ICE Facility Geographic Mapping

Comprehensive analysis of immigration detention facilities, private contractor operations, and geographic distribution across the United States. Based on TRAC data, GAO reports, and contract analysis.

181

Total ICE Facilities

Major Facilities Mapped

62,913

Contracted Bed Capacity

48,056

People Detained (Apr 13, 2025)

76%

Nationwide Utilization

Facilities Over Contract

GEO Group Facilities

CoreCivic Facilities

IGSA County Jails

Other Private Operators

MTC/Other Contractors

Major ICE Detention Facilities by Region

Arizona 3 facilities

Eloy Detention Center

Capacity: 1,596 CoreCivic

Private contract • High-capacity facility

Phoenix Federal Correctional Institution

Capacity: 1,280 IGSA

Federal facility • Mixed population

Texas 12 facilities

South Texas ICE Processing Center

Capacity: 1,686 GEO Group

Private contract • Family detention hub

Joe Corley Detention Facility

Capacity: 1,100 IGSA

County partnership • Rural location

Washington 2 facilities

Northwest Detention Center

Capacity: 1,575 GEO Group

Private contract • Hunger strike history

Pennsylvania 4 facilities

Moshannon Valley Processing Center

Capacity: 1,878 GEO Group

Private contract • Largest in region

🏢 Private Contractor Analysis

Two companies dominate U.S. immigration detention: GEO Group and CoreCivic operate the majority of private ICE facilities through guaranteed minimum contracts and IGSA partnerships.

GEO GROUP

The GEO Group

Boca Raton, Florida

Revenue: ~$2.3 billion (2023)
Major facilities: Northwest (WA), South Texas (TX), Moshannon Valley (PA)
Operates electronic monitoring through BI Inc.
Contract type: Guaranteed minimums + fixed fees

CORECIVIC

CoreCivic

Brentwood, Tennessee

Revenue: ~$1.9 billion (2023)
Major facilities: Eloy (AZ), Otay Mesa (CA), Tallahatchie (MS)
Focus on non-criminal detainees
Contract type: Per-bed minimums + service fees

🚨 Overcrowding Crisis: April 2025 Data

45 facilities (25% of total) exceeded their contracted capacity on a single night in April 2025. This systematic overcrowding reveals the gap between contracted beds and actual detention operations.

Biggest Single-Night Overages (April 13, 2025)

Krome North SPC (FL) - Akima Global Services
Contract: 611 beds • Population: 1,806 • +1,195 over capacity

Pine Prairie IPC (LA) - GEO Group
Contract: 500 beds • Population: 923 • +423 over capacity

Karnes County IPC (TX) - GEO Group
Contract: 928 beds • Population: 1,311 • +383 over capacity

Stewart Detention Center (GA) - CoreCivic
Contract: 1,966 beds • Population: 2,312 • +346 over capacity

Physical Impact: At Krome, ICE erected a 400-bed tent in April 2025 to relieve triple-bunking conditions. County jails often contract for minimal ICE beds but open hundreds more on demand.

🚧 Planned & Expanding Facilities (2025-2026)

ICE facility expansion driven by overcrowding crisis: With 45 facilities exceeding capacity, ICE is pursuing emergency bed expansions and new contracts.

🏗️ Known Expansions

Krome North SPC (FL) - Emergency tent facility (400 beds) erected April 2025
Stewart Detention Center (GA) - Seeking capacity increase beyond 1,966 beds
Pine Prairie IPC (LA) - GEO Group exploring dormitory additions
Multiple Texas facilities - IGSA contracts under renegotiation for higher caps

📋 Contract Solicitations

Florida RFPs: Watch for GEO Group, CoreCivic, and Akima Global Services bids
Texas IGSA renewals: Counties seeking higher per-bed payments
Emergency contracts: ICE authorized to expedite facility agreements
CBP partnership facilities: Shared detention infrastructure projects

Note: ICE facility planning data is often restricted. This section tracks publicly available RFPs, contract modifications, and media reports. Submit updates if you find additional information.

💰 Budget Impact & Transparency

GAO found ICE "consistently underestimated the cost to house detained non-citizens," driving repeated raids on other DHS accounts.

FY 2018-2023 Fund Transfers
≈78% of all DHS intra-agency transfers went to ICE • Total: ≈$1.8 billion

FOIA Litigation Success
Forced ICE to release facility-level datasets • Watchdogs now press for regular public updates

Data source: TRAC Reports, GAO-24-106550 (May 15, 2024), The Washington Post

📊 Research Attribution

Austin Kocher & Adam Sawyer Interval ADP Dataset: The overcrowding statistics and facility-level data used throughout this analysis are courtesy of Austin Kocher's comprehensive research on ICE detention facilities.

As long as you cite this post and attribute the work to Adam Sawyer and Austin Kocher, feel free to use these graphs and the data table without seeking additional permission.

Source: Austin Kocher's Substack - Interval ADP Update (164 ICE facilities dataset, 47MB)

📊 Data Sources & Methodology

This geographic analysis is based on:

TRAC Immigration Data: Syracuse University's Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse facility-level statistics
GAO Reports: Government Accountability Office audits of ICE detention contracts (GAO-21-149)
Contract Documentation: Public procurement records and FOIA responses
Facility Inspections: ICE Performance Based National Detention Standards compliance reports
Procurement Tracking: Florida Vendor Bid System, SAM.gov, county RFP portals for expansion contracts
Industry Reports: CoreCivic and GEO Group quarterly earnings calls mentioning capacity expansions
Austin Kocher & Adam Sawyer Research: Interval ADP dataset covering 164 ICE facilities with overcrowding analysis

Note: Facility-level data is updated as available through public records. Interval ADP data and overcrowding statistics courtesy of Austin Kocher and Adam Sawyer's research (164 ICE facilities, 2025). Some capacity and population figures may reflect contracted maximums rather than current occupancy.