeland-security clients."
--- End quote ---
As for Abraxis... it appears that the above-mentioned Abraxas Corp. is a different Abraxas, specifically one that is located in Virginia and which has significant ties to and involvement in "support services" for the CIA, according to this blog entry. Fwiw, they also do not seem to have any personnel in common.
Their website: http://www.abraxascorp.com/
Some press releases and news pieces which confirm that it is indeed the Virginia-based Abraxis Corp. which is in the process of being acquired by Cubis Corp.:
* San Diego's Cubic to buy Virginia security firm
By Mike Freeman, UNION-TRIBUNE · Tuesday, November 16, 2010 at 9:58 a.m.
* Cubic Corp. Enters Into Deal To Acquire Abraxas Corp. - Quick Facts
RTTNews.com · 11/16/2010 9:37 AM ET
* Cubic will acquire Abraxas
San Diego company will pay $124M for national security firm
Washington Technology · By Tania Anderson · Nov 16, 2010
Celyne:
Hi:
Thanks for clearing that up.
When I first came across the article of Cubic buying Abraxas, it appeared to be a logical progression. GEO, as a provider of alternative elementary school programs for our urban poor is worrisome enough. Their track record including their contract with housing immigrants at Guantanamo is not assuring.
Apparantly the Philadelphia School District had a plan in 2008 to cut out of sending their students to for profit/independent facilities, but appear to have done little toward this agenda. Studies are continually coming out pointing to the fact that children in these programs rarely get out of them and onto productive paths. The actual accountability of these programs is murky at best. The process for sending the children to these alternative schools is also questionable. This is what I have been able to research so far. I am in the process of getting in touch with various groups that work within these organizations and those who are independent watchdogs of them. Any leads you could provide would be helpful.
Thanks,
Celyne
Celyne:
Also, actually, Cornell and GEO merged see http://http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20100419006086/en/GEO-Group-Cornell-Companies-Announce-685-Million for this:
The GEO Group and Cornell Companies Announce $685 Million Merger
Creates $1.5 Billion Revenue Diversified Provider of Essential Government Services
Combined Company Well Positioned to Capitalize on Growing Global Demand for Correctional, Detention and Behavioral Health Services
Also found this an interesting statement from Cornell Co.'s 2009 Annual Report:
Our smallest division, Abraxas Youth & Family Services, faced particular challenges during 2009 due to budget cuts across the country, and in particular with our two largest markets: Pennsylvania and Illinois. This created intense pressure on all providers of juvenile justice and substance abuse treatment programs.
These pressures compelled us to reconfigure programs and consolidate capacity at several smaller facilities. Perhaps the one bright spot in this segment is that our unrelenting focus on operating quality has enabled us to increase market share from less resilient competitors who have either exited the market or “cut corners” as they try to survive.
Though Abraxas did not achieve the goals that we established at the beginning of the year, we did make progress as demonstrated by increasing average contract occupancy over 2009 to 85.9% from 80.6% during 2008. Also, despite the funding cuts, average residential per diems increased by approximately 3% which illustrates our ability to shift our programs to a more attractive mix. We finished 2009 with many empty beds in this segment, but for 2010 we expect to continue to gradually increase occupancy and favorable mix so that the division can continue to generate cash for Cornell, despite the continuing budget pressures facing the segment.
Read more: http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/100430/ ... z162D6z4Oc
I guess I'm just green and naive to this topic, but shouldn't the goal of these facilities be to get the residents out and on their feet, not to increase occupancy? (I know: this was written for shareholders, who are interested in their dollar return not in the societal implications of their investments). Still, there is an apparent conflict of interest here.
seamus:
What a bona-fide fucking monster THAT will become. Like some thing out of a bad orwellian/kafka-esque sci-fi movie. The potential for massive abuse is epic, fucking biblical. People need to know.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version