NYC DOC Floats $4.37 Million in Noncompetitive Jail-Tech Contracts

By Michele Evans / NYweeklyRecord.com / Date: 8/12/2026

Category: NYC Department of Correction / Corrections / Government Contracts / Accountability

NEW YORK CITY, NY –

New York City’s Department of Correction is seeking approval for three proposed technology contracts worth a combined $4,374,751, using a procurement method that does not require open competition.

The three notices appeared in the August 11 City Record. Each proposed award runs from August 1, 2026, through July 31, 2029. Each is classified as an M/WBE Noncompetitive Small Purchase under Procurement Policy Board Rule 3-08(c)(1)(iv).

Dice IT Solutions LLC is listed for a proposed $1,395,225 contract for OJMS unified data and application services. IncQbate LLC is listed for $1,497,066 for OJMS business-process reengineering. Routerati LLC is listed for $1,482,460 for an OJMS digital-solutions platform.

Together, the proposed contracts place more than $4.37 million in jail-system technology work with three vendors without a traditional competitive solicitation.

That does not establish wrongdoing. The city’s procurement rules allow certain noncompetitive purchases involving certified minority- and women-owned businesses. The notices also place the proposals into a public-comment process before final action.

But noncompetitive contracting demands clear answers because competition is one of the public’s strongest protections against inflated prices, vague deliverables and insider advantage.

The notices identify three different scopes, but they share the same agency, the same OJMS label, the same three-year term and values clustered just below $1.5 million. The public record does not explain in detail how the projects will operate together, how performance will be measured or why open competition was not used.

The notices also do not establish whether the three scopes are technically dependent, how data will move among them or what protections will govern information generated inside the city’s jail system.

Those questions matter at DOC, an agency already under intense pressure over violence, staffing, delayed reform and federal court intervention. Technology contracts can affect case tracking, operations, staff accountability and the records used to judge whether promised reforms are working.

A poorly defined technology project can fail quietly. Costs accumulate, timelines slip and agencies become dependent on systems the public cannot evaluate. A well-designed project can improve coordination and transparency, but only if the work is specific, measurable and independently reviewed.

The City Record notices do not accuse the vendors of misconduct. Nor do they show that the Department of Correction divided one project into smaller pieces to avoid another procurement process. Any conclusion like that would require evidence not contained in the notices.

Still, the close timing and related OJMS descriptions make oversight necessary. DOC should publicly explain what each vendor will deliver, why the work is separated into three contracts, what milestones will trigger payment and what happens if a project fails.

The agency should also identify the officials responsible for accepting the work and describe any cybersecurity, privacy and data-retention standards written into the agreements.

The public-comment deadline is 10 a.m. on August 21. That gives New Yorkers a narrow window to question the proposals before the contracting process moves forward.

Public comments are not a formality. They are one of the few points when residents, advocates, technologists and watchdogs can challenge a procurement before taxpayer money is committed.

For a jail system operating under extraordinary scrutiny, “technology services” is not enough detail. The city should show exactly what it is buying, why these vendors were selected and how taxpayers will know whether the work delivered results.

The issue is not whether minority- and women-owned businesses deserve city contracts. They do. The issue is whether every contract, competitive or not, comes with enough transparency to protect public money and the people whose lives are affected by the system.

Three proposals. Three years. More than $4.37 million. Before approval, New Yorkers deserve a complete accounting.