Program Statement 5405.01 at a glance
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Program Statement | 5405.01 |
| Subject | First Step Act Assessments, Programming, and Incentives |
| Effective / current edition date | May 7, 2026, approved by Director William K. Marshall III. Office of primary interest on the header block: DPI DIR. |
| Change notice | None. This is the original edition. |
| Supersedes / rescinds | “This program statement rescinds the Program Statements First Step Act Program Incentives and First Step Act Needs Assessment” (PS 5405.01 at p. 1). Those are P5220.01 and P5400.01; neither remains in the in-force policy set. |
| Governing statute | 18 U.S.C. § 3632 (risk and needs assessment system); 18 U.S.C. § 3621(h) (implementation and programming for all prisoners) |
| Governing regulation (28 C.F.R.) | The Program Statement’s own References block cites 28 C.F.R. § 523.41 (definitions) and 28 C.F.R. § 542.10 (administrative remedy). The incentives themselves are not codified in 28 C.F.R.; they are agency policy. |
| Related BP forms | None listed in this Program Statement |
| Official PDF | PS 5405.01, First Step Act Assessments, Programming, and Incentives |
Checked against the BOP policy set · 2026-09-06.
This is the Program Statement that governs how the Bureau of Prisons measures a person’s recidivism risk and criminogenic needs, assigns programming against those needs, and rewards completion — with phone and visiting privileges, transfer closer to home, achievement awards, preferred housing and quarterly events. It is the front half of the First Step Act machine; the time-credit half is a separate policy.
Read this page to understand how assessments and programming assignments actually work. The score that drives most of it — and what genuinely moves it — is on PATTERN risk score, which covers how a score is challenged and what a realistic reduction strategy looks like. The credits earned through this programming are covered on First Step Act time credits (PS 5410.01).
On this page
The rule itself: the FSA participation incentives
Section 6 of the Program Statement is the operative list — the discrete, enumerated set of things the Bureau says a person can actually receive for completing recommended programming. It is reproduced verbatim below.
The framing sentence matters as much as the list: “Completion of EBRRs may lead to various incentives outlined below. In general, eligibility for FSA incentives only pertains to programs that address one or more identified needs. Where applicable, incentives are contingent on available funding” (PS 5405.01 at p. 7). Both qualifications are real. A program that does not map to an identified need does not generate an incentive, and an incentive that costs money is conditioned on the institution having it.
The incentives, verbatim
| Incentive | What the Program Statement provides |
|---|---|
| a. Additional Phone and Visitation Privileges | “As an incentive for enrollment, successful participation, or completion of an EBRR program that addresses one or more inmate’s needs, inmates may be afforded additional phone minutes and visitation privileges in accordance with the Program Statements Inmate Telephone Regulations and Visiting Regulations. Additional guidance for FSA phone minutes and visitation privileges are provided on the FSA page of the Bureau’s intranet site.” |
| b. Transfer to Institution Closer to Release Residence | “As an incentive for successful participation or completion of an assigned EBRR program, an inmate may request, during their regularly scheduled program review, to be considered for placement at a facility closer to the inmate’s release residence.” Subject to: “the recommendation of the Warden at the inmate’s current institution; a determination by the Designation and Sentence Computation Center (DSCC) following a review of the relevant designation criteria ensuring the proposed receiving institution is an appropriate facility for the inmate; and bed availability at the proposed receiving institution.” |
| c. Achievement Awards and Preferred Housing | “FSA achievement awards and preferred housing are for those who complete EBRR programs of 100 hours or more, as identified in the FSA Approved Programs Guide… Getting Ready for the Outside World (GROW) is a special mission unit that may be used as a preferred housing unit incentive. GROW may be established at an institution at the Warden’s discretion and with approval of the Assistant Directors of the Reentry Services Division and Correctional Programs Division and the respective Regional Director… Individuals who opt for an achievement award will receive a financial incentive upon completion of an EBRR program of 100 hours or more.” |
| d. FSA Incentive Events | “Quarterly events are coordinated by the institution FSA Interdisciplinary Committee … and must be offered at each facility to inmates who have completed an EBRR program of less than 100 hours, as identified in the FSA Approved Programs Guide.” |
| e. Suspension of FSA Incentives | “While program participation is voluntary, declining to participate in recommended programming that address criminogenic needs may result in suspension of potential incentive benefits.” Loss or removal of incentives includes, but is not limited to: “Refusal to Participate in IFRP and Required Programs. Inmates who refuse to participate in the IFRP will not receive incentive awards for completing EBRR programs while on refuse status. Additionally, if an inmate does not participate in other required programs (e.g., Drug Education, Bureau Literacy Program – high school equivalency), they are opting out of all FSA incentives.” And “Violations of Institution or Program Rules. Inmates found guilty of any incident report, in accordance with the Program Statement Inmate Discipline Program, will be disqualified from monthly incentive awards and the quarterly incentive events.” |
Source: PS 5405.01 at pp. 7–9.
The Program Statement is also explicit that time credits belong to the other policy: “FTCs are also an FSA incentive and criteria for eligibility, earning, and application are detailed in the Program Statement First Step Act of 2018 – Time Credits: Procedures for Implementation of 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(4)” (PS 5405.01 at p. 7).
What the assessments are, and when they happen
The system has two instruments, and confusing them is the most common error people make.
| Instrument | What it measures | The Program Statement’s description |
|---|---|---|
| PATTERN | Recidivism risk | “PATTERN is the automated recidivism risk assessment instrument that objectively assesses an inmate’s current level of risk for re-offending. This tool calculates a recidivism risk score based upon predefined criteria outlined on the FSA pages of the Bureau’s public and intranet sites. Several of the element scores show staff and inmates programming opportunities to help decrease the inmate’s overall recidivism risk score, while other factors, such as the offense of conviction and criminal history remain the same despite program completions.” |
| SPARC | Criminogenic needs | “SPARC utilizes multiple needs assessment tools and processes to evaluate specific criminogenic need areas that help focus program recommendations to best prepare inmates to return to the community.” |
Together they are the Risk and Needs Assessment System: “The RNAS includes the Prisoner Assessment Tool Targeting Estimated Risk and Needs (PATTERN) recidivism risk instrument and Standardized Prisoner Assessment for Reduction in Criminality (SPARC) criminogenic needs assessments” (PS 5405.01 at p. 3).
The timing rules, verbatim:
- Initial needs assessment. “All needs are initially assessed upon arrival at the designated facility where the inmate begins serving their sentence. This process includes assessments completed by staff and self-assessment surveys completed by inmates.” Most time frames “are consistent with the initial program review as specified in the Program Statement Unit Management and Inmate Program Review.”
- Self-assessment surveys. “Inmates have one opportunity to complete the electronic self-assessment surveys. If a session times out or remains incomplete, this will result in a need refusal assignment in the applicable Bureau inmate management system.” Staff “must provide inmates with paper-and-pencil self-assessments to complete and return if an electronic version is not available or a self-assessment need refusal requires remedy.”
- Periodic risk reassessment. “Inmate risk scores are reassessed in accordance with the Program Statement Unit Management and Inmate Program Review. During regularly scheduled inmate program reviews, the Unit Management team utilizes the Insight application to reassess the recidivism risk of each inmate… Ordinarily, changes are a result of the inmate’s age, completed programs, and incident reports.”
- Periodic needs reassessment. “Inmate’s needs are reassessed in accordance with the Program Statement Unit Management and Inmate Program Review… If the review indicates a change in an inmate’s recidivism risk level or any criminogenic needs, staff must review the changes and recommend appropriate EBRR programs or PAs aligning with the updated assessments.”
- What can lower a score. “Only designated program completions may reduce risk scores; these are identified in the FSA Approved Programs Guide and listed on the FSA pages of the Bureau’s public and intranet sites with additional scoring details.”
Source: PS 5405.01 at pp. 3–5.
The statutory floor underneath those timing rules is 18 U.S.C. § 3632(a)(4), which requires the system to “reassess the recidivism risk of each prisoner periodically, based on factors including indicators of progress, and of regression, that are dynamic and that can reasonably be expected to change while in prison,” and § 3632(d)(5), which provides that a prisoner who successfully participates “shall receive periodic risk reassessments not less often than annually, and a prisoner determined to be at a medium or high risk of recidivating and who has less than 5 years until his or her projected release date shall receive more frequent risk reassessments.”
The programming-assignment rules
Three rules in Section 5 do more practical work than anything else in the document.
One program at a time. “Inmates are only required to participate in one program that addresses one or more of their needs at any given time with exception of a program that may be required under an alternative program statement (e.g., GED or Drug Education.) Staff will not require an inmate to participate in a second program, nor should they be marked as ‘decline,’ if they are already actively engaged in a program that meets one or more of their identified needs and cannot commit to another program at that time.” When a waitlist conflict arises, “[s]taff will consult with the inmate to decide whether they want to continue with enrollment in the new program or remain on the waitlist”; if the inmate finishes the current program, “they will be allowed to do so while staying on the waitlist for the other program” (PS 5405.01 at p. 6).
Registration is the inmate’s move, and a denial has to be explained. “Inmates are responsible for contacting relevant departments to inform them of their interest in participating in recommended programs.” If the request is refused, “[t]he department responsible for the program must utilize the Insight Feedback application to provide a relevant explanation as to why the inmate did not meet the specific program requirements at the time of their request. The same department should suggest alternative programming to address identified criminogenic needs” (PS 5405.01 at p. 6).
Disability accommodations, and incomplete rather than fail. “Inmates with documented disabilities may require more time or additional accommodations to complete an EBRR program or PA… Ordinarily, an incomplete assignment is more appropriate than a program failure assignment when cognitive or physical disabilities negatively impact the inmate’s ability to complete a recommended EBRR program or PA” (PS 5405.01 at p. 6). That distinction matters, because a failure code and an incomplete code do not carry the same consequences.
And the successful-participation standard, verbatim: “In general, to successfully participate in a program, inmates must: attend all sessions with only excused absences, complete all assigned activities and work, and comply with all program rules and instructions set forth by the program manager/facilitator” (PS 5405.01 at p. 3).
What First Step Act programming means for you
If you are the person inside: your Individualized Need Plan
Get the Individualized Need Plan from your last program review and read it against the incentives list. Three things decide whether you are in a good position.
Are the programs you are doing matched to an identified need? The Program Statement says incentives attach only to programs that “address one or more identified needs,” and that only designated completions listed in the FSA Approved Programs Guide reduce a risk score. Non-FSA programs are named in the policy — “team sports, mock job fairs, physical exercise, special pre-release events, reentry simulations, and worship services” — and it says plainly that “participants are not entitled to incentives under the FSA” for those. They may still be worth doing. They will not move the number.
Are you on refuse status anywhere? Refusing IFRP means no incentive awards while on refuse status, and refusing Drug Education or the literacy program means “they are opting out of all FSA incentives.” That is a broad consequence for a narrow act, and it is worth checking whether a refuse code was entered accurately.
Was a self-assessment survey marked as a refusal? You get one shot at the electronic survey and a timeout counts against you — but the policy provides the fix: staff “must provide inmates with paper-and-pencil self-assessments to complete and return if … a self-assessment need refusal requires remedy.” Ask for the paper version in writing on a BP-A0148.
Two rules to hold onto when a staff member says otherwise: you cannot be required to enroll in a second program while actively engaged in one that meets an identified need, and you should not be coded “decline” for that; and if a department turns you away, it is supposed to record why in Insight Feedback and suggest an alternative.
If you are a family member: what this policy can deliver
The most useful thing to understand is what this policy can and cannot deliver. It can produce more phone minutes and visits, a transfer closer to home, an achievement award, preferred housing, and a quarterly event. It cannot produce a release date; that runs through the time-credit policy and, ultimately, through the sentence computation.
The transfer incentive is the one families care about most, and it is worth reading the conditions carefully rather than hopefully. A request is made at a scheduled program review, and it is subject to a Warden recommendation, a DSCC designation review, and bed availability. Three discretionary gates. It is a request, not an entitlement, and nobody outside the Bureau can tell you how it will come out.
Note the statutory backdrop, though, because it is genuinely favorable: 18 U.S.C. § 3621(b) directs the Bureau, subject to bed availability, security designation, programmatic needs, medical and mental-health needs, faith-based requests, court recommendations and other security concerns, to “place the prisoner in a facility as close as practicable to the prisoner’s primary residence, and to the extent practicable, in a facility within 500 driving miles of that residence.” Designation is covered on Inmate security designation and custody classification.
If you are counsel: First Step Act programming
The statutory hook worth keeping in view is 18 U.S.C. § 3621(h)(6): “The Director of the Bureau of Prisons shall provide all prisoners with the opportunity to actively participate in evidence-based recidivism reduction programs or productive activities, according to their specific criminogenic needs, throughout their entire term of incarceration.” That is a mandatory verb attached to opportunity, and it is the provision behind most availability arguments. Pair it with § 3632(a)(5), which requires reassignment on reassessment “to ensure that … all prisoners at each risk level have a meaningful opportunity to reduce their classification during the period of incarceration.”
The Program Statement supplies the documentary record those arguments need. Programming recommendations, progress and concerns “are recorded in the Insight Feedback application for review during initial classification and inmate program review meetings”; a department that declines an inmate “must utilize the Insight Feedback application to provide a relevant explanation”; and accommodation determinations are “documented in the Insight Feedback application.” Insight Feedback entries and the Individualized Need Plan are therefore the first records to request.
On appeals, the Program Statement’s Section 10 is one sentence and it points where you would expect: “Inmates have the option to utilize the Program Statement Administrative Remedy Program for review of issues or concerns related to this program statement, as outlined in 28 C.F.R. § 542.10 and subsequent sections.”
One structural caution. The incentives in this policy are not codified in 28 C.F.R. The regulation the References block cites, § 523.41, supplies definitions; § 542.10 supplies the remedy process. The incentives themselves rest on agency policy and on § 3632(d)(1)–(3), and the Program Statement layers in discretionary and funding conditions on top. Frame a claim about an incentive as a claim about the process — a refuse code entered without basis, a decline entered contrary to the one-program rule, a program review that did not happen — rather than as a claim of entitlement to the incentive itself.
What changed with Program Statement 5405.01
This Program Statement, issued 7 May 2026, did something structurally unusual: it consolidated two separate First Step Act policies into one.
It rescinded two policies at once. The header block states: “This program statement rescinds the Program Statements First Step Act Program Incentives and First Step Act Needs Assessment” (PS 5405.01 at p. 1). Note that BOP rescinded them by title, not by number. Those titles correspond to P5220.01, First Step Act Program Incentives, and P5400.01, First Step Act Needs Assessment — the numbers still appear in the References blocks of other in-force Program Statements, including PS 5240.01, PS 5241.01, PS 5242.01 and PS 5410.01, which have not caught up. Neither number remains in BOP’s in-force policy set.
Why that matters for anyone reading older material. Every guide, brief, article and administrative remedy written before May 2026 that cites “PS 5220.01” for the incentives list is citing a rescinded policy. The incentives are now in Section 6 of PS 5405.01, reproduced above. If you are looking at a document that describes the incentives and cites 5220.01, check it against this edition before relying on it — and if you are drafting one now, cite 5405.01.
What is new in the consolidated version. The policy’s own stated objectives include several things the predecessor statements did not do: it “[e]stablishes guidance for implementing the Criminogenic Needs Assessment portion of the Risk and Needs Assessment System (RNAS)”; “[e]stablishes a consistent system (i.e., RNAS) for reporting data, monitoring, accessing, and auditing system usage”; “[d]irects resource allocation for institutions to deliver incentives and awards for program completions in compliance with FSA law”; “[e]stablishes clear roles and responsibilities at institution, regional, and central office levels”; and “[c]reates an FSA Interdisciplinary Committee at all institutions” (PS 5405.01 at p. 1). That committee is not decorative — under Section 6 it is the body that “must ensure incentives are appropriately awarded to those who complete programming within their discipline,” that coordinates the quarterly events, and that reviews the monthly completion rosters for 100-hour EBRR programs.
What did not change. The definitions in Section 3 are lifted from 28 C.F.R. § 523.41, which has been in effect since 19 January 2022 and has not been amended; the text in the Program Statement matches the current regulation. The time-credit rules were not folded in — they remain in PS 5410.01, last amended by Change Notice 2 in March 2023.
Where people get stuck when PATTERN does not move
“I completed programs and my PATTERN score didn’t move”
Often correct, and often expected. The Program Statement says two things that explain it: “Only designated program completions may reduce risk scores; these are identified in the FSA Approved Programs Guide,” and PATTERN includes “other factors, such as the offense of conviction and criminal history [that] remain the same despite program completions.” A score has static components that no amount of programming touches. The productive question at a program review is which specific element scores are dynamic in your case and which recommended programs map to them. That is a case-review question, and it is where a consult usually beats a form — see PATTERN risk score.
“I’m coded as declining a program I never refused”
This is the most common fixable error in the whole system, and there are three ways it happens: a self-assessment survey that timed out and was recorded as a need refusal; a second-program enrollment declined while already engaged in a recommended program, which the policy says should not be coded as a decline; and a department turning down a registration request without recording an explanation in Insight Feedback. Ask, in writing on a BP-A0148, what code is entered, when, by whom, and on what basis, and ask for the Insight Feedback entry. If that does not resolve it, informal resolution, then a BP-9 within 20 calendar days of the event (28 C.F.R. § 542.14), BP-10 within 20 calendar days of the Warden’s signed response, and BP-11 within 30 calendar days of the Regional Director’s (28 C.F.R. § 542.15).
“The program I need isn’t offered here”
The policy concedes the problem: “Program availability for inmates will vary by institution based on various factors such as institution population, staffing levels, and programming space,” and it directs facilitators to weigh “FSA conditional placement dates, projected release dates, length of time on the wait list, and those with high or medium risk of recidivism” when prioritizing placement. Two routes exist. The first is documentation — get the waitlist entry and the need-area match recorded at the program review, because unavailability you can prove is worth more later than unavailability you assert. The second is the transfer incentive in Section 6.b, which is expressly available for placement closer to the release residence, and separately the Bureau’s designation authority under § 3621(b). Both are discretionary.
“An incident report wiped out my incentives”
Section 6.e is blunt: inmates “found guilty of any incident report … will be disqualified from monthly incentive awards and the quarterly incentive events.” The policy does not state a duration for that disqualification. Because the consequence flows from the disciplinary finding, the place to attack it is the finding — through a Discipline Hearing Officer appeal, which under 28 C.F.R. § 542.14 “shall be submitted initially to the Regional Director,” not to the Warden. See Inmate Discipline Program.
“I’m on IFRP refuse status and didn’t realize what it cost”
Refuse status on the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program has consequences well beyond this policy, but here it is specific: no incentive awards for completing EBRR programs while on refuse status. Whether refuse status is appropriate — and what a realistic payment plan looks like — is a separate question with its own policy; see Inmate Financial Responsibility Program.
Related BOP policy on First Step Act programming
| Page | What it covers |
|---|---|
| PATTERN risk score | How the score is built, what moves it, and how it is challenged |
| First Step Act time credits (PS 5410.01) | Earning, losing and applying FSA Time Credits |
| Unit team and program review (PS 5321.09) | The meeting where assessments, recommendations and requests happen |
| Inmate security designation and custody classification (PS 5100.08) | Designation, Public Safety Factors, and transfer criteria |
| Psychology treatment programs and RDAP (PS 5330.11) | The residential programs that also count as EBRRs |
| Literacy program / GED (PS 5356.01) | A required program whose refusal costs all FSA incentives |
| Inmate Financial Responsibility Program (PS 5380.08) | Refuse status and what it affects |
| Inmate Discipline Program (PS 5270.09) | Incident reports, and the disqualification in Section 6.e |
| Inmate Request to Staff (PS 5511.08) | The BP-A0148 cop-out |
| Administrative Remedy Program (PS 1330.18) | BP‑8 through BP‑11, with deadlines |
Frequently Asked Questions About FSA Programming and Incentives
What do you actually get for completing First Step Act programming?
Five things, under Section 6 of PS 5405.01: additional phone minutes and visitation privileges; the ability to request transfer to a facility closer to your release residence; achievement awards and preferred housing for EBRR programs of 100 hours or more, including a financial incentive for those who opt for an award; quarterly incentive events for programs of less than 100 hours; and, under the separate time-credit policy, FSA Time Credits.
What is the difference between PATTERN and SPARC?
PATTERN measures risk — “the automated recidivism risk assessment instrument that objectively assesses an inmate’s current level of risk for re-offending.” SPARC measures needs — it “utilizes multiple needs assessment tools and processes to evaluate specific criminogenic need areas that help focus program recommendations.” Together they make up the Risk and Needs Assessment System (PS 5405.01 at p. 3).
How often is the risk score reassessed?
At each regularly scheduled program review, under the Program Statement. The statutory minimum is set by 18 U.S.C. § 3632(d)(5): reassessments “not less often than annually,” and “more frequent risk reassessments” for a prisoner at medium or high risk with less than five years until the projected release date.
Which programs actually lower a PATTERN score, and do team sports or worship services count?
Only designated ones lower a score. The Program Statement says “[o]nly designated program completions may reduce risk scores; these are identified in the FSA Approved Programs Guide,” and warns that “other factors, such as the offense of conviction and criminal history remain the same despite program completions.” Team sports, mock job fairs, physical exercise, special pre-release events, reentry simulations and worship services are listed as examples of non-FSA programs — valuable for reentry and clear conduct, but “non-FSA programs are not included in the FSA Approved Programs Guide and participants are not entitled to incentives under the FSA” (PS 5405.01 at p. 2).
Can I be forced to enroll in a second program?
No. “Inmates are only required to participate in one program that addresses one or more of their needs at any given time,” with an exception for programs required under another Program Statement such as GED or Drug Education, and staff “will not require an inmate to participate in a second program, nor should they be marked as ‘decline,'” if already actively engaged in a qualifying program (PS 5405.01 at p. 6).
What happens if I refuse IFRP?
You will not receive incentive awards for completing EBRR programs while on refuse status. And under the same paragraph, not participating in other required programs — Drug Education, or the literacy program — means “they are opting out of all FSA incentives” (PS 5405.01 at p. 9).
Was PS 5220.01 replaced?
Yes. PS 5405.01, effective 7 May 2026, states on its face that it “rescinds the Program Statements First Step Act Program Incentives and First Step Act Needs Assessment” — P5220.01 and P5400.01. Both are out of the in-force policy set, and the incentives list now lives in Section 6 of PS 5405.01.
How do I challenge a programming or assessment decision?
Through the administrative remedy process. Section 10 of the Program Statement provides that “[i]nmates have the option to utilize the Program Statement Administrative Remedy Program for review of issues or concerns related to this program statement, as outlined in 28 C.F.R. § 542.10 and subsequent sections.” Start with a BP-A0148 to the responsible department, then informal resolution, then BP-9, BP-10 and BP-11 on the deadlines in §§ 542.14 and 542.15.
Applied Insight — Christopher Zoukis, JD, MBA, Managing Director: The record that decides these cases is the Insight Feedback entry, not the argument. This policy directs a department that turns someone away to record why in Insight Feedback and to suggest an alternative, and directs that accommodation decisions be documented there as well. When we build a programming file, the first thing we ask for is the Individualized Need Plan and every Insight Feedback entry behind it — because a decline code with no explanation behind it is a very different document from a decline code with one.
This page is general information about federal Bureau of Prisons policy, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Elizabeth Franklin-Best, P.C. is a federal criminal defense and appellate firm with offices in Columbia and Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, serving clients nationwide; (843) 620-1100.
Reviewed for legal accuracy by Elizabeth Franklin-Best, Esq., Principal Attorney·September 2026