Reforming mass incarceration relies on halfway houses. Kansas needs more | Opinion

People can earn release from federal prison — and still not go home.

Kansas has very limited residential reentry center or halfway house bed capacity under the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Residential Reentry Management Kansas City contracting office, which oversees Iowa, Kansas, western Missouri and Nebraska. With only three of these facilities in Kansas and roughly 435 total beds across the four-state region, many eligible federal inmates face shorter halfway house stays, waitlists or direct release-to-home confinement.

That reduced access to critical reentry services — such as housing assistance, employment support and substance use treatment — can significantly hinder these people from successfully reintegrating into the community.

The bipartisan First Step Act, signed into law in 2018, allows incarcerated individuals to reduce their sentences by completing rehabilitative programs and earning time credits, which are intended to support their reentry into society. In theory, it represents a shift away from mass incarceration toward rehabilitation. But in practice, many eligible people remain confined — not because they failed to meet requirements, but because the system lacks the capacity to move them into prerelease custody.

A 2026 audit by the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that in 71% of reviewed cases, earned time credits were not properly applied. This is more than administrative error. It reflects a shortage of reentry infrastructure.

Residential reentry centers are central to this infrastructure. These facilities serve as the bridge between prison and community life, providing housing, job assistance, treatment services and case management — supports consistently linked to lower recidivism. Without them, release becomes abrupt rather than structured.

However, supply has not kept pace with demand. The Bureau of Prisons contracts with about 150 reentry center providers, offering roughly 8,500 to 10,000 beds nationwide. Many operate at or near capacity, leaving limited availability for individuals newly eligible for placement. Home confinement, another alternative, is also strained in some regions.

As a result, legal eligibility does not guarantee access. People who earn time credits often remain incarcerated because they can’t get a place in a halfway house. These delays separate them from family and support systems at a critical moment and weaken rehabilitation efforts, since the transition period is essential for securing housing, employment and continuity of care. When that process is disrupted, the likelihood of successful reintegration declines.

The financial cost is also significant. Keeping individuals in secure facilities is far more expensive than community-based supervision. Each unnecessary day of incarceration represents avoidable spending that could instead support treatment, housing or employment services.

There is also an inherent contradiction at the core of the policy: The First Step Act was designed to incentivize rehabilitation, but when earned credits do not translate into timely release, that incentive loses credibility.

The solution is not to abandon the policy but to complete its implementation.

First, the federal government needs a data-driven assessment of reentry capacity. The current contracting system does not reflect regional demand or population shifts. Identifying gaps would allow resources to be directed where they are most needed.

Second, Congress must treat reentry infrastructure as essential. Expanding residential reentry center capacity requires sustained investment in facilities, staffing and oversight. Without it, the system will continue to operate at its limits.

Third, federal agencies should expand partnerships with community-based organizations to increase transitional housing options beyond traditional halfway houses. A broader network would ease pressure on halfway houses and improve placement flexibility.

Finally, implementation must be more consistent. Oversight should be paired with stronger training and accountability within the Bureau of Prisons to ensure time credits are applied correctly and placements occur on time.

Maintaining the status quo is not neutral. It leads to delayed release, higher costs and reduced confidence in a major reform effort.

The First Step Act set out to reform federal incarceration. But without the infrastructure to support reentry, it still lacks the step that matters most: the step out the door.

Kristy M. Parrott is a 21-year veteran of U.S. military corrections and a former certified corrections supervisor with the American Correctional Association. She is pursuing an undergraduate degree in social work at Fort Hays State University.