Basis of Presentation (Policies)	9 Months Ended
Oct. 02, 2011
Basis of Presentation [Abstract]
Discontinued operations	Discontinued operations The termination of any of the Company’s management contracts, by expiration or otherwise, may result in the classification of the operating results of such management contract, net of taxes, as a discontinued operation. When material, the Company reflects such events as discontinued operations so long as the financial results can be clearly identified, the operations and cash flows are completely eliminated from ongoing operations, and so long as the Company does not have any significant continuing involvement in the operations of the component after the disposal or termination transaction. The component unit for which cash flows are considered to be completely eliminated exists at the customer level. Historically, the Company has classified operations as discontinued in the period they are announced as normally all continuing cash flows cease within three to six months of that date.
Comprehensive income policy	In June 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2011-05 which requires an entity to present all nonowner changes in stockholders’ equity either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. ASU 2011-05 eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. This standard will become effective for the Company in fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011 and should be applied retrospectively. The Company does not believe that the implementation of this standard will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operation and cash flows.
Fair value measurement policy	In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04 which provides a consistent definition of fair value in US GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) and ensures that their respective fair value measurement and disclosure requirements are the same (except for minor differences in wording and style). The amendments change certain fair value measurement principles and enhance the disclosure requirements particularly for level 3 fair value measurements. The standard will become effective for the Company during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011 and should be applied prospectively. The Company does not believe that the implementation of this standard will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operation and cash flows.
Revenue recognition policy	In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-13 which provides amendments to revenue recognition criteria for separating consideration in multiple element arrangements. As a result of these amendments, multiple deliverable arrangements will be separated more frequently than under existing GAAP. The amendments, among other things, establish the selling price of a deliverable, replace the term fair value with selling price and eliminate the residual method such that consideration can be allocated to the deliverables using the relative selling price method based on GEO’s specific assumptions. This amendment also significantly expands the disclosure requirements for multiple element arrangements. This guidance became effective for the Company prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010. The implementation of this standard in the thirty-nine weeks ended October 2, 2011 did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows. As a result of the BI Acquisition, the Company also periodically sells its monitoring equipment and other services together in multiple-element arrangements. In such cases, the Company allocates revenue on the basis of the relative selling price of the delivered and undelivered elements. The selling price for each of the elements is estimated based on the price charged by the Company when the elements are sold on a standalone basis.
Goodwill and intangible assets policy	In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08 which is intended to simplify how an entity tests goodwill for impairment. Under the revised guidance, an entity has the option to first assess 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 a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, an entity determines it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. However, if an entity concludes otherwise, then it is required to perform the first step of the two-step impairment test by calculating the fair value of the reporting unit and comparing the fair value with the carrying amount of the reporting unit. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, then the entity is required to perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of the impairment loss, if any. Under the amendments in this update, an entity has the option to bypass the qualitative assessment for any reporting unit in any period and proceed directly to performing the first step of the two-step goodwill impairment test. An entity may resume performing the qualitative assessment in any subsequent period. ASU 2011-08 is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted, including for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed as of a date before September 15, 2011, if an entity’s financial statements for the most recent annual or interim period have not yet been issued. The Company has elected to early adopt ASU 2011-08 for the purposes of performing its annual goodwill impairment test for its fiscal year ended January 1, 2012. The Company’s measurement date for the annual goodwill test is as of the first day of its fourth fiscal quarter. The implementation of this accounting standard will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows. In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-28 related to goodwill and intangible assets. Under current guidance, testing for goodwill impairment is a two-step test. When a goodwill impairment test is performed, an entity must assess whether the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value (Step 1). If it does, an entity must perform an additional test to determine whether goodwill has been impaired and to calculate the amount of that impairment (Step 2). The objective of ASU No 2010-28 is to address circumstances in which entities have reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. The amendments in this guidance modify Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts to require an entity to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists after considering certain qualitative characteristics, as described in this guidance. This guidance became effective for the Company in fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2010. The Company currently does not have any reporting units with a zero or negative carrying value. The implementation of this accounting standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows.
Business combinations policy	Also, in December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-29 related to financial statement disclosures for business combinations entered into after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The amendments in this guidance specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. These amendments also expand the supplemental pro forma disclosures under current guidance for business combinations to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments in this update are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The Company acquired BI during the thirty-nine weeks ended October 2, 2011 and has implemented this standard, as applicable, to the related business combination disclosures.

Basis of Presentation (Policies)

9 Months Ended

Oct. 02, 2011

Discontinued operations

The termination of any of the Company’s management contracts, by expiration or otherwise, may result in the classification of the operating results of such management contract, net of taxes, as a discontinued operation. When material, the Company reflects such events as discontinued operations so long as the financial results can be clearly identified, the operations and cash flows are completely eliminated from ongoing operations, and so long as the Company does not have any significant continuing involvement in the operations of the component after the disposal or termination transaction. The component unit for which cash flows are considered to be completely eliminated exists at the customer level. Historically, the Company has classified operations as discontinued in the period they are announced as normally all continuing cash flows cease within three to six months of that date.

Comprehensive income policy

In June 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2011-05 which requires an entity to present all nonowner changes in stockholders’ equity either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. ASU 2011-05 eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity. This standard will become effective for the Company in fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011 and should be applied retrospectively. The Company does not believe that the implementation of this standard will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operation and cash flows.

Fair value measurement policy

In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04 which provides a consistent definition of fair value in US GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) and ensures that their respective fair value measurement and disclosure requirements are the same (except for minor differences in wording and style). The amendments change certain fair value measurement principles and enhance the disclosure requirements particularly for level 3 fair value measurements. The standard will become effective for the Company during interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2011 and should be applied prospectively. The Company does not believe that the implementation of this standard will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operation and cash flows.

Revenue recognition policy

In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-13 which provides amendments to revenue recognition criteria for separating consideration in multiple element arrangements. As a result of these amendments, multiple deliverable arrangements will be separated more frequently than under existing GAAP. The amendments, among other things, establish the selling price of a deliverable, replace the term fair value with selling price and eliminate the residual method such that consideration can be allocated to the deliverables using the relative selling price method based on GEO’s specific assumptions. This amendment also significantly expands the disclosure requirements for multiple element arrangements. This guidance became effective for the Company prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010. The implementation of this standard in the thirty-nine weeks ended October 2, 2011 did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows. As a result of the BI Acquisition, the Company also periodically sells its monitoring equipment and other services together in multiple-element arrangements. In such cases, the Company allocates revenue on the basis of the relative selling price of the delivered and undelivered elements. The selling price for each of the elements is estimated based on the price charged by the Company when the elements are sold on a standalone basis.

Goodwill and intangible assets policy

In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-08 which is intended to simplify how an entity tests goodwill for impairment. Under the revised guidance, an entity has the option to first assess 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 a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, an entity determines it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then performing the two-step impairment test is unnecessary. However, if an entity concludes otherwise, then it is required to perform the first step of the two-step impairment test by calculating the fair value of the reporting unit and comparing the fair value with the carrying amount of the reporting unit. If the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, then the entity is required to perform the second step of the goodwill impairment test to measure the amount of the impairment loss, if any. Under the amendments in this update, an entity has the option to bypass the qualitative assessment for any reporting unit in any period and proceed directly to performing the first step of the two-step goodwill impairment test. An entity may resume performing the qualitative assessment in any subsequent period. ASU 2011-08 is effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted, including for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed as of a date before September 15, 2011, if an entity’s financial statements for the most recent annual or interim period have not yet been issued. The Company has elected to early adopt ASU 2011-08 for the purposes of performing its annual goodwill impairment test for its fiscal year ended January 1, 2012. The Company’s measurement date for the annual goodwill test is as of the first day of its fourth fiscal quarter. The implementation of this accounting standard will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows.

In December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-28 related to goodwill and intangible assets. Under current guidance, testing for goodwill impairment is a two-step test. When a goodwill impairment test is performed, an entity must assess whether the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value (Step 1). If it does, an entity must perform an additional test to determine whether goodwill has been impaired and to calculate the amount of that impairment (Step 2). The objective of ASU No 2010-28 is to address circumstances in which entities have reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts. The amendments in this guidance modify Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test for reporting units with zero or negative carrying amounts to require an entity to perform Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test if it is more likely than not that a goodwill impairment exists after considering certain qualitative characteristics, as described in this guidance. This guidance became effective for the Company in fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2010. The Company currently does not have any reporting units with a zero or negative carrying value. The implementation of this accounting standard did not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations and/or cash flows.

Business combinations policy

Also, in December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-29 related to financial statement disclosures for business combinations entered into after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The amendments in this guidance specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. These amendments also expand the supplemental pro forma disclosures under current guidance for business combinations to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments in this update are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. The Company acquired BI during the thirty-nine weeks ended October 2, 2011 and has implemented this standard, as applicable, to the related business combination disclosures.

- Definition

Disclosure of accounting policy for any discontinued operations. The results of operations of a component of an entity that either has been disposed of or is classified as held for sale is reported in discontinued operations if both: (a) the operations and cash flows of the component have been (or will be) eliminated from the ongoing operations of the entity as a result of the disposal transaction and (b) the entity will not have any significant continuing involvement in the operations of the component after the disposal transaction. If the entity elects to allocate interest expense to a discontinued operation, it may disclose its accounting policy for this election and describe its method of allocation.

+ References+ Details

- Definition

Disclosure of accounting policy for revenue recognition. If the entity has different policies for different types of revenue transactions, the policy for each material type of transaction is generally disclosed. If a sales transaction has multiple element arrangements (for example, delivery of multiple products, services or the rights to use assets) the disclosure may indicate the accounting policy for each unit of accounting as well as how units of accounting are determined and valued. The disclosure may encompass important judgment as to appropriateness of principles related to recognition of revenue. The disclosure also may indicate the entity's treatment of any unearned or deferred revenue that arises from the transaction.

+ References+ Details