When someone first comes into contact with the federal criminal justice system, it can feel like stepping into a different world.
The language is different.
The rules are different.
The people with authority use acronyms that most people have never heard before: PSR, BOP, RDAP, FSA, SGT, PATTERN, RRC, FTC.
A person may hear one thing from a lawyer, another thing from someone in a holding cell, another thing from a family member, and another thing from a person who says he knows how the system works. Before long, confusion grows.
That confusion is understandable.
The federal prison system is complicated because it touches so many areas of life. If someone asked me to explain a country as large and complex as China, I would first have to ask: What part do you want to understand? The economy? The culture? The politics? The history? The people? The food? The geography?
The prison system works the same way. We cannot understand it by learning one word or one rule. We have to understand how the pieces fit together.
That is why I am grateful when members of our community send questions. Those questions help me know what people still want to understand, even after going through the free lessons at Prison Professors.
One question comes up often:
Did the First Step Act replace good time?
The answer is no.
The First Step Act did not replace good conduct time. It created another pathway that may help eligible people transition sooner to a higher level of liberty.
To understand how these incentives work, we should separate three different mechanisms:
Statutory good conduct time
RDAP early release
First Step Act earned time credits
They are different. They have different rules. They have different eligibility requirements. And for people who qualify, they may work together.
Why the First Step Act Matters
The First Step Act became law in 2018. It was one of the most significant pieces of federal prison reform legislation in decades.
Before the First Step Act, the federal system had very few incentives for people to work toward measurable personal development. After Congress abolished parole for people convicted under the new-law system, most people understood that they would serve about 85 percent of the sentence, assuming they avoided disciplinary problems.
That system was known as determinate sentencing. A judge imposed the sentence, and the Bureau of Prisons carried it out.
The system did not ask enough questions about growth.
It did not ask enough questions about rehabilitation.
It did not create enough incentives for people to prepare for law-abiding, contributing lives after release.
The First Step Act began to change that. It required the Bureau of Prisons to use risk-and-needs assessments. It created incentives for people to participate in evidence-based recidivism reduction programs and productive activities. It also opened more conversation about community confinement, home confinement, and supervised release.
That does not mean the First Step Act is simple.
It is not.
People still have to understand eligibility. They still have to understand exclusions. They still have to understand how their risk level may influence the number of credits they earn. They still have to understand that staff members may interpret policies differently from one institution to another.
For that reason, a person must become a good self-advocate.
Self-advocacy begins with understanding the basic structure.
Statutory Good Conduct Time
Let’s start with good conduct time.
Some people call it good time. In federal prison, people often refer to it as statutory good time, or SGT.
In my view, the term “good time” can create confusion. It sounds as if a person has to do something extraordinary to earn it. But that is not really how it works.
A better way to think about statutory good time is this:
It is time a person may receive for avoiding disciplinary trouble.
That is why I sometimes call it the avoidance of bad time.
For people convicted of federal offenses after November 1, 1987, the law generally allows up to 54 days of good conduct time for each year of the sentence imposed. That is the mechanism that helps explain why people often say a person serves about 85 percent of a federal sentence.
This is separate from the First Step Act earned time credits.
That distinction is important.
A person may be eligible for statutory good conduct time even if the person is not eligible to earn First Step Act time credits. Those are separate issues.
Good conduct time does not mean a person is building a strong record of rehabilitation. It does not mean a person is documenting growth. It does not mean a person is preparing for success upon release.
It generally means the person has avoided disciplinary infractions.
That matters. Avoiding disciplinary problems is important. But it should never be the ceiling of a person’s adjustment strategy. It should be the floor.
A person who wants the best possible outcome should think beyond avoiding trouble.
The question should become:
What am I doing today to show that I am preparing for success tomorrow?
That is where self-directed work begins.
RDAP Is Different
The Residential Drug Abuse Program, or RDAP, is another pathway that may lead to an earlier transition from custody for people who qualify.
RDAP is not part of the First Step Act time-credit system. It existed before the First Step Act. It has its own rules, its own eligibility standards, and its own process.
A person who successfully completes RDAP may be considered for an administrative sentence reduction of up to one year. That can be a very significant benefit.
But not everyone qualifies.
To qualify, a person must have a documented substance-use disorder. In many cases, the most important documentation begins with the Presentence Investigation Report, or PSR.
That is why I encourage people who have not yet gone through the presentence investigation process to educate themselves early.
When the probation officer asks about a history of substance abuse, alcohol abuse, or addiction, the person should be truthful and complete. This is not the time to minimize a real problem because of embarrassment or fear.
I am not telling anyone what to say.
I am saying that honesty matters, and preparation matters.
If a person had a serious alcohol problem, a drug problem, or a pattern of using substances to avoid pain, stress, or responsibility, the person should not underplay that history. If the person says, “I have a couple glasses of wine once in a while,” that statement may not support RDAP eligibility. If the truth is that alcohol or drugs contributed to poor decisions, created instability, or became part of a destructive pattern, then the person should be honest about that history.
Some people worry that being honest about substance abuse will make them look bad before the judge.
I understand that concern.
But people should also understand the consequences of leaving that information out. If the PSR does not document the substance-use disorder, the person may later have difficulty qualifying for RDAP.
That is why preparation before sentencing matters.
A person should understand the system before making decisions that may influence the journey ahead.
RDAP is not automatic. Even if a person qualifies for the program, the early-release benefit depends on additional factors. The Bureau of Prisons makes the determination. Prior convictions, current offense conduct, detainers, program completion, and other issues may influence the outcome.
Still, for those who qualify, RDAP can be an important opportunity.
And even if a person does not receive the full early-release benefit, the program may still help that person confront patterns of thinking and behavior that led to the criminal justice system.
That is the larger point.
We should never look only at the time cut.
We should look at the growth.
First Step Act Earned Time Credits
Now let’s talk about the First Step Act earned time credits.
This is where many people get confused.
The First Step Act created a system that allows eligible people to earn credits by participating in approved programs and productive activities. Those credits may help a person transition earlier to prerelease custody, such as a Residential Reentry Center or home confinement, or in some cases move earlier to supervised release.
But again, eligibility matters.
Some people are excluded because of the offense of conviction. The First Step Act contains a list of disqualifying offenses. If a person is serving a sentence for one of those offenses, that person may not be eligible to apply earned time credits, even if the person participates in programs.
That can feel unfair.
At Prison Professors, we advocate for more opportunities for people to earn freedom through merit. We believe the system should create incentives for every person to work toward growth, accountability, and preparation for success. But we also have to be truthful about the law as it exists.
The law has exclusions.
That is why every person should learn the rules that apply to his or her case.
If a person is eligible, the next issue is participation.
The Bureau of Prisons uses a risk-and-needs assessment system. That assessment helps determine a person’s risk level and recommends programs or activities. A person earns credits by successfully participating in assigned evidence-based recidivism reduction programs or productive activities.
The number of credits may depend on the person’s risk level.
Some people may earn 10 days of credit for every 30 days of successful participation. People with minimum or low risk levels may earn 15 days of credit for every 30 days of successful participation.
That is why the assessment matters.
That is also why self-advocacy matters.
A person should not wait passively and assume everything will be calculated correctly. A person should ask questions respectfully. A person should document participation. A person should keep copies of certificates when possible. A person should understand what programs have been recommended. A person should make sure progress is visible.
The person who understands the system becomes more effective at navigating the system.
These Benefits Can Stack
Another area of confusion involves how these mechanisms work together.
Statutory good conduct time is one mechanism.
RDAP is another mechanism.
First Step Act earned time credits are another mechanism.
For people who qualify, these incentives may work cumulatively.
That means they may stack.
A person may receive statutory good conduct time. If that person qualifies for RDAP and completes the program successfully, the person may also receive an RDAP sentence reduction. If that person is eligible for First Step Act time credits and successfully participates in approved programs or productive activities, those credits may also influence the transition timeline.
This is why preparation can make such a significant difference.
I will give an example from our team.
Steve, our IT director, received a 60-month sentence. He qualified for RDAP. He participated in the programming the Bureau of Prisons required. He also worked to comply with the expectations of the system. Because of the way the different mechanisms applied in his case, he served about 19 months in federal prison, with the remainder of his time in community confinement or home confinement.
That was a significant outcome on a 60-month sentence.
But I want to be very clear.
No one should assume that Steve’s outcome will be the outcome for someone else.
Every person has unique circumstances and characteristics. The offense matters. The PSR matters. The sentence length matters. The risk assessment matters. The disciplinary record matters. The programs available at the institution matter. The timing matters. BOP policies matter. Staff interpretation may matter. Case management matters.
No one should build expectations on another person’s timeline.
Instead, build a plan.
Learn Before You Need the Information
The best time to learn about good conduct time, RDAP, and First Step Act credits is before surrendering to prison.
The next best time is today.
Too many people wait until they are already in the system before they start asking questions. By then, they may have already missed opportunities to document important information in the PSR. They may have already misunderstood how programs work. They may have already made statements that limit options.
Preparation gives a person a better chance to make informed decisions.
At Prison Professors, we offer free courses to help people understand the journey ahead. We do not want anyone to pay for information that should be available to the people who need it most.
That is one of the reasons I founded Prison Professors.
I served 26 years in federal prison. I did not have the First Step Act. I did not have earned time credits. I did not have incentives that allowed me to earn an earlier release through documented preparation. I served every day that the law required me to serve.
But I still worked.
I read.
I wrote.
I earned academic credentials.
I built a support network.
I documented my progress.
I prepared for success because I wanted to emerge differently from the way I entered. I wanted to reconcile with society. I wanted to prove, through a body of work, that I could live as a law-abiding, contributing citizen.
That strategy helped me when I returned to society.
And today, we encourage every member of our community to begin building that kind of record.
Do Not Rely Only on the System
The Bureau of Prisons has rules and policies. But the system is large. Staff members have heavy caseloads. Institutions operate differently. Policies may change. Calculations may not always be easy to understand.
That is why a person should not rely only on the system.
A person should build a record.
Keep track of programs.
Keep track of certificates.
Keep track of book reports.
Keep track of journal entries.
Keep track of work assignments.
Keep track of efforts to reconcile with society.
Keep track of release planning.
Keep track of steps taken to prepare for employment, family responsibilities, community involvement, and law-abiding life after release.
This record can become useful in many ways.
It may help during team meetings.
It may help with release planning.
It may help with requests for community confinement.
It may help with supervised release.
It may help with future employment.
It may help family members understand that the person inside is not waiting for time to pass. The person is working to grow.
At Prison Professors, we built tools to help people memorialize that work. We encourage people to build profiles, write biographies, publish journal entries, complete book reports, create release plans, and collect testimonials.
Those steps do not guarantee any outcome.
But they help a person build a stronger record.
And in a system that often reduces people to a register number, a strong record matters.
A Plain-English Summary
Here is the simplest way I can explain the difference:
Statutory good conduct time is the credit a qualifying person may receive for avoiding disciplinary problems. It is not the same as First Step Act earned time credits.
RDAP is a separate program for people who have a documented substance-use disorder and meet the eligibility requirements. Successful completion may lead to an administrative sentence reduction of up to one year, depending on the person’s circumstances.
First Step Act earned time credits are separate from both good conduct time and RDAP. Eligible people may earn credits by successfully participating in approved programs and productive activities. Those credits may help advance transition to prerelease custody or supervised release.
These mechanisms may work together for people who qualify.
But they are not automatic.
They require eligibility.
They require participation.
They require documentation.
They require self-advocacy.
And they require the person to stay focused on the bigger goal: preparing for success upon release.
The Bigger Goal
I understand why people focus on release dates.
Everyone wants to get home.
Families want their loved ones home.
Spouses, parents, children, and siblings are serving a sentence too. They did not break the law, but they live with the consequences. They want clarity. They want hope. They want to know what steps their loved one can take.
That is why we teach.
But I also want people to think beyond the release date.
The release date matters. But the person’s preparation matters more.
What good is it to come home earlier if a person has not prepared to stay home?
What good is it to earn credits if the person has not built skills, discipline, and a plan?
What good is it to leave prison without a record that shows growth, accountability, and readiness?
The goal is not only to get out.
The goal is to come home strong.
The goal is to live as a law-abiding, contributing citizen.
The goal is to rebuild trust.
The goal is to create income opportunities.
The goal is to strengthen family relationships.
The goal is to reconcile with society.
The goal is to make sure that the worst decision of a person’s life does not define the rest of that person’s life.
That work can begin today.
Start With What You Can Control
A person cannot change the past.
A person may not be able to change the sentence.
A person may not be able to change the offense of conviction.
A person may not be able to change whether the First Step Act excludes certain categories.
But a person can control today’s decisions.
That is where I encourage people to begin.
Learn the rules.
Ask respectful questions.
Participate in programs.
Avoid disciplinary problems.
Document progress.
Read books.
Write book reports.
Journal daily.
Build a release plan.
Collect testimonials.
Create a record that shows preparation for the highest level of liberty, at the soonest possible time.
That is the message we teach through Prison Professors.
We do not charge people for this information. We built our resources because we want people to become better self-advocates. We want people to understand the system. We want them to prepare. We want them to build records that show why they are worthy candidates for more liberty and more responsibility.
No one should work harder than the person who wants the better outcome.
Final Word
The First Step Act did not replace good time.
Good conduct time, RDAP, and First Step Act earned time credits are separate mechanisms.
For people who qualify, they may work together.
But the person who wants the best possible outcome should not stop at understanding the rules. The person should build a plan around those rules.
That plan should show discipline.
That plan should show accountability.
That plan should show growth.
That plan should show a commitment to living as a law-abiding, contributing citizen.
At Prison Professors, we believe in preparing for the highest level of liberty, at the soonest possible time. That preparation begins with knowledge, but it grows through action.
Do not wait for the system to define your future.
Start building the record today.
Self-Directed Reflection Question: What steps am I taking today to document my growth and prepare myself for the highest level of liberty, at the soonest possible time?