Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee grants six‑month extension for inmate health contract amid litigation and protests
Summary
The Fiscal Review Committee approved a six‑month extension of the Department of Correction’s contract with Centurion of Tennessee to continue inmate medical and behavioral-health services while litigation and protests over the procurement proceed.
The Tennessee Fiscal Review Committee on June 4 approved a six‑month extension of the Department of Correction’s contract with Centurion of Tennessee to ensure continuity of medical and behavioral‑health services at state correctional facilities while procurement protests and litigation proceed.
Why it matters: the Department of Correction is statutorily required to provide health care to inmates; the committee was told the department has been advised by the attorney general’s office not to release a new RFP while litigation continues.
What the department said: Ashley Fuquay, legislative director for the Department of Correction, explained the current contract would end June 30, 2025, and the requested six‑month extension would carry services through Dec. 31, 2025. Fuquay said litigation and a pending protest related to the department’s reprocurement process led the department and counsel to recommend pausing a new solicitation and to extend the current services to avoid disruption.
Committee concerns and dissent: Representative Bricken, Senator Yeager and others questioned the department about reports of past contractor performance, lawsuits, and protests. Representative Bricken noted the contract's large aggregate size (described in testimony as more than $800 million across terms) and said he would vote against the extension because of concerns about alleged bid rigging, staffing deficiencies and service quality raised by constituents. Several other committee members pressed the department for more details about the litigation and the procurement background.
Outcome: A motion for a six‑month extension passed by voice vote. Committee members were told they could request to be recorded as voting no via the clerk if desired.
Follow‑up: Department staff told the committee the litigation stems from a closed procurement process and that the department would continue coordinating with the attorney general’s office; staff said the department would return to the committee if additional extensions were necessary.
Speakers quoted and cited here are drawn from the committee transcript.
