Earlier today, on the Federal Bureau of Prisons website, I watched a video featuring Lauren Lambert interviewing Rick Stover, the BOP’s First Step Act subject matter expert. I clicked because I keep hearing the same question from families who are trying to make sense of dates and referrals: “Why don’t the dates match?” The video is the Bureau’s effort to address that confusion and share what they’ve improved, especially around First Step Act time credits and how they interact with Second Chance Act placement.
I came away encouraged. Not in a “feel good” way—this isn’t that kind of topic—but because the Bureau is being clear about what changed and where they’re putting attention next. I’m thankful this administration is treating the First Step Act as a priority and cleaning up problems that created unnecessary confusion over the last few years.
Below is what I heard, translated into plain English, without the legal fog.
First Step Act time credits: what the Bureau says has changed
Rick Stover emphasized something he wanted people to hear loud and clear: First Step Act time credits are being calculated correctly now.
He repeated it more than once, and I understand why. If you’ve been watching this unfold since 2018, you’ve seen enough inconsistency to be skeptical. So when the Bureau says, “We’re getting it right,” the natural response is: “Okay—what’s different now?”
The biggest operational change he described was how often the calculation runs:
- It used to run on a monthly cycle (often late in the month).
- Now it runs every day.
That’s not just a technical tweak. A monthly update cycle creates a lag. People live in that lag. Staff work in that lag. Families sit in that lag. A daily update reduces the “sudden surprise” effect where dates shift all at once at the end of a month.
Stover also made a point aimed at staff—especially case managers—about avoiding manual calculations. His reasoning was straightforward: there are too many variables, and manual math creates inconsistencies. He wants the system doing what it’s built to do, and staff relying on that system.
From where I sit, that’s a sign of maturity in implementation. Less improvisation. More standardization. Fewer avoidable mistakes in how First Step Act time credits are reflected on rosters and worksheets.
Why conditional placement dates change the timeline
Another part of the video that matters: Stover explained why the Bureau moved toward “conditional placement dates.”
Early on, the Bureau was hesitant about projecting dates forward. Instead of showing where someone was headed if everything stayed on track, it often showed only what had already been earned. That created confusion and frustration because people could see their credits building, but still feel like the process wasn’t moving.
Stover explained how that approach created a real bottleneck. Staff waited until credits were fully earned before making referrals for community placement. Referrals started later. Approvals took time. And by the time things were processed, people felt like they were behind where the worksheet suggested they should be.
The shift toward conditional placement dates is meant to fix that timing problem so the process starts earlier and lines up better with where First Step Act time credits point.
To me, this was one of the more important points in the entire update, because it goes beyond “the math works.” It addresses “the workflow works.”
The training update that reduces mixed messages
Stover also addressed training. He said staff training has been a major complaint for years, and the Bureau responded by creating a narrated slide presentation for staff, and a public-facing version for outside viewers.
That matters because inconsistency in training leads to inconsistency in answers. When families compare notes and one person hears “yes” while another hears “no,” the assumption is usually that someone is being treated differently. Sometimes that happens. But more often, the issue is simpler: staff aren’t all working from the same playbook.
More consistent training means fewer mixed messages about First Step Act time credits and fewer unnecessary conflicts caused by misunderstanding.
The main confusion: Second Chance Act vs. First Step Act time credits
Stover said the biggest misconception right now is how people think the First Step Act and the Second Chance Act combine.
People tend to assume: “If I’ve earned First Step Act time credits, and the Second Chance Act allows community placement, then those two things stack into a guaranteed amount of time.”
Stover’s point is that they don’t operate the same way:
- First Step Act time credits are applied based on eligibility and the statute.
- Second Chance Act placement includes discretion and resource limitations, and the law itself builds that in.
He emphasized that Second Chance Act placement decisions involve factors, including a resources factor. That’s not an excuse. It’s how the law is structured, and it’s been structured that way for years.
So the Bureau’s message is: yes, you may see both components on a worksheet or recommendation, but they don’t function as identical “guarantees.”
Why contract capacity is the real pressure point
Stover used a hotel analogy to explain capacity. It’s actually a good analogy.
Historically, Second Chance Act stays were often shorter—think a shorter reservation, quicker turnover.
But with First Step Act time credits working as intended, more people are in community placement for longer periods. That’s the point of the law: to transition eligible people sooner and keep them in the community longer.
Longer stays tighten capacity.
And here’s the part many people don’t realize: the issue isn’t always whether a building has open beds. It’s contract capacity. The Bureau contracts for placement slots. If the contract caps a location at a certain number, that’s the limit—even if someone says “we have beds.”
Stover also said the Bureau is reviewing contracts and looking at directing resources to increase capacity. If you want to see the Second Chance Act side line up more often with recommendations, that’s where work has to happen.
What I took away from the update
I came away encouraged by the direction and the clarity.
Here’s what I heard the Bureau saying, in a clean list:
- First Step Act time credits are being calculated correctly now, and the system updates daily.
- Conditional placement dates help staff start referrals earlier and align workflow with the timeline.
- Training is being expanded so staff and the public have clearer guidance.
- Second Chance Act placement includes discretion and resources, and that’s built into the law.
- Contract capacity is a major factor, and the Bureau is focused on improving it.
I’m thankful this administration is making the First Step Act a priority and cleaning up what wasn’t working. And I appreciate the Bureau putting out communication that’s direct, specific, and tied to real operational changes—not just slogans.
If you’re trying to make sense of your own situation, this update is worth watching. And if you’re tracking dates, the biggest headline is that First Step Act time credits are being handled with more consistency, and the Bureau is working to make the community placement side keep up with that progress.
Questions? Schedule a call.
Thank you,
Justin Paperny
FAQ: First Step Act Time Credits and Community Placement
What are First Step Act time credits?
First Step Act time credits are credits earned through eligible programming and activities that can affect when someone becomes eligible for community placement, depending on eligibility rules and assessments.
Are First Step Act time credits being calculated correctly now?
In the video, Rick Stover said the Bureau’s current systems are calculating First Step Act time credits correctly and that they’ve reviewed large numbers of cases to confirm it.
What changed recently in how credits are calculated?
Stover said the system moved from monthly calculations to daily calculations, which makes the information more current and reduces lag.
Why do people still say their dates “don’t match”?
Stover explained that much of the mismatch confusion comes from expecting Second Chance Act recommendations to operate like guarantees. Second Chance Act placement includes discretion and is influenced by resources and contract capacity.
What does “contract capacity” mean?
The Bureau contracts for a limited number of community placement slots. A location may have beds, but if the contract cap has been reached, placement dates can be constrained.
What is the Bureau doing to improve community placement capacity?
Stover said they are reviewing resources and working toward renegotiating contracts to increase capacity, so timelines can align more often with recommendations.
Should staff do manual time credit calculations?
Stover strongly discouraged manual calculations because of the number of variables and the risk of inconsistent answers. The Bureau wants staff relying on the automated system.
