Will First Step Task Force Make A Difference? – Update for August 1, 2025

We post news and comment on federal criminal justice issues, focused primarily on trial and post-conviction matters, legislative initiatives, and sentencing issues.

FIRST STEP TASK FORCE FINDING ITS FOOTING

Rick Stover, Senior Deputy Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Designation and Sentence Computation Center (DSCC), says that the BOP’s new First Step Act task force has begun evaluating prisoners now in halfway houses who could be transferred to home confinement if they were to receive the full benefit of “stacking” recommended Second Chance Act placement atop FSA time credits.

Writing in Forbes, Walter Pavlo said the task force – with over 30 DSCC analysts assigned – noted that while the SCA limits home confinement to the final 6 months (or 10%) of a sentence, “the end of the sentence is a moving target for some inmates because they continue to earn FSA credits each month even when they are at the halfway house. The Task Force is manually calculating these dates for inmates in halfway houses, because the BOP’s own computer program currently does not calculate these dates once inmates are released [to] halfway houses.” Mr. Stover said the task force is ensuring that such calculations will occur with the recent application updates.

Once that is done, Mr. Stover told Mr. Pavlo, the Task Force will focus on those currently in prison. Mr. Stover said, “As we… move inmates from the halfway houses to home confinement, we expect this to create a sizable number of open beds in many of our halfway houses across the country. This allows us to then revisit the placement dates for inmates currently in our institutions and increase the number of inmates that we can place in the community, and in many instances, allow inmates to get out of prison quicker to begin their transition to go home.”

Mr. Stover is optimistic, Mr. Pavlo reports. “While the Bureau has made marked improvements in our time credit calculation applications since the onset of the FSA statute, more improvements are needed. We have changes forthcoming that will simplify the data for both staff and inmates.”

The BOP effort to push prisoners out to halfway house and home confinement as early as possible is laudable, especially because some prison consultants think that the BOP has discretion to deny inmates their entitlement to FSA credits. I reported a month ago on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia’s dismissal of Crowe v. BOP. Former BOP Unit Management Section Chief Susan Giddings (now a private prison consultant), writing for herself and prison consultant Bruce Cameron last week, lauded the dismissal. She said that the Crowe court’s denial of class status

was particularly gratifying for the authors because they have consistently argued that 1) there is nothing in the FSA that eliminated or modified the Bureau’s designation authority, including halfway house and home confinement designations, and 2) the idea that the FSA required the Bureau to transfer an individual solely based their eligibility date regardless of any other compelling issues undermined the requirements of the Second Chance Act (SCA). The SCA required the Bureau to ensure that incarcerated individuals were provided with the same individualized consideration when making prerelease designation decisions as they were when making institution designation decisions. The decision-making process for prerelease placement (i.e., halfway house and home confinement) includes the inmate’s unit team making a prerelease placement recommendation based on a variety of factors, including but not limited to individual release needs, institutional conduct, the current offense, history of success or failure in prior community placement, and criminal history. The completed designation request is then sent to residential reentry staff, who then consider all the information provided by the institution, as well as the community program resources and any community safety issues when making the designation decision.

I disagree with Dr. Giddings and Mr. Cameron that Crowe went as far as they argues it does and that the decision is a good thing. Walt Pavlo may agree with me. He implicitly suggests that keeping inmates in BOP prisons when they are legally eligible for less restrictive incarceration may be due to a BOP mindset as much as anything. Earlier this week, Mr. Pavlo described the problem as being that

the BOP has lacked leadership to lead it into the modern era of incarceration. It is an Agency that prospered during the days of locking up drug offenders that saw the federal prison population top over 220,000 in 2013. Then as buildings became old and decrepit, it failed to keep up and now BOP employees sit in the same rotting, molded facilities that house the inmates they watch.

Dr. Giddings and Mr. Cameron seem confident that BOP decisionmakers will do the right thing by the inmates they oversee, and that they both need and will responsibly use the authority to withhold FSA placement based on SCA factors that they argue that the law provides. Their view is shared by a number of commentators and many US Attorneys’ offices, and is worth noting.

At the same time, Mr. Pavlo’s blunt suggestion that Bureau employees are locked in old thinking is a notion shared by its own cohort of observers.  New BOP Director Marshall so far has made some promising moves, including the Task Force. Now, the Task Force has to perform.

Forbes, Bureau of Prisons Task Force Taking Shape, Challenges Remain (July  23, 2025)

Giddings, Crowe, et al. v Federal Bureau of Prisons, et al: Common Sense for the Win! (July 25, 2025)

LISA, Class Action FSA Credit Lawsuit Against the BOP Case Dismissed (June 16, 2025)

Forbes, Bureau Of Prisons Could Fix First Step Act, If It Had The Will (July 29, 2025)

~ Thomas L. Root